[3DS MAX] Issues with Inset that have always bothered me

Geezus

Over the years, I've always run into the same issue with Inset. It was infrequent enough that I used a roundabout way to get the results that I wanted, but I'm a bit tired of that now. So, I figured I'd throw a post up in here and see if anyone has a solution for me.

Basically, if I have a mesh that has chamfered edges like so:


...and inset the front face, the verts on said face always intersect like so:


What I end up doing is deleting the face and simply scaling the edges in, in order to keep the vert's normals the same, like so:


Normally, this is sufficient for my needs, but as you can see, using this method doesn't provide uniform results, and it's a little more freeform than I'd like.

Does anyone out there have a solution or possibly a better workaround? Thank you.

kary

Instead of scaling the border, extrude it with no width?

Geezus

kary wrote: »

Instead of scaling the border, extrude it with no width?

I've tried that as well, but unfortunately this also causes the verts to intersect.

BeardyDan

Inset a tiny bit so the verts don't intersect, then uniform scale in both directions until you have the result you want.

Or you can do the inset first, and then chamfer. Like so:

Geezus

BeardyDan wrote: »

Inset a tiny bit so the verts don't intersect, then uniform scale in both directions until you have the result you want.

Or you can do the inset first, and then chamfer.

Insetting slightly provides the same results as scaling the edges without a small inset.

I could always chamfer after the fact, but a lot of times, especially if you're feeling out a shape, that's not always a luxury.

BeardyDan

I usually leave chamfers until after, and then just clean up any issues it causes with target weld and snaps. I think this might be more of a workflow thing as I'm not sure if there actually is the precise solution you are looking for here. Logically, If you inset after a chamfer you are basically telling one vert to move across and the other to move down which is always going to cause this issue.

I guess if you could do the tiny inset and scale numerically based on the proportions of the model (which is sort of what I was getting at before), that will give you a more uniform result, but that's not exactly ideal either, and it will leave you with a tighter grouping of verts than doing a chamfer after the inset.

monster

I think Inset is using vertex normals to calculate the direction of each edge. Here is a pic after an Inset operation and then showing the normals:



The only way to get the precision that you want is to do some reference cuts/connects. Then connect the edges. It's certainly slower than what you want, but it's a precision vs speed choice.

Geezus

Thanks for all the input.

Geezus

I've found the best way for this particular example is to use snap axis restraints.

Start by scaling your opened edges in. This will give you results with preserved vert normals, but non-uniform edge distances.




This provides uniform edge distance while preserving the vert normals. Surely this is scriptable, though?

jayoplus

Apologies for necro-ing the thread but I thought I'd ask about inset suggestions for something like

I currently have to manually fix the edges that are off which can be time wasting ^_^

So, no sooner had I hit post that I got an answer to this (fixed using spacing tool)

DEElekgolo

Try this out.

I use edge constraints to collapse those vertices there by the way.
You'll be able to control the thickness at either side this way as well.
Gives you a much better result than inset