Geometry node group input for "Single Value Only" #110807

New Issue

Hans Goudey · 2023-08-04T18:25:49+02:00

Hans Goudey commented

2023-08-04 18:25:49 +02:00

Add a new "Single Value Only" option to node group inputs, only for geometry nodes.

This would hard-code the non-field status of that input, and remove the "Use attribute" toggle in modifier and tool inputs.

Add a new "Single Value Only" option to node group inputs, only for geometry nodes. This would hard-code the non-field status of that input, and remove the "Use attribute" toggle in modifier and tool inputs.

Hans Goudey added the

Type

To Do

label 2023-08-04 18:25:49 +02:00

Hans Goudey added this to the Nodes & Physics project 2023-08-04 18:25:51 +02:00

Hans Goudey added the

Interest

Geometry Nodes

label 2023-08-04 18:26:06 +02:00

Iliya Katushenock commented

2023-08-04 19:34:49 +02:00

Like the field interface fact, this can be deduced automatically. And it can be used in the modifier panel.
This creates a limitation in cases where it is not used for its intended purpose. If you can enter a field, then your asset should be able to. If he can't do it, it's:

Or the limitation of built-in nodes.
The author of the asset came up with a good reason for me why I will no longer use his assets. I'll edit it anyway so that built-in nodes can work as intended with fields, and I will write to the author about how he did badly.

The problem that simulations or repeat zones need to work explicitly with singles or fields. And now there is no data in the interface about topology analysis and field interface. But it can be added, like the shape of the socket.

Assets, as a tool, still have to obey this logic.

Like the field interface fact, this can be deduced automatically. And it can be used in the modifier panel. This creates a limitation in cases where it is not used for its intended purpose. If you can enter a field, then your asset should be able to. If he can't do it, it's: - Or the limitation of built-in nodes. - The author of the asset came up with a good reason for me why I will no longer use his assets. I'll edit it anyway so that built-in nodes can work as intended with fields, and I will write to the author about how he did badly. The problem that simulations or repeat zones need to work explicitly with singles or fields. And now there is no data in the interface about topology analysis and field interface. But it can be added, like the shape of the socket. Assets, as a tool, still have to obey this logic.

Paul Szajner commented

2023-08-06 01:21:25 +02:00

I think this is good to have even if we can probably live without it too .

For modifiers panel I often find that the toggle tends to crowd the UI too much especially when the value isn't meant to be used as a field (even if it could).
Making good looking modifiers panels is actually difficult especially with complex geo-node setups, in that matter every little addition helps.

This can also be seen the other way around, like explicitly leaving this area as a field allows to point out that adding an attribute there is how the tool is supposed to be used.

I agree with @mod_moder that this shouldn't be over-done and in other cases adding artificial limitation isn't a good idea.
But at least it's good to have the choice rather than doing hacks like these :

I think this is good to have even if we can probably live without it too . For modifiers panel I often find that the toggle tends to crowd the UI too much especially when the value isn't meant to be used as a field (even if it could). Making good looking modifiers panels is actually difficult especially with complex geo-node setups, in that matter every little addition helps. This can also be seen the other way around, like explicitly leaving this area as a field allows to point out that adding an attribute there is how the tool is supposed to be used. I agree with @mod_moder that this shouldn't be over-done and in other cases adding artificial limitation isn't a good idea. But at least it's good to have the choice rather than doing hacks like these : ![image](/attachments/b5ff7fe4-a111-4baf-9f8b-50b16a40f71d)

image.png

106 KiB

Iliya Katushenock commented

2023-08-06 03:30:48 +02:00

@sozap You showed the same example I was talking about. If I used this group myself, i would actuall remove your hack so that it does not interfere with my use of the fields)

Paul Szajner commented

2023-08-07 13:32:02 +02:00

Sure ! Then it's probably better to do that in the group panel rather than looking for disconnected nodes.
Obviously power users will prefer to avoid unnecessary limitations and in many cases this feature is probably useless.

However, when building tools/modifiers for non-technical artists I found myself wanting to do that e few times !
Nodes allows to build complex tools and at the same time modifier panel is by design a minimalist interface, more control over the UI in general is super useful.

Sure ! Then it's probably better to do that in the group panel rather than looking for disconnected nodes. Obviously power users will prefer to avoid unnecessary limitations and in many cases this feature is probably useless. However, when building tools/modifiers for non-technical artists I found myself wanting to do that e few times ! Nodes allows to build complex tools and at the same time modifier panel is by design a minimalist interface, more control over the UI in general is super useful.

Download

What's New

Blender Studio

Manual

Developers Blog

Documentation

Benchmark

Blender Conference

Development Fund

One-time Donations

Geometry node group input for "Single Value Only" #110807