Leaderboard

No, Projection mode is for something else entirely ! That takes the initial position of a coincident mesh and deforms it with the target, which isn't what you need here... UV is definitely right, and use the scaling and positioning in the deformer to get it exactly as you want it... So if you now fuck up that cylinder mesh by displacing it for example (before the surface deformer in the OM !) then the UV should go with it and deform the label properly with only minimal adjustment... CBR

Gold....pure gold. Amazing how something becomes obvious ONLY AFTER it is shown to you. All I can say is "Duh!!!" at that point and slap my forehead in disgust. Thank you and I look forward to more!!!! Dave

Fields and mograph effectors would be a good example. they take the OM as the central place to view inter-object links and largely throw them away so now theres links, but no way to see where they are unless you start clicking through very object to find them.

In answer to getting the diamond flow in the first place... and then carrying on from there... (will take while to finish upload) I'll answer the complex poles thing in the next post 🙂 CBR

The humble padawan will throw himself at the mercy of the Master and attempt to answer 1. Do we need to worry about the complex poles remaining, both before and after the bevels ? Complex poles can lead to problems but in some cases are unavoidable. So, the questions that need to be considered is whether or not the complex poles preserve good edge flow? Are any of those poles made up of polygons that are not quads? In short, quads and edge flows are the goals to be achieved at the base polygon level before you apply bevel modifiers. If you can achieve that goal but create some complex poles in the process, then that is a good trade-off. 2. If not, why, and if so, why ? See answer to 1. 3. If we do wish they weren't there, what can be done / is already being done about them ? Well, that is where your genius comes in. You need to visualize the result in your head and think in 3D what is the solution. Then you have to figure out the most efficient way to get their using the modeling tools you have. Being able to visualize abstract problems in 3D is a function of genius thinking (according to Mensa). Not everyone can do it. But as you are also a mighty fine composer then it is pretty well established how well your brain is working. For us mere mortals, that is sometimes not so easy. In some cases, I have had to throw out the model and start all over again when I get into those situations. But a question for you: I don't quite follow your explanation of the first step: My approach would have been to start with a cylinder as you did, then save a selection of all interior edges. Select all the faces and run the "Poke Polygon" command. Deselect everything and re-select your tag of saved interior edges and hit dissolve. Now, while quicker, I will admit that your solution looks better in that your diamonds have edges that are equal lengths on all sides which will never happen with the poke polygon command. So how did you do it? Plus running the loop cut with quantize subdivision fixed at 1 (to give you 50%) and bidirectional set to off does work but then, as you get to the end, the cutting goes all wonky How did you get around this? Did you have to start making specific selections and restrict the cut to only those selections or is there some other setting I am missing? And I still have no idea how you got to here while still preserving the curvature of the glass: Yes...now you know why I am amazed...especially as it only took you 15 minutes to both visualize the solution and to execute it ((it took me over 90 minutes just to figure out most of what you did)!!!!!!! Dave

Déjà vu with 'Electric Image' years ago. Multiple attempts at resuscitation. It died.

Very nice. Thank you. Please note that this generator is also good for making cheese!!!! Dave