Developer Meeting Notes, March 4, 2012
Developers are finishing up the release targets for 2.63. Also, Google Summer of Code is coming up, and preparations are in full swing.
Hi all,
Here’s the notes from today’s meeting:
1) current projects
- Today BCon2 starts, which means we should freeze the release targets now.
- Lukas Toenne finished group nodes patch, awaits review still, added to release targets.
- Cambell Barton fixed BMesh docs as agreed last week. Check his week report here.
- Lukas also is working on custom nodes: (similar to pynode, as first step towards plugins).
- Bastien Montagne worked on new/better definition for “Hinge” bone.
- Nicholas Bishop: sculpt masking is getting closer to finished, there are patches and documentation links here.
- Sculpting partial-visibility patch has been reviewed and is ready.
2) Google Summer of Code
- End of this week is deadline for submitting Blender Foundation as Google Summer of code organization. Tom Musgrove will be handling this, Ton Roosendaal will coordinate the day-to-day GSoC duties. See the User wish list and the Official page for developers.
- The target is to get the official ideas page to only mention ideas that:
- are commonly accepted projects, fitting in roadmap
- are being backed up by the module owners
- are likely to get a mentor who can also review code and help migrating code to trunk
Thanks,
-Ton-
Question: these new custom nodes did they include python scripting nodes?
Still not sure I understand the difference between “merge” and “collapse”: where they both work, they seem identical, only there are situations where latter will not work, where former will.
If you merge all your selected vertices/edges/faces gets merged into one point, if you collapse all connected, selected vertices/edges/faces gets merged in the center of the individually connected parts. Try to select two unconnected faces on a sphere and try both merge and collapse and you’ll see the difference.
That should’ve been:
“If you collapse unconnected, selected vertices/edges/faces gets merged in the center of the individually connected parts.”
So “collapse” really means “merge connected”?
Really looking forward to b-mesh.
Holy moly, this is really taking off!! With B-Mesh and some final tweaks, Blender will be almost on par with any of the major 3d players, yet with more tools in the ditty bag than any other singlel software package!! It’s already lighter, more streamlined, and faster on load-up than any of the major players and now has (IMO) a more functional interface (once you get used to it). I know its easier to use than 3d MAX (personal experience) . And I can’t say enough about the little improvements to the UV tools, while the animation tools are becoming outstanding! I’m using the animation tools considerably as is – the MOCAP add-on stuff has proved incredibly helpful.
So, the software is great as it is, right now. Actually unbeatable. Further I’m saying this as a person who wouldn’t have even considered using Blender 15 mos ago. I forced myself out of simple economic necessity, and then only on the recommendation of a well skilled SILO modeller, who pointed out the worth of “trying Blender”. And who encouraged me when I hit a few problematic points during the learning curve. So for me, I’m quite content with the abilities at my disposal. I only mention the following points as future potential.
If the devs can crack a couple of things later, Blender, I think,
will Literally Bury other software packages as a choice for
pipelines. 1) The size of meshes which can be handled, (which is likely already being looked at) and 2) the ability to sculpt those large poly meshes.
All in all, its incredibly gratifying to see this evolution take place.
Yay, sculpting masks! Been waiting for that for a looooooooong time!
I certained – Blender is the most rapid developing software at the moment. Keep going on guys!
Cycles, BMesh, sculpting, ocean, dyn. paint, TONS of scripts – that’s why we love it and hoping it will be only better.
At least in the modelling world.
I struggle with the nodes system. Coming from a non-video/vfx background, it’s a real challenge for me to get some of the concepts.
With the custom nodes setup, are we talking about being able to load in custom, pre-packaged node setups?
Nodes are basically a programming language, in a form known as “data-flow diagrams”. I guess they’re supposed to be less scary than conventional text-based programming.
Though I think, seeing some of the node spaghetti that’s been posted in tutorials, that we need a “comment” node, which has no terminals but shows a text block, that we can position next to complicated groupings of nodes to explain what’s going on.
Regarding nodes, check out Jon Williamson’s tutorial on creating materials in Cycles, where he explains how the node view and the normal stack view can both be used, but in some cases the stack is more clear and in other cases the node view is more clear, depending on the task. I can post the linkback if it’s needed… http://cgcookie.com/blender/2012/02/29/introduction-texturing-cycles-in-blender/
Nothing about Cycles… Still hoping for a support for my old NVIDIA Geforce 210 on a win7 32bit system. Some builds on graphicall.org have been with all CUBA Kernels, but ony for 64bit computers. All CUBA kernel for the next release please…
Wow, that GSoC wishlist looks like years of work for developers! Should be exciting to see Blender gain all those features.
“autoconvert from BI materials to cycles materials” was a good idea, I really wish it can be impletended soon, GSOC or not
will be there a guide, that describes how to use the new script API to get access to the old properties that are now dropped or replaced by other, because of the new BMesh implementation?
(my MS3D add-on is not working anymore with BMesh 2.62.1 ~44620, and i have no idea how i can create UVs by the new script API {bpy.data.objects[0].data.uv_textures[0].data[0].uv1 is not available in the new BMesh implementation})
See the BMesh items here: http://www.blender.org/documentation/blender_python_api_2_62_0/contents.html
I have a just barely related question here. I saw a discussion the other day about whether or not future tutorials should teach b-Mesh or just teach to the old mesh. The discussion made no sense to me… it’s like replacing the transmission in a car with a different model of transmission, and then arguing about whether or not the instructions should teach the controls for the old transmission instead of the controls for the new transmission. In this analogy, the fact remains that the new make of Blender “automobile” has a new transmission, and people who don ‘t like the new transmission don’t want the use of it taught, for philosophical reasons. In all seriousness… when using Blender 2.63, isn’t the use of b-mesh a given? I didn’t think it was even optional, given that it is a complete replacement for the old programming!
“Improve viewport speed *****
Direct 3D under Windows would be highly desirable, considering AMD and NVidia’s crippling OpenGL performance on consumer graphics under Windows.”
please don’t cripple blender, or make it microsoft dependent, just because some other developers/companies can’t make their product work right
It’s the chicken or the egg paradox though!