You can’t make blanket statements about priority like that though, There’s been plenty a time when the priority for something I’m working on has been to have mid-edit feedback on some linked driver or facet dependant on the geometry so I know what I’m doing. Yes, but it is a question of “semaphores” of priority … the editing phase of the geometry by hand by the user, I think it should have the absolute priority to make sure that the movement of the vertices is always fluid, and only after they are all the other calculations. Heavy geometries, it becomes difficult to edit vertices (I am not referring only to subdiivided surfaces) yet there would be a trick to make them "read to be edited infinitely" there are architectural problems, clipping region and hide the. So having investigated, I suggested this in a conceptual way (and not reasoning from coder because I’m not able to) how the problem could be solved …īlender Artists Community – 28 Mar 19 Blender 2.8 Viewport Performance In practice blender, when moving a small group of vertices, should only calculate the position of that group of vertices in the phase of moving these, and not the entire geometry that remains unedited … Once for hardware reasons it was simply impossible to manipulate meshes beyond a certain number of polygons … as it was conceived not to have had too much importance or simply not given weight to it, in practice from what I understood blender in edit mode, it leads the defect of having all the vertices re-computed at each cycle of cpu / gpu … thus, it is evident that as soon as a certain threshold of number of vertices is exceeded, manipulating a mesh becomes exponentially heavy, even if small groups of vertices is moved, blender recalculates all the vertices of the geometry … I believe that it is due to a type of architecture that blender carries with him from the first cries of his birth …
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |