I added a grabbing function for manually editing the shape.
I added a grabbing function for manually editing the shape.
Looks nice, i would like to see how it handles more complicated meshes and indeed photogrametry stuff.
Well, maybe one day, my remesher will get to this kind of quality, for now it only gets close to instant meshes.
Yes, sorry i was talking about the Quadremesher. I already have your tool and yes its like instant meshes which is no bad thing.
QuadRemesher has its own topic on this forum. You’re welcome to join the discussion.
What!? You are waay to humble. You mean instant meshes remesh?
Your addon gives way better results than that.
I tried all the remesh addons, but Tesselator QM is my favorite. And I like your dedication to the addon.
Yup, it’s much better with the corners than Instant Meshes
It’s a frustrating search for the best tool. I just tried out the trial version of Exoside’s Quad Remesher, also that tool doesn’t offer a solution for joined models. It will remesh the seperate shapes, not the “joined” shape. Probably this is to be expected, but there is also no option to do so, which is unfortunate considering Blender’s poor boolean results.
But i think i may have found a small breakthrough in improving boolean results. After converting each object to mesh (alt+C), which applies all modifiers at once, if you apply all transformations (ctrl+A), i have found better results with boolean union.
A tool that could remesh or retopo the joined shape adequately would be a great addition for me personally. The result needs to be “good enough” to be able to apply a solidify modifier, for 3D printing. Imho, this is also something that leaves to be desired in Blender, but results seem to be better with clean topology. So that’s important for me. I’m currently ony using Blender for 3D printing.
It sounds like you want the voxel remesh modifier, still not in master but patched into the bonemaster branch and maybe others: https://blender.community/c/graphicall/kdbbbc/
Topology won’t be pretty, but you always can retopo with quadriflow (or any other) afterwards
If you Boolean the shapes first, and make sure the Detect Hard Edges By Angle option is activated, Quad Remesher will remesh the Booleaned mesh.
Alternatively, you can join the meshes (Boolean Union not necessary), and use Voxel Remesh or Quadriflow in Object Mode or Sculpt Mode. Then you can optionally use Quad Remesher for a better auto-retopology.
@Botoni replied while I was writing this. Voxel Remesh and Quadriflow are available in the Blender 2.81 release. The new Remesh modifier is not yet in Master, but that’s only useful if you want things to remain editable.
Obviously, it will work after doing a boolean union, but like i said, boolean results in Blender are simply horrific and a bad boolean doesn’t give good results after remeshing either (i’ve tried).
Also, are you talking about the Exoside Quad Remesher, or Tesselator Quad Remesher (or both)? I’ve only tried Exoside’s trial version of the two.
I will check out the Voxel Remesh. Thanks and @Botoni for the pointer.
I meant Quad Remesher. I rarely have problems with Booleans in Blender, and rarely have issues Quad Remeshing the result. Check out the topic about QR here at Blender Artists. There are tips and a FAQ, and the thread features some pretty complex Booleaned hard-surface models that were successfully Quad Remeshed.
Addon version : 1.0.0
Blender version: 2.82a
Mask Resolution: 100.00
Relaxation Steps: 15
X-Mirror and Use Grease Pencil both enabled.
Here is an error message that appears with these (default) settings with an object composed of 431.340 faces.
stepper Tree MASK vg modifier apply <bpy_struct, DecimateModifier("Decimate")> md field field bm to mesh Traceback (most recent call last): File "E:\blender\blender-2.82a-portable\2.82\scripts\addons\mesh_tesselator\particle_remesher.py", line 297, in modal return next(self.algorithm_steps) File "E:\blender\blender-2.82a-portable\2.82\scripts\addons\mesh_tesselator\particle_remesher.py", line 246, in stepper result = self.solver.spread_step() File "E:\blender\blender-2.82a-portable\2.82\scripts\addons\mesh_tesselator\surface_particles.py", line 191, in spread_step new_particles += particle.spread() File "E:\blender\blender-2.82a-portable\2.82\scripts\addons\mesh_tesselator\surface_particles.py", line 430, in spread for p, dist in self.manager.get_nearest(hit.co, 1): AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'co'
Please, could you show what mesh you are trying to remesh?, it seems like its not a solid.
Try running the voxel remesher before using tesselator to make sure its solid.
Here it is (this is a bust):
Could you try doing a voxel remesh before using tesselator? sometimes these models have degenerate geometry that mess up with blender’s bvh-tree that tesselator uses.
I’ve had some time to try out your addon. Very much enjoying it. I find these results more valuable than Blender’s built-in quad remesher. The ability to use guides is pretty awesome. I use Instant Meshes quite often, though cleaning up holes is time-consuming and often outweighs the gains.
That being said, I noticed that Tesselator tends to dissolve sharp edges.
In the following example, I used a mask to double the polys in the fin, when compared to the body, but did not use a guide. However, even if I bump up the polygons, it still looses the silhouette.
The following example shows the results when I’m using a guide, but am still loosing detail in the thinner parts.
The following is an example of how Instant Meshes finds that edge, and does so using a considerably lower number of polygons.
What settings can I adjust to improve this result?
Also, I’m not seeing the graphical overlay that is demonstrated in the example videos. Would really love to see this, as it looks like it’s helpful to understanding the settings a bit more (and it looks pretty cool).
Below is an example of what I see. Notice how only the edges produce some indicator that the process is running. Something not working with the overlay. Perhaps I need to be in a specific mode?
Hi, This kind of problem generally can happen if the fins are too thin (thinner than the distance between the particles). It generally helps if you subdivide the mesh a little more and increase the field resolution setting so the remesher has more information to work with.
I’m seeking for a new algorithm that can deal better with those cases, but Its being hard.
as for the interactive display, seems to be a bug in 2.83, it should work find up to 2.82, I’m going to fix it as soon as I have time. But it’s only a visual bug and shouldn’t affect the result.
Great. This is good to know. If you manage to get the new algorithm implemented, I look forward to testing it, and sharing results.
I figured it was a bug related to the Blender updates. No rush here, but will be enjoyable to see this process unfold graphically… when it’s ready.