They thought moving smooth feature to modifiers stack was a good thing but they made it even worsehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNGnNRoiKBU
nothing worse than a blender bros video desu
>>979052>desufaggot
>>979051 As a max user what blender does here seems analogous to how it works in max. Presenter seems pretty angry and pretty daft desu.
>>979051I don't see nothing wrong with the change, in fact that's much better if you need to export to other softwares
>>979065I've never used 3DS MAX but I don't think its developers are so incompetent as to attach an attribute that clearly belongs to the mesh to the object instead.>>979069That change is probably going to break every single exporter script.
>>979087I know but we can export natively now without edge split. better fix it now than never
>>979095What they did in 4.1 is not a fix for anything.
>>979096yes It is, anon you can do the test right now.the only thing i found annoying is using shift K instead of I for keyframes
>>979096max works that way
>>979102Even if MAX does it that way (I don't think it does) then Blender used to do it right before.
>>979139Well in max everything is an 'object' whether it is a editable mesh/poly/patch or spline/NURBs curve etc. All the modifiers that sit ontop of it are 'Object Space Modifiers'. So the concept of an 'object' in max is a higher level concept than 'mesh'. It's like the object is just the transform in space representing the container for any geometry and a mesh is a construct that can be a member of that transform.'Editable Mesh' is legacy in max and superseded by 'Editable Polygon' but in 'Edit Poly' which is what I'm familiar with from the top of my headyou can alter smoothing groups within 'Edit poly' itself or by applying a 'smooth' modifier ontop of it. Low level smoothing group edits are done with 'Edit Normals' that expose all normals at each vertex and allow you to alter them individually.Anything you do with a modifier in the stack can be collapsed down into the 'Edit Poly' which you can think of as the mesh/model itself.
>>979139>even if MAX does it that way (I don't think it does)You are wrong, Max works that way.I think you are not seeing the big picture, maybe for you it's something bad because convenience, but for me and others who work in the industry, being capable of compatibility with other software it's a must, and before it wasn't
dude talks like a side character mob from 90s B film
>>979177You are not wrong anon.
>>979051This guy is too masculine, to be whining like such a pussy
>>979197Your generation doesn't understand the concept of criticism. Nobody ever bothered to explain to you how it works, so you don't know how to deal with it and you demand to get rid of it.
>>979200Criticism is not immune to criticism itself.Autosmooth never should have been handle the way it was handled in the first place. The update rectifies the problem. But he's whining because he has to perform a few extra clicks. And it's that really nagging kind of whining, where every two sentences has a sigh and a snide little comment. My parents would have never tolerated such attitude growing up.He's not that much older than me. So I don't know what you mean by "your generation".
>>979201>he's whining because he has to perform a few extra clicksYou don't get it.
>>979204No, you don't get it.I'm glad that they fixed that shit
>>979139Sometimes I feel ashamed of being a blender user, I can't find an answer why this is a bad idea
>>979221If you knew how datablock are organized in Blender you would immediately recognize the changes made for 4.1 as a bad idea. Unfortunately the current developers don't seem to understand how the software works. And it's not just Auto Smooth. Collections are a bad idea too.
>>979232nobody in this industry seems to really understand how their software works
>>979241You're right. It's not just Blender. I see things going backwards, becoming more and more unnecessarily complicated and I wonder why.
>>979243>becoming more and more unnecessarily complicated and I wonder why.Part of the explanation is this >>979194
>>979051I prefer this videohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVHNzG2cd9k
>>979232I recognise that you don't have a fucking clue what you are talking about having a no destructive autosmooth that you can turn off every time you want it's not a bad idea, also what about animation? The now legacy one completely dropped frames and was unusable for animation
>>979282I'm not going to argue with you. If you can't see the problem you will whenever you'll decide to actually make something in Blender. You can start with the donut tutorial.
>>979294I make YouTube tutorials myself, I'm not going to cry because I have a better solution for autosmooth, that's really autistic, if you can't see why having a non destructive way to autosmooth is good it's really jarring to me.
>>979232>Collections are a bad idea too.collections have been one of the most useful things for me so far
>>979384The old/current way was/is non-destructive. The new way is destructive.
>>979395Are you sure about it? Do the test anon, export your mesh to another software using the old autosmooth and the new one, let me know which one split edges
>>979394At this point they are talking nonsense, and they justify their stupidity by lying.They want blender to be as obtuse and retarded as it's possible. I prefer that blender fix all the stupid shit it has instead of putting more half assed shit
>>979431Please.
>>979395Not a single software is destructive, that’s the dumbest thing you could do. Imagine not having undo button, that’s how dumb you sound.
>>979435That's not what destructive/ non destructive means.
>>979294I use blender every day, I'm going to give you an example. Autosmooth an object on 4.0 make a render with cycles using motion blur, you have a bit chance that it breaks, has happened to me so many times.Now I don't have that problem any more, and since it's a modifier I can key it from even appearing on the render which helps a lot on calculating times.
>>979437You're attempting to insult people's intelligence and you're being incoherent in the process. Have you applied for a developer position at the Blender Foundation yet?
>>979436This terminology has been applied before you were born, yes it means undo button you fuckin idiot. The concept is simple you destroy something, it means you have no undo button like in real life. Non-destructive means it’s not destroyed. Gosh you kids are so dumb.
>>979435Have fun with your several gigabyte history. You know, and the fact that you've just undone all the work you just did just to remove something you applied several hours ago.Totally "non destructive".
>>979051>Texture painting status: Broken>Sculpt codebase status: Sphagettied beyond repair>Edit mode performance status: Worse than ever>Normal aligned voxel remeshing status: Never happening>Vertex colors status: Implemented in the absolute worse way possible>Eevee Next status: Delayed again>Autosmooth status: Working perfectly before so had to do something about it>Blender overall status: Completely fuckedAll in a day's work no need to thank me.
>>979438I gave you a clear example how the new autosmooth works better, you haven't given any example of how it's bad except that you don't like it.Also, what's incoherent about the example that I gave you? It's a common problem with animations using motion blur, maybe you find it incoherent because you started a week ago in blender.
>>979447It's not even funny how stupid some people are, don't waste your time
>>979448>Autosmooth status: Working perfectly before so had to do something about itNot if you have to animate using motion blur, also heavily dropping Frames when you have to animate... totally perfect
>>979051>Cries because they fixed something > B... But... My workflow.That's why we can't have nice things
>>979447>>979450You are the idiot, this is what i do every day in animation. No one is going to redo an entire animation sequence.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-B4jtTf3Co
... why not change the modifier stack to a nodebased system, no juggle with the right position etc, just link them together like you want, split up the geometry data to get x number of different vatiations of the used modfiers and geometry data, when you apply, the linked modfiers stay persistent and outputs finalised geometrydata ...
>>979487Because it would be a bad idea.
>>979449People have given you plenty of examples of how the new destructive Autosmooth is a bad idea. You refuse to listen.
>>979490Give me one example, that's what I'm asking, I'm starting to think that you are angry to be part of the mob, don't hide on what other people say.Give me one example of how it's a bad idea, just one.
>>979446>>979455You see how you are moving the goal post? I quote >yes it means undo button you fuckin idiot.No, it doesn't, the undo button is not the same as being able to toggle off and on something at any point. Not how the undo button works.To use the undo button you need to store every thing that you did, after closing the software, it still needs to be stored somewhere.You are talking about 2 different concepts that are not interchangeable.Because you will loose all your progress using the undo button.
>>979512>Lose all progressTHAT’S WHY YOU HAVE THE REDO BUTTON IDIOT!
>>979509Head over to:https://blenderartists.org/t/blender-4-1-auto-smooth-is-now-a-modifier-only/1488922/661Go shill in there.
>>979513But if you redo you also redo the thing that you tried to change, I'm clearly speaking with a retard They are not the same concept, you are wrong completely
>>979514Why are you dodging the question?Give me an example, just one. If they are multiple examplesyou can give me just one without a problem.
>>979513Subdivide a cube, apply the subdivision, use the knife tool and cut a random shape, then try to undo the subdiv without losing the knife cut progress. Try it.
>>979521>No you cant fix it>Undo the mistake>No you cant apply the mistake again, you lose it>Redo>No you are wrongYou’re in the wrong, destructive means destroying. You are making up shit on things you weren’t even born. I remember when undo button was not a thing and how everyone had to carefully do things.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UndoWhat nonsense you saying will just bring us back into the stone ages.>>979524Sounds like skill issues and I already put the YouTube Maya video demonstration of such concepts. Only Blender doesn’t have it, it’s only you guys who unable to comprehend the concept of undoing something from 1000 actions.
>>979528Open your software, make a cube, subdivide the cube apply subdivision Close the software Open the software and try to undo the subdivision. Applying something makes it destructive, that's why you need to undo, not been able to modify the parameters or toggle on and off it makes it destructive, that's the definition of destructive >Sounds like skill issuesYea Im not skilled at talking retarded shit like you.I watched the video you've put on and it doesn't have anything to do of what we are talking about.>Only Blender doesn’t have itEven if that's the case do I remind you that we are talking about blender?So how we can do it if we don't have It?In that case you are still wrong because blender undo isn't non destructive.The thing that you don't understand is that undo/redo is stored in cache if it crashes or stops catching actions then you are fucked.In conclusion you are wrong even giving you the benefit of the doubt you are still wrong.
>>979561Poor anon, he believes blender awful code is correct but doesn’t know that other software developers create log files or better known methods for undo button. Cache methods are no longer a thing anon, that an ancient method once used in times when storage was a problem.You also can’t still comprehend the concept of not destroying something after 1000 actions. Turning things off and on is not nondestructive it’s the opposite of protecting the original cube you had. I know you blender people can’t return the cube back to its original shape because the developers after 20 years of asking for said feature was never implemented and after 15 years later some guy made an addon for it.Tell me how dumb you sound now, basic google search would have help you save yourself from embarrassment but you didn’t stop and become loyal to a product that can’t do everything.
>>979197He’s 4 ft tall and all he does is ooze insecurity…. I’m shocked he convinces anyone to buy his tutorials with how bad of a 3D artist he is. “Masculine” lol, lmao even
>>979562Clearly you are mentally illYou know what, every software is non destructive because you can save the file before making a change. Even better every software is non destructive because if you made something that you can't turn back you can start again.Thank you anon I didn't knew that a non destructive workflow meant nothing.This board is a joke and I am the stupid one to try arguing with someone who is clearly mentally handicaped
>>979562You are a troll, Maya uses cache for undo/redo.
>>979584No it doesn’t, the official website documentation for said code clearly says so: https://help.autodesk.com/cloudhelp/2024/ENU/Maya-Tech-Docs/Commands/undo.htmlVideo clip showing the settings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xf5UXU9-ePI&tIn case you’re still going to make up bullshit, Wikipedia also has an entire article telling you how it works: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queue_(abstract_data_type)It’s over, you are crazy one here.>>979583You’re crazy, save state is save state, you know like saving current event. A different method then undo, redo and replace. You are going crazy over the concept of undoing 7 days work to bring back the cube. This is how the industry works, the boss demanded magic of undoing the problem then it should happen. You are never going to win this debate, you aren’t qualified to do such actions and put shame on the blander community.
>they thought removing the musgrave texture node was a good ideaWHY
>>979743Because apparently you can emulate it using 15 other nodes.
>>979051Getting my credit card to buy the addons right now! Thanks OP!
>>979744I mean yeah you can technically emulate it with the way they merged it into the noise node which is cool but like fuck >>979772Only the ones you cannot crack
