I will not be able to reply for the next 2 weeks
Could possibly have the addon cache / store the original mesh in a subScene in the blender file, that it pulls from to rebuild non-destructively. Or store the mesh data in persistent memory in the blender file. Then basically re-does all the operations from a persistent list. Storing each Boolean / strip operation with settings for each.
Basically would rebuild like I think nurbs or CAD does. Then if its always rebuilding , could maybe even re order operations or remove/add non destructively. Altho May have weird results depending how it changes.
But really, this all might be a good candidate for the everything nodes project.
I agree though, having it destructive is not ideal. But, keeping it all non destructive could make it get slower and slower as things stack and more unstable. But still probably worth it, if possible.
I used to have “deferred updates” option on all the time when using mesh fusion because it was going very slow when dealing with many objects. So you can always make it update on mouse release instead.
Hey @Kickflipkid687 nice,do you have any more info on it? or anywere i can find some info on it?
Seems like a major under-taking / super complicated, but he’s getting there.
I Made the ver3.0.1 for Blender 2.90 specification change for myself.
bab_v_0_3_0_1.py (70.2 KB)
Fixed an issue where modifier apply “apply_as” couldn’t be used because it was abolished.
Only a small change.
I was looking at the source code to learn how the bevel works.
Is it like this?
- Create a curve object for hit detection from the bevel target edge
- Remove the mesh in the hit judgment
- Then bevel
- This avoids polygon collision
The processing of the corners and the removal of the mesh were advanced and not fully understood.
Looks like Howard, the dev of the newboolean system is going to incorporate BAB directly into the modifier. From his thread:
‘…likely, making “bevel after boolean” a builtin-in option of newboolean; to do that well requires fixing the overlap problem, I think.)’
This is huge!
But I’d prefer a geometry agnostic behaviour in the bevel modifier.
So we could get a good boolean operation and then we could bevel the outcome as much as needed.
Or we could just bevel how much we want any topology. Even the bad ones that come from “import crazy nurbs tessellization”. (Hey Moi3d, you know what I mean?)
Ilya has demonstrated a new ‘non-tube’ way of offsetting but still has not uploaded something workable with it. Maybe he has something in mind however. Having proper offset cuts so that the user may produce the bridging of them and produce the beveling kind he wants is a good idea indeed.
Btw, it must not be forgotten that such kinds of operations must have a good normals managment too. Otherwise someone can not have good results. But it seems that all those are problems that can be dealt with if the offset cuts are succesfuly achieved.
Well, all of these types of tools - BAB, Meshfusion, HardMesh, etc - expect a certain kind of clean topology. Also, they all do some form of normal transfer.
I don’t think CAD polysoup would be suitable.
I ran into some difficulties. When I manage to destroy them, I will post a test version
Is it possible to make a Creating a Variable Bevel in the latest version released for 2.8?
Check if this might work for you, adjust the bevel weight on the edges from 0 to 1 and on the bevel modifier you need to limit it to weight and use the percentage
Not at the moment.
Thank you for return.
A promising addon that frankly excited me, thanks for your hard work, I hope it gets a lot better soon.
The api is changed in new versions of blender.
I will not rewrite the add-on for alpha and beta, because they can change every day.
I will update only for stable releases