When using InsertEdge with the Absolute and Ring options, there are many cases where I cannot choose or flip the side of the ring that is used as the baseline for the offset distance.
I understand this happens because the side I want to offset from cannot be automatically calculated as a clean loop. However, when using Proportional mode, this limitation doesn’t exist. It would appreciate to have a Flip/Toggle Side option in the command line when using Absolute mode so we can manually force the offset direction.
Bug?: Unstitched Vertices / Open Edges in Loop Mode When using InsertEdge with Loop mode, the workflow is more intuitive, but it introduces a geometry bug if you create the edges in multiple successive steps.
The command ends up creating overlapping vertex that share the exact same spatial coordinates but are not stitched together. This leaves disconnected vertices and broken topologies within the SubD object that require manual repair later.
Is anyone else experiencing this, or is there a tracker already open for the Loop mode stitching issue?
nope you are good, was watching this to see if other users were struggling with this as well. thanks for bringing it up, curious to hear from others so we can create a fix that is useful.
… does not like star points / extraordinary vertices, and behaves different then bevel.
see this topic
with
useful fix
I think it s really important to have those similar commands (insertEdge, inset, bevel) follow the same logic.
the fix is to make insertEdge not fail at starpoints - so the solution is to select an edgeloop as @laborda suggests in the video.
for the ring-Selection it gets tricky - my guess: if insertEdge with loop selection works at starpoints - nobody will need the option ring-selection + absolut distance + select reference side.
i hesitate to suggest a gesture that allows from one side or the other inserting at an Edge-Ring. By gesture i mean a mouse movement tracking similar like the arc command creats +/- angles or reaches a point CCW or CW.
maybe _offsetSrf is a better reference ? it accepts negative input and has a flip option.
…but i am not a fan of overloading commands with to many options just to enable quite rare workflows that can (or should, with above fix) be accomplished with other ways… and we have so many commands / workflows where the correct selection with the correct command need to be combined. - i would prefer to skip this possibility ( ring selection + absolute + flip direction + defining what a negative number should do).
Thanks @Tom_P for your examples and suggestions. I think that for the specific case I need Inset works perfectly, but Bevel doesn’t , because it create edges in both sides and modifies the oririginal edge selected. I agree in most of the points you mention and also feel like we have many similar tools that solve the same function.
From user point of view I would appreciate if the insertEdge tools could recognize the side you pick, the same way it does loft when you pick several curves and you have to take care to avoid torsions.
… yes i like the comparison to loft (maybe even better then comparing to offsetSrf or arc - interface)
in rhinocommon this concept is called SelectionPoint
