PDA

View Full Version : MOVE Tool falloffs: cursor-centric versions?



jeric_synergy
08-22-2016, 10:25 PM
I just noticed that the MOVE TOOL's Falloff is a static thing, a region of space, versus a cursor-centric falloff.

( Took me 2 decades to notice? :confused: --I don't usually use Falloff because it's damn awkward to get to... IOW, Menus. :devil: )

I figured maybe MAGNET would be different, but really MAGNET just seems to be MOVE: RADIAL in fancy costume.

Surely there is a MOVE: FALLOFF that works rather more like a PShop brush? Lots in the middle of the cursor, less the farther away??? :stumped:

erikals
08-23-2016, 03:34 AM
Surely there is a MOVE: FALLOFF that works rather more like a PShop brush? nope! :)

and talking falloffs...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyTCjysl69Y

prometheus
08-23-2016, 04:58 AM
Donīt understand the question completly, (as I see it to have falloff move options..like photoshop)
The move tool has many fallof options..for instance, use the point radial falloff and use right mouse button and click and scale the radius, thus more point is moved withing the center of that and less outside it, similar to soft selection, I often use point radial, which moves points in reference to what point you start dragging, or use radial which purely picks points according to right clicked scaled radius and with that it doesnīt matter to pick any point ..just those points within that hud guide is affected...without the need of exactly picking a point as point radial needs.

prometheus
08-23-2016, 05:03 AM
nope! :)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyTCjysl69Y

Nope? as I mentioned above, to me the move tool has these options, but maybe I am not understanding the question or interprete it wrong?
or do you guys suggest a type of sculpt drag continuous stroke move? then it would be more like sculpting grab, but that isn īt available in native modeler, perhaps 3rd powers sculpting tool.

erikals
08-23-2016, 06:16 AM
nope.
the magnet too works, but the magnet tool "center/pivot" does not have the ability to snapping to a point/poly/edge, making it clumsy.
it's quite different from the drag network tool as well. and talking drag network tool, it errors out when clicking a polygon instead of a point.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ4pRP9qukg

jeric_synergy
08-23-2016, 07:48 AM
nope.
the magnet too works, but the magnet tool "center/pivot" does not have the ability to snapping to a point/poly/edge, making it clumsy.
it's quite different from the drag network tool as well. and talking drag network tool, it errors out when clicking a polygon instead of a point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ4pRP9qukg

That's what I thought. I guess I was suppressing that knowledge-- it's kinda hard to believe, really. It's easy to stumble along with whatever tool one is given, before going "waitaminnit....". :grumpy:

And I >>REALLY<< hate that tool falloff is selected by using a g.d. menu, and apparently there's no scriptable way around it. Effing menus SUCK. :devil:

prometheus
08-23-2016, 07:50 AM
nope.
the magnet too works, but the magnet tool "center/pivot" does not have the ability to snapping to a point/poly/edge, making it clumsy.
it's quite different from the drag network tool as well. and talking drag network tool, it errors out when clicking a polygon instead of a point.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ4pRP9qukg

Thatīs not the move tool ..itīs dragnet, but it doesnīt matter..itīs the same with the move tool fall off, and itīs nothing wrong with that fall off setting, it is POINT..radial move, it Needs to select a point directly, the radial falloff Doesnīt need that..on the other hand it needs to be set a guide radius with right mouse button and setting the radius, when that is done, it doesnīt matter if you do not pick exactly on a point to move..as long as you use the mouse cursor within that guide, but the radial falloff is static in relation to where you put your cursor..so itīs not good enough.
So there is nothing wrong in what those tools are supposed to do according to itīs fallof name.

That said and as you said in the end, it would be good if we had a sculpting move tool that doesnīt need to use a radial Point falloff, and it doesnīt need a static guide, it should move the points even if you do not cursor select exactly....so with all that said, maybe this is exactly what jeric ment?
I made a difference in interprete it as the falloff not working to move more points at the center of the radius and less when the radius ends, that does work, but it needs either a point exactly picke when dragging, or it needs a radial falloff, not point falloff.

So I am definatly for a fallof brush that simple moves within that set radius you do with point falloff, but without the need to exactly pick a point, this is something that annoyed me when using the texture fallof to sculpt a displaced area in modeler, you need a dense mesh just because of getting enough points for the drag sculpt.

However, since the texture fallofs I showcased alot before with procedurals doesnīt use any normal displacement, I have sort of skipped the use of it nowadays and simply go with blender sculpting and use anchored or dot stroke methods.

prometheus
08-23-2016, 08:03 AM
yes ..king of bad that it doesnīt work better, you would have to use 3d powers sculpt tools to overcome this in lightwave.

erikals
08-23-2016, 11:19 AM
yes, for certain things, Blender definitely is a good alternative.

i guess i'll be using it more later on, and make a homemade LightWave <> Blender bridge to make things flow easier.
(using autohotkey)


you would have to use 3d powers sculpt tools to overcome this in lightwave.
yep, read the programmers will possibly have a go at the Modeler engine in 2018  (subject to change)

jeric_synergy
08-23-2016, 04:47 PM
yes, for certain things, Blender definitely is a good alternative.
erikals, very likely, but I really hate jumping back and forth-- in fact, there's plenty of plugins that are Just Too Much, let alone another app.

While there's definitely Rocket Science needed under LW's hood, there's also plenty of just dead-simple stuff they ignored for years. Rocket Science doesn't interest me as much as a friggin' tool that DOESN'T stab me in the thumb every time I go to use it.

IOW, lots of easy, LHF that could have been addressed in a few hours by competent scripters, like the DEVS.

erikals
08-24-2016, 03:52 PM
IOW, lots of easy, LHF that could have been addressed in a few hours by competent scripters, like the DEVS.
i think they left out Modeler for years because all focus was on Layout Mesh Engine for, say 4 years or so.
and like Jarno (LW developer) said, they had to focus on Layout first, before they could start with Modeler.
so according to this link, read his statement, some Modeler development is next up.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?149194-New-Blog-Post-The-Modifier-Stack&p=1460368&viewfull=1#post1460368


Jarno  So Layout had the greater need with the lesser amount of work needed, and we tackled it first. Then with the experience gained, lots of new code in place, and the release clock reset, we can look at the modelling tools including the possibility of making them work in Layout.

jeric_synergy
08-24-2016, 08:09 PM
i think they left out Modeler for years because all focus was on Layout Mesh Engine for, say 4 years or so.
and like Jarno (LW developer) said, they had to focus on Layout first, before they could start with Modeler.

This ain't Louisiana man-- I ain't buyin' it. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-ZblMfZpuw)

There's obvious LHF that do NOT require advanced math, that only need competent professional scripting, to accomplish that have been ignored for YEARS, and even just simple tweeks to g.d. existing tools (wouldn't it be nice if MERGE POINTS remembered its damn settings). Somethings I've had other uses whip up scripts in HOURS.

To keep fobbing this off on "We were concentrating on Layout" is pathetic, and insulting to the customer.