Search this Topic:
Mar 19 11 7:34 AM
Mar 20 11 1:01 PM
Crash when attempting to UV geometry that is as far as I can tell clean.
Crash dump: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8...s/BrokenWings_crash.dump
Model file: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8...ngsBugs/BrokenWing.wings
Steps to reproduce: Select object, enter UV mode, select all charts, scale->normalize. Wings will report an internal error, and afterwards the interface will be increasingly unstable.
Mar 21 11 2:46 PM
Mar 21 11 10:45 PM
Mar 23 11 6:51 PM
Steps to reproduce:
Then you get:
front view top view
As you can see, the "crease" comes out unexpected, not with a cylindrical symmetry around the cylinders centerline as wanted. However there seems to be a symmetry, at least a mirror one. Or, maybe, even a cylindrical one "off center" by some amount to the right and a very little amount down (in top view), arbitrarily chosen?
In normal use of edge crease one wouldn't notice that. So happily continue to use crease. However, I would want that command to behave as correct as any other command in Wings.
Best regards, Georg
PS: tested with 1.4.1 and the latest snapshot.
Mar 23 11 7:06 PM
Mar 23 11 7:32 PM
@BlackHarmo: yes, essentially you are right: "Crease" is intended to be used on open edge loops. That is why I said "happily continue to use it". But you can't imagine a good use of it on closed edge loops ... with my images at hand?
I just wanted to make some "lathe" object and "Crease" seemed to be a shortcut (I know, that there are several other ways, to get a similar object, e.g. some sequence of bevel/extrude/scale and maybe even other ways).
Mar 23 11 7:40 PM
Mar 24 11 5:58 AM
Mar 24 11 4:18 PM
Mar 25 11 1:53 PM
Mar 25 11 2:55 PM
Mar 26 11 5:46 PM
Mar 26 11 7:30 PM
Mar 27 11 6:14 PM
Mar 27 11 6:48 PM
While working on another strange/interesting thing requiring exact angles I noticed, that the display of angles top left for EDGES seems to be OK, but the FACE angles are wrong/disagreeing:
a) 72°, OK b) 108°, WRONG
Both are the same object, derived from a Y scaled cube, thus the starting angles between edges and faces all were 90°. Then I selected (in 2 steps) the 2 faces shown and rotated them around the front edge (parallel to Y) by +-9° to achieve the wanted 72°.
The object itself has no 108° angle at all ... only the NORMALS of the 2 faces, pointing outwards, have that angle, indeed. That is very inconvenient for most users IMO, because it disagrees with the edge angle display. So I think, the inversed normal angle should be shown for faces.
And a final grumble: yes, the angle between isolated faces and edges (not considering adjacent topology) at maximum can be 180°. BUT, Wings KNOWS, by definition, adjacent topo, so it theoretically can figure out, that the angle between 2 faces/edges in a concave object is > 180° and should show that?
Mar 27 11 7:22 PM
Mar 27 11 7:29 PM
Mar 27 11 7:44 PM
Mar 27 11 7:55 PM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.