Відео

I don't know, I haven't used GeoScatter. It appears GeoScatter uses a geometry node setup behind the scenes, as long as that spawns regular blender instances then it should work.

Are you referring to the dirt material on the terrain, under the road mesh? That is created by my TerraNode Roads modifier, it's actually the same terrain material, but drawing the dirt layer based on a 'road' attribute that is generated with a Geometry Proximity node, in that TerraNode road modifier.

@ thx daniel for the quick response. I have added the TerraNode Road Modifier but I just get the displacement of geo and no dirt material. Do you need to use the TerraNode Base Modifier to work for this?

@@leonrenner8401 I believe you just need a mesh with enough resolution so that the Road modifier can save the attribute and a TerraNode material. However, if you're not using the Terrain Base modifier just be aware that the TerraNode materials are set up to use huge UV coords where 1 uv space = 1 meter.

That's great! I was afraid that no one had realized the power of the Collection to Object node. :) Is the updated Def Match Curve not producing the correct result? I did a quick test using a single object with stretch enabled, and the result was what I expected, the spacing seemed even and it reached exactly to the end of the curve.

I would expect the latest update to not work in versions before 4.3, but the 4.1 versions of the libraries are all still available.

I have made a radial array node, but I don't think I have a tutorial on it. It is a bit more complicated. ua-cam.com/video/9G1gt_jTN1o/v-deo.html

@@looseEdges No, I don't want a tutorial just want the radical to be with array, Like a node which is like array modifier but with radical feature too, I think your radical array is amazing, keep up the cool work

Depending on the order of the modifiers it will either put the river over the road, or visa-versa. It can't add a bridge automatically, but there's nothing to prevent you from placing one at the crossing.

@@looseEdges 🥰

I just want to keep the procedural texture generation< and from placing on top of each other

It sounds like you want to bake the texture. With cycles as the render engine, you can access the bake settings under the render tab. It may be easier to add a plane above the terrain and bake selected to active, from the terrain onto the plane, because the terrain's UVs are huge. Otherwise you'd have to convert the terrain to a mesh (apply all modifiers) and add a second UV channel for baking.

Usually, you can press Alt+C -> Convert to Mesh. That will apply all of the modifiers.

@@looseEdges hi thanks for this - another question, you have another video where you make a Two Connected Sagged rope continuous, how can this be done in your AddOn? -because adding sa SAG modifier to a Two Connected edges, then adding a ROPE modifier, doesn't make it continuous -this your tutorial with continuous Two Sagged rope: ua-cam.com/video/z-RC6NcxCC4/v-deo.html

@@scpk2246 That video was made during the development of the Strand Nodes, so I probably changed it afterward to always split the edges for some reason. If you change the output of the 'Sag' modifier to 'Mesh,' then add a 'Weld' modifier, and then add 'To Rope' it should connect all the adjacent sagging sections into one rope.

@@looseEdges wow! thank you for replying - it's all clear now! KUDOS to your addon, it's a real magic

Yes, it comes with an addon that can export the terrain as heightmap and attribute textures.

No, there isn't. In all my tests the additional computation to cull outside of the camera view was more expensive than the performance gained during the render. I think blender is able to keep geometry loaded in a cache, or something along those lines, if the geometry is static. Culling (via geo nodes at least) makes the object dynamic and it has to be re calculated and loaded every frame. At least that's my guess explanation for it. Another reason to not cull simplistically is that objects beyond the main camera view are often needed to render shadows that are in view.

Hi, for the wind to work you need to do several things, I'll list them here: Float Vertex attribute named 'wind' to control where the effect should be applied. (0=no effect, 1=full strength) In the material settings, set the displacement mode to 'Displacement and Bump' In the shader editor add the 'Wind Displacement' node group and connect it to the 'Displacement' socket on the material output node. On the Wind Displacement node, click on the '#frame' property and type in '#frame', to add a driver that will animate the effect. I think if you do all of those steps it should work. If not, let me know.

@@looseEdges ok i painted where i wanted the effect with the vertex paint then convert the attribute to vertex / float value named wind and it's working now, thanks !

@@ax777-k2p Great! Also, if you're using vertex paint to edit the strength, you should be able to just name the Vertex Color layer 'wind' and not have to convert it.

It limits it in that you cannot use a brush to paint the terrain, and maybe you lose a bit of very fine control because of that. But generally there are other ways of shaping / placing features on the terrain using control objects, and I personally prefer those over a brush because they remain in the scene and can be easily edited and tweaked. It is compatible with gadot in the sense that the data is exported in standard image formats that can be loaded into gadot, but I have not made a dedicated importer for gadot. I did some experimenting and started making one, but I have not gotten around to finishing it.

@@looseEdges So layered modifiers could be considered akin to layers in Photoshop. If you didn't like the road, for example, you could modify it or even delete it without upsetting any other layers in the stack. The control for the road (eg curved line) remains in place allowing modification to the road if required. Super powerful !

@@diyvideojunk2066 Yes, exactly, stacking modifiers is like adding a layer with a new detail, and the control objects function sort of like layer masks.

If you're referring to Unity's Humanoid/Generic animation types. No, I don't think so. I only use it to export 'Generic' animations. (those generic anims are for humanoid characters, but Unity doesn't know that...)

@@looseEdges if you find a way to do will be amazing, Speaking of which, you could add support for exporting Collection(instance) to your other asset, I missed it. Please!

could create an option that each fbx and prebafs folder creates a subfolder for each collection that belongs

I'm not sure that I have an easy answer regarding the UV stuff, (it's basically all vector math nodes) but I was needing a video idea for this week and I've just uploaded a fairly in-depth video about how this array node functions.

@@looseEdges would be great , to know more about how I would incorporate Trim Sheets, decals, edge wear and other essential game texturing techniques in this workflow as without that, it’s hard to really go too far as a senior games artist

Ah, that indeed is the case. I have fixed it and will see about making an update sometime. In the meantime, if you'd like to fix it yourself, add a Set Curve Radius node here: danielhickox.com/uploads/curve_to_rope_fix.png (Between the Mesh to Curve and Curve Sweep nodes with a radius value of 1)

Hmm, maybe... I was thinking about using a simulation zone that is controlled by checkbox. Once the checkbox is on, it fades in for some number of frames. Then if the checkbox is unchecked it will fade out over a few frames, and I can just keyframe the checkbox.

@@looseEdges but my idea is more work. All the cool kids use simulation zone.

A good number of the modifiers support instanced meshes in their outputs. Array Radial specifically does not because it also edits the UVs, however before I edit the UVs it is using instances internally (for the 'Rotate' mode), so in that case it would be easy to edit it to provide an instanced output. All the modifiers that support instancing need to have the source instance passed into the modifier via an object or collection. Currently, instances that are created with 'Split to Instances' or 'Geometry to Instance' nodes cannot be 'Made Real' ... or in other words, I don't think there's a way to create instances or split up a mesh inside of a GeoNode modifier.

Also, on modifiers that support instances, you can't just apply the modifier an get all the instances, the instances will actually disappear. You have to run the 'Make Instances Real' operator from the apply menu (Ctrl+A)

The way I like to think about tangent space (in a less technical way) is that its a shared coordinate system that can be constructed both from the the 2d UV coordinates and from the 3d world coordinates. This allows you to translate a point or a direction from 3d space to UV space by passing through the shared tangent space. However, because it's 2d in nature if you rotate a point around an axis that isn't perpendicular to a face. In 3d the left verts might move closer and the right verts father away from the center of that face, or in front/behind each other... but from a flat front on viewpoint the left and right verts simply move closer together, losing that depth info in the change from 3d to 2d.

@@looseEdges - thanks, that definitely helped