[Plugin][$] JointPushPull Interactive - v4.9a - 02 Apr 25

panixia · 24 Oct 2017, 11:23

following from: https://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=323&t=68433&p=626632#p626632

I took some time to explain why I think adding a "preserve quads" method could make sense to have in both JPP and NPP. I added in attachment the example .skp, in case this can be helpful.
I suppose there are quite a lot of people out there that uses JPP in combination with quad-friendly tools (Sub-d, QFT, VT, Curviloft, TIG extrude, Trupaint, and so on..)
I'm curious if someone else has encountered similar problems and if, maybe they found better/alternative/faster workarounds for theese situations.

I've created a basic quad topolgy example, in which I extrude a faceloop with Regular JPP (both with borders = "contours" and border = "each face") and Normal JPP, to show you when it would make sense to have a "preserve quads" option.
QuadFaceTools live mesh analysis is activated, so you can see that when quad (not shadow casting) diagonals are present, all the three methods produces triangles instead of preserving the "diagonal" behaviour.

Below you can see why this is not ideal for subdivision, as the triangles produces bad topology and smoothing artifacts.

Here you can see an orthographic top view of the same stuff, with monocrome style and edge visibility turned off, to emphatyze the smoothing artifacts.

With normal push pull you got an option to keep triangles, but still that doesn't preserve the "do not cast shadow" property, so that, even if the artifacts are less evident than the other methods, you can tell that the topology is slightly distorted. It's rather easy to fix this manually, just filtering selection for smooth edge (i use TT selection toys in order to do this quickly) then i check/uncheck smooth-soft/cast shadow in "entity info" dialog.
As you previously said, hopefully this is a rather simple (but effective) option to add, in order to automate the cleanup.

What I'm not sure is easy to fix at all, would be the quad-managing behaviour of regular JPP, as you can see below, there are a few more problems, with both methods.
"Create borders for each face" also produces inner faces, wich completely screw the subdivisions.
Notice that in addition to smoothing artifacts, you get messed UV, due to the topology distorsion and the presence of triangles would cause, for instance, Trupaint "quad" method to fail.
Moreover selection of rings/loop is screwed and you'll have problems if you need to do furter modifications to the mesh or manually unwrap it, and so on..

What I've found that DOES preserve the diagonals (at least in my experience) is regular JPP with "No Borders" option ticked.
Unfortunately, as you can see, it destroyes the surronding edges, so that some faces are lost.
Nevertheless, i think this method, is the best starting point for my manual workaround, which I'll try my best to show you, hoping that there's some little chance to automate/incorporate it in future developements of JPP.
The fact wich gives me some sort of hope, is that I use your brilliant Curvyloft to fix this, so maybe you could integrate some code from that.

Let's start with fresh geometry: to prevent missing faces, I select the geometry I need to JPP->invert selection->include inner (hole) loop in selection!!->make first group.

Triple click the remaining loose geometry and make a second group.

Perform JPP "No Tickening - No Borders" (diagonals preserved-live mesh analysis ok!)

Select both groups->explode

Pick the outer loops and run regular curviloft (lowered from default 5 segments to only 1 segment)

Do exactly the same for inner loops

Final cleanup: Select both curviloft groups->explode->orient faces->run ThomThom QFT"UnsmoothQuads"

Not sure it easy/possible to replicate such operation in JPP but that would be a MAJOR improvement to the usability of JPP in organic/subdivision modelling.
But if it's not possible we have to tank you anyway because, as you can see, with some minor tricks and workarounds JPP and Curviloft togheter have tons of usefulness in this kind of modelling!

JPPquadExample.skp

fredo6 · 24 Oct 2017, 12:36

Panixia,

I guess this is possible for the offset quad-face pairs to keep them coplanar when JPP-ing them.
However, this is more difficult for the border faces. Anyway, not a piece of cake.
Incidently, I relalized I have a strange problem in SU2016 and 2017. Basically, I don't see the "hidden" and "Cast Shadow" flags in the Entity Info.

In SU2015, this is fine

In SU2016 and SU2017, the flags are missing.

Fredo

panixia · 24 Oct 2017, 12:52

@fredo6 said:

this is more difficult for the border faces. Anyway, not a piece of cake.

I suspected that!

@fredo6 said:

In SU2016 and SU2017, the flags are missing.

You need to click the "+" icon on EntityInfo upper right corner to visualize those additional flags.

thomthom · 24 Oct 2017, 14:43

Let me know if there's anything I can help with in supporting quads.

fredo6 · 24 Oct 2017, 15:06

@panixia said:

@fredo6 said:

this is more difficult for the border faces. Anyway, not a piece of cake.

I suspected that!

Somehow, this is equivalent to writing a Quadify surface algorithm (i.e. turn a triangular mesh into a real quad mesh). So, an optimization algorithm, with tricky topological situations.

By the way, this could be done independently of JPP.

Fredo

panixia · 25 Oct 2017, 15:29

Not sure I understood 100% of what you said
But if you say it's difficult, I trust you.
Thank you anyway for your outstanding works.

fredo6 · 25 Oct 2017, 16:20

In the initial surface, each quad is composed of 2 co-planar triangles.

If I understood well, you would like that in the offset surface, each quad is also composed of 2 co-planar triangles, whereas JPP does not make the triangles co-planar for each quad.

If so, then the problem is equivalent to take a triangulated surface where you can group triangles by pair to form quads, and then make it truly 'quadified', that is, each pair of triangles is co-planar for each quad.

This algorithm is complex and does not have a unique solution, only 'good-enough' solutions.

Fredo

PS: Normal Push Pull does not have the problem, because the offset of a face is always parallel to the initial face. So the offset of 2 co-planar triangles gives the same co-planar triangles moved by the offset.

panixia · 26 Oct 2017, 18:35

@fredo6 said:

If I understood well, you would like that in the offset surface, each quad is also composed of 2 co-planar triangles, whereas JPP does not make the triangles co-planar for each quad.

No sir, I don't need them to be coplanar: I mean they preserve pseudo/non-planar quads as per Thomthom's Quadface Tools definition.

https://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=323&t=39442

That very same standard is found in Curviloft and in Trupaint "Quad Mapping Method", you added it at some point and works 100% bulletproof, whereas in JPP offsetted pseudo-quad faces are preserved, while extruded borders create "broken quads" with shadow-casting diagonals.. I suppose Thom is able to explain this better than me..

fredo6 · 12 Nov 2017, 17:12

NEW RELEASE: JointPushPull Interactive v4.2a - 12 Nov 17

JointPushPull Interactive 4.2a is a maintenance release:

Diagonals for faces and borders are now created with the quad convention for diagonals, that is: Soft, Smooth, Hidden and NOT casting shadows
Shading of the wireframe preview, based on a suggestion and code from Eneroth3

JointPushPull 4.1a requires LibFredo6 8.0 or above

See plugin home page of JointPushPull for Download of JointPushPull.

Main Post of the JointPushPull thread on this forum

Fredo

panixia · 13 Nov 2017, 13:51

@fredo6 said:

[*]Diagonals for faces and borders are now created with the quad convention for diagonals, that is: Soft, Smooth, Hidden and NOT casting shadows

Thank you sooooo much!!!
I don't have sketchup on this pc but I'll try this as soon as possible.

thomthom · 13 Nov 2017, 14:03

Thank you very much for these updates Fredo!

boofredlay · 13 Nov 2017, 16:00

Thank you Fredo!

tomaszdrgas · 14 Nov 2017, 01:16

I have little bug for JPP. Seems to be related to different matherials used for fases and edges since clearing all the materials to default helps..
I often use different material for edges to make them look lighter on jpgs,so it actually happens a lot..
I gave to it all default mat. and tried to replicate the error. (I marked the selection in red copied in front of it.) I added again different material to the 2 middle horizontal edges (everything else default). Still working. I added different mat. for fases sorrounding edges and it still worked. I added more mat. to all faces neighbouring with the selection to be pushedpull. Erra..
I attached file..

J-Fredo cleared.skp

Einstein · 8 Jan 2018, 06:03

Is it possible to perform Joint Push Pull on both sides (positive + negative offset) in one go?
Every time I have to exit tool, select faces again and again run the tool typing opposite value.

Einstein · 21 Jan 2018, 20:18

@fredo6 said:

@dtrarch said:

Dear Fredo

If it is at all possible please make the old JPP version work in SU2014?
The old version was so elegant and simple and while the new and improved will do more, for me it just crashes, loses object elements and the settings do not do what they are told to do.
I will be pleased to the first to add to your cookie jar if we could have the option to choose the JPP version to install.
SU user since V2 and honestly I did install the new JPP properly too.
I cleaned out the old version (.....roaming/sketchup and such as well)

Thanks and please

dtr

The old version (v2.1a) is still available at the following post.

It is compatible with SU2014.

You can run the new and old versions concurrently.

Fredo

PS: do you get bugsplats or intercepted crashes (with a clean dialog box)? And If so, is it during the geometry generation?

Hi!
Sorry for bringing up oldish answers but the problem still remains. I have exactly the same problem as Xiombarg - cannot pushpull faces along group's local direction (X,Y,Z). I did what Dave suggested - "removed" all plugins (by renaming Plugins folder and creating a new one only for LibFredo ad JointPushPull) to see if any plugin influences behaviour of JPP - none of them does, I assume. (Only v-ray, laubwerk and adv camera tools remained) Then tried to use link you gave to download an old version of JPP - "the requested topis does not exis", says sketchucation.

fredo6 · 21 Jan 2018, 22:09

@Einstein

I am not clear with your request.

But if you look for the old Joint Push Pull, here it is.

Fredo

Einstein · 22 Jan 2018, 10:58

@fredo6 said:

@Einstein

I am not clear with your request.

But if you look for the old Joint Push Pull, here it is.

Fredo

Thank you.

I meant, if I choose "vector pushpull" and tick LOCAL, the extrusion along X, Y or Z still does not respect gropu's local axes but global axes of model. I am referring to the new version of plugin.

fredo6 · 22 Jan 2018, 11:29

@einstein said:

I meant, if I choose "vector pushpull" and tick LOCAL, the extrusion along X, Y or Z still does not respect gropu's local axes but global axes of model. I am referring to the new version of plugin.

You'right. There is a problm there.
Actually, in Local mode, the Vector Push Pull does follow the local direction, but the visual dashed line shows the direction wrongly (in model coordinates).
I'll fix it and republish.

Thanks for signaling.

Fredo