[Bf-modeling] Bevel requirements

Sun Jan 5 01:22:05 CET 2014

But do you like the regular bevel using offset as the default? That is the
question.

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 6:57 PM, metalliandy
<metalliandy666 at googlemail.com>wrote:

>  Yea, I understand your question, mate. :) I was saying that Offset would
> be fine as it would match the regular bevel which is using offset as the
> default.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Andy
> On 04/01/2014 23:35, Howard Trickey wrote:
>
> I was intending to make it consistent with the tool. The question was
> whether the
> tool (and the modifier) should change the default from Offset to Width.
>
>
>  On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 6:03 PM, metalliandy <
> metalliandy666 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>>  I replied to this a few days ago but it got hung in the moderation que
>> so I thought I would post it again
>>
>> I would make it the same as the bevel tool for consistency tbh., so
>> offset would be fine.
>>
>> Is there a web portal for this list on the new site? I much prefer to use
>> those rather than email if possible :)
>>
>> -Andy
>>  On 29/12/2013 15:26, Howard Trickey wrote:
>>
>> I want to put the option for how to measure bevel width (the tool's
>> 'Amount Type') into the modifier.  Before I do, I wondered what people
>> think the default method should be? The old method (and what is assumed by
>> models with bevel modifier in files pre 2.70) is the 'Offset' method.  I
>> can see the argument for making the 'Width' method the default.  Have
>> people here tried both extensively enough to have an opinion?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Howard Trickey <howard.trickey at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> OK, revision 61221 has these changes.  Let's play with them some before
>>> putting them in the modifier, since that will affect what is saved in
>>> .blend files.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 5:36 AM, Howard Trickey <
>>> howard.trickey at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there are no opinions on my suggestions for naming methods, I think
>>>> I'm going to go with them and commit the change.  Reminder: will change UI
>>>> to say "Amount " instead if "Offset", and have a dropdown type with
>>>> choices:
>>>> Offset
>>>> Width
>>>> Height
>>>> Depth
>>>>
>>>>  I think I will go with Offset as the default, since that is what
>>>> users are used to, and existing models with modifiers will have been using
>>>> that method.  Also checked Wings3D just now and that's what it uses for its
>>>> (only) method.  Respond now if you think we should make 'Width' the default.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 7:43 PM, metalliandy <
>>>> metalliandy666 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  Hi Howard,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We can talk about adding inset-extrude like capabilities to Bevel
>>>>> later (I'm not convinced this is the right place for it -- why not in the
>>>>> inset tool itself?)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  Ahh, I didnt mean that we add inset extrude capabilities to Bevel. I
>>>>> meant that we should add the interactive 3d viewport control handles that
>>>>> were in the Inset Extrude addon as they were super intuitive to use and
>>>>> much better then using the tool properties.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Modeling/Inset-Extrude
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPes27n2pIk
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> -Andy
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 08/11/2013 23:24, Howard Trickey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We can talk about adding inset-extrude like capabilities to Bevel
>>>>> later (I'm not convinced this is the right place for it -- why not in the
>>>>> inset tool itself?)  For now I want to fix the Bevel bugs and make it so
>>>>> that people will stop saying "it's just broken".  So I want to concentrate
>>>>> on base bevel functionality first.
>>>>>
>>>>>  For names of these different modes, how about these:
>>>>> Across Face -> Inset or Offset
>>>>> Across New Face -> Width
>>>>> Angle Bisector -> Depth
>>>>>
>>>>>  Would those make more sense to you Jonathan?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:14 PM, metalliandy <
>>>>> metalliandy666 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Yes! That's the one :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 08/11/2013 21:27, Jonathan Williamson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andy, are you thinking of Inset Extrude for the interactivity?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Jonathan Williamson
>>>>>> http://cgcookie.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 3:25 PM, metalliandy <
>>>>>> metalliandy666 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Hey guys,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the main requirement for a decent bevel is that by default
>>>>>>> the result would be as even as possible with the same angle & width being
>>>>>>> obtained wherever possible. Hard surface modelling is made much harder by
>>>>>>> inconsistent bevel widths so I would vode for the 'Along New Face' option
>>>>>>> too.
>>>>>>> That being said current functionality should be retained of course
>>>>>>> as flexibility is the key to robust modelling tools. :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would also like the interactive control handles in the 3d viewport
>>>>>>> from the old inset script to make a comeback and be added to the bevel (and
>>>>>>> inset while we are at it ;) ), though the name of the addon alludes me atm.
>>>>>>> Perhaps Jonathan remembers the one I mean? If not I will find it out later
>>>>>>> and post it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the naming I would use amount or percentage vs fraction too. I
>>>>>>> think they would make much more sense to artists in general.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Andy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-modeling mailing list
>> Bf-modeling at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-modeling mailing listBf-modeling at blender.orghttp://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-modeling mailing list
> Bf-modeling at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-modeling
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-modeling/attachments/20140104/dc8f33c2/attachment.html>