Gordon bug
All  1-2  3-6

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
560.3 In reply to 560.2 
> What is the good option : each curve must have jonction's points to the
> others or like this exemple no jonction point?

As far as intersection points go, I think that should be close enough.

But right now this is running into the problem at the "closed seam", same kind of thing as the previous bug that Steph sent. I'm going to be working on this one but it might not be ready for the next beta, maybe the one after that.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  sk2k
560.4 
Hmm, what i'm doing wrong here?

Attachments:

  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
560.5 In reply to 560.4 
> Hmm, what i'm doing wrong here?

Well, one part is a bug which is causing a kind of asymmetrical lump in one spot. I need to do some work to fix that up.

But to get what I think you're expecting you're going to need to place 2 more sections for the open curves direction, so you would have 4 sections going around that direction instead of only 2 sections.

The Gordon/Network surface is not really quite the same as sweep, with sweep you would expect the shapes to swing around and pivot as things moved along the other curves.

Gordon/Network surface does not do that same kind of pivoting, instead sections kind of morph more directly from one to the other, more as if you had lofted between them...

Imagine if you did a loft just between those 2 open curves, that would result in a really flat type of surface, in one sense that is what happens here, that's why the result surface does not bulge out along the sides, it is also snapped more tightly between just those 2 curves.

Something like 4 curves around in a ring will then loft between each other to make a more "sweep-like" result.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
 From:  sk2k
560.6 In reply to 560.5 
I meant the asymetrical bump on both objects. Thanks for the explanation.

MfG
sk2k
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged
 

Reply to All Reply to All

 

 
 
Show messages: All  1-2  3-6