https://developer.blender.org/maniphest/query/45ySrBVT_hzR/#R
They know… they know
2 Likes
I know me thinks multirres is completely broken
So did @brecht over 5 years ago
it requires a pretty big change in how we store and calculate multiresolution levels that is not so much a bugfix but likely more of a partial rewrite of the system.
This was in relation to the infamous “spike” bug
Multires needs to be rewritten. Which is why I support pablo making a new data system from scratch, because to my understanding,“hackyness” is how sculpt ended being where it is today. I’m not particularly concerned with how long it takes.
and as @Tonatiuh said, there are things pablo listed that can already be included in the short term…
1 Like
A simple test:
add a cube, put a subdivision of 3, apply, put a multirresolution modifier, go to 4 subdvisions, then go down to 2 subdivisons move parts with move, go back to 4 and enjoy…
How a zbrush user is going to think that blender is usable for sculpting…
By the way I found a very good use for the relax smooth brush on pablo’s branch, for Retopology!
Messy mesh:
After using smooth relax brush:
Remember that it works with quads only, and it respect the form 
5 Likes
The free add-on Mask Tools by @Bookyakuno does the extract-with-smooth-border trick by using the Relax function of Loop Tools on the border before solidifying the extracted faces.
1 Like
Nice, lets see if that helps Pablo, Thanks!
1 Like
if a new code have to be rewritten,i wonder if in the meantime new multiresolution papers came up.i did a quick search,found some interesting paper.maybe not open source.
CINEMATIC VISUALIZATION OF MULTIRESOLUTION DATA: YTINI FOR ADAPTIVE MESH REFINEMENT INHOUDINI
Parametric Topology Optimization with Multi-Resolution FiniteElement Models
Now I’m afraid of never having the new features on master. Without proper investment, there is no guarantee that Pablo will continue to work on the new features. The improvements can be forever locked on a branch.
2 Likes
That though does not explain why his blog post talks about not being immediately practical for Dyntopo, that is unless the sculpting features get reduced to a glorified push/pull system and we’re back to using legacy box modeling (at least if the entire branch was merged ASAP, which is undesired and shouldn’t be the option taken).
With that the case, I don’t see why a few of the tools such as the voxel remesher and the new brush graphics can’t be merged.
Wouldn’t be the first time. So many promising GSOCs left to wither on the vine. Welcome to Blender.
3 Likes
While this is true, I think this is the first time a branch gains so much attention, no? I mean, Fracture Modifier exists, but it looks like Pablo’s work is more apealling (marketing wise).
1 Like
I think a few options are going to 2.81, but not the entire sculpt branch… witch is sad, but…
1 Like
Anyhow I’m still torturing myself, only using mask, mesh filter, mask filters transform, and two or three times the scrape brush, and of course the remesh. Not a very good workflow, it is to slow and you have to make a lot of hard decisions. but it makes you think in a different way. All starts with a sphere.
5 Likes
what this fuss is all about?
the branch is still alive, and that’s what matter.
i don’t mind if those features go to master or not as long as we have the branch updated with the latest master
there’s nothing to fear
1 Like
So I red this just now:
If the development fund grows beyond 30k:
Particles and hair nodes
Texturing tools and tools for procedural textures
Painting and Sculpting improvements
Better snapping and precision modeling
Cycles: denoising
Compositor
That is the plan after 2.80 if the development fund reaches 30k so for the time been just a few things from the branch are going to blender, and we may have to wait.
But yes Pablo’s patreon will maintain the branch, I hope.
Edit: this is the state of the devolepment fund:
2 Likes
So we are at 35.000 euros !! Which is great!!
Blender 2.81 it’s gonna be amazing
1 Like
4 Likes
the way the blog sounded to me, there are some easy to agree on merging part that will go right away … then there are some that will have to be worked on further but they will get merged after some iteration because they are simply the only way to do this features without a total rewrite .
so they will probably get in temporarily until a new large scale rewrite for sculpting happens , which seem to have become sort of normal in blender land 
multiple version since 2.5 was rewrites of multiple parts of blender, the introduction of cycles a whole new rendering system and 2.8.
So it is not like the thing is dead, just not gona be in the best shape or implementation from the get go espically with its popularity .
I mean the fact is, this article is on the BF official blog is basically a promise that this a priority, most likely because the heavy lifting is already done and there is a coder who’s happy to do the Job that’s like more than half way the job already done …
It used to be that the BF has lower code standards for patches and a bit more tolerance for hacks (before 2.5x). What we are seeing now is partly the consequences of that.
I do agree with others that Pablo should get a development fund grant to rework the fundamental structure of Blender’s multires and dyntopo sculpting, as this need could otherwise produce a major disincentive to keep going. I still remember when Jahka was diligently adding new functionality to particles and faced the fact that going forward, the particles would need a rewrite and the hair system would need to be a separate thing. Both of those large projects are already in the works, but Jahka quit Blender development and left the community at that point.
Though if the stretch goals of the development fund get started soon, we might have Sergey or a new member of the core team work on the foundation and Pablo can stick to tools.
3 Likes