Nice and fast fix! :-D
Wed, Jul 29
Tue, Jul 28
Is this a "known limitation"?
Mon, Jul 27
Thu, Jul 23
Wed, Jul 22
Tue, Jul 21
Wow! That was fixed quick. Thank you Howard :-)
Mon, Jul 20
Fri, Jul 17
Thu, Jul 16
Wed, Jul 15
Tue, Jul 14
Mon, Jul 13
Sun, Jul 12
I really like the idea, altough I think it could be more useful to have an option to use a custom packing region (like Ctrl+B in render mode, as currently both B and Ctrl B do the same thing).
My reasoning is that your example works well because everything is pretty neatly organized already, but a lot of times I believe it may not be the case. Maybe you are in the first stages of packing things, and you may change your idea along the way as to how to layout your asset's uvs, so you may have things somewhat scattered around at times, or with islands overlapping. Or maybe you are working with UDIMS, and you want to repack some uvs from different tiles. In those cases, the original selection may not be ideal, or even useful at all.
If we could define the bounding box to pack the islands independently of where they are originally, I think it would be much better.
Maybe both concepts can coexists, as there could be an option to use a custom packing region, and one of the fallback options could be that if the user hasn't defined any region, use the selection's original bounding box as Daniel says.
Sat, Jul 11
Fri, Jul 10
Thu, Jul 9
Thanks a lot @Campbell Barton (campbellbarton). I keep forgetting the "select split" + "move" combination Adding the functionality you mention will help a lot of users I think
Wed, Jul 8
I think "Free UV Boundary" sounds like a great name! Let's go with that
Here are some example images, Howard. Sorry for the long post. Perhaps I should break off each part in separate task?
Tue, Jul 7
I feel that it is important to distinguish the hair curves that the user groom with the particle edit brush and the hair curves that are procedurally generated by nodes/modifiers with two different names. Both for communicating clearly and also to align with the terminology used in other software used for grooming.
Based on your input I will use the following names
Guide curves = Curves that the user groom with the particle edit brush (no primarily render visibility)
Hair curves = Curves that are procedurally generated with nodes/modifiers (visible in render)
But what does it mean exactly to give them two different names? Are you also proposing that they would be two different data structures, that we would have two different Hair geometry types? Or would it be the same data structure but a different name is used in different parts of the UI? Or is it just something to describe workflow, but there would be only one name in the Blender UI?
At least with the design I had in mind, there would be one data structure, and nodes and modifiers would work on both curves used for guiding and rendering. The distinction between the different types of curves would basically be a node that converts hair geometry to more dense hair geometry, like a subdivision surface modifier for meshes.
My only concern is to have once again the object/collection scattering tools in the middle of the hair tools.
It makes sense with the "deform along guide" option but i think it should have it's own part somewhere else and keep this only for hair grooming in my opinion.
Thanks for the feedback @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht). This really helps with refining the Hair object design proposal :-)
Jul 6 2020
Thanks for the feedback @Jacques Lucke (JacquesLucke). Your questions are a really good reference for how I should make my design task more readable and clear. I'll start off by adressing your questions
Thanks for preparing this. :)
It seems you put a lot of focus on the transfer of a coordinate system along a hair strand. I understand that this is important, but it's probably not the right abstraction level for this task. Also, the solution you propose probably won't work well, for the reason you mentioned already. I'm quite sure that this will become a problem, because hair goes in many directions and some will come close to the singularity with high probability. It's probably best to just define a coordinate system at the root of a strand and then move that along the hair (instead of the normal and tangent separately). I've implemented something similar for Animation Nodes in the past and Blender probably has some code for this already, because it's doing the same thing when you select the "Minimum" twist method on curves.
The other examples for operators seem sensible. I don't really have anything to add to them yet.
@Julian Eisel (Severin), HALP! :) Do you have suggestions regarding the wording?
Jul 5 2020
Given that the design may change during the project I would suggest a design task. Once the project is more mature we then move it to the wiki. And yes, Long-Term would be the right column, thank you!