Also make volume options or I think its called make Mainfold...with history on this is a killer!

Hi Kreten, do you mean command for making solid from individual surfaces - see http://www.smlib.com/smlib.html -Petr

Hey tyglik,
The merge operator from that page you linked to is exactly how the CAD package CATIA can create solids. If that was implemented into MoI....OHHHH BOY!

Egsaclty that one!
Imagine this in combination with history to edit final surface shape!
WoW!

> Michale any chance that you make some kind od a shortcut editor?

Yeah, I probably need to do this pretty soon along with a re-organization of the options dialog.

- Michael

Re: Make manifold / merge

This one seems like a bit of an odd operation to me, since it involves creating a model with all sorts of excess pieces sticking out in all directions.

It just doesn't seem like a very natural approach, it's just a little easier to work on a few surfaces at a time and trim smaller pieces instead of having everything all sticking out everywhere.

Also right now it is possible to get the same result by using Trim and Join - select all the surfaces, run Trim, push Done instead of picking any other cutting objects (because in this case the objects being cut are also the cutters), and then hit done to leave all the pieces - select the excess pieces and delete, and select the remaining pieces and join and you've got that same result.

I guess I could add the Merge / Make manifold operation as a special case of boolean intersection. I suppose if you select only surfaces and no solids, and then run boolean intersection it could do this merge operation, would that make sense?

- Michael

I think yes:-)

Hi Michael,

I tried out a demo of PowerShape which uses manifold surfacing and it seems a bit
hit or miss...I suppose if you want to quickly sketch something out in 3D for visualization
and don't care too much if the shape and size is exactly on target, then it could be useful.
Just my $.02

-Jesse

> I think yes:-)

It looks like this will be possible for the next beta, the way I've got it right now is if you select all the objects to merge on the first boolean intersection prompt, and then push "done" without selecting anything for the second set, it will do this merge operation instead of the regular intersection.

This also allows it to work with solids, which I think seems pretty useful because it allows for this in one operation now:





This type of merge with a solid and a surface allows you to get 2 solids in one easy operation. I may end up duplicating some of this behavior inside of boolean difference as well, when differencing solids with surfaces.

I think I'm going to try a couple other boolean tuneups now as well.

- Michael

Here's a sneak peek at some other in progress boolean work...





- Michael

>>This also allows it to work with solids, which I think seems pretty useful because it allows for this in one operation now:
>>This type of merge with a solid and a surface allows you to get 2 solids in one easy operation.

It looks like _BooleanSplit in Rhino(?).
Anyway, boolean operations between solids and (poly)surface(s) would be useful.

Petr

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaá......... Boolean curves! Amazing!

/me drools. :D

MfG
sk2k

Boolean curves looks really nice Michael! I can already think of ways to use it :)

I have a small request regarding selection.
Is it possible to implement "select edge loops"? I've attached a couple of screenshots to show what I mean. If you select an edge of an object and be able to use a command that will it enable a selection of all of the edges in a loop. Not select all edges but all edges on a single face that are connected.

Hi Richard, I definitely want to add some kind of edge chain selection helpers in the future, but it doesn't look like they're going to happen for V1. I expect to have a set of selection helpers like this for V2.

- Michael

Yup curve booleans are in for the next beta!

Here's another example:

Original:

Boolean difference:

Boolean union:

Boolean intersection:


There is also a merge operation which like the previously mentioned merge is invoked by doing an intersection with only one set and pushing "Done" instead of selecting a second set - this will cut everything into piece and generate all the closed loops. So in this case the result looks the same as the original, except it is all split into little pieces.

The way these work is if you select only planar, closed curves that are all on the same plane, then the boolean tools will do a curve boolean.

It seems to be working really well, the only complication is with Union in some places - since everything is all selected all in a single shot for union there are some times when it can't properly tell when a shape completely contained inside another is supposed to be a hole or a solid shape.

The really cool thing is this is yet another instance of making the existing tools more powerful without adding any extra UI!

Looks like I will be able to wrap curve booleans up tonight and try a couple other boolean enhancements tomorrow...

- Michael

Holy moly! I can't wait for that. :) MoI gains up in power. Great work Michael.

MfG
sk2k

Hi Michael,

Boolean curves: You won't have to click inside the areas you want to keep or remove? It works without intervention? I think so if I understand you well. On the other hand, this is restricted to closed curve (how you mentioned) due to this automatic handling, isn't it...

Petr

> Boolean curves: You won't have to click inside the areas you
> want to keep or remove? It works without intervention? I think so if I
> understand you well.

Yes, this is correct it works in the exact same steps as a regular solid boolean, no extra picking or intervention required.


> On the other hand, this is restricted to closed curve (how you mentioned) due
> to this automatic handling, isn't it...

Yes, that is the case. I tried to get open curves to work with the merge operator - it almost works but there are some complications that get in the way that won't be easy to solve for now.

Something that involves open curves and manually picking areas, although certainly useful in the right circumstances, just is not what I would call a boolean operation. Boolean operations involve using Difference, Union, or Intersection.

A region picking method would be something I'd consider to be more applicable in the Trim tool instead. Right now in MoI there is a control in Trim that lets you specify whether you are keeping or removing the selected fragments - this would be a good spot to also have a point-in-area selector as another optional way to specify the fragments.

- Michael

Michael,
Thanks for the info. No problem on waiting as I have enough tools in this version to keep me plenty happy ;)
And those new booleans are sparking ideas already :)