MESHmachine

commercial
add-ons

(Peetie) #386

No in the handle and deformer, there should be no Ngons. In the plug it’s ok, as I see examples given by MACHINE3. (I have the tendancy not to use Ngons anywhere, but just a habbit that’s hard to get rid of).
The problem with the plugs I had is solved now. For me the problem was that the outher edge of the handle should be smooth. (Avoid tentacles, spikes in the handle’s shape, like that). Here an example how wel the plugs work when the handle is smooth:


#387

Thanks for the reply. Your new (and previous) plugs look great.

I’m probably newer to this than you so, while I have tried for all quads in past, MESHmachine feels liberating not having to be so disciplined and I’ve embraced it!

I did learn from your questions about not using custom normals in plugs. That completely passed me by in the tutorials. Fingers crossed I haven’t done that but I’ll have to go back and check.


(z01ks) #388

Just wanted to the @MACHIN3 opinion on this. I feel like a slight bottleneck in the workflow would be the Quad Corner conversion. Right now it’s just a one-by-one ordeal. Maybe I am just not knowledgeable of the quickest way to create Tri Corners to Quad Corners in bulk? Or maybe there is a way to avoid getting tri corners in the first place? thx!!


(MACHIN3) #389

The workflow is to avoid them in the first place. Don’t bevel 3 edges running into the same corner at the same time.
On the mesh level you can bevel 2 first, and then the 3rd one. With speedflow or by manually using vertex groups, you can do the same with mods.

The reason the conversion of tri corners to quad corners can’t be batched, is that for every corner there a 3 ways to solve it. Think about it. How should that be determined for every corner, when multiple are selected? Give me a solution to that problem and I implement it.

Its not that it would be hard to code, it’s that its hard to decide. I could do it just randomly, but don’t think thats helping anyone.

edit: looks like you cant do it that easily with just vertex groups either. That’s probably why speedflow mixes it with angle based bevels. For mesh bevels it still works as described.

edit2: turns out, it works after all, just had to turn off clamp overlap. also it needs some extra cuts to avoid selection flushing.


(z01ks) #390

Thanks for the insight. This is just pure imagination without much knowledge of how challenging implementation would be, but it could be slightly faster if multiple Tri Corners were selected and Quad Corner modal was activated, then by clicking on the different corners in the viewport during the Quad Corner modal they would automatically rotate. So that would streamline the repetitiveness a tiny bit… But actually I can just try adding a shortcut to Quad Corner :slight_smile:


(Peetie) #391

Not sure if this could be one of the workflows for you:

Base Cube - Edit mode;

  • Side Edges: Edge bevel Weigth
  • Top Face: make Vertex group
  • Bottom Face: make Vertex group

Base Cube - Modifiers: (From top to bottom):

  • Bevel on Weight
  • Bevel on Vertex Group - Top
  • Bevel on Vertex Group - Bottom
  • Here the Booleans come (Duplicate your base cube)
  • Another Boolean, etc
  • Bevel on Angle. This fills in the missing bevels.


Above cubes are made with only bevel and Boolean modifiers.
Maybe an idea to save such a cube in Startup file on a layer somewhere.

Not sure how model-friendly it is, but such a model is easy to adjust in MESHmachine


(MACHIN3) #392

This is basically the workflow speedflow is currently pioneering. It simplifiies this exact process a lot. And yes, those are ideal conditions for MM.