Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Fastbee

Quad Remesher by Exoside

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Cerbera said:

Bit of a 'swings and roundabouts' situation for me, that one...

 

On the plus side, it's certainly going to make a lot of jobs massively faster, and save the world a lot of tedious manual retopo while we deal with the ever growing client stream of awful CAD models that need sorting out.

 

But I quite like some of those retopo jobs, so will miss them if they become a lot less infrequent or disappear altogether. Might also mean that a lot less of those jobs are offered to anyone anymore, modellers or not...

 

I don't think it can entirely replace the art of modelling though - flow seems largely undirectable, and in the videos I saw  even though its choices were quite good on the whole, it seemed you were kinda stuck with whatever flow it went for, but TBH I'm secretly quite glad it can't do that - means that proper modellers have got another few years in the ring before we're entirely replaced by AI and our skills go the same way as roof-thatching and become 'lost knowledge' :)

 

CBR

Take heart:  Great art and talented artists will always find a way.

 

I had the great opportunity to talk to a traditional matte painter from the golden days of photo-chemical/mechanical special effects (his big claim to fame is that he did the opening title shot for Ghostbusters).  He also did matte paintings for Pirates of the Caribbean movies.  The guy is talented.  I met him at the MAXON Power Integration tour in Boston so he made the switch to digital.  But what struck me from talking to him  is that the shift to digital was a frightening change for the SFX artists of the day.  And this guy new them all...all the greats (even Denis Muren who is the grandfather of digital VFX).  The artists were all terrified (which is understandable) but what struck me is that even some of the seasoned VFX supervisors  were scared (accept for Mr. Muren of course).  Change is always scary.

 

I used to study the old techniques as I have loved VFX since the 1960's when I was a young lad.  What I have found is that knowledge of the old techniques provides useful insights in how to make things look real in the digital world.  Hey, the old timers faced the same issues in the toothpicks and rubber band era of VFX too!  Knowing how they solved it in the physical world helps replicating reality in the digital world as well.

 

Well...new tools create new opportunities and possibilities.  Just look at how many people are in the industry today as compared to the 1980's.  DCC is a multi-billion dollar industry.

 

Re-topology may be automated by the AI demons you fear, but hard-surface sculpting may now become an even bigger new industry  than it is today with new tools and techniques you never would have considered unless you were pushed into it.  Hey, you would never use boolean tools because right now it is easier to just polygon model it from the beginning then mash it together and fix it later.  But what if you could use boolean modeling tools in ways you never dreamed of and get perfect quads with outstanding mesh flow because some AI was able to make it work?

 

Your tremendous knowledge of quad modeling is only going to give you an advantage because even should an AI system do it for you, you will have a deeper understanding of what those algorithms need as you work with the new tools/techniques that these new capabilities create.  That insight will help you push these new tools further than you could if you didn't have that knowledge and that will allow you to once again stand out as a gifted modeler.

 

So have no fear.  You are exceptionally talented modeler and while the tools may change, your talent, knowledge, experience and insights will always be in demand.  So don't fear the change....just go with it.

 

Dave

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you for those very kind words, and you do make some very good points there, Dave - I hope that is indeed the way it goes :)

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Cerbera said:

Thank you for those very kind words, and you do make some very good points there, Dave - I hope that is indeed the way it goes :)

Count on it....and that's coming from an old duffer who has seen it all.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/17/2019 at 9:33 AM, King of Snake said:

Arrimus demonstrates the quad remesher workflow.

 

Very nearly posted that myself 🙂 Interesting that Arrimus views it as important enough to be an entire paradigm shift.

 

CBR

Share this post


Link to post

Just thought I'd mention that I made a video about this plugin 🙂

 

Share this post


Link to post

Here's my dumb n00B question:  why is it important that models be retopologized?    I have experimented with the software Instant Meshes.   It always seems like my model suffers,  one way or another in becoming simplified and regularized into quads.    Is it all about gaming and VR ?    To give a gaming engine fewer data to crunch in realtime?

Share this post


Link to post
  • Topic Author
  • Author of the topic Posted
    1 hour ago, rasputin said:

    Here's my dumb n00B question:  why is it important that models be retopologized?    I have experimented with the software Instant Meshes.   It always seems like my model suffers,  one way or another in becoming simplified and regularized into quads.    Is it all about gaming and VR ?    To give a gaming engine fewer data to crunch in realtime?

    One is you can reduce the polys that helps in handling it all together.  Less polys is faster no matter what you use it in.  If it's a character that will be rigged the polys need to be very specific so it all deforms right when moving them via joints.  You can't get a crease where there is no poly geometry.  It's also better for easy selecting the polys and manipulating them.  It also makes it easier when you go to UV the object.  It's hard selecting the lines it should be cut on if it's all over the place.  Quads also do whey better when using a subdivision object to make it smoother.  Specifically in C4D a tool like this could also be used along with the sculpting tools to move some things in kind of the shape wanted then retopo every now and then to get a better spread of polys so one could continue sculpting without really out there geometry to super high density mesh.

     

    If all you work with is solid objects and it's never moving it is not such a big deal if it's already exactly as you want it.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    7 hours ago, rasputin said:

    why is it important that models be retopologized?  

     

    Not all models do need it. And if all models were built to the same high standards, there would be less need for it still, but they are not, and we live in a world where stuff often has to be done faster than might be ideal, which means working with 'minimum standard' meshes. For example, CAD programs (from which a lot of client models originate) seem to operate in a way that is largely oblivious of quality topology (optimised as they are for design-helpful speedy iteration), or even basic poly rules - they will do literally anything that produces a viable (ie renderable) surface, and that is usually massively unhelpful for anything people might try and do later with that mesh, in a program which is different to the one it was originally made in; if they try and subdivide it, it fails - if they try and add bevels, it fails, and if they try and use half the selection and modelling tools, they will be battling uphill constantly, and fighting topology all the way because few of the tools can work predictably where edge flow is terrible or non-existent. Sometimes you get meshes that were inexpertly modelled, and that might be for 'valid' reasons, like if something was built without animation in mind, but then someone decided it had to move ! Indeed it is most usually character animation where loop placement suddenly becomes crucially important.

     

    Likewise, if you want to use Subdivision, there are even more strict polygon rules, and not following those will produce duff, imperfect or inconsistent (across apps) SDS results. Usually this applies most to heavily curved or undulating surfaces, or to surfaces where there is a mixture of rounded curves and proximal ultra-sharp corners and planarity. Interestingly, in this last of circumstances, there are no automatic tools in existence (not even quad re-mesher or instant meshes) that will do as good a job as the experienced human modeller doing it by hand, which is why people like me are still in a job despite them ! And yet we too welcome these tools because they make our job a lot faster and eradicate a lot of the more tedious aspects of the poly-pushing.

     

    Or, you might start a model in a very painterly / artistic way, with sculpting let's say, which allows very fast shape dev and iteration, but when you finally get your finished form the polys won't be in a particularly optimal order, having been mercilessly shifted about in the sculpt and you can almost always improve that by retopologising the base mesh after it. Also if you are baking new sculpt information, and the base mesh you started with doesn't adequately describe the final form (like if you used sculpting to pull out some horns from the head of a demon for example), so you are getting loads of stretched and uneven polys everywhere, then again, retopo is the only thing that can save the day, and return your mesh to usefulness further down the pipeline. There are also texture and UV-based reasons why topology should be decent. The short story there is that very unevenly distributed polys (even 100% quads) tend to produce sh*tty UVs prone to excessive texture distortion. But again, I could find you examples of circumstances where even that doesn't matter.

     

    And, in the interests of fairness, I should point out the corollary,  that there are occasional circumstances where quality of topology genuinely doesn't matter at all. For fully planar surfaces, for still shots or where there is no deformation animation, and no SDS involved, then your surfaces can look like a proper birds' nest of technical errors and still 'work' in that they give a flawless rendered result and have taken very little time and effort to make, which can be helpful or even necessary with tight client deadlines to be met.

     

    Each job we undertake requires a different level of adherance to various poly modelling rules. The confusion and difficulty for beginners arises not from the rules themselves, which are surprisingly few and simple, but from knowing which ones apply in which circumstances, and why. 

     

    CBR

    Share this post


    Link to post

    Thanks,  fastbee and cerbera,  for taking the time to educate me like this!

    Share this post


    Link to post

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Reply to this topic...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Sign in to follow this  

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...

    IMPORTANT INFO:

    We are in the progress of finalising upgrade to Cafe 3.0. If you are experiencing issues, please change the default theme to Cafe 2.5 and thing’s should work again. We will notify everyone when we resolve all the issues.
     

    It would be also great if you could report any issue you might have on your side so we can fix them. :cowboypistol: