CSG Subtract!

I have an idea for a new verion of blender. I don’t know if it is possible to program this for Blender but if it is it sure would be a great tool.

I sometimes use a program called 3dgamestudio. This app is a block modeling game maker. Its engine has a great tool called CSG subtract. This tool is great becasue you can take any shape you want, have it touch another object, hit the CSG subtract button, and then delete the object. When you delete the object it takes along with it what ever part of the other object is was touching in its shape. So you can see how this could be a very helpful tool for cutting holes or whatever else you want out of an object.

If Blender already has a tool like this I am not aware of it. If it already has this tool please let me know how to use it.

Just a thought,

TraceR

Isn’t that what the booleen function “difference” does?

yea that is true, i just wish it gave cleaner results.

Is there a tut or something on how to use this?

yea that is true, i just wish it gave cleaner results.[/quote]

Some of the coders have been working on imporving the booleans recently.

jesterKing has posted a build “on behalf of Laurence” to test some new boolean meathods if you want to try it out. There is also mention of a python script by SpkyElctrc.

http://www.blender.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=phpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=4545

Yeah, the booleans need some work…
But CSG itself (Constructive Solid Geometry) is a completely different modelling concept than Blender’s mesh-based modelling, so you couldn’t really implement it, without implementing the whole CSG approach. Would be nice though :slight_smile:

Zsolt

There are a couple of Boolean tuts out there.

http://www.janw.gothere.uk.com/Tutorials/boolean.html

http://members.yourlink.net/gruff/intersect.html

I thinks there’s one on blender3d.org, too.

ooo, thanks! these look good. :stuck_out_tongue:

By the looks of things they were made for pretty old versions of blender, but they should still work as tuts.

This may be a tough choice through because the CSG approach is somewhat similar to what “solidworks” does, basically the concept is as follow:
You start out with a simple object ( e.g. cube, cylinder, cone…) , and then do varies “operations” (e.g. bevel, halo, boolean…) with it, now here’s what seperate CSG from most 3d editing method: In most 3d editing method, the operation done is permanent and unchangeable. If you scale up a cube and halo it with 5 unit thick of “wall” remainning, you can’t undo the scale directly to make a unscaled but haloed cube with 5 unit thick wall.
However in CSG all operations are independent from each other. All operations can be turned on and off. You can bevel then halo a cube and turn off bevel to see a cube that’s halo but not beveled.

And what about Feature Based Modelling? That would be the ultimate solution to all our boolean troubles :slight_smile: The holes, cutouts, etc. could be moved around in the model, or turned on or off, without affecting the original model.
But the problem with this, and CSG is that it would take Blender in a CAD direction, which several people, including some coders, seem to oppose, (see the other threads on Blender’s future). I for one don’t though, I think these could give Blender very powerful modelling tools.

Zsolt

May be if the ideological gap between the traditional editing and the CSG editing is too big, but the demand for CSG grow, it may be good to solve this by adding a new data type besides mesh, meta, curve, etc, called “CSG” :wink: Then data in meshes is stored with the final results only, while data in CSG is stored by the detail of each operation. (But this may make file size WAYY large)

CAD programs tend to have a lot of odd stuff with their tools, Blender should remain as a fully featured multi-purpose modeler.

Umm, having NEW modelling tools would make Blender even more multi-purpose, wouldn’t it? I mean I didn’t say the old stuff should be replaced.

you seem to know nothing. but speak all the time.

CAD is increadibly important in my line of work.

sorry to say it but if blender had cad features, A) it would make my job much easier, and B) i could probably get thousands of dollars towards a training program for blender within my university.

CAD functions can also improve blenders artist modelling without compromising things.

cad has the following areas of expertise.

Industrial design
-Products
-furniture
-cars
-boats

Architecture
-visualisation
-floor plans

Film
-scale set representation

interior design
-walkthroughs
-interior plans

note that the current blender is targeted entirly at the movie. creative sector, and this area is not as big as the ones above.

my unviersity spends about 120,000 a year on a CAD package, of which i do not know how to use because i use blender.

i do better work in blender than these guys do in this program even though blender is not a cad package. now if blender was a cad package then i could do it faster and i could get the university to stop wasting their money (hopefully i could get them to waste it on blender instead)

i am telling you guys that CAD is BIG BUSSINESS. it shouldn’t be ignored. and if coders are opposed to cad funcitons in blender then i am sorry but here is where i will stop using blender.

i am putting my career on the line by choosing blender with the assumption that within 3 years it will be CAD capable.

i might pay that money to take the CAD course at university if that is the case.

Alltaken

[quote=“Zsolt”]

Umm, having NEW modelling tools would make Blender even more multi-purpose, wouldn’t it? I mean I didn’t say the old stuff should be replaced.[/quote]
Well, I guess as long as blender can still do all the stuff it can do now.

Umm, having NEW modelling tools would make Blender even more multi-purpose, wouldn’t it? I mean I didn’t say the old stuff should be replaced.[/quote]
Well, I guess as long as blender can still do all the stuff it can do now.[/quote]
Why wouldn’t it?

Kansas_15 strikes again