- User Since
- Jul 11 2018, 9:13 PM (58 w, 18 h)
oh thats really not what I was after - the workflow to set the origin via the 3d cursor is not great I agree!
after thinking about this a bit - wouldn't it make sense to unify this with the 3d cursor workflow?
I mean setting the origin shares a lot (like all?) with how you'd want to set the 3d cursor. Snapping to geometry, align it to faces/edges, move to components, align to a transform, place by setting its values etc.
Jul 17 2019
@Dalai Felinto (dfelinto) thank you for looking into this.
Jun 15 2019
Jun 2 2019
Jun 1 2019
May 29 2019
May 28 2019
@Brendon Murphy (meta-androcto) while I agree that such a command might be useful, the changes here don't really touch that area. This is mainly about mesh creation.
May 23 2019
May 21 2019
May 20 2019
May 19 2019
May 18 2019
- rebase to current master.
small consistency tweak, uses dots instead of squares as vertex shape.
May 17 2019
May 12 2019
May 10 2019
May 8 2019
May 7 2019
May 6 2019
May 2 2019
May 1 2019
Ah thanks, makes senses, completely forgot about that option.
Apr 26 2019
Apr 24 2019
Apr 15 2019
Apr 4 2019
Mar 16 2019
Not sure if you handle it already, but I'd suggest to make the orientation alignment optional.
Feb 26 2019
Feb 11 2019
Feb 7 2019
Feb 6 2019
Jan 22 2019
Dec 19 2018
I think youre making it a bigger issue than it is. Yes the tooltip could be improved to mention the increment fallback - but how about making a concrete suggestion what it should say?
In my original tooltip there was somethign about it, maybe it was too lengthy or because of the changes it made no sense anymore - anyways its just a tooltip/wording issue, the usage of this is straight forward.
Dec 18 2018
@Ludvik Koutny (rawalanche)
builder.blender.org already has brechts iteration of this - just give a try?
you dont need to activate incremental snap - just use vertex snap and disable affect for rotate&scale. if affect is turn off these modes will always fall back to incremental snapping.
@Campbell Barton (campbellbarton) thank you for taking this up again :)
Dec 16 2018
Dec 13 2018
@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) ah yes you are correct - all good then.
Dec 12 2018
@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) good to hear back from you. dont worry about changeing stuff around - I think the actual implementation is pretty simple, its the design which isnt so straight forward.
Dec 9 2018
I liked the Idea from @Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) very much, as its very simple, clean and non intrusive.
Dec 7 2018
Dec 4 2018
@Brecht Van Lommel (brecht) glad you also feel this way - I didn't dare to propose such a thing :)
Dec 3 2018
@Germano Cavalcante (mano-wii) this does not work, as other tools also use these snap flags. Now you can only control these for move/rotate/scale - but you can't control the snapping in other modes like shrink wrap anymore.
I already feared to have missed the window of opportunity, but with the release on the horizon it's also very understandable.
Dec 2 2018
Nov 30 2018
@William Reynish (billreynish) I will change the implementation to follow the propsal then. thanks for your input.
@William Reynish (billreynish) basically I want to have vertex/increment snapping at the same time, but rotate should not snap to any vertices - as in denser models there is basically a vert everywhere and it shouldnt mess with the incremental snapping. It also kinda defeats the point of incremental snapping as it introduces 'uneven' values again. Im well aware that its a bit on 'one has to explain this' side...
Nov 29 2018
makes sense to revert it for now, and the reasoning why it is the way it is is much clearer - as this was kinda vague on the intial revert comments on this topic.
Nov 28 2018
@Hjalti Hjálmarsson (hjalti) so youre basically using the gizmo version all the time with normal/local to do 'regular' transformations and the G key as a shortcut for global transformations? (now that is an interessting usage scenario..)
bold move guys :)