Hey,
I’ve been experimenting with the Boolean modifier - its a great tool.
When I put it to difference, I find I can get cross-sections of stuff - which is really cool.
It even gives a thickness to those cross sections - but the UV mapping acts weird
on the affected areas.
Does anyone know of a way to create a new UV map for that affected area, without having to apply the Boolean modifier?
I’m basically looking for a way to model something, with parts inside it that I can dynamically cross-section later, with predictable UV mapping.
I know what you’re talking about…I don’t know of a solution…but I just had this thought…not sure if it will work.
What if you use the Index OB render pass, as well as the UV render pass…then you can assign the texture in post through the compositer. I’ve never done this workflow myself, I’ve only watched the demo video of it’s capability somewhere…maybe in the wiki somewhere (it was a couple of months ago).
Good luck, and I’ll maybe play with this technique myself for fun.
doesn’t work…it only works on different objects…it would be handy if the newly created faces of the cross section would take on the material of the cutter object, then it would be easier to control.
Yeah ultimately if the new faces aren’t applied not much can be done
to them at the 3d stage. But I think your onto something with
doing something at the compositing stage.
-I render everything with the mod set to Difference.
-Then I render it with it set to Intersect.
-I then composite them together with the intersected
coloured over. I then render the ‘inside’ cube with the outer cube’s material’s alpha
set to zero ( although this last step could be replaced with the zmask option ).
Of course its a bit cumbersome - it’d be nice if there was an option like ‘ignore UV map’
in the boolean modifier.
And yeah, an option like you described would be nice too. One where the material of the penetrating object could be applied to the new faces of the other object.
