Renaming a UV map breaks references in UV map nodes #55610

Closed
opened 2018-06-25 02:46:24 +02:00 by Phil Stopford · 7 comments

System Information
Win 10 Pro, 6 GB GTX 1060

Blender Version
Broken: 2.79b, 86e20a2

Short description of error
Renaming a UV map within the mesh panel fails to update UV map entries - they go red.

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error
Create an object with a UV map.
Set up node surfacing for a material on the object, using the 'UV map' node. Select the existing UV map.
Rename the UV map in the mesh tab for the object; check the UV map node in the shading node graph. It will be red.

**System Information** Win 10 Pro, 6 GB GTX 1060 **Blender Version** Broken: 2.79b, 86e20a2 **Short description of error** Renaming a UV map within the mesh panel fails to update UV map entries - they go red. **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** Create an object with a UV map. Set up node surfacing for a material on the object, using the 'UV map' node. Select the existing UV map. Rename the UV map in the mesh tab for the object; check the UV map node in the shading node graph. It will be red.
Author

Added subscriber: @phil.stopford

Added subscriber: @phil.stopford
Member

Added subscribers: @brecht, @lichtwerk

Added subscribers: @brecht, @lichtwerk
Member

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Archived'

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Archived'
Philipp Oeser self-assigned this 2018-06-25 13:56:39 +02:00
Member

I think this is by design (the fact this is namebased).

Consider the fact that Materials or NodeTrees might be used by multiple different objects: how would choosing a UVMap work then if it was tied to a specific object's UVMap?
If two objects would use this Node (both having a UVMap called "MyUVMap"), if you then rename the UVMap of one object, what should happen to the UVMap node? (if it changed, it would break on the second object...)

Anyways, dont think there's a bug here (dont even think this is a limitation aka could be improved...)

Might be wrong on this though [if @brecht thinks there's something to be done here: feel free to reopen...]

Closing.

I think this is by design (the fact this is namebased). Consider the fact that Materials or NodeTrees might be used by multiple different objects: how would choosing a UVMap work then if it was tied to a specific object's UVMap? If two objects would use this Node (both having a UVMap called "MyUVMap"), if you then rename the UVMap of one object, what should happen to the UVMap node? (if it changed, it would break on the second object...) Anyways, dont think there's a bug here (dont even think this is a limitation aka could be improved...) Might be wrong on this though [if @brecht thinks there's something to be done here: feel free to reopen...] Closing.
Author

For additional background, I ran into this following Brecht's advice on devtalk about how to workaround the UV map per object limitation; I went through renaming the UV maps on each object (prior to joining the meshes together) and all of the surfacing broke (since I'd made an explicit reference to each UV map in the surfacing). It was a fair bit of work to fix this up, so it felt like a bug (lack of notification or something)

For additional background, I ran into this following Brecht's advice on devtalk about how to workaround the UV map per object limitation; I went through renaming the UV maps on each object (prior to joining the meshes together) and all of the surfacing broke (since I'd made an explicit reference to each UV map in the surfacing). It was a fair bit of work to fix this up, so it felt like a bug (lack of notification or something)
Member

@phil.stopford : thx for getting back, for reference: we are talking about https://devtalk.blender.org/t/origin-of-uv-map-limit-in-blender/1014, right?
Anyways, dont think this additional background info would change the fact that this is not a bug [imo].

@phil.stopford : thx for getting back, for reference: we are talking about https://devtalk.blender.org/t/origin-of-uv-map-limit-in-blender/1014, right? Anyways, dont think this additional background info would change the fact that this is not a bug [imo].
Author

Indeed. I'm just offering additional background to help any decision from Brecht at this point :)

Indeed. I'm just offering additional background to help any decision from Brecht at this point :)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset Browser
Interest
Asset Browser Project Overview
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
EEVEE & Viewport
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
EEVEE & Viewport
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Normal
Priority
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#55610
No description provided.