Great Question. Although technically that's correct, for some reason and in some cases (especially if you have caps enabled in the Sweep, or creating a spline with adaptive intermediate points) the polygon count for the sweep may change from frame to frame. Visually it shouldn't make a difference BUT if you're using Motion Blur, it will mess up the effect. Also, changing point counts don't allow you to generate interpolating Alembic files, thus making them awkward to work with. My method always produces a stable point count because it just deforms the cylinder.
so smart of Maxon to just turn you loose on us
haha... I've gone rogue.
wouldn't be better to use sweep instead?
Great Question. Although technically that's correct, for some reason and in some cases (especially if you have caps enabled in the Sweep, or creating a spline with adaptive intermediate points) the polygon count for the sweep may change from frame to frame. Visually it shouldn't make a difference BUT if you're using Motion Blur, it will mess up the effect. Also, changing point counts don't allow you to generate interpolating Alembic files, thus making them awkward to work with. My method always produces a stable point count because it just deforms the cylinder.
@@noseman very valuable answer