Voxel Fill Brush=Useless

[AbnRanger]

I can't ever seem to get any sort of tangible result with the Fill brush in Voxels...it's the most useless tool imaginable. I jack the value up to maximum and it still acts like it doesn't want to work. This isn't a one time occurrence. I've never been able to get much if anything done with it. Narrow crevices maybe a smidge, but anything wider than that and you're flat out wasting your time trying. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[kay_Eva]

works fine for me, you see you don't click on the empty region, you click on the voxels surrounding the empty region otherwise, your brush stroke will either miss the voxel altogether or it will think you are clicking on the part that is behind the empty region, which when you think about it, you actually are doing that!

[artman]

Voxel fill brush is lethargic and doesnt fill large cavities at all.Only small holes.

New Surface Fill (in surface mode) is much much much better,it does what it says,and it does it fast.

Try It,you will be amazed.

[cakeller]

Voxel fill brush is lethargic and doesnt fill large cavities at all.Only small holes.

New Surface Fill (in surface mode) is much much much better,it does what it says,and it does it fast.

Try It,you will be amazed.

Actually, you can CRANK THE HECK outta the depth 5000.0 fills holes quick like. but as Artman said, it is only for filling holes. in fact, 25,000 works smashingly well - so. but since you might want it to be more sensitive for something, it's best to just accept that you can crank it high. (as opposed to requesting that the strength be rescaled, which might be a logical conclusion)

fill is nice to use on lower settings for REALLY tiny features. but when you want to blast away and fill in crevices - crank it up ! 5, 10, 25,000 etc...

by the way, the increase tool is similar - you can get some really fast effects by cranking it up. of course, it's a little harder to control - but there are times when it's helpful... for filling holes that are open trough, since the "fill" tool can really only work if your brush is surrounded by surface... mostly.

[AbnRanger]

Actually, you can CRANK THE HECK outta the depth 5000.0 fills holes quick like. but as Artman said, it is only for filling holes. in fact, 25,000 works smashingly well - so. but since you might want it to be more sensitive for something, it's best to just accept that you can crank it high. (as opposed to requesting that the strength be rescaled, which might be a logical conclusion)

fill is nice to use on lower settings for REALLY tiny features. but when you want to blast away and fill in crevices - crank it up ! 5, 10, 25,000 etc...

by the way, the increase tool is similar - you can get some really fast effects by cranking it up. of course, it's a little harder to control - but there are times when it's helpful... for filling holes that are open trough, since the "fill" tool can really only work if your brush is surrounded by surface... mostly.

Thanks for the tips...I noticed a bit more of a difference in surface mode, but it still didn't work like you'd expect...which I think is key. There shouldn't be ANY brushes where you have use special tricks to get it to operate properly (and in accord with it's name...fill should immediately start filling in holes and crevices...not make you scratch your head wondering what you're doing wrong).

The new surface tools seem to work the way I hoped voxels would.

[cakeller]

Thanks for the tips...I noticed a bit more of a difference in surface mode, but it still didn't work like you'd expect...which I think is key. There shouldn't be ANY brushes where you have use special tricks to get it to operate properly (and in accord with it's name...fill should immediately start filling in holes and crevices...not make you scratch your head wondering what you're doing wrong).

The new surface tools seem to work the way I hoped voxels would.

I agree - it's bothersome when you have to scratch your head to figure tools out.

I think it is a partial misconception of what the fill tool is supposed to do.

It's not to FILL holes. It's to fill grooves. or rather, it is to ADD material only in concavities. period.

Increase fills holes better than fill. (notice fill doesn't use the term "fill holes" just fill.. it fills crevices, or cuts off high parts if holding ctrl. that's the design of that brush. it has it's uses as is without changes.,,, with the exception of possibly the controls)

I like the way the tool works as it is - maybe the cotrol slider's soft limitation of 100 should be relaxed so it is not unintuitive to crank it up. but it works exactly as is.

The fact that you can cheat the numbers (put negatives in, or numbers larger than 100%) is one of the coolest things about the controls in 3DC, besides the fact that doing so doesn't CRASH THE PROGRAM!

I PRAY THAT NEVER changes. limitations are for Wussies! hehe I Don't like to be told what I cannot do!

I'm not saying there's no room for improvement, but since I use and like the tool as is, and you're JUST NOW starting to use it - perhaps give it a chance before suggesting it be changed (again, other than perhaps the slider limit)

Maybe I'm alone in liking it as is?

[AbnRanger]

I agree - it's bothersome when you have to scratch your head to figure tools out.

I think it is a partial misconception of what the fill tool is supposed to do.

It's not to FILL holes. It's to fill grooves. or rather, it is to ADD material only in concavities. period.

Increase fills holes better than fill. (notice fill doesn't use the term "fill holes" just fill.. it fills crevices, or cuts off high parts if holding ctrl. that's the design of that brush. it has it's uses as is without changes.,,, with the exception of possibly the controls)

I like the way the tool works as it is - maybe the cotrol slider's soft limitation of 100 should be relaxed so it is not unintuitive to crank it up. but it works exactly as is.

The fact that you can cheat the numbers (put negatives in, or numbers larger than 100%) is one of the coolest things about the controls in 3DC, besides the fact that doing so doesn't CRASH THE PROGRAM!

I PRAY THAT NEVER changes. limitations are for Wussies! hehe I Don't like to be told what I cannot do!

I'm not saying there's no room for improvement, but since I use and like the tool as is, and you're JUST NOW starting to use it - perhaps give it a chance before suggesting it be changed (again, other than perhaps the slider limit)

Maybe I'm alone in liking it as is?

I've tried to use it a number of times before and the strength value doesn't operate the same way other brushes do, and therefore it's not consistent nor is it intuitive like they are. You shouldn't have to crank it that high just to start seeing some results. When the depth indicator is well above the round cursor then one expects that to be sufficient to get a decent result. That's all I'm saying. Consistency with other tools/brushes is in order.

[artman]

I noticed a bit more of a difference in surface mode, but it still didn't work like you'd expect...which I think is key.

Are you kidding?Its day and night.

New SF.Fill brush works first try on any sort of cavities and you dont need any special trick or anything.

[cakeller]

Are you kidding?Its day and night.

New SF.Fill brush works first try on any sort of cavities and you dont need any special trick or anything.

probably depends on the density of the mesh? I noticed a huge difference in the speed of fill will the SF Fill... but I was only using low res test.

[cakeller]

I've tried to use it a number of times before and the strength value doesn't operate the same way other brushes do, and therefore it's not consistent nor is it intuitive like they are. You shouldn't have to crank it that high just to start seeing some results. When the depth indicator is well above the round cursor then one expects that to be sufficient to get a decent result. That's all I'm saying. Consistency with other tools/brushes is in order.

yup, I GET that, but... there are times when there are teeny details I want to fill, but don't want to affect gross scale features. If the resolution of the depth is lowered by making 100 equivalent to 5000, then 1 is going to be like 50, and 2 like 100... leaving much less granularity between numbers to be able to deal with the teeny tiny features - if you get my meaning.

Especially when it comes to modifying the depth on the fly - it's already hard enough to adjust settings on the fly.

But, perhaps if there was a different representation than depth it would be better.

what I mean is, I don't want to lose the ability to work with fine details and have controlled useage, but I admit there ought to be an easily recognizeable effect when set at 100...

perhaps it would work if the depth represented a logarithmic value? 1 = 1, 10=100, 100=1000 ... or something like that. in addition, perhaps the radius also scales the effect... e.g. a radius of 5 has a given effect, and a radius of 25 has an effect (depth) 5x greater for the same value in depth?

I can see flaws in that as well - perhaps it would just be best if there were an additional controller called scale of effect (like how there's growth and thaw for the increase tool, there's no reason there couldn't be depth and effect scale. both within the 1-100 range would give you an effect of 1 - 10,000, which should then make intuitive sense to you and not lose what I need from it.

of course, I may be the anomale... and I definitely am a tinkerer so I never mind if there are quirks to software - but you are right - one should absolutely be able to adjust a setting with the controls and get some results without having to stumble upon it, like I did with many of the funky cool features in 3DC.

[AbnRanger]

Are you kidding?Its day and night.

New SF.Fill brush works first try on any sort of cavities and you dont need any special trick or anything.

Well, the size of the cursor seemed to have a lot to do with how fast it worked....as did the size of the mesh. It helps knowing you can crank up the depth value that large.