Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
The file loads without crashing now. On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 3:01 AM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote: Committed a material option so UV interpolation is calculated using the same method that sticky used, r50806. - see UV Project material option. This fixes the nasty errors you pointed out. Now blender crashes on loading the same file ( http://www.pasteall.org/blend/16548 ). Not sure about specific revision, but this file works well with RC1 (r50696). Crashlog: http://www.pasteall.org/35469 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers -- - Campbell ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote: Committed a material option so UV interpolation is calculated using the same method that sticky used, r50806. - see UV Project material option. This fixes the nasty errors you pointed out. Now blender crashes on loading the same file ( http://www.pasteall.org/blend/16548 ). Not sure about specific revision, but this file works well with RC1 (r50696). Crashlog: http://www.pasteall.org/35469 ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
[Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
Why sticky coordinates were removed from blender? The original comment says that this feature was unavailable from blender UI, but in reality the only part of blender without support of sticky coordinates was cycles. This feature was quite popular since Andrew Price created a tutorial about camera mapping at http://www.blenderguru.com/videos/camera-mapping/ . Not speaking of BCON4, but at this point people would loose all the data about sticky mapping in their blend files. I hope r50789, r50790 and 50791 will be reverted or fixed some other way as soon as possible. Cheers Sv. Lockal ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
Unless I'm missing out on something, using project from view uvs is a better solution and works with cycles. On Sep 21, 2012 12:56 PM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: Why sticky coordinates were removed from blender? The original comment says that this feature was unavailable from blender UI, but in reality the only part of blender without support of sticky coordinates was cycles. This feature was quite popular since Andrew Price created a tutorial about camera mapping at http://www.blenderguru.com/videos/camera-mapping/ . Not speaking of BCON4, but at this point people would loose all the data about sticky mapping in their blend files. I hope r50789, r50790 and 50791 will be reverted or fixed some other way as soon as possible. Cheers Sv. Lockal ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
Project from view ignores the scale and aspect of camera. Additional uv tweaking is needed to match the scale of original image. The other potential replacement could be adding and applying UvProject modifier on the special uv layer, however it distorts uvs in perspective mode. Also it doesn't take image aspect into account (default aspect is (1, 1)). And even after fixing distortion in uvproject modifier there are still problems: 1) No replacement in do_versions provided 2) No changes in documentation and release notes 3) Even then Spacebar menu - Add sticky is easier than going to modifiers panel, adding Uv project modifier, setting image, setting aspect, setting camera and clicking apply after each geometry change. On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Nate Wiebe natewieb...@gmail.com wrote: Unless I'm missing out on something, using project from view uvs is a better solution and works with cycles. ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: Project from view ignores the scale and aspect of camera. Additional uv tweaking is needed to match the scale of original image. 2 easy work arounds for this: 1) Match the image to the aspect ratio of the camera by cropping before hand. 2) Do some simple math to scale the UVs by the Y axis. I'm probably going to add this to my script to automagically calculate the right ratio for the UVs. Why is this solution better than stickies? Because you can modify and tweak if wanted/needed AND it works with Cycles. ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
@Lockal, Cameras really shouldn't be scaled - when you scale a camera it won't render scaled, so UV project is correct in this case. On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: Project from view ignores the scale and aspect of camera. Additional uv tweaking is needed to match the scale of original image. The other potential replacement could be adding and applying UvProject modifier on the special uv layer, however it distorts uvs in perspective mode. Can you expand on this? - not sure what you mean. Also it doesn't take image aspect into account (default aspect is (1, 1)). And even after fixing distortion in uvproject modifier there are still problems: The aspect is 1:1 but its a setting that can be modified. Adding an option to use the scenes aspect can be done easily, though it does create a tricky dependency (changing scene aspect would need to update modifiers). 1) No replacement in do_versions provided Since this has been hidden for so long, my assumption was that users were not accessing. 2) No changes in documentation and release notes Yep. this needs doing. 3) Even then Spacebar menu - Add sticky is easier than going to modifiers panel, adding Uv project modifier, setting image, setting aspect, setting camera and clicking apply after each geometry change. I see your point but dont think its an argument for keeping sticky - such a tool can be added as an operator accessible from C, or a macro / py script. eg - http://www.graphicall.org/ftp/ideasman42/uv_project_apply.py On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Nate Wiebe natewieb...@gmail.com wrote: Unless I'm missing out on something, using project from view uvs is a better solution and works with cycles. ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers -- - Campbell ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
My vote is for putting them back, since its clear they are being used, so as long as BI is still being used sticky should remain, just not on bugs associated with it that the feature is no longer developed and will not be fixed. Not to mention its very late in the cycle to be doing this On 22/09/12 08:34, Campbell Barton wrote: @Lockal, Cameras really shouldn't be scaled - when you scale a camera it won't render scaled, so UV project is correct in this case. On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: Project from view ignores the scale and aspect of camera. Additional uv tweaking is needed to match the scale of original image. The other potential replacement could be adding and applying UvProject modifier on the special uv layer, however it distorts uvs in perspective mode. Can you expand on this? - not sure what you mean. Also it doesn't take image aspect into account (default aspect is (1, 1)). And even after fixing distortion in uvproject modifier there are still problems: The aspect is 1:1 but its a setting that can be modified. Adding an option to use the scenes aspect can be done easily, though it does create a tricky dependency (changing scene aspect would need to update modifiers). 1) No replacement in do_versions provided Since this has been hidden for so long, my assumption was that users were not accessing. 2) No changes in documentation and release notes Yep. this needs doing. 3) Even then Spacebar menu - Add sticky is easier than going to modifiers panel, adding Uv project modifier, setting image, setting aspect, setting camera and clicking apply after each geometry change. I see your point but dont think its an argument for keeping sticky - such a tool can be added as an operator accessible from C, or a macro / py script. eg - http://www.graphicall.org/ftp/ideasman42/uv_project_apply.py On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Nate Wiebe natewieb...@gmail.com wrote: Unless I'm missing out on something, using project from view uvs is a better solution and works with cycles. ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
I would vote for that we remove it.In my opinion using the UV Project modifier is a better workflow.As for the more click argument, you can use the copy attribute menu addon to copy selected modifier. So it actually require fewer click. As for compatibility, people can always download an older build of blender to open their file. I know it sound rude. But to me, not to remove a dated feature just because many people know how to use it through a dated tutorial doesn't make much sense. There are also tutorials out there that teach how to do camera mapping using the UV project modifier. So the new user should be fine. From: p_boel...@msn.com To: bf-committers@blender.org Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 01:23:52 +0200 Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender I agree. If people still use the feature and all removing it does is taking that away and breaking old-file compatibility, I vote we keep it. -Patrick Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 09:09:38 +1000 From: mfoxd...@gmail.com To: bf-committers@blender.org Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender My vote is for putting them back, since its clear they are being used, so as long as BI is still being used sticky should remain, just not on bugs associated with it that the feature is no longer developed and will not be fixed. Not to mention its very late in the cycle to be doing this On 22/09/12 08:34, Campbell Barton wrote: @Lockal, Cameras really shouldn't be scaled - when you scale a camera it won't render scaled, so UV project is correct in this case. On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 5:12 AM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: Project from view ignores the scale and aspect of camera. Additional uv tweaking is needed to match the scale of original image. The other potential replacement could be adding and applying UvProject modifier on the special uv layer, however it distorts uvs in perspective mode. Can you expand on this? - not sure what you mean. Also it doesn't take image aspect into account (default aspect is (1, 1)). And even after fixing distortion in uvproject modifier there are still problems: The aspect is 1:1 but its a setting that can be modified. Adding an option to use the scenes aspect can be done easily, though it does create a tricky dependency (changing scene aspect would need to update modifiers). 1) No replacement in do_versions provided Since this has been hidden for so long, my assumption was that users were not accessing. 2) No changes in documentation and release notes Yep. this needs doing. 3) Even then Spacebar menu - Add sticky is easier than going to modifiers panel, adding Uv project modifier, setting image, setting aspect, setting camera and clicking apply after each geometry change. I see your point but dont think its an argument for keeping sticky - such a tool can be added as an operator accessible from C, or a macro / py script. eg - http://www.graphicall.org/ftp/ideasman42/uv_project_apply.py On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Nate Wiebe natewieb...@gmail.com wrote: Unless I'm missing out on something, using project from view uvs is a better solution and works with cycles. ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 2:34 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote: Can you expand on this? - not sure what you mean. Ok, Project From View has an option to correct aspect, so it's not so bad. However, UV projection produces distorted maps, see http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=38001 (blend file: http://www.pasteall.org/blend/16548) Such mesh was created only to demonstrate exaggerated distortions, but those exist for any non-flat mesh in perspective mode. Project from view and Uv project work almost perfect in orthographic mode (there are some distortion for overlapping faces which I don't take into account), but both of them produce distorted uv maps for non-flat meshes in perspective mode. On the other hand, sticky produces clean image like if it was composited over the 3d image. Adding an option to use the scenes aspect can be done easily, though it does create a tricky dependency (changing scene aspect would need to update modifiers). New options for object modifiers are always welcome :)! such a tool can be added as an operator accessible from C, or a macro / py script. New tools are also welcome! Err, actually this would be rather old tool. Also the same tool could be used in do_versions to convert old sticky coordinate setting to uv maps (if it is even possible, see the image above) -- Sv. Lockal ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
Re: [Bf-committers] Regarding sticky coordinates removal from blender
Committed a material option so UV interpolation is calculated using the same method that sticky used, r50806. - see UV Project material option. This fixes the nasty errors you pointed out. On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Lockal S lockals...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 2:34 AM, Campbell Barton ideasma...@gmail.com wrote: Can you expand on this? - not sure what you mean. Ok, Project From View has an option to correct aspect, so it's not so bad. However, UV projection produces distorted maps, see http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=38001 (blend file: http://www.pasteall.org/blend/16548) Such mesh was created only to demonstrate exaggerated distortions, but those exist for any non-flat mesh in perspective mode. Project from view and Uv project work almost perfect in orthographic mode (there are some distortion for overlapping faces which I don't take into account), but both of them produce distorted uv maps for non-flat meshes in perspective mode. On the other hand, sticky produces clean image like if it was composited over the 3d image. Adding an option to use the scenes aspect can be done easily, though it does create a tricky dependency (changing scene aspect would need to update modifiers). New options for object modifiers are always welcome :)! such a tool can be added as an operator accessible from C, or a macro / py script. New tools are also welcome! Err, actually this would be rather old tool. Also the same tool could be used in do_versions to convert old sticky coordinate setting to uv maps (if it is even possible, see the image above) -- Sv. Lockal ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers -- - Campbell ___ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
