Marius Silaghi has released TurboTriSmooth, a new modifier for 3ds Max that subdivides triangle meshes while promising to produce smoother results and nicer topology than standard TurboSmooth. According to the developer it can be used on triangulated models, cloth, scans, decimated meshes, meshed fluid simulations, terrain, or on any triangle mesh. It’s particularly suited for smooth triangulated meshes like cloth, scan data and decimated meshes, fluids sims and more. TurboTriSmooth costs €40. More information on Marius’ website.
CGPress is an independent news website built by and for CG artists. With more than 15 years in the business, we are one of the longest-running CG news organizations in the world. Our news reporting has gathered a reputation for credibility, independent coverage and focus on quality journalism. Our feature articles are known for their in-depth analyses and impact on the CG scene. “5 out of 5 artists recommend it.”
Look EPIC!!!
This is such a useful plugin.
Outstanding. Marius is a real innovator who’s created some of the most useful plugins for Max. Autodesk should have hired this guy years ago. This one guy puts Max development to shame. Autodesk just keeps raking in millions yearly for their stale product.
2021.3 has new Subdivide and much more. What’s your problem?
Problem is Autodesk is milking Max to pay for all their pet projects. Based on the amount of updates they provide, it feels like they have 5 developers working on Max. Marius shows what’s possible with a single motivated and talented developer who takes the initiative to innovate. It’s very impressive. His quad chamfer modifier is still better than the copy Autodesk made of it, which last time I tested it was useless for game development. Despite working on it for years, it still didn’t do everything Marius’ plugin did almost 10 years ago. I shell out over $800 a year for Max “maintenance” after purchasing it for over $3,500 to begin with. I paid about $40 for Marius’ quad chamfer plugin over 7 years ago, and he maintains it for free. The value is outstanding.
You certainly have no idea about programing and what has been update. Keep dreaming.
Yup, super, they took maya retopo and put it in max, one year later. Wow.
Try the same thing in Maya. Good luck.
True…maya had the retopo modifier atleast a year before us, yet everyone wants to pretend they are surprised. no animation tools for how long now. or even any unique tools that we can boast of. now, we almost need plugins and scripts for every damn thing.
actually it was the opposite, Maya’s team took the Max’s retopo and put it in Maya before it was finished, just take a look at the finished Max retopo and compare it to Maya’s unfinished and underperformance and you’ll see what exactly happened
anuser – You’re speculating. I’ve been a software developer since before Max was released and have a very good concept of the amount of effort and manpower that goes into it.
Senorpablo, you are making some widely inaccurate assumptions here regarding the max development team. You may know how to program, but you do not know much about the 3ds Max Development team. I personally work with them closely and I know for fact that everything you said above is all WRONG aside from Marius being a great developer, I agree with that.
JokerMartini – I have no quarrel with the development team as individuals. Rather, I question the lack of resources provided them by Autodesk, as well as overall product vision and development practices and priorities. No doubt much of which is dictate by corporate interests. Product managers come and go, teams get laid off. All the schemes to milk money from existing customers. Maintenance and yearly releases were supposed to be for our benefit. Subscription now, and all the extortive business practices. Watch what happens if you don’t renew your maintenance more than a few weeks ahead of the due date. That was really eye opening for me. I also listened to an hour long call where an Autodesk agent tried to talk my boss into converting our perpetual licenses to subscription. It was gross. The amount of half truths, omissions and nonsense put forth in an attempt to get the sale.
Shipping beta software as release, and counting on paying customers to perform QA. Max QA is grossly understaffed. There is a 100% reproducible crash bug in the most up to date version of 2016 and it’s not some totally esoteric feature. The bug reporting system, or lack thereof more accurately, is absurd and has been for years. Reported bugs fall into a black hole. The ticket submission requires users to input the same system information over and over, despite Autodesk having a complete user account system. Things that get re-written in Max almost never work as well as what came before. I can list numerous examples of this. The “new and improved” select by name is still awful. That modal window now opens in the top left corner, whereas the old one opened in the middle of the screen because whomever created the original understood that it’s asinine to display a modal control anywhere else. Reported this at least 4 times. It’s so slow also compared to the original, non-script version. Try doing a wildcard name search on a scene with more than a hundred objects. It becomes laughably slow. The default viewport shadowmap looked awful for over 5 years. The default resolution was set to 512, and there was no way to change it other than through maxscript every single time you loaded the program. UI caddies are terrible and utterly useless fluff. Intern level stuff. At least they stopped updating the icons every other year. MCG, while impressive in theory, was implemented in such a way that no one wants to bother to use it. Died on the vine just like the impressive-at-the-time viewport updates circa 2008. Max is now trying to catch up to EEVEE. Here’s some viewport bloom. I’m terrified to try out the new render to texture. The old one was bad, but at least I knew its quirks. The maxscript documentation for RTT was completely lacking and a mystery, but I cringe at the thought of trying to implement the new one.
If you’re so knowledgeable about the Max dev. team, and I’m so far off, tell us how many full time programmers are working on Max. I stand by my statement that based on the yearly updates, 5 programmers could get it done if they were of the caliber of the folks I work with, or Marius. Everything Max does now is playing catch up with other apps, scripts or plugins. Copying Marius’ quad chamfer plugin, and never getting parts of it right even after tinkering with it for five years now. The round shade feature still doesn’t set explicit normals(though I think there’s some new modifier that maybe works in conjunction). Max used to be the innovators. Blender development is running circles around Max. Can’t buy up and neuter the competition this time, Autodesk. I don’t even use Blender, but I donate monthly to the development fund because I believe it’s the best way to improve Max, via market competition. Dollars are seemingly the only thing that motivates Autodesk.
My client always wonder why making my animation is taking days and month when computer is doing all the job.
Like always you have so many inaccurate statement in your writing, I don’t think even worth to argue.
Do not forget Tyson with tyFlow. Where is also usfull modifiers
Marius is one of the best 3ds max plugins developer out there who makes good and well useful plugins for daily work. I just bought it from him, well worth the money!!!
Now with quad chamfer done, Marius should join the max team for an much needed and improved cap modifier.
€40 is asking too much for not much features included.
How does this differ from Marius Silaghi’s Turbosmooth Pro? I feel like Turbosmooth Pro holds much better value for the same price.
The plugins is specifically for triangles, not quads like TS Pro… so it avoids the artifacts from meshed simulations or the examples in the video. Only the super-old MeshSmooth has some options for triangles…
Turbosmooth Pro is made for Quads and TurboTriSmooth is made specifically for triangles, so no $40 is not that much, he is a single developer and needs to earn something!
it is lifetime access with maintenance/updates. it is fair price.
Its 40 Euro for a dedicated tool designed for a specific job.. if it does that job well for somebody who doesn’t want to spend time tidying a mesh to get good soothing results then I can see it being a worthwhile investment. I would guess Marius knows his target market very well after years in the business, and for sure he knows the effort spent in developing the tool. I would agree if you aren’t going to earn money from the tool then 40 euro is a lot to spend.
With all my respect to Marius, the first thing that came to my mind was the price. TurboTriSmooth sure does a better job but I wouldn’t pay whole €40 for that much of an upgrade in quality… especially when I can still stick to turbosmooth
I made a new video showing it on cloth and fluid meshes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVeMfH2qPtM
Thank you for still doing Max plugins! I’ve purchased several of them over years and I loved using all of them. This one also looks very useful!
..and thanks for still compiling plugins for 2014. This is on my to buy list.
HSDS modifier works good with triangles. What advantage to use this plugin for 40 euors?
HSDS does not work on animated meshes…
I added now in version 1.02, a free update, support for semi-sharp creases based on edge crease values and smoothing groups. Besides that the modifier has support for linear UVs and control of the uv border smoothing. It is very fast, easy to use and works with changing topology.
I wish you coded for Blender.
Ohh my god what some people complains about €40, funny to read and at the same time, disrespect to Marius. What do you get for €40? A glas of good wine and a meal on a restaurant?
I can only imagine how long time it takes to develop a plugin, testing, searching for errors, fixing errors and so on… €40 is NOT to much, even if you have Turbosmooth, I had complained and not bought it if it was set to €140 but €40 is nothing compared to what you get!
New in TurboTriSmooth 1.03 – Added a Preserve Quads option so quads won’t be triangulated in meshes made from quads and triangles