Just learned how to use the bevel shader aka rounded edge shader for blender.Modo is, dare I say, obsolete
Great, another software bait thread.
>>606928Stop fucking software baiting.
>>606929>>606933stop defending modo
>>606938Kid, I use Blender. I'm just sick and tired of these argument threads that go literally nowhere and are just a bunch of depthless comments.The primary argument I see against Blender is just:>Blender is wrong.Against Autodesk is just:>I was able to do this in Blender, everything else = terribleThere's no objective argument in any of these because all these debaters just for some reason refuse to provide support to their arguments or even attempt to see the other side. >You want a reason as to why Blender is wrong? Oh, because it's wrong.>You want a reason as to why you should use Autodesk? Oh, because I use it and everyone else should.I fucking hate these threads because all they do is incite irrational hate against anons. If we HAD to have these threads, I just want to see proper arguments by people who use both sides and understand their pros and cons.
>>606958a reasonable/intelligent comment on a software b8 post? i must be hallucinatinginb4 the shitstorm hits
>>606928Is that just face weighted normals or what
>>606928>dare I saythat phrase is obsolete.
>>606958You want a reason as to why Blender is wrong? Because it's useless, has no useable UI, if you're a beginner it confuses you and teaches you the wrong basics. Because it wastes your times and gives you zero chance of ever getting a job in a studio. Because its only reason to exist is to circumvent Autodesk licenses.And I could go on a lot longer bu I won't.
>>606982>Because it's uselessThere's the immediate "blender is wrong" argument.>has no useable UII bet you haven't even thought of touching Blender before. >inb4 why would i?I don't know, so you can better understand how arguments work, develop your own stance and not blindly follow bandwagons because you want to be cool like the rest of the kids?>confuses you...how is it confusing? You just exposed yourself as a brainlet if you think Blender is confusing at all. >teaches you the wrong basicsHow are there "wrong basics"? If you're following a shit tutorial, sure, but Blender by itself doesn't do anything different, otherwise it'd be a revolutionary approach to 3D production. 3D is 3D. The workflow and approach are identical no matter your software host. It's like saying you should only use horse-hair brushes to paint when in actuality the bristles of your brush don't fucking matter. >Because it wastes your timesHow does it "wastes your times"? If you can provide an argument that isn't "hurr durr blender is wrong!!!", that is.>gives you zero chance of ever getting a job in a studioYeah, because skills in basic 3D don't translate over platforms at all, huh. You do realise that employers will give training so you can accommodate to the industry, right? >to circumvent Autodesk licensesHow is this even a relevant argument? So what if it circumvents Autodesk licenses? Does that help me model waifu?>go on a lot longerGo ahead, sure. The fact that the last argument isn't even relevant just shows that you were already out of points and scraping the bottom of the barrel.>inb4 you're just a blendlet you don't understand anythingOh wow, ad hominem. Never expected that.
>>606985Don't bother with these shitters cunt, if logical explanation etc woulda changed their mind their shitposting would've stopped a long time ago
>>606985>>606987You two can use Blender all you want. I give you my permission.
>>606988Sure thing pal
>>606982>teaches you the wrong basicsAnd this is coming from someone using terms like "Editable Poly" and "Editable Mesh".
>>606980>that phrase is dare I say, obsoleteanon you had one chance
>>606928Dat glorious cycles noise>>606973No, it's a shader effect that gets applied to hard edges at render time, you don't have to do anything except enable it.This means it's not useful outside of renders, as well as not being able to define variable-width chamfers, but as far as a quick and dirty method for smoothing edges goes, it gets the job done. Since it's just a visual effect, you can get away with shit topology and yolo it up with booleans.
>>607011Isn't face weighted normals a much better technique then
>>607018But afaik you don't have to bevel anything at all to use the bevel shader, while I still have to create chaos in my topology with a single bevel in order for FWN to work. I think it's also easier to control the bevel width with a slider, while with FWN you'd probably have to manually redo everything, right? Then you just bake that to low-poly and GG.
>>607024Managing chamfers is indeed a problem. In Max it's manageable since you can just throw on a chamfer modifier, however it only works with the automatic weighting script, if you want to manually set normals from faces, you have to collapse the mesh to an editable poly, and in this case you have to keep a second copy of the mesh pre-chamfer.It would be really nice if Audodesk integrated a fully featured Edit Normals mod that had the selection tool flexibility of Edit Poly, or perhaps integrate it into the poly tools altogether.
>impossibly small bevel at rendertime
>>606928>lightwave had a (japanese) edge/bevel shader plugin 20 years ago>blendlets get wet over literally 20 years old techalso, fix the noise, blendfag
>>606933Why isn't software shilling against the rules again?
>>607070if something is FLOSS it can't be shilled because its free
>>607068Could you change the code of the shader to your taste?
>>607082Who has time for that when there is work to do? I don't... unless some autistic blendlets.
>>607088the shader is less than a page long anon
>>607088Studios do, that’s why they hire graphics devs.
>>607089>>607095samefag, hang yourself blender shill
>>607006replying is obsolete.
>>607128you are obsolete