Hi Matt, > Having extra funky automatic tools can be great too, but it's a > different thing. You still also need tools with manual control, even > if only just to clean up problems after an automatic topology > generation algorithm. So these manual tools are probably not > mathematically intense, but implementing them will require good UI and > workflow design, and working with artists to make them useful and > efficient.
the point is for use cases - if somehow user selects more that very simple area then 'general' algos would be OK. but if knowledgeable members know some approaches to handle relativly different cases with said script - and it will be useable - then OK. the problem is that - though things look simple - they anyway require quite powerful tools. and of cause - it is up to applicant and SoC leader to select approach. My series of mails were just give more outlook. even if the talk was 'hot' it might be useful after all. and no need to think that if I behave like 'young' I'm young - I have more than 10 years of graphics programming experience and lead 15 people team, it is for this reason - I'm so informal - because I try to give different outlook, and it is not I'm who will decide after all. Regards Sergey On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:36 AM, Matt Ebb <m...@mke3.net> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Sergey Kurdakov <sergey.fo...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> all mentioned approaches was like these: take arbitrary mesh and make it >> better. >> it is developed with simple interface with mesh in - mesh out. >> >> in case you can suggest any better algos - and I provided best in >> class of retopo algos > > Hi Sergey, i think there's a bit of confusion - the point for these > tools is to have something manual and hands-on, so users can lay down > polys exactly where they want them to be. Just like normal mesh > modelling but as part of a retopo workflow. > > Having extra funky automatic tools can be great too, but it's a > different thing. You still also need tools with manual control, even > if only just to clean up problems after an automatic topology > generation algorithm. So these manual tools are probably not > mathematically intense, but implementing them will require good UI and > workflow design, and working with artists to make them useful and > efficient. > > So that's the purpose behind this wishlist item, to improve the manual > editing tools for drawing/tweaking mesh topology manually on an > existing reference surface, not to implement a fancy algorithm that > guesses and generates geometry for you. > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > Bf-committers@blender.org > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
