Hybrid mutation between two object

unhandled

(Shimpei) #1

Hello everyone,

I want to make hybrid mutation object like this picture.

AXIS%EF%BC%BFYuta-Sano-%E3%82%B0%E3%83%A9%E3%82%B9%E3%83%9B%E3%83%83%E3%83%91%E3%83%BC%E3%81%AE%E5%9B%B3%EF%BC%88%E3%83%8F%E3%82%A4%E3%83%96%E3%83%AA%E3%83%83%E3%83%89%EF%BC%89%EF%BC%92

Is there anyone who knows how to do like this?

What I want to do is to generate object from two object which has both feature.
And also I want to modify its shape by balance which depends on which feature is stronger.

Best regards,
Shimpei


(Bumaye) #2

Hi Shimpei,

I am not sure, but you could use the Plugin “Pufferfish”. it has a component , where you can tween between two meshes, but it only works, when they have the exact same amount of vertices…

greetings,
bumaye


(Shimpei) #3

Hello bumaye,
Thanks for your reply.

That’s truly what I want!

I will try this one.

Best
Shimpei


(Parabolic Design) #4

Any good idea / workflow, how to make/rebuild the two objects to have the exact same amount of vertices?


(Bumaye) #5

I never tried it out, but I would suggest to model the objects with the same base object like a torus .

But I have to admit , that I don’t really have an idea, how to model a table, with a torus as base :smiley:
It could be possible, to modify one of the objects to get the same amount of vertices ( like cull vertices or adding some…)

greetings,
Bumaye


(Michael Pryor) #6

The usual workflow for shape blending (in Maya and other software) is that topology must be the same - this is more than just vert count, but also vert order and genus, you want the correct things to blend to the correct positions. The typical workflow is to take one geometry like a mesh sphere and model both geometry from that sphere without changing the vert count. It wont be easy from torus to Table, they have different topology genus. That table is genus 0, that torus is genus 1.

This donut to coffee mug works well because they are both genus 1 (have one hole)
Mug_and_Torus_morph

Typically you should blend things that have the same genus, vert count, and vert order.


#7

Interesting!

I guess you could solve the genus problem by putting a very tiny hole, nearly invisible, in the middle of the table?

Edit: But then again, you’re not gonna get the same morphing results shown in the OP’s image.


(Michael Pryor) #8

Exactly, If that is where you wanted the torus hole to blend to. The components will work no matter what as long as vert count is same, otherwise you have verts that don;t know where to go. The topology planning is up to the user. IF you want the torus hole to blend to the leg, put a little hole in the leg.

You could blend from torus to table with no hole in the table and just have the vert count the same, but the results will be some overlapping mesh faces somewhere with some bad geometry.


(Michael Pryor) #9

OP’s image isn’t really a blend. It looks like they probably had the same vert count and just tweened the verts, but not the mesh faces. Then used something like cocoon or some matching cubes mesh on the verts along the way. Not really a blend but more of creating new meshes along the way.

Edit: Here you go - https://www.axismag.jp/posts/2016/12/67956.html

Looks like it is a regular tween just without caring about self intersections.


(Parabolic Design) #10

A good trick, (work well with 3ds max).

I don’t know if is possible to do something similar with GH.


(Michael Pryor) #11

It is, but again - you need same genus for that to work (and relatively same “shape” bounding mesh) - for instance if you tried to use that outer triangulated mesh sphere to wrap a donut, it wont figure out the hole.


(Michael Pryor) #12

Here is a similar concept Daniel Piker did with my component (an old earlier version) and Kangaroo to blend two rings with different topology - by wrapping one ring in the others topology. But again, same genus that is why it worked well.

interpmesh.gh (100.4 KB)
Capture


(Shimpei) #13

Hello all,
Thanks for all your example and explanation.

In the view of genus, no hole shape will generate better result.
Is it correct?


(Parabolic Design) #14

I was thinking if is possible…

  1. To wrap the main object without the holes.
  2. To wrap the holes as solids
  3. During the morphing, move and subtract the solid holes from main object.
    Good idea?.:thinking:

(Michael Pryor) #15

It doesn’t matter. What matters is the that they match.


(Michael Pryor) #16

Holes is topology are not a subtraction, they are a wrapping of the surface.