I haven’t done 3d for a long while now, probably a year. Been busy on other things. I didn’t even upgraded to 501 and 601, which is the latest. Modo, I think, has a trial version with 15 day evaluation.
Hello everybody,
In last commit I add GUI for bridge. Please test it)
Thx.
Yes I know about this problem in some situation. I working for fix it.
Also I add cubic interpolation.
And you can work with bridge in “Face select” mode.
New bridge skipped internal edges. It work such as in LoopTools.
Please test this features.
I Implemented first version of bevel.
Now it work only for linear shape of bevel.
But you can try use it. In some cases not obviously how bevel should work. For example planar case. Which result you expect in case when we selected planar internal edges? (http://wiki.blender.org/uploads/0/0b/Planar_bevel.png)
Some example work of new bevel:
http://wiki.blender.org/uploads/3/35/Bevel_example.png
That looks really good!
With regard to internal edges, it makes sense that if the edges are selected, they will be beveled (Result 1). However, I can see how in some cases it would be easier if you want to bevel around a surface without necessarily beveling internal edges.
What if Result 1 happened if you bevel in Edge select mode and Result 2 happened if you bevel in Face select mode? It would be more consistent with expected results in each of those modes (Edge select / Face select).
I would expect result 1 to happen, since all edges are selected. To achieve result 2, I would use Boundary Loop to select the outer edges and then bevel. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1482587/Blender%20UI/BoundaryLoop.png This way a combination of robust tools gives you many desired results, without the need to have one do-it-all tool.
Also, very nice to see bevel tool progress 
I would expect the second result (mainly because it´s a planar surface), but I can see where the first one could be desired (to create creases).
How about an option to “affect only non-planar surfaces”?
You could work this by working in edge-mode and then select all hard edges, but what if you have a more complicated mesh, and you want the bevel to only affect hard edges, to smooth the bevel without creating redundant geometry? Just select all the faces of a cube that´s been subdived a couple of times and see what I mean.
Btw, great work and looking forard to see your stuff in trunk!
Reading this thread, it would be even better if a dev. decided to resolve a lot of the complaints and bug reports about the bevel tool in trunk by allowing to be replaced with the version shown here before 2.64 is released (which is already superior even in its basic state).
In fact, if any of the work here can help resolve bug reports sitting in the tracker then I would fully support their inclusion for 2.64, as they are trying to find ways to get the number of open bug reports down.
For that you could just do ‘select sharp edges’ or similar.
I still think it should bevel all edges selected while in Edge Select mode, and bevel around the perimeter of selected faces while in Face Select mode. It’s kind of the way extrude sometimes works, depending on what selection mode you’re in.
Not sure what that has to do with anything I wrote…
I wasn’t being cheeky, I was just saying.
Sorry, I was in a bad mood and misunderstood what you were saying.
The tip is helpful, but my problem is that I would prefer to have a bevel that works properly to begin with. In the real world a bevel is used to smooth sharp corners. Adding a bevel to all edges unless that is what you specifically aim for doesn´t really make much sense, and misses the main point of a bevel tool.
What do you think how should looks round beveled for planar case in result 1(for internal edges in planar faces)?
The user shouldn’t select all edges in the first place, that is not the purpose of a bevel tool in the first place(that’s why we have the modifier, which works really bad in some cases but that is not the point here). However, if a user selects to bevel all edges of an object those edges should be beveled, no matter if they are planar or not, like the suzanne example from redtriangle. If a user selects an edge that lies on a planar surface that edge should be “beveled”, that’s what he has chosen after all, the program shouldn’t think for him like: hey you doing a bad thing, I won’t let you do that…
example, edge loop that contains flat surrounded edges: if the flat edges are beveled too it produces fine tesselated geometry all around, subdivision friendly too, if the flat edges aren’t beveled the tool would produce triangles…
anything else other than result 1 and suggestions to avoid result 1 with options is making bevel unnecessary complicate to program, to avoid it anyway takes away power from user.
The example from lamoot is nice but both selections are just wrong, the first one selects unnecessary edged and the boundary loop excludes the necessary ones… Both examples will give “bad” geometry, but it’s the users problem, not the tools problem to deal with…
what is the status of this project with this project and the precision modelling one I am not seeing users posting how the are using the new tools. 90% of the post still read like feature requests:(. GSOC ends in about a month would the even be time for users to test, report bugs and give feedback.
I am starting to think this goes nowhere. UV, smoke, dynamics GSOC are filled with post of people using the new tools here still mostly nothing.
I’m on win32… The last build was on July 8th. Is it up to date so I can test it?
Ha ha, the dispair is a bit unwarranted in this case:) It actually seems RedTriangle is doing some good progress, from what he reports, but I agree it would be nice to be able to test and give critique, hunt bugs and such. Problem for me is the latest sushibuild for windows is from july 8th 
Maybe some nice person could help us with that?
All right! Thanks for the new build, Vitos1k, I’ll check it now!
Running this build gives me an error about missing VCOMP90.DLL. After installing msvc2008_vcredist_x86.exe it still shows me the same error. Do I need to reboot?
What to do with this?
