LOL - I tried already (I asked for a subset of similar features months ago :-P )

Actually I've been begging for the realtime curve booleans - being able to slide around circles, rectangles and arbitrary shapes and have them automatically boolean together to create your base profiles before extrusion etc.

The fact they threw in realtime 3D booleans is cool - LWCAD is probably the only plugin that makes Modeler still worth using for me.

-Will

The 2D realtime curve boolean video is pretty nice.

Hi Kreten - your wish has already been granted for several of these things! :)

In MoI, try Array/Dir and you should see real time feedback. Similarly Array/Circular will give you feedback and show you the result as you tweak parameters, and also the same thing applies to Array/Curve.

I mean all of them do that except for Array/Grid, which is kind of a bit problematic for doing real-time feedback since it is possible to generate quite a large number of copies with that particular one, it can be a bit on the "heavy" side so it does not try to give you real time feedback.

But all the other array commands in MoI do give you that feedback already, so for the most part that stuff is already in place, there you go! :)

- Michael

Hi Will, the fundamental problem is that style of real-time boolean is only really feasible to integrate with a kind of small drawing toolset and actually does not really work for a more general purpose type solution.

For example, one important function in MoI is being able to work with imported data.

If you want to be able to import some curves from an AI file and then use those in a boolean, as far as I could tell from the workflow of LWCAD, that is just not possible since the way those real-time booleans work they are all options that are built in to the UI of individual drawing commands (like drawing a circle, rectangle, etc...).

That is pretty cool for certain cases, but if I made booleans only work directly with drawing tools and nothing else, it would mean you could not perform a boolean on a curve that you had drawn previously, or that you wanted to import from someone else's file, etc...

For MoI it is a very important function to be able to process any kind of curve like this, not just a few special specific draw commands.

So if I were to change all the curve boolean functions in MoI to be just that style of booleans, I would actually lose a bunch of pretty basic functionality.

That's why the current system is set up the way it is - by picking objects to boolean instead of being baked into just some specific draw commands it keeps that boolean functionality to be much more general purpose and work in many additional situations.

I do want to enable the history function to be able to edit boolean operations in the future, once I get that together, it should be able to give you this same kind of feel for doing some editing and getting real-time boolean feedback, but without sacrificing the general purpose power behind the current system.


Don't get me wrong, those real-time booleans embedded in drawing commands definitely look cool! But I just can't afford to lose the power and flexibility that the current system provides.

- Michael

***Edit*** - above I wrote "If you want to be able to import some curves from an AI file and then use those in a boolean, as far as I could tell from the workflow of LWCAD, that is just not possible" - but looking it over there does seem to be a different non-real-time boolean in addition to the stuff embedded in the draw commands.

In MoI it is an important principle to try and avoid having large sections of redundant UI, I mean it would have to provide a pretty significant value for me to add a big section of boolean UI that showed up on every single draw command. I just don't see how that is providing significant enough value for the cost of the UI bloat. It will be a lot more natural and efficient UI-wise to provide this kind of feedback through a history editing function, rather than trying to bake it into a bunch of individual commands. I mean this is actually a pretty perfect example of how something like a simple circle command can end up being complex and unfriendly to use because of adding too many bells and whistles into what should be a basic building block function.

"For example, one important function in MoI is being able to work with imported data.

If you want to be able to import some curves from an AI file and then use those in a boolean, as far as I could tell from the workflow of LWCAD, that is just not possible since the way those real-time booleans work they are all options that are built in to the UI of individual drawing commands (like drawing a circle, rectangle, etc...).

That is pretty cool for certain cases, but if I made booleans only work directly with drawing tools and nothing else, it would mean you could not perform a boolean on a curve that you had drawn previously, or that you wanted to import from someone else's file, etc...

For MoI it is a very important function to be able to process any kind of curve like this, not just a few special specific draw commands."


Thanks Michael, for the explanation and I can appreciate the importance of working with imported curves, esepcially if it's something I may have just created previously!


It would be nice to be able to import a curve and "push" other curves into (actually I've never tried that with LWCAD either???)


I do however believe that the "realtime" curve booleans should be seen as a "special drawing mode", not something expected to work with external data.

Limitng perhaps, but I've only ever used the LWCAD function just as shown in the video; select the shape to be drawn, push it together with what was previously drawn, rinse/repeat and finally exit the operation...

Now I'm curious to see if LWCAD can even do that since I never thought of using it that way!


But I will say that I probably wouldn't like to see MOI burdened down with "special draw modes" because of the danger of destroying its simplicity and elegance!


-Will

Hi Will, yeah I mean the problem is that is a pretty big limit to only work with those particular tools.

Wouldn't it be nice if you could do something like draw a circle, then array it to make 8 circles, then perform a boolean with those, then after all that is complete, go in and edit the original circle and get a real-time update to reflect your edits?

That's the kind of thing that I hope to enable with a deeper history function, but of course there still is plenty of work to do to make that happen.

But if that can get set up then it is far more flexible and powerful type of real-time feedback that would work in a lot more situations rather than just for a kind of one-shot drawing tool.

Also another related area may be a special kind of "hole" command at some point in the future that could end up being pretty similar to a combination circle command with real-time booleans.


But a special mode added for every single drawing tool.... It just seems like so much UI to add... It would just need to provide a pretty significant benefit in exchange for that, not just a "cool factor"...

It is tough keeping MoI's UI streamlined and easy to use, I mean doing that does mean being pretty careful about keeping things simple.

- Michael

"Wouldn't it be nice if you could do something like draw a circle, then array it to make 8 circles, then perform a boolean with those, then after all that is complete, go in and edit the original circle and get a real-time update to reflect your edits?

That's the kind of thing that I hope to enable with a deeper history function, but of course there still is plenty of work to do to make that happen."


WOW Michael, that would be hella awesome!

Yes, having a more complete history mechanism I guess would allow similar kinds of operations but in the MOI style of object editing which would be much more consistent.


Perhaps if you had a "roadmap" posted on the wiki where we could see some of your ideas on what you're planning to implement, that would eliminate perhaps some of the requests like these since we could see that perhaps what we would like will be in there in some form or fashion.

After hearing about the more advanced history functionalities, I don't even wish for that LWCAD style drawing mode any longer! :-)



-Will

Hi Michael,

Add: Grid and Dir Array

It would be nice if there was a second mutually exclusive mode (like Radius/Diameter) to make a Dir and Grid array, I mean we were able to set up a distance between two subsequent items of array (preferaby by clicking in the viewport) instead of setting a number of items; then drag a dashed line/window to multiply a number of items. I think I already mentioned it during V1 beta stage and I you can see there is something similar for LWCAD "fence tool" command (step 4 with bubble text - "tools snap according to predefined..." http://www.wtools3d.com/swf/online_help/LWCAD_25/fence/fence.html). Is it too complicated?

Petr

>>LOL - I tried already (I asked for a subset of similar features months ago :-P )

Months ago, Will? I think that what you show here at least once per month, considering a real-time booleans, is a pure art of scrounging :)))

Petr

ps: I hope you have sense of humour... hehe

Well I have said I requested a similar feature in MOI several times... ;-)

-Will

Hi Will,

> Perhaps if you had a "roadmap" posted on the wiki where we could
> see some of your ideas on what you're planning to implement,
> <....>

It's kind of tough for me to do that because I don't really have a completely locked down roadmap and schedule.

My priorities and roadmap can change quite a bit as I am in the middle of working on stuff, as I get new ideas etc...

- Michael

Hi Petr,

> It would be nice if there was a second mutually exclusive mode
> (like Radius/Diameter) to make a Dir and Grid array, I mean we
> were able to set up a distance between two subsequent items of
> array (preferaby by clicking in the viewport) instead of setting a
> number of items; then drag a dashed line/window to multiply a
> number of items.

I guess I'm not really sold on that "dynamic drag to adjust number of items" type thing.

It just does not seem to me to provide a lot of value - especially for the commands other than Array Grid which allow you to change the number of items as a previewable option already. Like for example in Array Dir if you want 6 items just type in 6 <enter> and you'll get it, if you want one more, type in 7 <enter> and you'll have one more. I'm not really sure what waving the mouse around to move between 6 and 7 really gives you, I mean other than looking cool.

I do want to add a switch hopefully for both Array grid and array dir where the distance that you set will be used as the kind of "full set" distance instead of the "item cell" distance, that's kind of related so that may help get some of the feel for what you want to do there.


> (step 4 with bubble text - "tools snap according to predefined..." <...>
> Is it too complicated?

It kind of looks like that "predefined" distance comes from a whole pattern library mechanism that you use to set those patterns up beforehand.

Certainly that could be useful, but having the whole pattern library mechanism to implement along with that does make it quite complicated overall...

- Michael

Hi Michael,

>>I guess I'm not really sold on that "dynamic drag to adjust number of items" type thing.

okay, c’est la vie :)

>>I mean other than looking cool.

Instead of looking cool it's rather a way how to meet the target when I more or less know both an ofsset distance (or item cell) and a given room to fill in. It means the number of array items is unknown unless I calculate it before.

Petr

Hi Petr,

> Instead of looking cool it's rather a way how to meet the target
> when I more or less know both an ofsset distance (or item cell)
> and a given room to fill in. It means the number of array items
> is unknown unless I calculate it before.

Will Array curve work for this situation?

What you could do is draw a line for the "given room to fill in" part - draw the line for that full extent.

Then select your object, run Array/Curve, Pick the "extent line" as the path curve, then in the options, fill in the "Distance" entry with your offset/item cell distance and the count will be calculated for you automatically, it will fill in as many items as it can while traveling along that line in offset distance chunks.


For Array grid the equivalent thing I guess would be a kind of hatch pattern like fill? Is that the kind of result that you would be trying to get with that?

I guess the way it could work would be a "Fill extents" type button on the "Choose number of copies" stage. If you clicked that button then you pick a rectangle or box for the full extent, then you pick an individual cell with the mouse or enter cell spacing. I suppose the first corner of the cell would be locked to the corner of the full extents rectangle...

- Michael

Hi Michael,

>>Will Array curve work for this situation?

Hehe... yup. Actually, I used to make an array using Array/Curve command quite a lot. But I seem to have forgotten and stopped using this "array along a line trick" when command Array/Dir was added. So yes, it is what I was looking for. Although, I must draw a line first... but it's okay considering a frequency of using this kind of pattern-making.

>>...hatch pattern like fill? Is that the kind of result that you would be trying to get with that?

Yes.

>>..."Fill extents" type button on the "Choose number of copies" stage...

It sounds good to me - it might be better than drawing two or three lines as a path curves for Array/Curve command first.


Petr

Hi Petr, I think it would be easiest to tune up Array/Dir first, I think that definitely makes sense for it to be able to do the same job as Array/Curve with a line.

I'm thinking of a Mode: dropdown option that lets you switch it into 1 of 3 different modes:


1 - (same as current behavior) - you give a number of items and pick an offset. The full extent is a byproduct.

2 - You give a full extent and a number of items, and the offset distance is calculated as full_extent / (num_items + 1).

3 - You pick 2 distances, an offset distance and then a full extent distance. Items are placed by moving along the full extent in offset distance chunks until it runs off the end of the extent.

So I guess these modes could be named:

1 - Offset, Count
2 - Extent, Count
3 - Offset, Extent


Can you think of any other styles that would also be useful?

- Michael

Hi Michael,


>>Can you think of any other styles that would also be useful?

No. There are just three variables (full distance, cell distance, number) so each mode corresponds to one equation.

The third modes might be in reverse order - first pick a full distance then offset distance.

Petr

Hi Petr,

> The third modes might be in reverse order - first pick a full distance
> then offset distance.

I figured that would be closer to that fence tool in LWCAD, by picking the extent last the kind of dynamic action part would be seeing regularly spaced instances of your object appear, with more added as you moved your mouse further.

But I think there is a good possibility here to allow them in either order, I can just get 2 distances and take the smallest as the offset.

I'm thinking of picks similar to Scale1D here - first a base point, then a second point, which then defines an initial line. Then the third point will track along that line.

If the third point goes longer than the original line, the third point becomes an extent, if the third point goes shorter than the original line then the original line is the extent.

- Michael

Hi Michael,

>>I figured that would be closer to that fence tool in LWCAD

Yes. But the possibility to pick fixed full distance then be able to change an offset distance by dragging a mouse seemed more useful to me. It would be more Dir/Curve-like solution (definitely, I didn't ask you to think an additional way of making array out because of that "cool" part of LWCAD's fence tool. Fortunately, you understood.. :)

Of course, your idea of having both normal and reverse order for third mode is the "ultimate solution".

Petr

Hi Petr, I have implemented these array dir options for the next beta, they seem to have turned out really well, here is a demo:



The first one is the normal method same as v1. The next option is the "Extent, Count" one, where the 2 points are taken as the full distance and the offset is taken as offset = full_extent / (num_items - 1) (correction from what I wrote earlier).

Then the last mode is where you give 2 distances and the item count is calculated for you (and displayed in the options panel). Either start with the small distance as the offset, then move your mouse further to create as many copies as will fit in that longer distance, or start with the long distance first and move your mouse closer to the base point to reduce the offset and generate more copies within that extent.

That seems to pretty well cover this area.

- Michael