Hi Pilou,

re:
> When you draw your "arrows" does the Text is yet configured for has definited Size, Align (up, down,on),
> Distance etc... or it's after draw?

Neither - the text is displayed as a text label on screen more like the object snap tags like "End", "Mid", etc... so it gets its size from the regular UI font size.

- Michael

Hi Michael,

Thanks, the extension lines would be fine with that gap.

>For the gap on arrows, would that also apply to the arrows going to the extension lines in a linear dimension like above,
>or only to the arrows on other dimension types?

The arrows can touch the shapes and the extension lines as there is no ambiguity for the reader but the actual ones slightly cross the shapes.

Thanks,

Michel

When will we get the dimension tool. I think everybody here is full of expectation.

Hi Michel, the arrowhead points do have a few pixels sticking out past the lines, that's due to its wire outline being drawn with mitered corners and anti-aliasing.

You can see the same thing in regular curves in MoI if you just make a line and a pointy triangle:



Max's one doesn't do that because it makes a surface for the arrowhead and surface trim boundaries are not drawn with mitered corners between segments.


If this is troublesome I guess I could make a setting to not miter the arrowhead tip.

- Michael

Hi Rudl,

> When will we get the dimension tool. I think everybody here is full of expectation.

It will be in the next v4 beta which will probably be the last one.

I've got just a couple more areas to finish them - text display and export to PDF/AI/DXF formats.

- Michael

Hi Michael,

>Max's one doesn't do that because it makes a surface for the arrowhead
>and surface trim boundaries are not drawn with mitered corners between segments.


>If this is troublesome I guess I could make a setting to not miter the arrowhead tip.

Thanks for the explanation.
I would prefer the drawing to be as sharp as possible when adding dimensions if it's not too hard or heavy on display performance.

Michel

Hi James, here's a different variation on the arrowhead reorienting. This one turns the plane around the arrowhead direction to point as much as possible towards the view direction.

I tried this before but I guess I had something wrong. What do you think, better or worse than the one that switches between 2 planes? :



- Michael

Michael,

>> better or worse....? <<

Not just better, it is exactly what I originally requested.
Absolutely Brilliant!

Thank you so much

James
https://www.instagram.com/nodeology/

Hi Michel,

re:
> I would prefer the drawing to be as sharp as possible when adding dimensions if it's not too hard
> or heavy on display performance.

Well the thing is that mitered corners for the outer line drawing helps make the butt end of the arrow sharp.

It's subtle but here's a comparison - here's #1 with all mitered corners for the outer line:




Here's #2 with the outer boundary as separate lines with no mitered corners at all. The thing I don't like here is if you zoom in to the butt of the horizontal ones you can see it's got a slight rounded appearance instead of very crisp corners:




Here's #3 with only the butt corners mitered and not the tip mitered. It makes a little more blunt tip than it ideally should be but that would also mean the tip won't stick out as much:




Here's #4 with no outer line drawings at all, only a fill:




So number 1 is pretty much the best arrowhead shape that I can make I think. I don't like the butt end of number 2. Number 3 seems like a good compromise it keeps the tip from extending out too much but keeps the butt end sharp. The tip is a little rounded from a perfect arrowhead though. Number 4 seems pretty gross with no antialiasing.

My current thinking is that I'll go with #1 by default but I could have an option to do #3 instead. I'm not sure if #2 or #4 have much value but let me know what you think.

- Michael

Hi James,

> Not just better, it is exactly what I originally requested.
> Absolutely Brilliant!

That's great, you're welcome! That's what I'll set up then.

- Michael

IMO, as an Industrial Designer, non-destructive modeling is a powerful tool as it allows designers to adjust proportions and details *after the fact.* I have always been fascinated by Vitaly Bulgarov's magical sense of proportion and design execution which he creates in MoI. Trying to replicate in polys (the resulting mesh is much more render friendly) has always ended up in a disaster based on lack of proportion correctness-- UNTIL I came across Blender's modifiers.

I coined the term NITROX3D and wrote a post on it at BA:

https://blenderartists.org/t/nitrox3d-a-new-hard-surface-workflow-for-designers/1162363

It's not meant to replace MoI3D, as there still is no solid modeler functions and 3D printing these types of meshes typically requires massive corrections. But creating and editing them is a snap using Blender's modifier stack. Pretty sweet stuff.

It has made me a believer in parametric modeling. And because it's all polys, it happens pretty darn fast versus parametic functions added to the NURBS KERNEL.

@Chipp
it's funny as same technology emerge in the same time on the same prog! :)
Seems SpeedFlow has the same paradigm. "No destructive polygons building" all stay editable.

Am I wrong ? SPeedFlow Companion (2 Addons in the same package) - by a French forum friend - the accent ;)
https://pitiwazou.artstation.com/pages/speedflow (big video who show all aspects - see*2 spedd for a better accent! ;)

Hello Chipp!

I took only a quick look at your article, but it seems that you're doing really a SUPER GREAT JOB!!!

Very interesting things for all Industrial Designers.

Since you switched to Blender you're making serious progress into this field!

My respects :)

Hi Michael,

Yes, no 1 and no 3 are the best looking ones.
An example with the arrows pointing to a line would help to see the difference.
Is the rounded end touching or going through the line?
An option in the ini file could be nice.
But this is a minor request. The gap you added to the extension lines was the important one to me.

Thanks,

Michel

Frenchy,

Non-Destructive has been along for awhile. Long before Speedflow and even Hard Ops. I was using it in September on client projects with Jerry's help (masterxeon1001).

Wazou has done a nice job integrating his complex tool into a workflow-- just has Jerry has with Hard Ops and Boxcutter. The problem I see is that neither of them go far enough and it's important to *UNDERSTAND* what's behind all the fancy pie menus and commands. They even use vernacular not common to Blender.

My goal is to use NO ADDONS and teach people the power of all the modifiers w/regard to Non-Destructive modeling. Once you fully understand, you can decide if an accelerator toolkit, likd Speedflow, Fluent, Hard Ops and/or Boxcutter can help you. And if they break, you'll then know how to fix.

I would challenge all of them to try to create Vitaly's model in their tools. I doubt very seriously they can.

Hey Marco,

Yes, staying quite busy when I'm not too sick. The manifesto at that link tells a bit about what I'm thinking w/regard to the state of CAD vs Surface modeling apps. The boolean stuff is getting better, and I have tutorials on baking tiny bevels and even chipped paint in EEVEE. Funny how I'm doing a lot of the same stuff I did here, including kitbashing, PAT the ergonomic model, and more. I think NITROX3D will provide similar help on a feature by feature basis: how to add parting lines, how to create ND (non-destructible) glass bottles which can be edited over and over to create virtually unlimited shapes. How to add ND die cast details, etc.

I also want to do a design series which talks about how to create a specific look using best design practices and KIT OPS. Create a SCI FI Crate in a few minutes with lots of details.

ND modeling allows for such things. Thanks for the kind words... hope you're doing well :-)

Hello Chipp!

@You: "...when I'm not too sick..."

Hmmm...English is not my native language...
When you say "sick" did you mean "infirm"?
If so, I'm very sorry about that!!!
I hope nothing serious!

@You: "...Funny how I'm doing a lot of the same stuff I did here..."
It's true! It's the same old story :)
But I think it's not like "reinventing the wheel".
It's like watching the same subject from different angle :)

@You: "...Thanks for the kind words... hope you're doing well :-)..."

You're welcome!
Oh...I'm so busy this (long long period)!
In my (late at night) spare free time, NO more 3D for the moment but practicing and studying freehand digital painting with my Cintiq and iPad Pro :)

Have a nice day!

@Chipp
Yes nowadays tools for modeling are quasi perfect!
Next step will be the IA where human will be completly replaced! :)

before :)

@Mip,

re:
> An example with the arrows pointing to a line would help to see the difference.
> Is the rounded end touching or going through the line?

Here's an example with the arrowhead tips not mitered with some arrowheads touching things:



- Michael

Hi Michael
I would prefer it if angular dimensions text (blah) were parallel with the dimension lines. It does work the way it is so I would be content if it is a lot of trouble to make a change or alternative.
cheers,
eric