Shrinkwrap with Blender 3.1 Geometry Nodes - TUTORIAL

In this tutorial I show how to replicate the shrinkwrap modifier using Geometry Nodes in Blender 3.1 alpha. I replicated a particular modifier configuration (Method: Project, Axis: Positive, Culling: Front), and I implemented the offset option.
Let me know in the comments if you have any Ideas on how to improve the node tree!
--- ABOUT ME ---
● Artstation ➜ www.artstation.com/rbancone
● Behance ➜ www.behance.net/RiccardoBanco...
● Instagram ➜ riccardoban...
● Twitter ➜ riccardobancone

[@cekuhnen]

This is going to be very interesting to see if and how geometry nodes can replace the linear modifier stack and generate a much more generative design workflow

[@VerticalVertex]

Big thanks for the tutorial. Hoping for more in the future.

[@dontmvme8796]

Thanks for the video! Seeing this shrinkwrap made with geometry nodes, I can't help but hope someone would come up with a way to combine this with face maps to wrap quickly and simply a mesh with clean topology on a messy high resolution mesh (so as to avoid having to retopologize manually every single time), the idea being to hit face maps with the same name so that the eyes, cheeks, eyebrows, etc. from one mesh would wrap themselves directly around their conterparts from the other mesh, if that makes sense ^_^

[@gabrielmoro3d]

This is amazing! How would you go about making it project with the Nearest Surface Point method? Thank you!!

[@DrunkenUFOPilot]

Handy trick: after parenting the plane to use with GN, to the original plane using shrinkwrap and subdivisions, I add a Wireframe mod to the original plane, after all the other mods. Make the wires skinny. Now I can see through the original shrinkwrapped plane to the new GN one, in case they're not matching or I have different offsets. Very handy for experimenting!

[@riccardobancone3761]

Yeah, that's a pretty clever trick!

[@jennylee7483]

Very useful! Thank so much :D

[@mmcc2852]

very interesting and easy to follow along, but i think you miss understood, the offset should be base on the normal after projection(hit normal?)

[@ГенаКорбан]

If I have a lot of decals, can I shrink them with auto-increasing offset for each to avoid z-fight?

[@GLGraffixx]

Big Thanks :) for it was important to use it with multiple objects. (I have now 2 Suzanne in this scene ;) ) it will be time for modifier nodes :D

[@GLGraffixx]

Is there a way to shrinkwap on it self? Like a closed hand beteew the fingers and the hand inner side.

[@MikuDanceAnima]

Excellent tutorial, super well explained, I have a question. The edges are very hard, how can I make them softer? I wanted to use geometry nodes as an effect of a finger pressing a pillow.

[@AArmstrongC]

you could add a smooth modifiera, use shade smooth, or a subsurface modifier

[@SanOcelotl]

how would you make it affect just your vertex group?

[@DjAbhiphop]

Any change we can get the node setup

[@trafficface]

I knew it! It is possible!

[@maayaa77]

Delete the over shot raycast edges ?

[@shellesh]

Is the Capture Attribute trying to offset the disc using Suzanne's normals? or the normals of the disc at point of raycast?

[@riccardobancone3761]

To my Understanding so far, placed there, the capture attribute stores the original plane's normal just after the subsurf node, before the raycast. Using that normal appeared to give the most similar result to the modifier counterpart, but It's totally fine to use the hit normal to displace the mesh, infact that was the first thing I tried while reverse engineering the modifier by observation / trial and error. It just gave me a slightly different result , but it probably makes even more sense to use the hit normal direction.

[@tistalagosta3449]

guys i'm new to blender and i was wondering didn't they just release 3.0 and after two weeks they release a new version is this normal

[@riccardobancone3761]

This is the alpha version, not official stable release.

[@tetsuooshima832]

Why ? That's what you need to answer before starting the tutorial. Why do you even need to do that when you already have the modifier. Then I'll consider waching 20 min about it x)

[@riccardobancone3761]

I can assure you that Having any functionality implemented in nodes is way more flexible and powerful than modifiers. This is a simple example , to prove that the final result is the same as the modifier, but imagine having a bigger and complex node tree and you want to shrinkwrap geometry on another in the middle of the tree. You couldn't use the modifier. That's the whole point of nodes, they are more flexible and powerful than a linear Modifier stack.

[@tetsuooshima832]

@@riccardobancone3761 a bigger tree ? No I can't imagine what you have in head, I guess that's not for me then. I use Houdini for the complex things, I'd use Blender for the ease of use, so I can't comprehend yet why would you make it more difficult. One day I will understand maybe, so far I'm still having a hard time with those geometry nodes

[@riccardobancone3761]

About complexity, have you ever seen any video from erindale Woodford? I'm with you with the ease of use of blender. Implementing nodal counterparts of modifiers doesn't remove the ease of modifiers workflow. For simple tasks I still want to use modifiers, and I hope that workflow won't be removed. But If I want more control, I'm all for nodes, just like you use Houdini for complex things, I hope a day I'll be able to do Houdini like stuff directly in Blender.

[@dreamsprayanimation]

I can give you one very specific example of why this is useful in nodes. Using noise to drive a procedural animation of a volume cube being shaped by say a wave or noise texture. Geometry made this way randomly adds and deletes points per frame hence why it is procedural, if I wanted to say capture the movement of these points to scatter instances on it or simply retopo/remesh using a subdivided cube using this node setup would allow it all to be contained within the same node tree and not use a single modifier. Shrink wrap is both scale and location dependent. If the source object moves or scales the modifier can break. Using transform node at the very end of this setup would act as a whole unit as if everything was patented to itself.

[@w1ck3d01pr]

By your accent ain't you Kaizen? Why even call yourself another name. Weird.

[@SloppyPastrami]

is there any way to make this setup work with geometry that is not a plane ( ex a cube ) such that only the faces that touch the target would actually connect and the rest would stay above and deform to match ?

[@riccardobancone3761]

The setup as is should work as you describe with any mesh.