I dont understand why i need to click “V” after only a vertex (Or any 2d Element) is selected and ctrl-b is clicked.
Ctrl-B only works directly without additional Key input (V) if an object has 3d elements. It would be real great if the tool would be a bit smarter…
Hint!: Screencast Keys add On dont show the V input after ctrl-B
Because there is no check about what is selected.
As you said, that implies to make a distinction between a plane and a grid.
A distinction that a user is competent to do. So, instead of pressing Ctrl B, just press Shift Ctrl B.
That is the shortcut to directly do a bevel on vertices.
1: -GREAT! Thanks a lot. Will work for now
2: -Why not? Why there is no check?
This is why i feel its a litlle dumb and therfore needs uneeded additional key inputs and could be optimized to make it quicker.
Only a single vertex/edge/area is seleted- > bevel those involved Vertex
More vertex/edge/area are selected but just in a 2d area-> bevel those involved vertex
Only if there could be a decision the tool should ask for it imo.
There’s edge bevel and there’s vertex bevel. They’re different tasks, it’s that simple. From Blender’s perspective, a selected edge is also two selected vertices. It literally has no idea whether you want to bevel only verts or only edges. Hence it’s up to you to specify.
That is changing of a commonly used tool behavior for old users.
That means work for developer to introduce checks, verify “its does not create bugs”, satisfy derivative user requests and documentation to write.
So, that would mean postponing other important tasks.
Seriously, bevel is modeling stuff that received the most attention during the past recent years.
There was mention of bevel, every two Blender releases.
Beveled curves in 2.91, bevel custom profiles polishing in 2.90, bevel custom profiles in 2.82, bevel miter pattern in 2.80, bevel profile in 2.78, …
It looks like until now, priority was rather about increasing tool abilities than having it guessing user’s desires.
Yes iunderstand, but both got called with ctrl-b and then ask for an option although there is no. There is no real option available (eg because there is no 3d edge to bevel) why ask for an option? Nothing will hapend if you just hit ctrl-b. Thats bad design imo.
Its just i had to repeatedly have to use bevel because of some cut outs i need to do. Shift Ctrl-B will do and acellleratethis task but i feel while doing this hundreds of time a day it could be smarter…
yes yes yes, thank you guys.
I understand somehow. Maybe a lil nitpicking on my side.
It was just to get some attention to finally polish this function. I understand that lots of changes need to be made carefull not to introduce other bugs or workflow inconsistencies. Its just the fact that my described problem is not really asking the tool for guessing. As i wrote in this case ctrl-b only does nothing…without added V input…
When there’s nothing to bevel, the tool shouldn’t bevel something else. That’s just inviting inconsistencies and unexpected results. You, the user, direct the tool to what it should operate on, not the other way around.
Nothing to bevel?? Ctrl-B is for bevel overall atm then you can tell just to use the verts. What unexpected results? i thing i explained it enough.
Whatever some people seem to prefere “consistency” before workflow…
Yes, nothing to bevel. There’s no “bevel overall”. There’s edge bevel, and vertex bevel. Ctrl+B activates edge bevel. When there’s no edges to bevel (thus, nothing to bevel) it should not switch to something else and bevel what you haven’t asked it to. Because in a real workflow you’re not always looking at your whole selection, you’re only looking at some part of it (because the rest is off-screen or occluded by geometry), and need confidence that the tool isn’t going to do something unwarranted where you aren’t looking. Consistency is workflow, literally.
Yes you could make also different shortcuts for edge extrude, for vert extrude and one for face extrude but
Imagine you have a face selected but hit the shortcout for extruding edges… and nothing happens for the sake of consistency…
And if there is nothing to bevel why does it enter the bevel funtction…
BTW the whole workflow is often inconsistent for a sake of speed.
eg:
make no sense to me discussiing what a real workflow is…
I have to agree with @dave62 here. Sometimes I design patterns (in 2D, using vertex extrusion) for further extrusion, and I’d just like the bevel operator/tool to figure out that I want a vertex bevel because it’s effectively attached to no face. It seems like a check that could be done reasonably without error.
This really depends on if such a check would cost performance.
I don’t see how that’s relevant. If you have edges selected (because you can’t, in Blender, have a face selected without edges being selected), hit a shortcut to extrude edges and nothing happens, then it’s a bug. This has nothing to do with edge bevel. It has no effect on boundary edges, that’s its modus operandi.
Not without error, no. Consider this selection:
Note, there are 8 vertices selected, but all edges seem to be boundary. So it’s an n-gon. In this case - those other 4 verts are mid-edges. On this selection, such “smart” bevel would not only bevel the corners, it would create extra vertices for no other reason than… all edges are boundary? I would never trust such a tool again.
Maxivz tools has a context sensitive bevel that works on whatever selection mode you’re in (vert/edge/face - face insets, similar to modo). Really zero reason why it shouldn’t be this way by default. Anything else creates bloat and confusion.
Yes right nothing to do with bevelling, just to demonstrate inconsistencies like behaviour.
i would expect that each each get split (depending on segments set in bevel tool). Doesnt need to be smart to only bevel verts that are on visible bounderies. I just ask for a tool that regocnizes that there is no edge to bevel, just vertex. so it automatically switches to vertex bevel although Edge bevel was hit.
That could be a general solution, hypothetically, yes. But for it to become a default behavior in Blender itself, the whole selection mode system would have to be redesigned from scratch (and because of that - nearly all tools, and any add-ons depending on those tools). Because long ago they chose the mixed selection mode thing, where selection flushes from one component type to another all the time, not to mention the fact that you can have all three selection modes active simultaneously if you so desire.
As it stands, the add-on you’re mentioning simply operates in good faith.
This is the consequence of a more general issue. It’s one of those sketchy Blender “paradigms” that they never want to change. This one is that most tools should be mesh element mode inspecific. This means that any tool should work from any mode. In reality, they are already breaking their own paradigm on multiple places, but they still push it in other place.
So they want you to be able to do edge bevels from face mode without having to switch to edge mode first, or to do vertex bevel from edge mode without having to switch to vertex mode first. The problem is that theory is often far away from practice, and in practice, imho, having two separate modes for Bevel tool is a worse and less intuitive solution than simply having one bevel tool which behaves differently based on the mesh element mode you are in.
The latter, imho better solution would also allow us to have bevel behavior for faces, where it could do what inset combined with “depth” parameter adjustment currently does. If we were to stay with the paradigm though, we’d now have even third mode for bevel tool “faces only”… That’d be crazy 
I somehow agree with the sentiment of lacking consistency. Same goes for mode specific tool behaviour that is pradictable across all toolset.
I’d rather have working solution when you switch between vert/edge/face than have all the modes active all the time.
This is not the situation I described : I meant beveling on vertices not connected to any faces can be toggled to vertex bevel without error. I can’t think of a good enough heuristic for cases such as the one you picture.
