It's actually simple to implement in general. Doesn't mean cheap or quick, but there's hardly anything exotic about it. Voxelling non watertight geo is also a non-issue, I think it's highlighted in the features because some stuff out there frequently craps itself with non WT and non Manifold topology, but it's not a technological breakthrough.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: > I meant "simple to implement" once you have done it in maya of course I am > sure us not simple, specially since looks like non water tight geometry is > handled apparently very well and that may be the tough part. > > I will ask our RnD guy here what does he thinks about it. > > Jb > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On 19 Mar 2014, at 08:17, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Its really nice research, and simple to implement, this is the kind of > tool that will cost you peanuts to integrate in max and Softimage isn't it? > > > > I will certainly read the paper properly. > > > > Jb > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > >> On 19 Mar 2014, at 02:31, Luc-Eric Rousseau <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paulo César Duarte > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Agree, and the geodesic voxel binding skin algorithm, Blender already > have > >>> at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only > >>> implementation of existing tools. > >> > >> Got a link to that? Geodesic voxel binding is research by Autodesk. > >> > > -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
