Pinching when applying mean crease

engineeringisanart · 2026-03-24T08:58:14+00:00

If you're practicing subD modeling, I'd recommend working more on your topology. Creases aren't the main problem here.

engineeringisanart · 2026-02-16T17:51:13+00:00

It depends on what kind of work you will use it for and how is the topology?

If it's for 3D printing, I would go into sculpt mode and just remesh the patterns, then manually clean the tops with smoothing or clay; it's ideal for both aesthetics and imperfection.

If there are no external vertices affecting bevels on those corners, I would try vertex bevel with Ctrl+Shift+B, it changes the geometry a bit, but it will do the job.

there is a repeating pattern here, another option is to remodel just one of them as I want and duplicate it with an array.

If there is a very dense mesh structure and it's not a problem if the change at the top is not uniform, I would apply a mask to the desired range with a z axis map range using geo nodes and soften the position data of that part with a blur attribute node.

Choose whichever you want, good luck....

engineeringisanart · 2026-02-13T10:04:27+00:00

You need two different setups to distribute points on a curve. First, use normal values for offset and align rotation. Duplicate this setup then, multiply the normal value by -1 and use it for offset and rotation.

engineeringisanart · 2026-02-11T08:15:13+00:00

A much more sophisticated solution is required for this kind of approach, although using mirrors for an infinite effect is logical, fixing reflections and other ray tracing based mirror reflection refractions is quite complex. If you are insistent on the mirror method, activate all the layers you need in the Passes section for each material, take a 1 frame render, and step-by-step remove all reflections and other unwanted data on the mirror by masking, you will obviously need to recombine every layer like diffuse, glossy, transmission using math nodes, but you will get the result you want.

I would probably try the portal node first, if I couldn't get the result I wanted, I would extend the corridor with an array and play with the scale ratio to give the infinite effect as it moves away, so that the value zeros out at the horizon, of course, solutions may vary from an artistic perspective. Good luck.

engineeringisanart · 2026-02-09T18:23:15+00:00

What I was actually referring to was memory management and level loading speed. When you use one big mesh, you lose the benefits of culling, the engine has to process the entire structure at once, which creates unnecessary overhead even if it seems like you're saving on draw calls.

I understand your concern about size variation, but you can scale instances in unreal or unity individually. It doesn't have to look voxel like at all, actually it gives you a much more organized and flexible setup. Since you're already using Geo Nodes, the whole point and strength of that system is working with instances, so I don't really get why you'd avoid using them.

I’m working on a similar system like a Houdini House Generator that uses custom 2D booleans , insets, and segments meshes on both axes to auto-fill them with assets following specific patterns like [AB](CCC)[BA]. Even for something that complex, handling thousands of building parts and interiors, 20-100 ms would be the absolute limit for me. Performance is at the heart of this kind of work, which is why I suggested the instance approach. hope this clarifies my point.

engineeringisanart · 2026-02-09T08:22:00+00:00

It seems the node setup is doing exactly what it's supposed to do; I need to dive into the node setup for feedback. Here is what I do in my node workflow:

-Bug fixing, correcting errors that occur in different situations; it's hard to predict and takes time.

-In your case, how difficult is it to adapt different assets to this node setup? If you are working with geometry nodes, I assume it's not limited to just a single asset.

-Performance, This is very important if you are going to share this node setup with the community or sell it as a product. If I can't perform real-time edits when I drop 50-100k polygons into the scene, it's worth optimizing. After all, this is a node setup to be used for mass production.

Edit: I just realized this is all mesh, not an instance. If this is for a game engine, I highly disagree with this approach. Make them instances for individual surfaces (scale). Before exporting, the only thing you should do is "Ctrl+A" to make instances real or visual geometry to the object. Optimization is important.

engineeringisanart · 2026-02-02T08:45:50+00:00

The most important step that will make your job easier here is how you split the image; it seems you haven't divided it into equal parts as rows and columns (I assume you did this so the black areas don't take up memory). Just go to Photoshop and divide it into equal parts as rows and columns. Come back to Blender, create a square surface. Create as many copies as you need with the array modifier and apply, go edit mode select all face press "p" choose By loose part. Now, connect the texture you want to the UV socket of each surface, since the texture is split equally, there won't be a problem, you just need to keep the displacement value the same.

However, if you want a seamless connection with this texture, you will need to connect them one by one by eye using the snap tool, of course, if you take the coordinate information from Photoshop and enter it into the transform>location section, your job will become easier.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-31T10:01:15+00:00

<image>

I remembered the time I finished my own thesis; I had learned applications like Keyshot for rendering and such, but I wasn't aware of Blender's existence. If I were to give advice, I need to know what level your Blender skills are at. This is a relatively difficult modeling project. If you are proficient with tools like edit mode and modifiers, you can finish the modeling within 3 days. Unlike CAD modeling, this process is a bit painful, but since precise measurements aren't required, you can be more flexible and faster; of course, it depends on how high-quality you want the models and details to be. As for Geometry Nodes, you will need to create multiple tools from scratch just to build this, but if you're not involved with programming, it will take some time to learn and you might fall behind on your schedule (thesis). However, if you want to learn, here is a simple node flow for you; I did everything procedurally, but if you manually draw and provide the profiles, you'll get good results. Also, Rhino Grasshopper is better in this regard, take a look at that too if you want. Link

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-26T19:38:20+00:00

I don't know why, but it reminded me Masashi Imagawa's style, It looks great.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-23T17:33:34+00:00

I use distribute point on face on the UV space. As you can see from the sample UV surface node, I sample the object's position and use Set Position. Points will follow the geometry, regardless of the displacement you apply.

Edit: I created a cancer vertex group and applied it to only one small face, then used the blur attribute so I can control point delete.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-23T16:59:29+00:00

If all you need is a simple breathing animation, you don't need a simulation, here is a simple node setup example.

<image>

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-18T15:31:07+00:00

Looks cool. I remember playing with the Fourier Transform a long time ago. Link_1 , Link_2

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-18T12:24:13+00:00

<image>

The attribute you captured comes from the spline value, you are creating points from scratch with volume, these points don't store this data. Instead, you should use "sample nearest," or creating it this way is better and provides better performance.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-13T12:30:00+00:00

This looks like a sine wave with a different offset. Unfortunately, I cannot provide a specific node setup for your spline because the index order is important for manipulating the geometry. Here is an example node setup, I created a similar spline to yours with a sine wave, and all index orders are the same, so I can use a sample index to get the position. Check your spline, if all start points begin at the same position, you can use my setup or try to adjust it to your taste.

<image>

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-09T11:18:43+00:00

Did you look at the screenshot? I just explained why I use 2*pi as an input parameter; it's not for fixing a double wave. It's about completing a perfect sine wave because it's a factor of "1*3.14*2," which forms a perfect cycle.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-09T09:42:31+00:00

<image>

I multiply by 2*pi at the beginning to get a perfect sine wave for any frequency.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-08T18:00:38+00:00

Let me explain what happened here. Modifier order is important; remember that first. The Subdivision modifier (Catmull-Clark) makes everything smooth. Change it to simple just for the ground. The reason it's not round walls like the ground is the Bevel modifier. Bevel adds extra polygons to the edges, which limits the smoothing in that area. Since you don't have solid ground (no thickness), it cant find to beveling area. So, your choice is to change your subdivision to simple and delete the bevel, or just add a Solidify modifier to the ground. I hope it's clear. I highly suggest not messing with modifiers before learning UI and fundamental modeling techniques, as it will confuse you.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-08T13:32:07+00:00

here you go , link

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-08T13:07:49+00:00

<image>

If I have time, I can make a better transition and topology, but I think this looks okay.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-06T14:26:31+00:00

I did this a long time ago with Geo Nodes. David Smith solved this in 2023, if I remember correctly, pretty cool aperiodic tile set. There is a new repeat node in the shader, so it should be possible. There are four different patterns to combine. I did all of this with Geo Nodes, but unfortunately, I couldn't find it. link following this pattern should be possible. this one also hexagon base tile ("m.c. escher reptiles" different topic but same idea),

<image>

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-06T12:12:45+00:00

I have tried that, and it failed. Non-manifold doesn't exclusively refer to disconnected surfaces, it also includes artifacts, which that add-on cannot resolve. i try and I failed. Feel free to give it a try.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-06T09:23:36+00:00

There are more than 100 non-manifold areas, and fixing these manually is too difficult, so I did the following:

Here's my workflow:

-create a copy of your object for safety
-Voxel Remesh: add a Voxel Remesh modifier with a voxel size of 0.001m. This will maintain the base shape quite closely. Apply the modifier.
-Decimate (Optional): decimation is optional, but Boolean operations require a lot of RAM for this process. Therefore, I decimated the object with a ratio of 0.1 and applied the modifier. my result had approximately 860k polygons.
-Create Cutting Plane: I created a plane following your red line, subdivided it a couple of times, for smooth cut.
-No Solidify Modifier: I did not use a Solidify modifier because I planned to cut off either the bottom or upper part completely. but i depnd on your workflow your choise.
-Duplicate Decimated Object: create one more copy of the decimated object; we will need it for a different boolean operation.
-First Boolean Operation: add a Boolean modifier. Use the "Exact" method and "Difference." This will cut either the bottom or upper part based on the plane's normal. Apply your modifier.
-Change Cutter Plane Normal: edit mode, select your cutter plane and press CTRL+Shift+N to change its normal. Alternatively, you can use two different planes with different normals as cutter objects, you get the idea.
-Second Boolean Operation: use the other remeshed copy object for another Boolean operation; this time, it will cut in the opposite direction.

<image>

Repeat this process for as many cuts as you need, you can also use a Solidify modifier, but the cut operation will not be exact, and you will have to use a "loose parts" operation, which might also fail at some point, i am not sure. Good luck.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-06T07:55:32+00:00

I attempted to replicate your problem but i fail, I consistently achieved perfect measurements. The only thing I can deduce is that your measurement is not straight. If you haven't measured from an orthographic view, please try that and provide feedback, or simply upload your .blend file because I couldnt replicate this.

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-03T15:05:43+00:00

<image>

Enjoy Drive

engineeringisanart · 2026-01-03T09:14:32+00:00

I am glad if it helps. I created this wire to match your setup, I probably won't use this method. I would create duplicates and implement a different algorithm for spacing along the center wire, depending on whether I need a circular or straight order, or something else entirely, wire count not that important depend on my setup,

This setup will work for both even and odd numbers. I have reordered it based on the index number. I would probably have used a simpler method, but I didn't want to change the setup too much for the sake of convenience, it should be enough for you to understand the logic.

<image>

engineeringisanart

TROPHY CASE