[Bf-modeling] Proportional Edit Mode (Connected)

[Campbell Barton]

Committed r57608, Called "Projection (2D)" in the proportional menu,
I found this wasn't useful to mix with `Connected` option, so its
added as another option in the menu.

http://blender.markmail.org/thread/fat3fx432woeodgp

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Jonathan Williamson
<jonathan at cgcookie.com> wrote:
> The 2D aware influence would be very handy in special scenarios but I
> certainly wouldn't want it to be default. If it can be added as an option
> then I'm all for it!
>
> Jonathan Williamson
> http://cgcookie.com
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hah, no worries :) consider the first 2 issues I raised on this list
>> (extrude-transform and pet-looking-stupid) ended up simply being bugs!
>>
>>
>> But I forgot to mention something regarding PET,
>>
>> Someone recently suggested 2D distance measurement option.
>>
>> This would be an option so even if 2 points are close on the screen,
>> that their depths may be different would be ignored (the region of
>> influence would be a view aligned cylinder rather then a sphere).
>>
>> The one use case I can thing of for this is to do a quick bend - and
>> not have to worry about near/far verts getting different influences.
>> Feel like I'm doing a poor job of explaining this so if this makes no
>> sense I could give some other example or a test patch.
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Jonathan Williamson
>> <jonathan at cgcookie.com> wrote:
>> > Oh my... I feel like an idiot. It works exactly like I want it to and I
>> > never realized. I always thought that "Connected" just isolated the PET
>> > to
>> > the current mesh island. Ignore my message :)
>> >
>> > Jonathan Williamson
>> > http://cgcookie.com
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:09 PM, Campbell Barton <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> How would `Topological Length` be different from existing 'Connected'
>> >> option for proportional editmode?
>> >>
>> >> Would it ignore the actual length of edges and treat every edge as if
>> >> it were the same length?
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Jonathan Williamson
>> >> <jonathan at cgcookie.com> wrote:
>> >> > Thanks for the improvements Campbell!
>> >> >
>> >> > While on the topic of PET, the biggest improvement I think it needs
>> >> > is
>> >> > support for Topological Length, rather than just proximity. This
>> >> > would
>> >> > work
>> >> > almost exactly like Select More/Less, such that you can grow out the
>> >> > area of
>> >> > influence, based on the adjacent, connected geometry.
>> >> >
>> >> > Two examples of how this would be used are:
>> >> >
>> >> > Scaling just the lower lip on a character, without touching the upper
>> >> > lip.
>> >> > Posing an arm by rotating around the shoulder, without affecting the
>> >> > ribcage.
>> >> >
>> >> > Each of the above is quite tricky to do with the current PET. You
>> >> > always
>> >> > have to do a lot of cleanup work. I generally just avoid PET and do
>> >> > it
>> >> > manually for these reasons.
>> >> >
>> >> > Jonathan Williamson
>> >> > http://cgcookie.com
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Campbell Barton
>> >> > <ideasman42 at gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> To follow up on this topic, from the feedback so far my impression
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> that PET currently works acceptably, minor improvements are always
>> >> >> nice but I didn't hear anything very urgent about PET failing or
>> >> >> being
>> >> >> broken, or connected behavior being really annoying the way it is
>> >> >> now.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Aside from Andy's comment about visualizing weight - I'm going to
>> >> >> call
>> >> >> this `Good Enough`, and move on (in fact move back to mirror feature
>> >> >> discussed before).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Feel free to disagree and raise issues with PET - but think we can
>> >> >> move onto more important topics.
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Bf-modeling mailing list
>> >> >> Bf-modeling at blender.org
>> >> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Bf-modeling mailing list
>> >> > Bf-modeling at blender.org
>> >> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> - Campbell
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Bf-modeling mailing list
>> >> Bf-modeling at blender.org
>> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bf-modeling mailing list
>> > Bf-modeling at blender.org
>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Campbell
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-modeling mailing list
>> Bf-modeling at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-modeling mailing list
> Bf-modeling at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>



-- 
- Campbell