DominikS

Wow. Thanks for you early review! Even 2x could be a game changer, but 10x sounds awesome. I need to check that on some of my projects, but I'm happy when I get 2x anyway ...

Wow, thx @Zerosixtwosixthat's really an interesting setup! Even if I don't use it with this project, I will come back to this in the future!

@HappyPolygonYeah I thought about ropes too, but I wanted something that's a little more easy to control. So currently I try an emitter with a tracer and some turbulence. And this actually works quite nicely to create those strands. Maybe that's the way for me to go. Thanks anyways for your suggestion. @MashFor the cable itself, I had great success using the spline wrap. I completely forgot about spline wrap. So thanks for your input as well.

I don't need to animate it. Also I do not need to cutaway parts from the outer sheath. So I don't need to run the cables all the way along the rubber hose. I definitely need the splayed end. Actually, I need even more control over the ending than the image suggests. This is because it should be possible for the fibers not only to spread out as evenly as in the picture above, but also to clump a bit and then these clumps are basically new strands. See the attached sketch. Thanks for your help so far.

Hi everybody, I am trying to build a graphic like the one attached. But I do want to keep at least the base splines or whatever as procedural as possible. Simply because the individual fibers should be able to be randomized in length and also in their flow and direction. Also the whole cable should be able to bend. I hope this makes sense. I quickly tried a few things like using hair as a base, or traditional modelling and rigging but I don't really know what the best workflow would be. I don't have a problem to convert to polys at some point, but want to keep the procedural setup as long as possible. I am thankful for any advice!

This is an awesome list of overlooked features. You're usage of the Polygon Reduction tool is interesting, also I have never tried the sculpting projection tool. Thanks @HappyPolygon

Well, that's worth a try I guess 🙂 Thanks!

Thanks @imashination for your explanation – that makes sense! I guess there is no option to increase the amount of detail for the z-buffer? Or is there any workaround for a better viewport result? I find that very confusing when modeling ...

Thanks, @Cerbera But I think we talk about two different things. I mean the lines marked in the image below. Why are these little line parts visible? The corresponding geometry is hidden inside the other cylinder ... Its even more clear if I zoom in and out ...

Hi everyone, I am always wondering about why parts of the wireframe lines are visible in the viewport although they actually shouldn't be visible. If you look at my example image, I had two cylinders with the same radius, just rotated. As you can see the lines don't stop where they meet, they are a little bit longer. If I put both of these cylinders inside a unite boole, the wireframe is correct. Why is there a difference, I don't get it. Any ideas or explanation? Thanks!