Hi Guys,
I went with Pascals idea in this other thread to solve the problem.
Nice...@Willem - offsetting EditPoints may make a more accurate offset than moving control points. Not as Macro-able though it looks like.
-Pascal
in thread by Dave…
I will accept advice that an offset needs loads more control points, though when I converted the offset to my existing control point structure, and tweaked the points I got it to match the shape visually when zoomed in enough to be happy with fit.
I then also used Daves video and use of MoveUVN and Pascals advice to him of use edit points which makes a far better result.
I then realigned the tangent control points, then I scaled the shape 1d top to bottom as I had done to the previous offset shape. I need a matching control point count for the aerofoil type profiles so cannot just go with what offset did. It seems whatever method, Daves or Rebuild, that the tangent ends need adjustment (match etc as suggested) afterwards. I will go with whatever is said as acceptable, here its a visual match, visual doesnt seem the normal practice and gets shot down but here it is the way to do it.
whatever has prompted the fixes by other posters, Daves video is quite revealing…
Offset to have a loose option, and/or whatever has caused others to comment on its results.
An option for best fit with existing control points and retain tangengy if thats possible, keeping same control point count, …or just one for keep control point, let user realign tangent ends if they get ‘broken’. So if someone draws an egg shape and offsets it, the curves at top and bottom dont go bent, or user gets to realign afterwards.
Steve