Forum Groups
  All forums
    Help & Feedback
      Work in progress
      Finished Art
      Non-Max related

Maxunderground news unavailable

First page  Go to the previous page   [01]  [02]  Go to the next page  Last page
Selecting invisible edges and turning them randomly
show user profile  MrPumpernickel
Hey guys (and for the old timers, long time no see)!

I'm looking at a way to randomly turn the invisible edges of a mesh.

Imagine if you create a plane, it's all nice and ordered, and all invisible edges are pointing in the same diagonal direction (example 1 below). Now if you apply for instance a Noise modifier to it the result still ends up looking fairly ordered (ex 2). What I essentially want to do is turn some of the invisible edges the other direction, but without having to do it by hand, so the mesh ends up a bit like example 3. If it was like in the example doing it by hand would be an option, but my actual application has thousands and thousands of edges needing turning, it would be the job for a madman not working towards a deadline.

Is this possible? Do I need to look into maxscript for this? It's definitely a big black hole of knowledge for me, so I'm hoping someone has an idea, or has done something similar, already.

Cheers maxerinos!

YouTube Channel

read 372 times
4/29/2015 4:09:38 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 4:09:38 PM)
show user profile  Garp

read 367 times
4/29/2015 4:30:51 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 4:30:51 PM)
show user profile  MrPumpernickel
Garp, my hero! Thank you ever so much, that works great!

Maybe I'll get into maxscripting one day, though for now I'll stick to Arduino, Processing and C# :)

YouTube Channel

read 364 times
4/29/2015 4:41:31 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 4:42:36 PM)
show user profile  Garp
Cheers :)

(C#.. pff)

read 361 times
4/29/2015 4:45:02 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 4:45:02 PM)
show user profile  MrPumpernickel
Now now, that's enough code elitism :P

YouTube Channel

read 359 times
4/29/2015 4:48:05 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 4:48:05 PM)
show user profile  Garp
Arduino looks like a lot of fun.
I've always wanted to have a go at it but I'm too afraid it would eat up all my free time.

read 353 times
4/29/2015 5:15:06 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 5:15:06 PM)
show user profile  MrPumpernickel
I won't lie, it does eat up a lot of time, but it's tremendous amounts of fun. I'm really into physical prototyping, and even my MA thesis dealt with making a system for physical prototyping, involving Arduino. Now just to find a damn job in that field, haha!

YouTube Channel

read 341 times
4/29/2015 6:21:10 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 6:21:10 PM)
show user profile  Garp
A job at NASA? Arduino-driven mars rovers? Now, that would be fun!

> I'm really into physical prototyping
What do you think of the new CLIP system that's coming?

read 339 times
4/29/2015 6:36:32 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 6:38:18 PM)
show user profile  herfst1
Hey Garp, I don't suppose you could tell me the thought-process / procedure into working out a line of script like that in max?

I'd assume:
1. open listener.
2. create plane and turn an invisible edge -> check listener and copy code.
3. ... how do you know how to write it down in the correct format e.g. "f = 1 to polyOp.getNumfaces..." are there a set structures you can follow and just substitute variables? Or is it more intuitive, for instance I saw the DebrisMaker2 dude explaining and he wrote something like, "for x 1 in blah, blah, blah," (I can't remember the script), he used the "in" word specifically, though I don't remember why, will have to rewatch.

Basically, whenever I ask for help and show what I've done my logic is almost always fine, it's just the formatting, and it pisses me off.

tl;dr is there a maxscript cheat sheet for formatting, or is it a case of just going through F1 every time you forget?

[edit] I just remembered I have an Allen McKay video on maxscripting. I'll rewatch that.
read 335 times
4/29/2015 6:46:50 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 6:48:52 PM)
show user profile  Garp
The process is simple: copy/paste in the listener as is and hit enter.
Of course, you need to have an editable poly object selected.

In terms of variables, there is only one that hooks the logic to the surrent scene state: it's the dollar-sign. It's maxscript's shorthand for whatever the current selection is. The other variable - f - is just the counter that iterates through the face indices.
To see it in action, make a plane, convert it to epoly, go to edge mode and click on edit tri or turn to see the hidden edges. Then run the code over and over.
About the for loops, the for i = a to b do... form gives to variable i all values from a to b, which have to be numbers. The for x in coll do... just iterates through the elements in the collection coll, x taking the value of each element in turn. Now the disorienting bit is that maxscript also accept the syntax for i in a to b do..., as if a to b were seen as the collection of numbers in [a..b].

edit: I'm not aware of any mxs cheat sheet but for tutorials, these are the ones you want to go through.

read 329 times
4/29/2015 7:11:03 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 7:17:21 PM)
show user profile  herfst1
Thank you, Garp. I appreciate the response. And thanks for the video links. Will watch them now.

[edit] just seen there's three pages worth... fuck... in a good and bad way.
read 319 times
4/29/2015 7:45:18 PM (last edit: 4/29/2015 7:46:22 PM)
show user profile  MrPumpernickel
Nah Garp, you'd need something with a bit more oompf than Arduinos for those rovers, though the mind shudders at all the custom stuff that goes into those.

Though, the are Arduino satellites, so that's pretty cool!

About Clip, don't get me wrong I LOVE 3d printing, but I don't agree that the issue is to create faster and cheaper methods. We already have methods which allows printing for peanuts. The new materials are exciting, absolutely. As for the TED talk, it mostly just annoys me, the whole Terminator angle is bullshit, mentioned only to get people who have no idea about 3d printing to understand what it's about (while not being like Terminator at all). Clip is simply like an improvement of stereolithography that they're marketing and hyping up like a well oiled marketing machinery. He also mentions some things which are commonplace in the design process (like 3d printing being part of product development) as they are new and hinge on things like Clip. Gamechanging stuff? Meh.

YouTube Channel

read 301 times
4/30/2015 4:25:06 PM (last edit: 4/30/2015 4:25:06 PM)
show user profile  Garp
I had completely forgotten they used Terminator in their pitch! Yeah, that was rather cheap.

I wasn't too excited by the speed aspect. It was more about the continuity of the process (if 10-micron increments are considered continuous enough) which, with my touristic understanding of those things, would imply greater mechanical resistance. The other thing was when he said they could throw the entire polymer chemistry at it.
So thanks for putting things in perspective. I get excited a little too easily :)

read 293 times
4/30/2015 6:10:36 PM (last edit: 4/30/2015 6:11:11 PM)
show user profile  herfst1
You have to think one step further: bioprinting.

With the old techniques it was composed of slices, with this new technique it, essentially, grows. Can possibly grow an arm and a leg. Or not.
read 290 times
4/30/2015 6:39:27 PM (last edit: 4/30/2015 6:39:27 PM)
show user profile  herfst1
Or take it one step further: body sculpting.

Now we're talking way into the future, people will have a sculpt bath/shower in their homes that they get in and they can lie/stand in and, firstly, get scanned, then they have the option to apply a previous scan to the surface of the skin. Of course, the sculpting machine with check body mass and limit it's selection to only be able to apply compatible scans, so if you lost the baby fat in your cheeks, you can't use a scan where you still had full cheeks, so this device isn't 100% able to cheat aging.

But there are some societal issues with this technology. Firstly, privacy. How do we know the body scan that has to be initially preformed before any sculpting can begin doesn't capture more than just cosmetic data? What if it's scanning deeper and checking for chemical imbalances in the sweat? Also, what if someone hacked into the mainframe and stole the scan data of some celebrity and put it on the internet.

A second issue is what psychologists call, The Peter Pan Syndrome. If you are limited to only being able to use compatible previous scans then people would be inclined to never miss a day and keep scanning themselves on the day of their 21st birthday. And when the scan becomes unavailable they'll become obsessed with surgery to fill cheeks and suck in butt so that the scan will become available again. And there's a chance of a major crash. Say a woman maintained her 21st birthday scan for 20 years then, after her 41st birthday, she just couldn't maintain it any more, well, shit, she won't have any meaninful (or true) body scans of herself for the last 20 years and she could suddenly age like a motherfucker.

A third issue is identity theft. What if someone with the same body mass and silhouette as you stole your body scan data and went on a crime spree? Of course this would be very rare... unless there were dodgy black market surgeons who specialised in prepping people to be able to take other people's scans.

But on the plus side, cosmetic surgery could become a breeze. And you could check out what you will look like before you go under the knife, all the surgeon needs to do is grab a body scan and take it into Zbrush 25R3 and do his magic before hand.
read 288 times
4/30/2015 7:05:34 PM (last edit: 4/30/2015 7:05:34 PM)
First page  Go to the previous page   [01]  [02]  Go to the next page  Last page
#Maxforums IRC
Open chat window