Make2D bugs

v6-make2d
v6

#1

Hi @GregArden just found three bugs in the latest wip.

1 - the age old “is the edge hidden or not” for the perspective view, it has to do with the tolerance, but still, maybe you could override the tolerance for figuring out it an edge curve is hidden or not.
2 - if the objects are grouped then make2d adds the curves to the object group, where they don’t belong.
3 - the perspective view 2d data is very small for objects like this, it should imo use 1:1 for center of object bounding box to approximate the size.

make2D error 04.3dm (307.2 KB)


(Brian Gillespie) #2

Thanks @holo, this is logged at http://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-33470


(Greg Arden) #3

Holo,
Sorry for the late reply to this but I just now got around to looking a little more closely at this problem.

  1. As you have figured out the reason your results look so ratty is because the tolerance is to large. The little spurs you see in the result are (.5 to 2.0) times tolerance. So basically you need a tighter tolerance to get good results at that level of magnification. Here is you model with a tolerance of .001 instead of .01.

Your comments in 1 imply that you would like to get a good result without specifying a tolerance. I don’t think that is possible. I use tolerance to eliminate duplicate detail. This is far from perfect, but I think I think it far better than spending an immense amount of computational resources to try to resolve fine details that get collapsed to a single pixel in the production image.


#4

Hi Greg, thanks for looking at it.
What i really wish for is a tolerance override setting in the make 2D command.
It would be really usefull when making 2D’s for 1:200 prints as well, where most details don’t need 0.001 of a mm tolerance, and visa versa as shown here.

Edit: " I use tolerance to eliminate duplicate detail."
I think it would be possible to choose the visible one out of the duplicates as default, and discard the hidden one.


(Greg Arden) #5

Holo I agree that having a tolerance setting on Make2d makes a lot of sense. There is no reason to think that model tolerance is the right tolerance to use. The tolerance should depend on the medium of the final result, e.g. the sheet size.
Maybe @Rajaa could experiment with tolerance setting and see if the Make2d code makes good drawings at better tolerance settings.


(Brian Gillespie) #6

@GregArden did you log a bug for this? Conversations are easy to lose…


(Rajaa Issa) #7

Filed a bug for this one: https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-38086

This is the result with the latest WIP, which is far from ideal: