Dividing Faces?

Some faces don’t have a ‘vertical’ or a ‘horizontal’. For example the top face of a cube has no vertical. 3DC uses an arbitrary method to determine ‘vertical’/’horizontal’ and is usually right, but not always.

If you find that vertical is wrong just change it to horizontal.

Richard

Hi

I think I’ve come across something that shouldn’t happen. This happened when I was working on a few models.. at first I thought it was something I was doing wrong, then I tried the same method on just a sphere… here’s how it goes…

Drop a sphere into your scene… then, from front view select all the faces on the right of the sphere… then delete these… next, right click on the sphere and enter properties…Now select mirror object in the X axis and exit.

… next, select a few faces on the editible side an dived these Horizontal or Vertical.

The result is that the faces were divided properly but the operation also produces extra vertices on all the faces where the mirrored side and the editible side meet??

This is a very handy tool for dividing faces, but when working on more complex models it would produce an awful lot of extra points and detail… and takes alot of time to delete these unwanted points

It seems that this happens when I model this way… can it be fixed easy?

James

Assuming I am understanding you there is no way to ‘fix’ that.

But perhaps I am not understanding you. If you could show it in wireframe I might be able to tell better.

Richard

Here’s a wire Richard…
These points go right around the sphere, where
I cut the sphere in half

I mostly model using the mirror and smooth option in the object properties pop-up…, to work in this way I must cut the model or object in half verticly… and when I use the divide
operation, this is what happens

Can you see what I mean?

Ok, I understand now. What you are seeing is 3DC trying to auto-repair a hole and failing. I think it is non destructive. Once you commit your ‘mirror’ you can run the Consolidate operation and I think it will remove the extra points.

Richard

Thank you, Richard. <!– s:) –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!– s:) –>

This worked a treat <!– s:D –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt="" title="Very Happy" /><!– s:D –>
It’s the first time I’ve used the consolidate operation <!– s:o –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_surprised.gif" alt=":o" title="Surprised" /><!– s:o –>
I realy hope it works this well with most of the modeling I do <!– s:) –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!– s:) –> It would save a lot of time
COnsolidation seems to be a good addition to
3DC

Thanks for the help

James

Here’s something else that I’ve found… if you divide these stretched cubes using say the verticle option, the one that is standing up divides well…. but the one lying down doesn’t calculate properly. Can this be fixed easly

Here’s something else I’ve discovered… if you divide these two cubes using the verticle divide option… the one standing up divides well… but the one lying down doesn’t add up. Can this be fixed easly?