[WIP]Bevel after Boolean

add-ons

(Tosky) #541

Using 0.0.1.2 I encountered that error which show up if you touch any of the parameters, so I can’t modify the bevel size and other things.


(Rodinkov Ilya) #542

Try before using the add-on to deselect everything and select only the desired object.


(Fatesailor) #543

As far as I see you have used a sphere primitive. And its pole area have touched the bevel area. This is something that has to be avoided. Also, It is preferable to use a sphere made of a cube instead of a sphere primitive. Having objects with as much as possible evenly distributed polygons on them is best.

And, have a look in my tutorial videos, they can be helpful. There are some details that the user have to be aware when working with the add-on… so it is good to learn about them.


(Tosky) #544

I’v made two sphere from a cube, then selected the target (boolean-ed) object only yet still gives same error. No problem on a fresh blender installation: at first it works, but as I said after some period of time it start to freak out even if I use it as first step of a new project.

EDIT- seems like the error was the solver: I need to select ‘carve’ instead of ‘bmesh’. A curious oddity: undoing the boolean bevel and re-selecting bmesh instead of carve, then clicking to bevel boolean again it will produce working parameters. So it seems like the addon get somewhat confused, as if it can auto-select carve instead of bmesh but not at first try?


(Fatesailor) #545

Btw, which version do you use? I do strongly recommend that you use the 0.9 version. It is the best working one.


(AFWS) #546

Didn’t carve get removed as a solver option? If this version of the addon has that as a option, it might be the reason for the error.


(Tosky) #547

The 0.1.2 in fact :grimacing: That because 0.0.9 dont let me change parameter saying “object does not have a boolean modifier”

EDIT- Ok, seem like there’s really some sort of mis-comunication between boolean(s) added from addons interfaces (like Bool Tool or Speedflow) and ‘boolean bevel’. After I add a boolean from these addons I’ll need to touch the parameters from the vanilla boolean modifier a little just before clicking on “bevel”. Otherways I’ll get console errors from “boolean bevel” parameteres as showed in posted pics.


(Matt) #548

IWoah. Cool!!

I’m experimenting with .9 version yet I think. Sounded like was the most stable version so far?

I was experimenting with mesh machine today. I found a way to get a similar rounded edge result , on a sphere /sphere Boolean. By doing an offset on the edge with merge option. Then do it again, on the opposite edge loop/original. So it ends up sliding/merging the original edge into 2 new loops. Leaving the new interior faces quads. So then I did subdivide / profile and rounded it out.

Edit :

I also noticed if I have normal issues, I usually have to go into the object mesh properties and clear the custom normal data. Then also maybe unify normals.


(Fatesailor) #549

Tosky… you have to deselect all, after the boolean operation (which must be in brush mode), and then reselect the boolean-ed objects for making them ready to be processed with the add-on. You can do this thing in v.09.

Kickflipkid687… I have seen in some demonstration videos this offset function of Mesh Machine but it seems that there is the need of some manual work on the mesh for achieving a flawless result, something that can make things difficult when coming to complex boolean situations. Bevel after Boolean deals with quite complex cases flawlessly (without any need for manual interventions). It is a tool that has the potential to evolve to a Mesh Fusion or Hard Mesh for Blender. This is its aim somehow.


(Matt) #550

Yeah. Def. is some more manual labor to do the Mesh Machine method.

I do wish this tool/script could work on lower poly meshes, but maybe it can in the future. Or maybe this isn’t the tool to use in that case. But, I’ve had many issues with it, where the geo just explodes/spikes out, I think unless the base geo is dense enough maybe.

Zbrush has good Live Boolean, but no proper fillets. Also is many steps, since have to Send over, Smooth, Boolean, Convert to crappy Triangulated Mesh, Dynamesh (Sometimes crazy dense), Smooth THAT, then try and Optomize/not crash, get a crappy mesh again, then finally send that back. Unless you run Z-Remesher or something to try to clean it up a bit again.

I’ve also tried Modo/Mesh Fusion, but it was a bit finicky/more technical than I wanted, at the time. Also had issues/didn’t work as expected in many cases.

This other Blender script is interesting, which I’ll have to test as well.


(Fatesailor) #551

Such tools, as is Bevel after Boolean, work always with dense meshes. It is something that has to do with the very nature of their workings. You can not avoid it. Both Mesh Fusion and Hard Mesh too work good only with dense meshes.

Now, as to the Open VDB remesh… its aim is not producing fillets of various thickness but only achieving a slightly smooth transition in the corner edges so that they may not look artificial. It is a useful tool but its functionality, as to the matter we are discussing here, is very limited.


(Rodinkov Ilya) #552

Blockquote It is something that has to do with the very nature of their workings. You can not avoid it. Both Mesh Fusion and Hard Mesh too work good only with dense meshes.

Experimented on the new method.
At the moment, not everything is ready. Just the stage of creating the offset
Strangely enough, he works for lowpoly
But it does not look good.


(Fatesailor) #553

There is no need to have it work in very low poly meshes Ilya. Having it for relatively dense meshes (as it is now) is ok. The main aim, in this case, should be having a powerful tool for acquiring things that is impossible -or very difficult- to acquire with the usual modeling tools.

I think that so as it is now it is in a good way. The needed thing is to find ways to make it more flexible and powerful. That’s to say making it able to achieve wide bevellings and be able, as well, to act efficiently in more complex situations (as is producing bevels on already bevelled areas).

Whenever you have something for testing put a link here so that we can begin testing it. :smiley:


(Rodinkov Ilya) #554

Not yet ready to put on the test.
Also I very often try something else. Therefore it would be necessary to spread a lot of times.

So far it looks stable. It is necessary to experiment. At the moment offset is automated.




(Fatesailor) #555

Very very nice! :smiley:


(Matt) #556

Very cool!!


(Rodinkov Ilya) #557

A simple test of the new algorithm.


(Arseny Melkumyan) #558

Нормально так !


(Rodinkov Ilya) #559

At first glance, it seems that it works with lowpoly and sharp corners


(bkjernisted) #560

Rodinkov_IIya, when is this going to be available for download. Looks great! Thanks