Re: [Inkscape-user] [Inkscape-devel] New LPE, New Video. Fillet/Chamfer
Hi Nathan. I do a deeper look.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// El mar, 13-05-2014 a las 03:40 +1000, Nathan Hurst escribió: 1) to my old astigmatic eyes the tangents do not look like they are
quite matched, are you sure you have the tangent code correct. This is especially noticable when you are filleting a curve rather than a line.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When I convert to paths a filleting the result curvature is a path of one segment, start and end nodes of this are tangent to front-back curves, and thsi sttart and end nodes are also handled as tangent for the inkscape UI.
Maybe the problem is how far is the tangent handle from a node, but there isn`t a perfect way to determine, it depends from case. I use the nearest point to the tangent from a point placed at a half distance from the real knot filleting to the original cusp node.
Here are some pics about how it works: http://sta.sh/28yrjqkdiw1
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// 2) can you add fillets with smooth curvature variation (e.g. cornu
spiral, spiro, and I recall there being a 2geom toy that demonstrated something like that).
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I see about it in power stroke code, I realy do the code but finaly removed, think isnt interesting in one curve path, because it increase the nuber of nodes of the resulting path because you need to pass the cubic values of the handles as points, because the incoming and outgoing curve need to be unchanged.
This is my opinion but if anybody want to tell me about, i could change ;)
Thanks Nathan for the feedback.
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Jabiertxo Arraiza Cenoz < jabier.arraiza@...2982...> wrote:
Hi Nathan. I do a deeper look.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// El mar, 13-05-2014 a las 03:40 +1000, Nathan Hurst escribió:
- to my old astigmatic eyes the tangents do not look like they are
quite matched, are you sure you have the tangent code correct. This is especially noticable when you are filleting a curve rather than a line.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
When I convert to paths a filleting the result curvature is a path of one segment, start and end nodes of this are tangent to front-back curves, and thsi sttart and end nodes are also handled as tangent for the inkscape UI.
Maybe the problem is how far is the tangent handle from a node, but there isn`t a perfect way to determine, it depends from case. I use the nearest point to the tangent from a point placed at a half distance from the real knot filleting to the original cusp node.
Here are some pics about how it works: http://sta.sh/28yrjqkdiw1
Is there any real benefit to the knots being offset from their origin vs overlapping? Since by default, the fillet & chamfer knots are 10px (and 90degrees CCW) offset from their "origin", it is not very obvious what they're connected to.
See the linked image (1) to see how this is massively confusing. The top object has the knots offset to 0px and looks as expected, the bottom one is the default when the LPE is first applied. By default here, the green knots all correspond to nodes that they are fairly offset from. In this case the top-left node has a control knot that is overlapping the bottom-left node. The bottom-left node has a knot floating to the right of it. As a default this is really bad for usability imho.
One more suggestion (if possible) would be to add a field for "focused knot" which contains the numerical value of the last dragged or clicked knot. This would be nice to fine tune things for perfectionists without forcing them into the xml editor.
Cheers, Josh
El mar, 13-05-2014 a las 15:38 -0700, Josh Andler escribió:
Is there any real benefit to the knots being offset from their origin vs overlapping? Since by default, the fillet & chamfer knots are 10px (and 90degrees CCW) offset from their "origin", it is not very obvious what they're connected to.
See the linked image (1) to see how this is massively confusing. The top object has the knots offset to 0px and looks as expected, the bottom one is the default when the LPE is first applied. By default here, the green knots all correspond to nodes that they are fairly offset from. In this case the top-left node has a control knot that is overlapping the bottom-left node. The bottom-left node has a knot floating to the right of it. As a default this is really bad for usability imho.
Ok this ia a ugly problem. I solve putting the offset inside the same segment instead 90degrees CCW. I dont want to put a initial value of 0 offset because it make unselectable the node, because a default knot place over it.
One more suggestion (if possible) would be to add a field for "focused knot" which contains the numerical value of the last dragged or clicked knot. This would be nice to fine tune things for perfectionists without forcing them into the xml editor.
You can change it numericaly selecting the node, checking apply to selected nodes and change the radius, but you havent a visual value of actual distances, so is planned a knot dialog on a event to full configure it. You can: *Read actual values *Toogle fixed or relative *Also toogle fillet or chamfer *Numeric distance or porcentaje entry This is enought? Liam P. White use a similar dialog in his power stroke implementation [1], i get the base code from him.
@LiamW Whats your opinion to change the knot dialog to a double click? I want to use the same way than you but seems to me double click is better. I have a diff if you want to allow double click event on knots. Tell me about.
[1] https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscapebrony
Regards, Jabier.
Ok this ia a ugly problem. I solve putting the offset inside the same segment instead 90degrees CCW. I dont want to put a initial value of 0 offset because it make unselectable the node, because a default knot place over it.
Done in last revision, here are a screen shot: http://sta.sh/0sfnq2flsfj Nathan ordering my sta.sh broken the link to teh tangent pics, here are new ones: http://sta.sh/2cdmgppy65h
The branch is now in the inkscape.dev group so this is the new direction to the branch: https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/fillet-chamfer
participants (2)
-
Jabiertxo Arraiza Cenoz -
Josh Andler