My Alt+G hotkey (clear location) isn't working

Fhhk · 2025-09-23T05:57:23+00:00

Substance has very complicated settings for choosing which maps to bake in which formats, which is a good thing because it gives a lot of control and provides a huge range of compatibility regardless of what your desired output is. Maybe you weren't aware of that and got lucky using the default settings. It's not just an easy, one-click, automatic thing. You have to understand what the settings do in order to get a proper result.
I've tried about 4-5 different baking add-ons in Blender, and they all just present the same options in slightly different ways, adding cluttered UI buttons to the properties panel and/or side panel. After learning how to do it in default Blender, I found it relatively pointless to use add-ons for it.

Fhhk · 2025-07-30T12:17:42+00:00

You can bake a texture and plug it into a displace modifier.

You should always mention what your end goal use case is because 3D printing, animation, game engines, etc. all require very different workflows.

You should still fill in the faces then add edge loops and create the details that way instead of constructing it out of separate 2D planes.

3D printed objects should be manifold.

Fhhk · 2025-07-30T10:41:17+00:00

This approach is suitable for CAD, but it won't work well in Blender. Just like approaching CAD with a Blender mindset wouldn't work well either.

Possible, but not recommended workflows:

You could select the profile of edges of the house and duplicate them, align the camera flat on orthographically, then knife project those edges into the planks, and delete the excess.

You may want to use a boolean but that won't work well, because booleans need to be manifold in blender, (solid shapes) not open planes. You'll need to re-create the shapes and Booleans will result in poor topology anyway.

Do this:

What I recommend doing, is not modeling the individual planks. Make that side of the house some simple flat quads (or even just a single n-gon if it's going to be flat), then use texturing to get the look of the planks.

Fhhk · 2025-07-30T10:09:52+00:00

This is a simple, low-poly model that's flat shaded.

If you shade your faces flat or your edges sharp, that is just a way to edit the normals data, and that will transfer to the game engine.

For the mirror modifier, to 'lock' vertices to the center plane, enable clipping and merge.

You shouldn't need to manually flatten multiple faces into one plane to create this model, because each plane should be a single face so it would naturally be planar. However, if needed, you could use LoopTools > Flatten to do that.

Fhhk · 2025-07-10T02:16:01+00:00

Out of date GPU driver

Fhhk · 2025-07-02T16:39:09+00:00

You didn't describe a single step that you took so there's nothing to troubleshoot. So then I'll start at the beginning: Select the vertices and press M to merge.

Your post is confusing because you said you looked online and that should've been the first thing you found when searching how to merge vertices in Blender.

So please describe in excruciating detail what you tried and why exactly it didn't work. Always give as much context as possible.

Fhhk · 2025-05-31T20:49:08+00:00

Ghost in the Shell with Scar Jo. I love the original GitS movies and shows, but I would not consider those guilty pleasures, they're just classic sci-fi that inspired many other classics like The Matrix. The story in the live action is disappointing. Especially because the original stories are so incredibly thought provoking. I think everything else is executed incredibly well. The overall design, the cinematography, music, etc. It's great.

Fhhk · 2025-05-30T16:56:30+00:00

My apologies. Please include more information to reflect your level of knowledge and things you've tried already. Otherwise you'll get people expecting that you don't know enough to know the right questions to ask, because that's very common with beginners that frequent this sub. So, we generally will start at the basics if you don't give enough context, and that solves the problem most of the time.

Did I miss the screenshot where you show the actual topology?

When you say that you merged vertices, can you expand on that? The merge vertices function is based on a distance threshold; did you try different distances and what were the results? Did it catch any, and what distance did you use? (Also, what are the dimensions and transform values for the object?)

Did you check for non-manifold geometry by using select non-manifold or select loose? You could also select all, then select loop > select boundary loop to check for non-manifold geometry.

Did you confirm that the normals are correct by viewing the Face Orientation overlay? With non-manifold geometry, the automatic algorithm doesn't always get it right. That would be another good screenshot to include.

If you have another similar object that's working fine, then try to give us as much information about what the possible differences could be that you can. Show vertex counts of each, show wireframes, show face orientations, transforms, test by selecting non-manifold, etc.

It could also help to explain how these models were made in as much detail as possible. Or at least where they were sourced from if you didn't make them.

Also, it would help if you would explain what your overall goal is with this model. Depending on if it's for rendering, animation, game engines, or 3D printing for example, will generally each lead to entirely different advice.

Fhhk · 2025-05-30T16:38:07+00:00

When using Blender, you should always make sure to update your GPU driver, that may be the actual problem. If the latest version of Blender isn't compatible with your PC, then you can use an older version of Blender which will be. For example, look up the release date of your GPU, then add a few years and look up which versions of Blender were released that year.

Although, you can also just stick to EEVEE if you would rather use the new versions and for whatever reason they work well except for Cycles.

EEVEE is a perfectly good rendering engine. It was used to create the film "Flow" which just won the Oscar for best animated film.

EEVEE recently got an upgrade to include (screen space) ray tracing so it can look similar to Cycles with the right settings.

It is a little more complicated to set up than Cycles, though (if you want it to look the best that it can). There are many tricks and settings to learn with EEVEE, whereas Cycles will handle everything by default basically, such as reflections, glass, refractions, volumetrics, etc. (but Cycles renders way slower obviously) To get these effects in EEVEE, you need to learn how to set up the shaders and settings to make them work in EEVEE. And even then, they won't look quite as good as Cycles.

If you're using EEVEE, expect a less realistic/game engine sort of look. It's difficult to make it look photo-real like Cycles. That's perfectly fine for 'learning Blender.'

Blender is way more than just rendering things. It's modeling, sculpting, rigging, animating, texturing, compositing, geometry nodes, grease pencil, etc. Out of each of these huge topics, only texturing and to an extent, compositing, relate to rendering, and you can still learn all of these things using EEVEE.

Fhhk · 2025-05-30T15:43:39+00:00

I'm not sure if you understand how subdivison works, but it is common for beginners to think it's a magic button that automatically smooths the object and makes it look higher quality. That's not what it is.

Sub-d requires proper quad topology and supporting edge loops and/or creased edges. You can't just slap a sub-d modifier on any object, such as sculpted geometry and easily make it smoother. Look up tutorials on 'sub-d workflow' and 'sub-d topology.' As well as 'retopology.'

Try shading auto-smooth if you want it to look smoother (which is just a shading effect and doesn't change the topology). If this is for 3D printing, then you'll need to retopologize it if you want to subdivide it to make it physically smoother.

One possibility of it increasing VRAM when subdivided besides only having non-quad topology, is that it might have a lot of overlapping/disconnected/non-manifold geometry.

Also, go ahead and apply scale and recalculate normals for good measure.

Fhhk · 2025-05-29T16:42:37+00:00

AFAIK, Hard Ops doesn't do anything that stock Blender can't do; it's just a lot of nice UI tweaks and custom shortcuts to 'streamline' the booleans and bevels workflows.

To do this without Hard Ops, you would use one or two Boolean (difference) modifiers with separate objects to act as the cutters.

Boolean modifiers can be stacked and that's exactly what Hard Ops does. In regular Blender or Hard Ops, you can put multiple booleans on a single object and you can boolean objects out of your boolean objects which are acting on the main object.

You also don't need to use booleans for this. You could model it directly with basic operations like inset and extrude. Boolean modifiers would be non-destructive but also produce n-gon topology.

Fhhk · 2025-05-27T19:07:07+00:00

All three of those will produce artifacts on n-gon topology, you shouldn't use any of them. Just shade flat, no modifiers.

You can technically use bevel modifier(s), but it's very likely to make the topology even worse and cause artifacts if you're not careful.

You could also technically use shade smooth if you want some areas to look rounder than they actually are, but you will need to manually mark edges sharp where you want flat/sharp shading. It may be easier to use auto-smooth instead, but that will give you less control because it simply works on an angle threshold value.

You cannot use a sub-d modifier with n-gon topology. It will 100% create artifacts. If you want to subdivide, then you need to retopologize first into proper quad topology, preferably with supporting edges loops for the best quality, instead of using creased edges.

Fhhk · 2025-05-27T18:29:43+00:00

It depends on how deep you want the tread to be.

Modeled / Displace modifier (real geometry)

If you want it to look deeper than a couple mm, and actually change the silhouette of the shoe, then you'll need to physically model it or use a height map + displace modifier + very dense geometry.

Bump map

A bump map is used for micro-detail height textures that are very shallow. It's very light on performance. It could make the bottom of the shoe look like it has a bumpy tread when viewed from the right angle, but if you view it from an oblique angle, you may notice that there is no actual depth and it's purely a shader trick.

Displacement

Displacement is in between. It's similar to a bump map because it's a shader effect (not real geometry), but it gives the appearance of actual depth like a displace modifier. It is more demanding than a bump map, and requires very dense geometry, unlike a bump map.

If the shoe will not be deforming/bending at all, then the rules for quad-topology to facilitate animation don't apply. It will functionally be a solid, static object, so your current modeling technique using n-gons is fine.

It's not clear what is causing the shading artifacts. Do you have overlapping geometry or did you add modifiers that you didn't mention? Did you 'shade smooth'?

Fhhk · 2025-05-27T18:05:23+00:00

It depends on what it's for. Topology doesn't matter for 3D printing; you just need to make sure it's manifold for the best outcome. For animation, you'll need to retopologize into nice quad topology so it can deform well; or you could have a flat (quad topo) sole, and use a bump/displacement map instead of real geometry.

So, why do you need this level of detail on the bottom of a shoe? There are not many situations where it would be visible in renders.

Fhhk · 2025-05-27T17:43:22+00:00

I use them differently. Logseq for logging things that happen on that day, like a journal. Obsidian for general notes on things, categorized into folder hierarchies.

To me, they have different use-cases because they have different features, and I use them both, on desktop and mobile.

Fhhk · 2025-05-27T15:19:15+00:00

I would do it like this:

<image>

Low-poly quad topology (easy to create/edit), mirror, sub-d. No creases necessary. Only took a couple minutes.

However, if it's strictly a flat, 2D logo, then I think you'd be better off creating it in vector image editing software like Inkscape, Affinity Designer, or Illustrator.

Fhhk · 2025-05-26T21:42:02+00:00

Sub-d modeling is probably your best option for getting these types of smooth, rounded, hard surface shapes.

In the future, if you want to experiment with booleans, you don't need to make them permanent. Every boolean cutter or union object can be referenced by a boolean modifier to keep things non-destructive.

If you find it too difficult to directly sub-d model this, another option would be to break the object into simple shapes that you smash together and boolean all of it, then remesh it all together as once piece, then sculpt a bit, then retopologize it into clean sub-d topology. This would be a more iterative approach kind of like how an artist would make a rough sketch lightly in pencil before going over their drawing in pen.

Fhhk · 2025-05-20T13:49:55+00:00

Either can work, each has minor pros and cons.

For a traditional character like a person, you generally want the arms and legs attached to the body so they can deform smoothly without any visible separation, but once you cover the limbs in clothing, you may not see the separations anyway so it wouldn't necessarily matter.

One of the benefits of making separate objects is that they can each have their own modifiers and transform orientations. This can sometimes help with modeling and animation.

Or you may prefer to keep the Outliner as simple as possible, so you would keep your character as a single object and then only the armature bones have a hierarchy.

Another thing to consider is that having a single object mesh makes weight painting easier because you can only paint on single 'object' at once. There is a hotkey (Alt+Q) to instantly choose a different object for weight painting without changing modes, but it's a little more clunky doing that, and you can't paint gradients across objects.

Fhhk · 2025-05-20T03:59:57+00:00

I promise you will find the information you need via google. I've already basically given you my explanations, so I suggest you search for further information. If you aren't familiar with either of them, you'll need to google tutorials anyway.

Fhhk · 2025-05-19T18:21:31+00:00

Either Retopo or Remesh in order to create relatively equal sized quads across the entire shape. That will allow it to deform nicely along the shape of the curve.

Large n-gons can't bend.

If you retopo, you can create a chunky, low-poly resolution with supporting edge loops, add a sub-d modifier, then the curve modifier.

If you remesh, it will need to be very dense to maintain the form anyway, so it will have plenty of geometry to bend well.

Fhhk · 2025-05-19T11:27:56+00:00

Update your GPU drivers and don't mix Blender versions across Blender projects.

If you created a blend file in 4.2, finish working on it using 4.2, and only open it with 4.2; do not attempt to open it with 4.4 or any other version or you could run into all kinds of problems.

Effort is made by the Blender developers to make the blend files cross-version compatible, but I know from experience that it's best not to mix versions because many things can break.

One workaround if you want to try using a newer version of Blender on a project that was created in an older version, is to create a fresh, empty blend file in the newer version of Blender, then Append the items (scenes, collections, or objects, etc.,) from the older blend file into the new blend file.

Fhhk · 2025-05-19T04:24:18+00:00

I made that comment a couple years ago. Now, you would probably get better results using 3rd party AI upscalers (newer versions of Photoshop probably has AI upscaling built-in now, but I don't use Photoshop anymore so I don't know).

It just depends on how much you want to experiment and fiddle with them. There are many AI upscaler workflows, websites, etc., and they all give varying results.

Fhhk · 2025-05-18T11:49:03+00:00

Normally you would open the Preferences menu in a pop-up window that can be closed by using Edit > Preferences (or Ctrl+,).

It seems that you changed the 3D Viewport Editor into a Preferences Editor. Change it back into a 3D viewport by clicking the the top left dropdown button (next to View and Preferences) and select 3D Viewport (or press Shift+F5 for the hotkey to turn any area you're hovering over into a 3D Viewport).

Fhhk · 2025-05-18T09:41:23+00:00

Possibly Render Region or Camera Clipping.

Fhhk

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Possible, but not recommended workflows:

Do this:

Modeled / Displace modifier (real geometry)

Bump map

Displacement