I find this a bit overcomplicated. You could just leave out the first planar cut and cut out everything with one boolean operation. Create one mesh that has the correct shape, and use that to subtract, instead of first cutting with a plane, and then trying to match to that.
Perfectly valuable point. I guess he tried to demonstrate, how you could still utilize this boolean operation, when you mesh already does have some finalized cuts. Sure it's always the best idea to be certain of what you want to create right at the beginning, but the more complex it gets, that simply doesn't happen and you want to add operations after the fact, when your mesh isn't optimal for that anymore. So what he showed doesn't make the most sense in the OPTIMAL scenario, but it does when you have navigated yourself into a suboptimal spot and don't want to scrap your mesh.
That's for an ideal situation, which most workflow doesn't have. Overall the concept here is to bevel the boolean oject to get bevels on the main object. I don't know where's the "overcomplicated" part of it.
every video on this channel is like: * gestures at the most mundane and meaningless shape known to mankind * "okay so now we've got a pretty cool shape let's get to work"
You can by pressing the letter corresponding to the axis. Like if you want to move in the X axis, you G to grab and then X to constrain it to the X axis. You can also press shift + X and that will move it in the Y and Z axis but not the X axis. It was a little awkward watching this video when you know that.
Was about to watch this But just got news about Taylor Swift romance rumors I worry about her boyfriends. Beveling is Easy Taylor is a whole other thing
You should have called the video: here’s how to model things in a terrible way and then find terrible solutions to solve a simple bevel on our terrible model.
Of course it makes little sense, when a mesh is still so simple. You could recreate everything properly easily. But if your mesh is already way complexer, you want to add such operations without scrapping everything again, it makes total sense. You people should not only project such a demonstration onto the very model he is showing, but imagine in which general scenarios this could be helpful. It would be the same as if your tire blew up on the freeway. Are you also arguing there "well duh, why didn't you buy a new tire before the drive?"
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
►► Learn Hard Surface Modeling in Blender in Under 2 Weeks - www.blenderbros.com/?el=jg
Valuable as always. Keep em coming, Josh
I find this a bit overcomplicated. You could just leave out the first planar cut and cut out everything with one boolean operation. Create one mesh that has the correct shape, and use that to subtract, instead of first cutting with a plane, and then trying to match to that.
Perfectly valuable point. I guess he tried to demonstrate, how you could still utilize this boolean operation, when you mesh already does have some finalized cuts. Sure it's always the best idea to be certain of what you want to create right at the beginning, but the more complex it gets, that simply doesn't happen and you want to add operations after the fact, when your mesh isn't optimal for that anymore.
So what he showed doesn't make the most sense in the OPTIMAL scenario, but it does when you have navigated yourself into a suboptimal spot and don't want to scrap your mesh.
That's for an ideal situation, which most workflow doesn't have. Overall the concept here is to bevel the boolean oject to get bevels on the main object. I don't know where's the "overcomplicated" part of it.
yup, now try that with 10 live exact booleans on a 300k tris mesh, and your room will be real warm
every video on this channel is like: * gestures at the most mundane and meaningless shape known to mankind * "okay so now we've got a pretty cool shape let's get to work"
We can do it quickly with Ngon shape but it's cool to know that trick
how did you create that red cut in the sphere at the start?
It's with a paid addon, boxcutter i think
Now bevel around the cut away perimeter.
pretty good
Love your #Blender hacks. Especially those with booleans #timesaver 🙌💯
Cool idea. Can't you snap the vert while only moving it on one or two axes?
You can by pressing the letter corresponding to the axis. Like if you want to move in the X axis, you G to grab and then X to constrain it to the X axis. You can also press shift + X and that will move it in the Y and Z axis but not the X axis. It was a little awkward watching this video when you know that.
awesome
I needed this so badly
This was on its way to being a baby Yoda floating crib 😂
Box cutter ngon cutter bevel cutter done.
Every time I have tried this it has looked awful.
Was about to watch this
But just got news about Taylor Swift romance rumors
I worry about her boyfriends.
Beveling is Easy
Taylor is a whole other thing
You should have called the video: here’s how to model things in a terrible way and then find terrible solutions to solve a simple bevel on our terrible model.
i think this is Helpful for a lot of us , but like dude come on if u don`t like the model from the start of the vid why do u even watch it ?
At the START of this video. Josh said : For the demonstration:
Of course it makes little sense, when a mesh is still so simple. You could recreate everything properly easily.
But if your mesh is already way complexer, you want to add such operations without scrapping everything again, it makes total sense. You people should not only project such a demonstration onto the very model he is showing, but imagine in which general scenarios this could be helpful.
It would be the same as if your tire blew up on the freeway. Are you also arguing there "well duh, why didn't you buy a new tire before the drive?"
can you show us not a terrible sollution?
first