[Bf-committers] New Modifier : Morph Target

patrick boelens p_boelens at msn.com
Tue May 27 18:39:00 CEST 2014


After thinking about this for a bit I think the main strength of this modifier would come from it's arbitrary topology mapping. Others have brought up subdivided -> low-res mappings and vice versa, which would be a big first step in this.

After that - and perhaps I'm thinking way outside the scope here - it would be amazing if we could morph even something as simple as a subdivided plane into a face e.g. (I'm thinking projection along (an) axis now).

At that point I think there would be more than enough differences to and advantages over shapekeys for it to warrant its own modifier hands-down. For me personally the one-on-one mapping of vertex positions would seem like the biggest workflow challenge this modifier doesn't yet solve, and is what keeps me slightly wary of this being a modifier that adds an extra layer of complexity for relatively little gain. If all we want to achieve is shapekeys in the modifier stack, I would probably vote for just that: a shapekeys modifier that simply can't be placed below topology-changing (adding or removing) modifiers in the stack.

Just my $0.02,
Patrick

> Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 18:13:14 +0200
> From: j.zolcik at allblue.pl
> To: bf-committers at blender.org
> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] New Modifier : Morph Target
> 
> Hi,
> 
> As you probably remember 1 year ago I was working on my own version of
> "Morph
> Modifier" (http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?289299-Morph-Modifier
> but because of a lack of time never got a chance to "rewrite" it to
> implementable version. Recently (actually week ago) I started sorting my
> code a little bit. If you are not in a hurry I will be able to
> "present" some patches soon.
> 
> As I remember functionality was very remotely duplicated and I am not
> sure if my modifier would be ever good enough for actual
> implementation, but I would appreciate a week or two to be able to
> compare.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> On Tue, 27 May 2014 10:20:08 -0500
> k k <kkmlist at yandex.com> wrote:
> 
> > Juan
> > 
> > The idea is  a bit like displacement modifiier in the context of
> > using with subdivision modifier. Instead of using a texture map for
> > positions, we will use an actual higher res mesh to morph to. For
> > example this can be very useful for animating a low res character
> > then applying highres details from a mesh, instead of using a
> > displacement maps. In that respect the results will be much more
> > precise which can be effectively used for places where mesh precision
> > is important (ie landscapes, character interaction) and the final
> > look wont be an approximation like displacement would produce. I have
> > not tried it but I do not think that we have vector displacements atm.
> > 
> > 
> > Pose space, sounds good :)
> > 
> > cheers
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 27.05.2014, 08:05, "Juan Pablo Bouza" <jpbouza at hotmail.com>:
> > > Cool Kursad!
> > >
> > > Yes, in the procedure I'm thinking of, the subdivision level /
> > > vertex count of the subsurf modifier that is before MTM should be
> > > fixed. Then you could apply  a second subsurf modifier after MTM.
> > >
> > > Well, anyway I think you should concentrate on getting the pose
> > > space working first!! :D
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > >>  From: zanqdo at gmail.com
> > >>  Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 00:24:33 -0600
> > >>  To: bf-committers at blender.org
> > >>  Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] New Modifier : Morph Target
> > >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
 		 	   		  


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list