In context, I gave up my job as a teacher of eleven years to gain a diploma in 3D animation (it was a tough animation school with very high standards & performance expectations: they failed 1/4 of the class but thankfully I passed. Fees were about $10,000.00). There we learned Maya. Ironically, students were indeed unofficially expected to pirate from Autodesk. I was the only one (ever, apparently) to take a stand against that trend by using Blender at home and importing models into my reel as OBJs for work in Maya at school. I had stern warnings from various tutors that this approach was not recommended, but I thought I’d like to avoid the piracy route. Those “colleagues” are both the people I’m now trying to get a job with (e.g. be employed by their company) and also the forums of the same school, because entries to their speed modeling contests and the like can be “spotted” by professionals looking for new talent. For modeling, it is wireframes they are mainly looking at, hence why beveled edges and few triangles (if any) are so important.
I really didn’t want to say all that in detail before because it’s long winded and not constructive to the question about bevels. It could be even used as pesonality-jabbing by the kind of person who would mock my having a diploma in the first place.
…but perhaps now you see, dyf, my claims of working alongside professionals (or trying to) who are using other packages do indeded add up, as does my support for Blender.
You’d be correct there. After I wrote a recent entry to the bugtracker (basically a “nooo…” to the whole bevel issue being dropped) the current dev of that bevel explained to me that they are indeed rewriting the Mesh-Kernel, meaning that any scripts (possibly including all scripts currently implemented) would be needing a massive rewrite. For this reason he said, fixing the problems with Bevel would only be a temporary measure. Incidentally, he also recommended that I should indeed be comparing Blender to other packages as this can help with ideas for improving methods of various functions.
So no, I was not aware of those internal goings on, but at the same time, by closing the thread, it was like saying that the Bevel will not be looked at… ever.
My issue with the Bevel is not that I want a Maya clone. Heck no… I use Blender a lot more than I do Maya. It is that the bevel essentially does a bad job; specifically it adds triangles and cannot add two “side by side” edgeloops (changes and odd number of edges to an even number, which is destructive of the original edge and at times even the overall edgeflow.) Some users may disagree, but if their work were to be scrutinised by panels inspecting their edgeflow and the quad-quality of their mesh faces, how long before they would see the basic point?
I’d hate for there to be loads of eyecandy and complete rewrites added to Blender while all the time the basic bevel does not improve.
So I try to use blender in real world contexts, find there are problems, report back with the issues and now I’m a fag? I’m mind boggled there, but then, I didn’t make this thread as a mud slinging match.
…actually, when I started this thread, I had been asking for anyone who knew of a work around for the current bevel problems (point the way)… I guess the short answer is that nobody does.
Hey Conz3D… I have also tried to peek into the code. Some of the file uploads I put on the bugtracker (particularly the bevelIQ.blend file) were designed with that scrutiny approach in mind.