[Bf-funboard] Remove doubles issue & use for UV

[Julio Iglesias]

Thanks! "use unselected" is a must indeed!

By the way, probably this is a common question but... why are UV operator
panels in the 3d view?
It is not a problem using the default "UV Editing" layout, as the panel is
just at the right side of the uv editor, but in any other layout setup, it
feels completely wrong usability wise.

Regards.


On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:14 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Following up on this old thread
>
> UV remove doubles committed by Matthew Smith
> r52190 - http://markmail.org/message/mrfbhvrhn5mgpsyb
>
> I've added 'Use Unselected' option so you can merge a UV island into
> its surrounding UVs.
> r52199 - http://markmail.org/message/6qfdlwl6vewlg532
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Julio Iglesias <j at zafio.com> wrote:
> > Now that's Perfect! thank you!
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Julio Iglesias <j at zafio.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Interested to know why it only worked `Good enough`? - Did it work
> >>>>> with the example image you posted, how should it work better?
> >>>>
> >>>> I hope I didn't offend you! It is just that using unselected as target
> >>>> leaves little control in some situations where you have two nearby
> >>>> loops at the same distance and you only want to merge one. But we can
> >>>> always slide away the other loop as workaround, it doesn't hurt much.
> >>>
> >>> Not offended at all :), but I like to know any problems with current
> solution.
> >>>
> >>> Its often good to submit a blend file (rather then just an image or
> >>> text description), otherwise devs have to guess that it solves the
> >>> problem a user describes.
> >>>
> >>> But I see what you are talking about now,
> >>>
> >>> For the specific task of joining loops I think remove-doubles is too
> >>> generic a tool,
> >>> Though there is one change that could be made so it works better in
> >>> your case - Selected->Unselected could have an option to enforce a 1:1
> >>> match (where 2+ selected vertices never merge into one unselected
> >>> vertex).
> >>> Though as Alberto points out - this is getting closer to being a
> bridge tool.
> >>>
> >>> So suggest the following:
> >>>
> >>> * Remove doubles (Unselected) option is generic and doesn't care about
> >>> loops/topology, I prefer to keep it this way.
> >>> ... When geometry mostly overlaps but you want to choose to merge one
> >>> part into another I found this quite handy.
> >>> ... If you have multiple edge loops that it may merge into, you can
> >>> simply hide one of them so its not taken into account.
> >>>
> >>> * Alberto's suggestion of using bridge is good and can use used as-is,
> >>> collapsing after is a bit cumbersome but OK.
> >>> ... Rather then extend remove doubles it may be better to add option
> >>> to bridge without face creation (which simply joins), this could have
> >>> a `Factor` 0-1, where 0.5 merges in the center.
> >>
> >> Committed merged-bridge (Option for bridge tool & factor to slide
> between loops)
> >> http://blender.markmail.org/thread/vdfegqlhtto6igqc
> >>
> >>>> Anyway, what I really miss is an option to merge at center rather than
> >>>> just at the unselected position.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> - Campbell
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-funboard mailing list
> >> Bf-funboard at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-funboard mailing list
> > Bf-funboard at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
>
>
>
> --
> - Campbell
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-funboard mailing list
> Bf-funboard at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-funboard
>