 | | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) Well, at least splitting into triangles at the middle would produce a fairly clean result in that it would eliminate artifacts, but at the cost of creating extra triangles. I've been working on my adjustment tool and my initial results have (...) (14 years ago, 21-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) I am short of time at the moment for a more detailed answer, but are you aware of Edger2? ((URL) The code is a mess, but it does a pretty good job... Philo (14 years ago, 21-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) It would be interesting to have a configurable threshold, a 0.1ldu move is not visible and might bring more quads to flat state. (...) Thanks - fortunately it was certified by two other peoples ;o) (...) Probably... (...) There is a special (...) (14 years ago, 21-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) Ah, I was not. Very interesting. I'm still plowing ahead with upgrading Edger regardless because I'd like that built into this tool, but options like making inlining parts optional and not adding conditional lines within a certain angle (...) (14 years ago, 21-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) Not sure what you mean - it doesn't check if a line has its ends properly ending on a surface vertex. (loosely related) I have a pending update for edger2 that check if the angle of existing condlines matches angle between surfaces. If the (...) (14 years ago, 22-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) reads the primitives correctly. What I meant about bad lines was that I noticed your tool does some checking for spurious lines; that must just be for lines between coplanar surfaces. (I could see this being a problem for highly detailed parts (...) (14 years ago, 22-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Advice on hair pieces
|
|
(...) So do I... That's why I love Sculptris that has a wonderfully intuitive interface (but it does help to have a reasonably powerful machine). Meshlab is more austere and lacks documentation, but the few needed functions can be conquered without (...) (14 years ago, 22-Sep-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
