Would be more useful if I could also specify number of faces in U and V directions. Right now I have a default 2 faces on U and 2 on V.
This is filed as https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-58326, I added your vote, thanks!
What result would you want in cases where a consistent u/v direction cannot be assigned? (which happens whenever the input has any vertices with an odd number of connected edges)
In those cases, is it possible to have the user pick a main direction? Also to adjust this direction before applying the subdivision?
For me it would be very useful if I could control the amount of edges of an edge loop. That way I can match one edge loop of a Subd with another SubD edge loop and join/ bridge the two objects.
That would make quadremesh a super tool for me as shoe-last designer!
If you want I can post an example of what I have in mind.
please post! super helpful to see examples
This picture shows my intended workflow.
I want to bridge the re-meshed part of the footscan with an existing nose cap (green).
Therefore the amount of edges on the borders of both objects have to be the same.
It would be great when step 3, matching the amount of edges could be automated in some way.
Command : RebuildEdgeloopToMasterEdgeloop (or something).
Option: Ad slashes to dictate which faces should be merged (or split, when the master-edgeloop has more edges then the one to rebuild).
Now both edgeloops can be bridged or stitched.
And maybe it is also possible to incorporate this as an option in Quadremesh, like a “Guiding edge loop” that restricts the amount of faces/edges at an edgeloop.
I think this can be a very useful command.
I think an easier way would be to just subdivide your toe cap to a higher face count and then bridge… automating this would be very difficult given the endless amounts of topology that is possible. BUT I agree it would be cool.
Subdividing the toe cap is something I would like to avoid, that makes it less easy to modify later when needed.
Subdividing the cap will not automatically lead to two “bridge-able” edgeloops with the same amount of edges. But I understand that it is very difficult to “rebuild” a face-loop to less faces, as a sort of opposite of subdivide.
Maybe, in the future…