Just Stumbled upon this great addon. I agree with Fatesailor, the “slice” option must come back, your amazing bevel addon does not work well with boolean cutters that have a solidify modifier enabled on the cutter. The “Slice” is an easy way to create panels and panel lines on high poly meshes.
Also, which values do I have to tweak and adjust to get flat bevels in the latest version 0.1.8? I can’t find “Push/Pull” settings you mentioned earlier.
***Edit: So I just tried v0.9, and it just works much better for my use case. There are too many “options” available, should try to make it simpler like in v1.8, but v0.9 is better for 4 reasons:
I can set my “cut radius” in v0.9 smaller than the value of 0.01, but I cannot do that in v1.8.
Performance: v0.9 just works quicker when calculating.
This is mostly for cutting hard surface booleans into curved surfaces: I don’t have to tweak a lot of settings in “Patch settings” in v1.8, this is mostly solved for me in v0.9 by letting me adjusting the cut radius to a smaller value than the 0.01 limit in v1.8.
Slice. This is invaluable, bring it back lol.
Thats a wall of text, but I’m really thankful that you shared this, if you setup a gumroad or anything I’d be happy to donate or pay for a finalized version
I can set my “cut radius” in v0.9 smaller than the value of 0.01, but I cannot do that in v1.8.
It’s easy to fix
Performance: v0.9 just works quicker when calculating.
I just checked, the console says the opposite
v 0.1.8 - 0.5 sec
v 0.0.9 - 1.1 sec
Slice. This is invaluable, bring it back lol.
I have repeatedly written that these are test versions. And that now it does not make sense to spend time adding slice, because the main function does not work well.
@gromishe
Спасибо за перевод. Я примерно так и понял. Но были сомнения.
What I wrote in this post
It also does not always work. There are self-intersections @MACHIN3
I think I have not seen in any program yet, so that a similar tool works with an open loop
If you succeed, it will be great. Good luck to you
As for how to deal with corners on beveling.
I don’t know what is and what is not possible. But The best filleting methods and blending of surfaces is seen in cad modeling software. for example autodesk alias. Those corners are actually called ball corners, and in the modeling process you usually solve them as the last part, so maybe instead of curving bevel around corners, it could be treated as a separate step?
For better illustration, and maybe for a bit of inspiration take a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnwOa64aVpA
Maybe check out other videos from that channel too, guy has a good understanding of alias and cad modeling and maybe it could inspire you to some solutions. As best modeling and surfacing quality can only be achieved in cad modeller for now!
Thanks again and I hope to see your add-on in Blender 2.8 soon. Good luck
It is looking quite good Ilya, will experiment with it whenever you upload a new version!
Lasilaci86… nice, clear use of the add-on, bravo! Whenever you have others examples of its use share them please. It is good to have many examples from various users here. It is encouraging for Ilya and it is a demonstration of its usefulness for the newcomers also!
Update:
In different situations, different methods (pipe, custom pipe) may behave differently. Therefore, you should experiment.
Theoretically, the pipe method should behave better than before.
Sometimes for a better result you need to enhance the parameter Smooth Value.
And yes, if I know that people use my add-on, then I will have more motivation @lacilaci86
Thank you for the video @Fatesailor
I thank you Ilya for this so great add-on! Making the instruction videos for it was a joy indeed!
Now, tested the most recent version a little bit: everything works much more smoothly… the progress is very evident in this version. It produces easily bevels on bevels (and even very large ones). The only problem I detected is that in the case of inwardly directed bevels they become too deep so that the needed smoothness in the transition between the boolean-ed objects becomes lost (the areas noted with the arrows in the images below).
Also, something that the users must keep in mind: it is necessary after every operation done with the add-on, to switch to ‘edit’ mode, select the whole object and click on ‘set from faces’ button in the normals tab there. Because the operations the tool makes produce some irregularities on the normals. It is something very easy to deal with but someone has to know the ‘detail’ of how to deal with it.
The only problem I detected is that in the case of inwardly directed bevels they become too deep so that the needed smoothness in the transition between the boolean-ed objects becomes lost (the areas noted with the arrows in the images below).
What do you mean ? Are the normals turned in the wrong direction? Or something else ?
I don’t see a problem in the picture
switch to ‘edit’ mode, select the whole object and click on ‘set from faces’ button
This will reset the custom normals. Which leads to the fact that the surface does not seem so smooth.
‘Thank you for the video.’
Is it sarcasm that I don’t like to capture video tutorials?
I guess I’ll start returning the functions available in previous versions.
After that I capture video (I will try)
Ilya if you look carefully to the beveling areas which are pointed out with the red arrows you will see that the transition between the boolean-ed objects is not smooth. The beveling produces a cavity somehow there. It is as if there is a tightening with a rope on the bevel area. I do not think that it is a normals problem, it seems that it is a problem of geometry (of the mesh).
As to the ‘set from faces’ command… I do see that it makes things ok. I do not understand what do you mean (Machin3 too) by saying that in such a case the surface will not look smooth.
The video… ok, your joke is understood! No problem! The videos still convey the way the add-on works. After some new versions I may make a new video.
@bkjernisted
At the moment, the algorithm works as follows:
A pipe is created.
If there is an intersection, then it is smoothed until the intersection disappears.
Consequently, the larger the intersection, the larger the smoothing.
Correspondingly, a large bevel cannot be created in a small area.
The solution is oddly enough - you need to reduce the size of the bevel (If initially it is very big) @Fatesailor
Perhaps some kind of translation error. And we misunderstood each other.
I just wrote that I would record the video if necessary, but later. @lacilaci86
I tried to port the add-on to 2.8 beta.
But for now. The boolean operation erases data from vertex groups.
Without vertex groups add-on will not function properly.
