We’re really blurring the lines here !
I guess proceduralism only makes sense where there are several distinct steps involved, and each one builds on top of the last, so the order is paramount. Say you extrude a face along a spline and then apply some noise on this newly created geometry -it only makes sense to do it in that order. With sculpting on the other hand, each part of a sculpt could be sculpted independently from the others, even though as an artist you may be tempted to start with sculpting the character’s skull to get a sense of proportions, you could very well -technically- start with the nose. I wouldn’t say there is as much dependency between steps in sculpting, at least not enough to qualify the process as procedural. What do you think ?
I have to admit, the geometry nodes sculpting brushes are pretty impressive.
I would not find a need to use them though.
What advantages do they have over just sculpting? Even the fact that the values can be changed afterwards is not worth it when you realize how many nodes it would take to acquire a moderate sculpt. After the 325th node, you would be able to roast marshmallows on your cpu.
And in the end, your result could be great. Could you tweak some parameters and generate more art?
The point is the automation, and the getting the computer to do the work for you. Relying on the positions of 325 manually placed empties is a lot of work for nothing.
So I found an Attributes Panel in 3.0… how do you actually assign geometry to these attributes? When I go into edit mode there’s no extra buttons the way vertex groups has.
Also, the only built-in edge attribute you can access and use in the geometry nodes editor is Crease, what about Bevels, Seams… and that other one I never use?
If the steps used to make something can be changed afterwards, that counts a procedural for me. I am not too sure for the importance of order of operations. Both sculpting and nodes have functions that are dependent and independent of the order of operations. If you brute force it enough, all non-procedural operations can be converted to procedual operations.
If some mad man wanted to sculpt for Nodevember . Not too sure of the practical uses tho.
Yes, but they stop making sense if the order is scrambled. I expect a procedural system to be somewhat stable in its output, otherwise proceduralism would be less advantageous than it is.
Hey guys, how you all doing? Is there a way of aligning only the pivot of an object inside GN? Lets say I have a cube and I want its pivot aligned to another object without rotating the object.
Just want to stop by and tip my hat in respect of y’all.
This thread is equally mind blowing as well as a blow to my confidence seeing you guys pull off great stuff I didn’t thought would be possible and certainly can’t do myself.
It shows without a doubt how powerful this procedural stuff is (again and again) and its not like I am ignorant of proceduralism, which makes it even more awesome.
Over the last years I dipped my feet in the deep waters of Houdini with varying results (mostly failure and defeat) and it has become something like my White Whale.
Seeing Blender becoming more procedural and therefore powerful is equally exciting and daunting to me. I am running out of excuses to become better myself.
As the saying goes: “if you want to become better play better opponents.”
Blender wasn’t really a strong opponent in the past but it turns out to be one more and more every day.
So keep on chugging away, show me how powerful you are and subsequently Blender is, the more you advance and the bigger the advantage you have, the more motivated I become to follow as I am not the kind of guy who gives up - ever.
To the devs: I might often come off as entitled, demanding, rude even in these forums, but this is only surface level emotions and my child like temperament as I often forget myself when excited because this is very meaningful to me.
I am actually deeply grateful (even when I am not showing it) for the fact that you give use Artists god-like powers to create our worlds.
That is due to limitation of fast drawing of instances. But Instancing is done.
If you want to see it, you can add a Realize Instances node or an Instances to Points node after the Instances on Points node, or a Mesh to Points node before.
I am having an issue with Geometry Nodes. I am making a procedural building. Kammerbild has a great YouTube video on creating procedural building using Blender 3.0.0 I am in Blender 3.0.0 Beta. his video is Create a procedural Building in Blender (pt.1)
Here is a screenshot of the setup to create the building. Both walls are facing the same direction. I want the 2nd wall to face the opposite direction
In the video he uses the point Rotate node.
I tried to rotate the blocks that make the building using the legacy Rotate Point, the Rotate Euler Vector Rotate and Rotate Instance. None on these worked to rotate the 2nd wall.
My logic say to put the rotate after the transform of the 2nd wall. When I change the value of the z axis to 90 the 2nd wall becomes perpendicular to the 1st wall. When I change the z axis to 180 mothing appears to happen; changing it to 270 gives the same effect as 90. When I put the Rotate Instance node after the transform node the warning "Realized data in input geometry is ignored. Nothing happens when I change the values of the node.
I added a realize instance between the transform and the rotate instance nodes to see if that would fix the issues. It did not work.
Rotate Euler gives the same results as changing the Transform rotation.
I would appreciate any suggestion of how to change the direction the 2nd wall is facing.
. Not too sure of the practical uses tho.
. Kevin commited attribute rendering for eevee just before 3.0 hit beta.
