Page 4 of 8


Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 1:30 am
by flb_z
i am looking for some programmers that support the N-GONS PROJECT
every one is welcom :D[/quote]

Hi there!

Ok is it possible to make a function(class) that you can switch to positive or negative boolean edge.

a simple square can make square hole if you make it substractive(negative)
This objet became a filter objet not the final model but a value(xyz) that define the hole, or that define a addition then x-fonction can calculate resulte to N-Gons

it can than act without modifying anything just add a fonction that change the way objet are evaluated.

Sorry for my bad english! I try!

:!: :?:

Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:33 am
by joeri
Hi flb_z,
If you edit your post and change Youssef| into Youssef"] the qoute will work.

I think you are talking about a modifier object. An object that will act as an edit tool.
This would need "realtime" boolean functions (that work).
That the result is N-gon or not does not seem important to me.
If it makes a bunch of triangles or macaroni is irrelevant because when you edit the object that is being modefied you will get the original object.

When applying the modification to the original object, you might want n-gons, if you think that "clean" meshes are important.

Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2004 2:11 pm
by Youssef|3d
I found a new ngons example :D ... _ngons.htm

quotation of the link : "While Rendering in Cinema 4D all Quads and N-Gons will be triangulated."

C4D scanliner workes like blenders scanliner thats why they use faked n-gons

we see the ngons in the 3dview but they will be tringulated thats why we dont need real ngons :wink:


Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:49 am
by Zarf
Youssef|3d wrote:I found a new ngons example :D ... _ngons.htm

quotation of the link : "While Rendering in Cinema 4D all Quads and N-Gons will be triangulated."

C4D scanliner workes like blenders scanliner thats why they use faked n-gons

we see the ngons in the 3dview but they will be tringulated thats why we dont need real ngons :wink:

That document is a bit misleading from a techincal standpoint. Since he was using 'hypernurbs' (which from what I can tell is just catmull clark subdivision) the N-Gons are not tesselated before rendering at all. Instead the whole mesh including n-gons is subdivided by catmull clark rules which ALWAYS produces only quads, no matter the amount of sides an n-gon has. It would be this all quad mesh that would be tesselated into triangles then rendered.


Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 5:15 pm
by Youssef|3d
Zarf wrote
just catmull clark subdivision
thats true, c4d uses the ccs but the fact is that the render doesnt needs real ngons and thats why I posted this link to show everybody that we dont need real ngons and that we can fake the ngons like maya and friends.

are you never asked yourselfe why the people like tools like mirai. wings or 3dsmax or other tools.
For example: mayas doesnt has raytracing they fake raytrace but if you want to get nice and real raytracing results you must use mental ray (soft shadows for example)

Its the polytools that are a result of the ngons support. they have more then 50 poly tools like cutting without getting tris and many more :shock:
and thats why they are so successful

I love blender and I want to support it with my experience and everything that I know.
many blender users dont know the predivide of ngons but if we will get them they will love them and learn more about poly modelling. :wink:

Posted: Sun Nov 28, 2004 11:50 pm
by Youssef|3d
Zarf, you said the true 8)

it looks like we need another subdivisor to integrate faked ngons

catmull clark could be the best solution but I dont know how hard it is to integrate a new subdivisor

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 11:17 pm
by joeedh
Check out The screenshots of the object in editmode uses 100% new, non-Blender Mesh code.

And BTW I talked to lukep on IRC about all the points he raised, that's why there's not a reply. NOTE: This will work in addition to the current mesh system, not replace it (although I'm not sure if that's clear in the wiki, stupid webbrowser wiki editing bugs).

Oh, and as a piece of trivia the subsurf subdivisor supports NGONS!! I love the subdivision code :) ) .

P.S.: And if it's not clear. . .ngons, ngons, ngons. Although I admit I'm not doing this for ngons (I'm doing it for the half-edge data structure, which Blender really needs).

Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 11:59 pm
by -efbie-
I saw this on the wiki and i think it is really great :)
I documented myself a little on half-edge - winged edges, and i saw that you could create 'holes' in a face simply by adding a "negative" edgeloop, or with an "helper edge"
Will you implement this ?
and How does the system handles the Ngon ( a face with one or more holes) that it creates ? this part wasn't really clear in the paper that i found... If you could give me some links, I'm really interested by the subject :)

Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 1:32 am
by joeedh
Here are some interesting links.

Half-Edge data structure from flipcode:

You'll find inside this pdf the allegedgy elusive radial-edge structure. But it's only discussed briefly. ... _nurbs.pdf



Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:44 am
by Azrael

N-GONS let me place geometry where it is needed at that time. The end-end result is usually a mesh with 4 and 3 sided faces. But I love having N-GONS there when I am initially sculpting. It's a great thing for control. It helps to keep the base mesh nice and clean.

If blender added N-GONS I would (and others) feel more comfortable modeling in it. Especially when cutting into a single face.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 1:59 am
by Pierre-Luc_Auclair
N-Gons are always fake anyway. In the end all your graphic card understands is triangles and vertices.


Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:44 am
by Azrael
Triangles are all my video card see's, indeed.

People like throwing that around alot. But the fact is, I am a sculptor, not a video card. And using NGONS in the contruction of my mesh gives me the control I want. In the end I will have turned them all into quads and tri's, but in the building process I use them to create more efficiently and quickly.

A good example of this is try reading a mesh poluted by tris and understand it's construction. You wont see the loops, you wont see the control curves. You'll see triangles.

A feature to enable and disable NGONS is probably what would make everyone happy, since in the end, your video card only see's tri's.

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:58 am
by Pierre-Luc_Auclair
Really, I would welcome ngons with arms wide open. My opinion, I should have stated it sooner, is that blender is currently lacking much more important things than ngons. Yes ngons is nice for a couple of things, but it's not the be all and end all in the modeling realm. I'd rather wish someone to put hours on normal editing, hard edges, node texturing tools, etc. than into what's not a must have.

Really, I've been doing modeling for nearly 5 years now into packages that support ngons, and since I completely switched my modeling to blender, I cannot say I have ever gotten the feeling I was missing it.

Also I don't know how enabling/disabling ngons can be relevant. Ngons don't get created by default, they get the status of polygons (not quad or tris), afaik, simply by grouping.


Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 6:01 am
by Azrael
I like NGONS. I'm not the only one who sees advantages to them, even if they are "faked" they still exist in my workflow, and I can edit their geometry as an NGON and not as a face that now has been triangulated by my videocard and has given me extra edges that I didnt put there myself, removing control from the user.

There are a lot of features that blender has. And features that blender needs.
And NGONS would be nice. Blender is beautiful, we all love this thing. We wouldn't be talking about NGONS here if we didn't care about blender. But I simply feel a lack of control when creating gemometry in blender.

And as a side note if you dont mind... can I see your work?

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:52 pm
by Pierre-Luc_Auclair
Click on the www under my post, there's my portfolio.

By the way, I totally agree with you and I feel the same. But I really think Blender needs some other features very much stronger than ngons. It's a matter of priority. When we get all the basics done well, then we should start implementing about such features.

Meanwhile, I think we should focus on the ideation part and elaborate what we want ngons to look like in blender and how we could innovate.