Yes still bugs in there. If there are no ngons present, its quite ok, but as @Rimasson demoed there are also bugs left. For the ngon case its much worse. This is in principle not dramatic but its there for too long. If blender wants to support ngons, then its operations and modifiers should support them too.
1 Like
I’ve just tried the latest windows build. having to activate symmetry for each object is quite annoying. sculpting with eevee materials is great.
That’s weird, here if I activate/deactivate symmetry it stays the same for any object in the scene. Have you tried to reset defaults?
1 Like
aah, that must be it, thanks! 
1 Like
Nope, you’re right I’m sorry, I was using an older build but in the latest build it is indeed as you described, symmetry has to be changed per object and reseting everything to default does nothing. I can’t find a way to set it as it was before.
There should be a toggle or something to let the users choose if they want symmetry per object or global, right now it is very annoying 
1 Like
Really? I thought it sucked… 
An option would be great indeed, leaving the decision up to the user. In ZBrush, symmetry per object (subtool) is the default behaviour. I don’t think it can be changed in ZBrush.
I personally welcome the symmetry per object option, because it happens too often that I’ve accidentally turned out to have messed up the other side of a non-symmetrical model because I forgot to turn off symmetry.
4 Likes
I’m not too concerned about the n-gons, but this whole multi-res setup just seems like a hardship. This should have been nipped in the bud and sorted properly. I know it’s entirely subjective, but for sculpting it should have been just a very straightforward affair, specific to sculpt mode, and not a modifier at all. Does anyone besides Pablo even test these tools(workflow-wise) on the dev side?
3 Likes
What a mess.
2 Likes
User can set symmetry options for a whole selection of meshes at once.
Although, only one mesh can be set in Sculpt mode, you can still have several of them selected. You have to extend selection through outliner or temporary switch to object mode.
When you have active object in Sculpt mode and the other ones with orange selection outline ; you just have to alt click on a setting of symmetry panel to make the change for all objects.
The only thing that can annoy me is that symmetry mode is the same for all modes.
If I switch from sculpt mode or paint mode to edit mode, my most frequent use case is probably to work with symmetry in paint mode and without symmetry in edit mode.
I would be annoyed if I had to switch symmetry, at each mode switch.
IMO, if there is a user preference to introduce, that is more about having settings applied globally to all modes or individually per mode.
Modifier’s workflow is fruit of 2.5 development.
It was used for the first time during Sintel movie. At that period, there was a displacement development in render branch.
But there was a concern about displacement going crazy during deformations of mesh.
So, there was a rendering concern in favor of a modifier that would adapt it.
And the principle was also about being able to pose mesh during sculpting through armature modifier without having to develop current Pose brush, in order to produce corrective shape keys.
At that time, there was no corrective smooth modifier.
During 2.8 UI workshop, this aspect was not questioned because there was no Sculpt mode developer. The idea was just to preserve old workflow and to solve known bug.
Pablo came with his proposal, months later.
That is probably true that in practice, we can count on other tools to change the workflow. But that does not seem obvious that such workflow could work well.
To prove that a multires workflow with multires data used as mesh properties is working well, we need a proof of concept, an experimental branch where it is the case.
We can not break compatibility with old files and what is not perfect now but mainly working for an hypothesis that multires as mesh data is better.
4 Likes
what happend to ctrl editing face sets. its not working in recent builds?
I guess thats done as part of patch reviews and I think behind the scenes there are quite some times more devs involved in a subject than what see by just looking at the commits. I also read that some of their artists do some testing here and there, but I don’T know how it is in this specific case.
I am with you, some areas are really in need of better usability in blender and this is also true for multires editing. Forcing it to be no modifier anymore is perhaps less desirable IMO. That should be a technical descision first and foremost, much like the question if a rewrite of it is wise or not. It could for example be presented and integrated very different but still stay a modifier internally, without the user noticing that at all.
This question is best solved by a dev who knows the underlying code well and can make a good assumption on the state of the code and how fitting it for the future roadmap. Its about perfomance, variablility, robustness, how manageable the code is, how well it integrates and last but not least the time needed to implement it.
But thats also the reason why critics are so important. Deciding it technically is not automatically leading to a good workflow. Critics are needed and should be brought up and heard. instead of defending bugs, like some did recently.
4 Likes
Agreed. Blender will not improve by fanboyism.
7 Likes
What tool are you talking about ?
Here, I have no problem with Ctrl while using Draw Face Sets brush or Ctrl W to grow face set.
When you hold ctrl it allows edit the existing faceset like painting.
edit: i just messed up my starup file. how could i get that function without loosing all customization?
From my experience, as of 2.90, even adding or subtracting geometry from the multires mesh (in editmode) is working without spike issues.
I quite like the ability to edit the topology of the mesh while a sculpt is in progress, as I am one who can often change his mind on something and it would be a bit trickier for me to get the perfect sculpt if the form is locked in once multires becomes active. Such rigid step-by-step workflows should be left behind in favor of progressively less destructive and more flexible workflows, I don’t care if the industry says otherwise because of how slow they can be in trying new things.
1 Like
Regarding the MultiRes algorithm, I think it needs a bit more credit than just saying that it is all bad because of a couple of bugs. Bugs that should be taken seriously, sure, but a far cry from what we had at the start of the year. That stuff was completely unusable.
I can confirm what Ace_Dragon just said. I’ve been able to separate pieces of a mesh and merge them back together in Edit Mode without losing a bunch of details in the process or getting mesh artefacts with MultiRes still active on everything. I’ve even been able to merge what was originally separate meshes with the same MultiRes subdivision number into a single mesh without any hiccups.
The only time I ever get serious problems with the mesh exploding is when I use Shrinkwrap and it has to project very fine details like long nails and such on a character. In most other user cases you don’t actually see these artefacts on geometry that are normally used for a production ready model.
7 Likes
It works, here.
First, you can check if problem comes from your startup.blend file by loading factory settings (File menu > Defaults > Load Factory Settings).
As long as you don’t Save preferences, startup file should not be lost.
So, if you have no problem with factory settings, problem comes from your preferences.
Second, you can check if problem comes from your addons, your preferences, your keymap configuration.
If you succeed to discover what setting is creating the problem, you will just have to resave your preferences with this option disabled.
You will not loose all your customization.
For sculpting only I agree, if we want to replicate or try to get closer to what Zbrush offers in terms of workflow there’s no better way than having multires as part of the mesh data and not in a modifier.
But, having said that, I realized recently (in the middle of a client project) that having multires as a modifier is very useful for freelancers like me or small studios. I can have a very simple lowpoly-ish mesh setup with an armature, some shapekeys, other deformers or even simulation, and on top of it all a multires to sculpt extra details that can be edited at any time without having to bake displacement or normal maps.
That’s a huge time-saver, and while it may not be something that gets used on a big pipeline, it really is an interesting workflow that can be very helpful for quick turnarounds and small teams.
So yeah… Now that I used that workflow I understand why the devs want to keep multires as a modifier
9 Likes
Fanboyism doesn’t help. Nor does cynicism, or the deattached attitude to look at something at surface level, without bothering to understand why things are the way they are, and saying “call me back when they fix this lol”
Multires as it stands works. Yes it does, or else I wouldn’t be using it at work. It works for sculpting, for animation, in a non destructive manner, so it has a different set of edgecases to “other things” which is why it’s unfair to compare it to “other things” that don’t have nearly the same capability. It has no precedent to be compared to 100%.
5 Likes