Page MenuHome

"display: modified" in the UV editor is not showing wire-frame generated by modifiers applied to unwrapped mesh
Open, Needs Triage by DeveloperPublic

Description

System Information
Operating system: Windows-7-6.1.7601-SP1 64 Bits
Graphics card: GeForce GTX 970/PCIe/SSE2 NVIDIA Corporation 4.5.0 NVIDIA 417.35

Blender Version
Broken: version: 2.81 (sub 10), branch: master, commit date: 2019-09-10 13:53, hash: rBe0f7ada0d2b0

Short description of error
UV Editor in 2.79 had a feature to display uv with all modifiers applied. This feature is not available in 2.80, but from what I can see checkbox is back in 2.81 develop builds. However currently it seems to not work. Might be it's still development in progress? Although in that case - I think checkbox would not be visible.

What is visible in the uv editor:


What is visible after applying mirror modifier (this is expected result without the need to apply modifier):

How it looked in 2.79:

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error

  1. open provided file
  2. It contains cube with mirror modifier. All is default except of checked "Flip U" and "Flip V" in "textures" section.
  3. In the uv editor sidebar is visible and "modified" checkbox is already selected.
  4. This means that uv editor should display wire-frame with modifiers applied, yet it's displaying wire-frame of single cube only, not showing mirrored one created by mirror modifier.

Details

Type
Bug

Event Timeline

Tomek (VGT) added a comment.EditedTue, Sep 10, 6:24 PM

Ok, now the weirdest part about this bug:

  • opening file I've provided in Blender 2.81 is successfully reproducing bug as described
  • opening file in 2.80 release version "display: mirrored" checkbox is visible and working correctly - showing mirrored mesh when enabled

Also at this point I'm no longer sure if I had this checkbox missing in 2.80 release as I described earlier. I could've sworn that I saw my uv editor sidebar missing this feature when using Blender 2.80 earlier. That was the reason I checked it on 2.81.
So I would be thankful if anyone else can check if this is reproducible in 2.81.