Inset thickness/depth history regression
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

System Information
Win10 Pro 64bit v1709
64GB DDR4 RAM
NVIDIA GTX 1080 with driver 397.31
NVIDIA GTX 680 with driver 397.31

Blender Version
Broken: (2.79a 8928d99270f, 2.79b f4dc9f9d68b)
Worked: (2.79 5bd8ac9)

Hey all,

Blender used to remember the last thickness values used for inset, which is desirable as when modelling you generally want a consistent width for inset when used on the same mesh with subd. Inset is an invaluable tool for quickly generating support loops that retain the flow of curvature on a surface as manually adding such loops can cause creases in the mesh. This ability has been reduced as the user is forced to input the same value manually each time the tool is used. It should be noted that all other settings apart from depth are recalled correctly when re-running inset (depth should also be remembered but isnt.).

If you use 2.79 (5bd8ac9), the inset values are remembered each time you use the tool.

  1. Generate a cube
  2. Select a face loop
  3. Press I to run Inset
  4. Enter a thickness value of 0.05
  5. Select another face loop
  6. Press I to run Inset
  7. The thickness value of 0.05 is remembered
  8. Repeat infinitum

If you use 2.79a (8928d99270f) or 2.79b (f4dc9f9d68b ), the inset values are reset to the default value of 0.01 each time you use the tool.

  1. Generate a cube
  2. Select a face loop
  3. Press I to run Inset
  4. Enter a thickness value of 0.05
  5. Select another face loop (if not already selected)
  6. Press I to run Inset
  7. The thickness value is now 0.01

F3 can of course be used, but is generally unworkable as it breaks the flow of modelling and is limited in the number of actions which can be stored. In addition, pressing F3 might as well be replaced by simply entering the inset value manually as it takes around the same time to preform both actions.

Thanks for looking :)

Details

Type
Bug

To my knowledge, this was an intentional change (though there seems to be some discussion about it)

It seems to me this was concluded with:

  • Shift+R and F3 remember the setting
  • invoking modal with hotkey Iwill always start at near zero

If that is the case, then this report can be closed?

But before closing this, I would like to raise attention to @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) and @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) just to make sure...

Thanks for the reply @Philipp Oeser (lichtwerk)

If this is the new default then that's rather unfortunate. T53441 was not a valid bug report as the tool has remembered the value since 2.64.

F3 and Shift+R cannot be used as a direct replacement for I as it only has a limited number of history states, which means that after only a few minutes modelling you have to re-enter the required value (assuming you can remember it if it is set to something irregular). This unfortunately breaks the functionality of the tool significantly and it seems the lesser of two evils would be that people reset the tool to zero is they want that state, rather than forcing people to re-enter a specific value if they require a set amount. Also, the tool remembers all the other checbox states/values (apart from Depth, which should also be recalled when the tool used again) so if If the intention was to reset Inset to default each time it was used then everything would need to be reset wouldnt it?

Could we please revert the functionality back to the original state or at least get some kind of over-ride checkbox or setting somewhere that is a fix for this?

Personally I can live with the current behaviour, but I can also see advantages of the way it was before.

Dont want to disturb the guys doing their CodeQuest magic, but as I am no UX designer, I will pass this on to @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) then.
As this also touches Tool design in a more general way, maybe @William Reynish (billreynish) can share his view on this topic?

Thanks, @Philipp Oeser (lichtwerk)

Generally I think it is desirable to recall any values that have to be entered manually into a tool from the last use (including bevel), as consistency in such things is essential to solid modelling. Hopefully we can get this sorted out to mutual benefit for all users.

Cheers