often it would be nice to have a more dense SubD or increased number of edges - only in one direction.
_subDivide will not change shape but insert in both directions
_insertEdge will allow a single direction but will bulk / deform the shape.
I would love to see an option to have a Subdivide in one direction only.
the new testsubdedgematch will profit from this as well.
therefor it would be great to define the subDivide-Direction by a Edge-Loop (perpendenicular to the subdivide-Direction)
some kind of workaround / maybe easier to implement:
this could also be a insertEdge option:
InsertEdge with smooth-mode positioning.
(instead of box-mode positioning)
with this i mean, the new inserted Edge at 0.5 relative Position should have the same positioning as a corresponding edge of subdivide.
(and on the Face of a box-Mode-SubD)
Hi
Why i think this could be done by isocurve or isosurface since you mentioned one direction means u or v.at the other hand built in will be great since this has many use case.
Hello @Tom_P! A shape-preserving InsertEdge could be handy like you said.
As far as I know, however, inserting edges only in one direction will necessarily change the shape of the smooth SubD. This is because such an operation does not follow the standard Catmull-Clark subdivision scheme we use to transform the box SubD to the smooth SubD. Therefore, the only reliable way to add more edges without modifying the smooth shape of the SubD is to use the command SubDivide.
dear @pastrana
thanks for having a look.
thanks for your explanation - it s clear that insertEdge is a different algorithm then (catmull clark) subdivide.
the result I would love to get from a user s perspective, would be the same as doing a subdivide - and define edges to keep / to be transferred from the new sudivision level to the old ( …or delete unwanted edges from the subdivide result ).
To define those wanted (sudD) Edges the selection process could be similar to insertEdge , but also should allow something like “perpendicular to edgeLoop / naked Edge” (as there is not such thing as uv’s).
I don t care if the shape is not 100% preserved.
but I guess in many cases the (“subdive + delete”) Result is nicer then the insertEdge Result.
