Blender has some form procedural modeling already.I have made stuff with it.There might be way a to make that work in blender.
Here are some interesting websight links.https://www.blendernation.com/2013/12/19/video-tutorial-intro-to-procedural-modeling/
The procedural aproach videos are ever very eyecatching, things apear very well finished as like magic. In reality thats not ever the experience, if you lost flexibility you get quick result, but if you want flexibility other aproaches get better.
the natural place for the procedural stuf is on the generation of large amounts of asets generated by the own program. like in building big citys (interior included) and natural worlds (with all flora and fauna included). For making individual assets makes no sense.
It is supposed that the Procedural modelling nodes was initially a target for the 2.8 but seems that this project it is delayed if I am right?
Until then the Sverchok add-on will be the king of procedural modelling in Blender.
checkout animation nodes : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uTqd5XEoso
But can animation nodes be used for procedural modeling.
Well first of all, that demo is pretty insane obviously. Some seriously cool power in that design. But that’s some pretty low level stuff there. a lot going on under the hood.
Yes, as far as I know, procedural nodes are coming at some point. It’s just a mater of getting the initial 2.8 stuff out of the way like viewport, deps graph, render Layers etc. Then its on to nodes for everything. Particles. constraints, modifiers, modeling, etc. It’s going to be pretty amazing but probably quite a ways off. But it’s good to know it’s in the plans.
On another note, if you really want to try doing something like this now, there’s actually a procedural node system out there now. It’s called Sverchok. Check it out here:
What happened with everything node?
I just said, it’s coming.
What Blender needs which Modo has is Mesh Fusion.
SubD modeling for concept stuff is pretty amazing.
But with Sub and booleans with Blender you are speed and finish wise very limited.
However in the Houdini movie it seems that they remesh with quads well which I would even prefer
more over mesh fusion.
But what Houdini is doing has nothing to do with booleans. It’s doing a procedural loft along procedural curves, lots of curve projection and more lofting, etc.
You meant Modo, right? What Modo is doing is a sweep/lofting type transition. But you can set that up pretty easily in Houdini as well, here I just did a flat edge, but you could do a soft transition as well, using some voodoo.
But in Houdini you can also do crazy boolean type stuff with VDB - stuff which goes way beyond what any boolean or Mesh Fusion type system can do - but it’s gonna generate some very high density meshes. This guy made a HDA out of it but all the tools for doing this is in the VDB section of Houdini, so… From 2.20s into this clip…
But I think Houdini is insanely underrated for hard surface modelling, being able to do stuff like this procedurally is pretty nice…
As the seam is generated from the geo, you could basically run a cloth sim and have a seam follow it perfectly while having it “outside” the simmed mesh with all that it offers in manipulating it. Really cool.
And I’m really looking forward to see what the Blender animation- and particle nodes will be like, hoping they will handle data as Houdini does, so you can use geometry as particles, etc, man you can do some cool stuff…
I think Mesh Fusion is also highly overrated hahaha
I know those two are different - I was just expressing a wish for Blender
Okay, I was just referring to the Houdini video. I know you can use Booleans in Houdini. But specifically, in the video above, they are not actually using doing Booleans.
Smthng alike is new asset/tool for Houdini: Flux HDA @gumroad (formerly known as Fusion HDA)
mind blowing - just mind blowing!
Well, seeing SideFX said they are going to do a lot of focusing on modelling in Houdini now, I’m pretty sure they’ll cover this stuff - meshfusion like beveling options in booleans and selection fall-off’s would be greatly welcomed in Houdini of course.
In regard to Blender, I have high hopes for implementing an all-nodes type system, and if you keep the old workflows, you will really have a best of both worlds type application with Blender.
I don’t think that will ever happen. Boolean alone in blender are slow carve or buggy bmesh.
and BF would need the same caliber of programmers to pull of such a thing.
But i could be wrong.
Like somepeople told, blender needs a way to bevel boolean objects, a easy way to make this, like that example. And a Bevel shader. With that Blender will help a lot all the hard surface work.
Bevel shaders are nice for rendering highlights onto hard edges but you can spot it easily specifically also when the bevel is bigger.
thats why I prefer real geometry bevels rather