About feature requests

indigomonkey · Post by **indigomonkey** » Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:01 pm

I second KDR_11k's suggestion - if you could make a mid-face vertex, as it were, and then could limit the vertex to only be movable in the plane of that face, it would be very useful, especially to a n00b like me.

sten · Post by **sten** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:12 pm

indigomonkey wrote:I second KDR_11k's suggestion - if you could make a mid-face vertex, as it were, and then could limit the vertex to only be movable in the plane of that face, it would be very useful, especially to a n00b like me.

the new selectionmodes like for example Face selection already have a "facedot" to move just *that* face

did you check the new selectmodes in latest 2.35 ?
http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Mesh_editi ... 425.0.html

indigomonkey · Post by **indigomonkey** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 10:11 am

I know it would involve a lot of a lot of work in a new direction, but I've currently been working on a project in which I want parts of the backbuf picture to show over the model.
I've been acheiving this with planes with alpha = 0 in front of the model. However, could a new blender utility be introduced which edits images, allowing you to select regions as foreground, while leaving the rest as background?
This would allow me to make animations in which the camera moves, without having to move the planes frame by frame...

Actually, on second thought this sounds like a bad idea. But it may be worth a think?

levon · Post by **levon** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 10:48 am

you could just parent the planes to the camera, then they would move with the camera.

er i mean, have the camera as the parent of the planes

theeth · Post by **theeth** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 12:45 pm

Or just use the sequencer with an alpha over effect.

Martin

Vek · Post by **Vek** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:50 am

Feature Request: Python access to whether a curve (3d, not IPO) is either closed or open... yes... its missing... heh

jbk · Post by **jbk** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 11:21 am

Simple request: commandline access to parts rendering (border render really).

Why:
Without this distributed computing projects will not have easy access to this feature and will not be able to take advantage of the extra speed that can be gained by spreading the load of a single frame over several computers.
So an option to render only the upper-right 1/4 of the image - just like yafray has - would be nice.

Also this is usefull when rendering images larger than the maximum resolution of blender (10kx10k I think?) from the commandline.

[Edit:] Ah nevermind - I wrote the code myself....

joeri · Post by **joeri** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 3:37 pm

In an attempt to keep track of all the feature requests there is now a list on blender3d.org
http://www.blender3d.org/cms/Feature_Re ... 480.0.html

Before posting a request you can check out if a simular request exists.
If so, add to that threat/wiki. Or if not, post a new threat.

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » Fri Dec 31, 2004 11:04 am

Hm, the project vertex proposal from page 3 is missing (and no, it has zero to do with any form of face selection or movement constraints, merely placing vertices not on a plane defined by the cursor but the mesh's surface).

joeri · Post by **joeri** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:04 pm

KDR_11k wrote:Hm, the project vertex proposal from page 3 is missing (and no, it has zero to do with any form of face selection or movement constraints, merely placing vertices not on a plane defined by the cursor but the mesh's surface).

You can use this page to submit a found feature request:
http://www.blender3d.com/cms/Feature_Re ... 500.0.html

KDR_11k · Post by **KDR_11k** » Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:55 pm

Yeah but I wasn't sure how smart it would be to link to the feature request thread...

oin · Post by **oin** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 10:18 am

KDR_11k wrote:
Hm, the project vertex proposal from page 3 is missing (and no, it has zero to do with any form of face selection or movement constraints, merely placing vertices not on a plane defined by the cursor but the mesh's surface).

If it is what I am thinking, that feature would rock... Would it be actually possible?

rogma · Post by **rogma** » Mon May 09, 2005 12:49 pm

I have a feature request about python API, already posted in Python section. I repost here for discussion purpose and feature request :

I would like a way to save a packed image to a choosen file through python API. It would be something like :

image = Blender.Image.Get("image")

image.save("/path/to/directory/")
# save the packed image in a directory

The aims are twofold :

- have self contained 3D model (only one file, the .blend one, no image files around)
- be able to batch export any number of this kind of model to another format

I insist on the batch issue, all these operations could be done through the blender interface, but imagine you have 50 files...

Any existing exporter could benefit from this feature.

Regards

stfighter01 · Post by **stfighter01** » Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:17 pm

feature request:

a very nice and easy to make feature.

zoom in and out with the mousewheel should take the mousepointer as center for the zooming.

with this feature it would be much more easy to get to the correct position, because u dont need to move the view a second time.

i saw this feature in ProEngineer, a technical modeller, but it would rule here too.

mfg stfighter

kisolre · Post by **kisolre** » Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:57 pm

Feature request:
Variable curve resolution for each segment. So you could create pipes with straight parts and turns, then convert to mesh and have low poly count for straight parts and high poly count (so they are smooth) for turns.

Now it is only posible to select resolution of all segments of the curve simultaneously.