THE N-GONS PROJECT

Compiling, libraries, modules, coding guidelines and porting

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

Azrael
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:46 am
Location: Stouffville, Ontario -- Canada
Contact:

NGONS

Post by Azrael » Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:51 am

NGONS usually look like polygons. But if you could add some kind of option to "Highlight " Ngons in Orange or some other color. Then you wouldn't need to hunt for them in the final cleanup.

Bellorum
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2004 3:27 pm

Re: N-GONS

Post by Bellorum » Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:57 pm

Azrael wrote:N-GONS==Control

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.
100% agreed. Unfortunately some people bashing n-gons have hardly ever even tried working with them. You can argue all gets converted to tris at rendertime, but it's just not that simple. When subsurfed, a 5-sided n-gon doesn't render the same as a quad and a tri. But it's workflow that makes me intrigued. I can sketch up a model in Wings 3D faster than in Blender, and still I've used Blender for a longer time. On the other hand, there are things about Blender workflow I like better, so of course I want the best of both worlds in the same package.
There's no such thing as democracy. There's only the tyranny of one, and the tyranny of many.

cessen
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 11:43 pm

Post by cessen » Sat Nov 12, 2005 12:31 am

Pierre-Luc_Auclair wrote:N-Gons are always fake anyway. In the end all your graphic card understands is triangles and vertices.
Wrong. By that argument we should eliminate quads from Blender, too, since triangles are obviously the only "real" polygon.

Yes, video cards and many 3D renderers do tesselate the geometry before rendering it, but that doesn't mean the geometry is fake. Are quads fake? No. Are NURBs fake? No. Just because they are tesselated at rendertime doesn't mean they're fake.

In the case of N-Gons there aren't standard rules on how to interpret them if they're non-planar (that I know of), but that still doesn't mean they're fake. They're definitely not fake as a data structure.

And as has been reitterated many times here, they are useful as a modeling tool. Their main use is for box modeling, where maintaining clear, clean edge loops during the modeling process is often more important than keeping the model all-quads. It also lets the artist easily dice up the N-gons into quads themselves, instead of having to undo the tesselation done by the program first (which is a nasty work-flow barrier that slows things down). It also lets the artist more easily localize detail in the mesh while modeling, and propigate the edge loops etc. later.

Also, it been mentioned that N-gons have a predictable effect on subdivision surfaces that can sometimes be exploited to good effect.

Azrael
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:46 am
Location: Stouffville, Ontario -- Canada
Contact:

NGONS

Post by Azrael » Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:22 pm

Any word on when NGONS will be implemented? I am looking forward to creating a model 100% in blender. :-)

jesterKing
Site Admin
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Finland

Re: NGONS

Post by jesterKing » Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:11 pm

Azrael wrote:Any word on when NGONS will be implemented? I am looking forward to creating a model 100% in blender. :-)
But you already can! ;)

/Nathan

Azrael
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:46 am
Location: Stouffville, Ontario -- Canada
Contact:

N-GONS

Post by Azrael » Wed Jan 04, 2006 7:03 am

Blender's lack of NGONS leads to some serious control issues when it comes to cutting my mesh. These unfortunate issues lead me away from modeling in it. I, and many others tend to model things in a quick and dirty way, that just lets me let loose on my work.

Image

That image began in a process that looked much like this:

Image

This illustrates how NGONS can be used in the construction of a mesh, and how we can use them in our favour to work on something relatively quickly.

this a tutorial shows another example of box modeling using NGONS in construction: http://ambient-whisper.cgcommunity.com/ ... age-1.html
Last edited by Azrael on Wed Jan 04, 2006 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sonic TH
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:21 pm
Location: USA

Post by Sonic TH » Wed Jan 04, 2006 10:50 am

Yes that was my first reaction when I discovered Blender didn't have N-Gons, "well I can't use this". But you gotta think about this, Blender is open source, if people shun it because it doesn't have a feature they want then it most likely never will. I hope that sooner rather then later, we will have N-Gons.

Azrael
Posts: 0
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 3:46 am
Location: Stouffville, Ontario -- Canada
Contact:

NGONS

Post by Azrael » Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:44 pm

It leads me away from modeling in it, but not from UVW, and rigging. :-) But if it had NGONS, modeling in it would be superb, on par with all the other great features. :-)

artisanicview
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:57 am

Post by artisanicview » Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:07 am

Just a short remark. Actually this thread have visited 15246 times. I think is one of the most vieved threads of this forum. And I think this is normally beacouse of the importance of NGONS implementation into the Blender.

Youssef|3d
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 8:02 pm

Post by Youssef|3d » Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:47 pm

some ideas for blender

http://www.nevercenter.com/videos/index ... review.mov

realy like that tab where you can edit your primitives and the split tool :shock:

Eternl_Knight
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:22 am

Post by Eternl_Knight » Wed Aug 23, 2006 7:01 am

NGONs are very important for modelling (and I agree - the number of hits this thread seems to get implies how many people would like to have them implemented).

I currently model completely in Wings due to its incredibly smooth workflow for just that task. It's support for NGONs makes re-topologizing a mesh for animation very simple. While the Blender modelling workflow is not as smooth as I would like, the lack of NGON support is actually the deal-breaker for me.

Has there been any progress on this or has it been abandoned?

--EK

greboide
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:05 am

Post by greboide » Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:29 pm

http://mediawiki.blender.org/index.php/ ... Dev/HeMesh

i think that it can interest someone willing to help in this project.

James Morris
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:44 pm

Post by James Morris » Sun Oct 01, 2006 5:25 am

having ngons would definately attract people, but the truth is that almost all of them would abandon them if they really learned how to model (calm down). blender's fgons make ngons almost unnecessary, but I think what we really need is for blender to create the f-gons automatically. for example, take one side of a cube and subdivide it (noobies expect four faces but are horrified at the diagnol cuts across the other sides of the cube), but have the fgons created already (should be a toggle button). The result to the user would be that they would think blender has ngons.

psyborgue
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 8:18 am

Post by psyborgue » Sun Oct 01, 2006 7:22 am

James Morris wrote:having ngons would definately attract people, but the truth is that almost all of them would abandon them if they really learned how to model
eeh. I think it's okay to use ngons as long as they are not still there when you are finished with your mesh. I used to model primarily in wings and was very used to doing this. It's nice to be able to delete an edge (creating an n-gon temporarily), and then reconnect the vertices in another manner resulting in better topology (without having to re-create faces). Before i finish, i make sure the mesh is 100% quads.

That being said, there are better ways to model which result in better planned meshes, as well as other ways around the n-gon limitation in blender (such as creating a polyline cage). It took me a while to get used to modeling in blender withoug n-gons but now that i am used to it, i have to admit that i do plan the topology of my meshes better.

However, for those who come from other programs and really don't want to re-learn to model, it would probably be very useful to have ngons (or f-gons if they work well enough). It's hard to argue not having a feature makes a program better. After all, almost every single other 3d app i can think of supports n-gons. Are they all wrong?

BackwardsDown
Posts: 0
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 3:04 pm

Post by BackwardsDown » Sun Oct 01, 2006 8:35 pm

Blender does "need" to have NGONS in my oppinion. They are very handy and are used in a lot of programming-tutorials. Also, people would abandon blender less, becouse in my opinion, NGONS is the 1 big thing I miss in blender.

Post Reply