Regression: Face sets are no longer created in 3.4 when using Box Trim

Hoang Duy Tran commented

2022-12-09 02:31:34 +01:00

Member

Simplified Report

Use Box Trim on the default sculpting sphere.
No face set is created.
In 3.3, a face set is created, hence the regression.

Original Report

System Information
Operating system: macOS-10.15.7-x86_64-i386-64bit 64 Bits

Blender Version
Broken: version: 3.5.0 Alpha, branch: master, commit date: 2022-12-02 21:53, hash: 9719fd6964

Short description of error
At this page of documentation:
https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/sculpt_paint/sculpting/tools/box_trim.html

This text:

Result after a Difference boolean operation:

Result after a Join boolean operation:

I cannot see any face set described in the text:

When using the Union or Join mode the new geometry is assigned to a new Face Set. When using Difference mode, interior geometry is also added to a new face set.

The older version, 3.3.1 worked as described:

Just added another observation. The text for option 'Use Cursor for Depth' said:

Use cursor location and radius for the dimensions and position of the trimming shape. If not set, the tool uses the full depth of the object from the camera view.

The second part of the text clearly said:

If not set, the tool uses the full depth of the object from the camera view.

I personally cannot visualise any situations where you CANNOT set these parameters since I'm using mouse pointer to interact with the GUI, and the operation is performed after the mouse RELEASE event. Please tell me any situation where these parameters ('cursor location', 'radius') are not set?

## Simplified Report - Use Box Trim on the default sculpting sphere. - No face set is created. - In 3.3, a face set is created, hence the regression. ## Original Report **System Information** Operating system: macOS-10.15.7-x86_64-i386-64bit 64 Bits **Blender Version** Broken: version: 3.5.0 Alpha, branch: master, commit date: 2022-12-02 21:53, hash: `9719fd6964` **Short description of error** At this page of documentation: https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/sculpt_paint/sculpting/tools/box_trim.html This text: ![Screenshot 2022-12-09 at 01.22.35.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F14045787/Screenshot_2022-12-09_at_01.22.35.png) Result after a Difference boolean operation: ![Screenshot 2022-12-09 at 01.16.46.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F14045789/Screenshot_2022-12-09_at_01.16.46.png) Result after a Join boolean operation: ![Screenshot 2022-12-09 at 01.19.52.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F14045791/Screenshot_2022-12-09_at_01.19.52.png) I cannot see any face set described in the text: ``` When using the Union or Join mode the new geometry is assigned to a new Face Set. When using Difference mode, interior geometry is also added to a new face set. ``` The older version, 3.3.1 worked as described: ![Screenshot 2022-12-09 at 01.25.29.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F14045796/Screenshot_2022-12-09_at_01.25.29.png) Just added another observation. The text for option 'Use Cursor for Depth' said: ``` Use cursor location and radius for the dimensions and position of the trimming shape. If not set, the tool uses the full depth of the object from the camera view. ``` The second part of the text clearly said: ``` If not set, the tool uses the full depth of the object from the camera view. ``` I personally cannot visualise any situations where you CANNOT set these parameters since I'm using mouse pointer to interact with the GUI, and the operation is performed after the mouse RELEASE event. Please tell me any situation where these parameters ('cursor location', 'radius') are not set?

Hoang Duy Tran commented

2022-12-09 02:31:34 +01:00

Author

Member

Added subscriber: @hoanguk

Omar Emara commented

2022-12-09 09:36:41 +01:00

Member

Changed status from 'Needs Triage' to: 'Confirmed'

Omar Emara changed title from ~~Sculpting - box trim - do not create a face set as described in documentation~~ to Regression: Face sets are no longer created in 3.4 when using Box Trim

2022-12-09 09:38:45 +01:00

Omar Emara commented

2022-12-09 10:03:41 +01:00

Member

Added subscriber: @OmarEmaraDev

Omar Emara commented

2022-12-09 10:03:41 +01:00

Member

Let me now if you need a bisect.

TheRedWaxPolice commented

2022-12-09 16:49:00 +01:00

Added subscriber: @TheRedWaxPolice

TheRedWaxPolice commented

2022-12-09 16:49:00 +01:00

Not sure if it is now the intended behavior or not, but if you create a face set first (for example face set from visible) then it starts creating face sets...

blender_2022-12-09_16-41-32.mp4

Not sure if it is now the intended behavior or not, but if you create a face set first (*for example face set from visible)* then it starts creating face sets... [blender_2022-12-09_16-41-32.mp4](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F14046857/blender_2022-12-09_16-41-32.mp4)

Hoang Duy Tran commented

2022-12-09 17:45:09 +01:00

Author

Member

In #103052#1457737, @TheRedWaxPolice wrote:
Not sure if it is now the intended behavior or not, but if you create a face set first (for example face set from visible) then it starts creating face sets...

blender_2022-12-09_16-41-32.mp4

Thank you for this feedback. When using 'Face Set from Visible'. I was expecting to see face sets created immediately on whatever I could see. Did not expect this to be the behaviour designed. Yes, it seemed to work this way. This should be documented in the online manual of how the feature works. Quite confusing to my normal understanding.

> In #103052#1457737, @TheRedWaxPolice wrote: > Not sure if it is now the intended behavior or not, but if you create a face set first (*for example face set from visible)* then it starts creating face sets... > > [blender_2022-12-09_16-41-32.mp4](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F14046857/blender_2022-12-09_16-41-32.mp4) Thank you for this feedback. When using 'Face Set from Visible'. I was expecting to see face sets created immediately on whatever I could see. Did not expect this to be the behaviour designed. Yes, it seemed to work this way. This should be documented in the online manual of how the feature works. Quite confusing to my normal understanding.

Hans Goudey commented

2022-12-09 17:48:50 +01:00

Member

Added subscribers: @JulienKaspar, @HooglyBoogly

Hans Goudey commented

2022-12-09 17:48:50 +01:00

Member

@JulienKaspar I think there are possible upsides to both behaviors-- the new face set might not be wanted, so it may be a waste to create it (potentially impacting performance later on). On the other hand, if it is helpful then it's a nice feature.

I see a few options:

Remove the face set creation from the trim tool completely
Always create face sets in the trim tool
Add a tool option for whether to create face sets
Add some more global "Enable Face Sets" in sculpt mode that can be used by more tools

@JulienKaspar I think there are possible upsides to both behaviors-- the new face set might not be wanted, so it may be a waste to create it (potentially impacting performance later on). On the other hand, if it is helpful then it's a nice feature. I see a few options: 1. Remove the face set creation from the trim tool completely 2. Always create face sets in the trim tool 3. Add a tool option for whether to create face sets 4. Add some more global "Enable Face Sets" in sculpt mode that can be used by more tools

Hoang Duy Tran commented

2022-12-09 18:11:06 +01:00

Author

Member

In #103052#1457780, @HooglyBoogly wrote:
@JulienKaspar I think there are possible upsides to both behaviors-- the new face set might not be wanted, so it may be a waste to create it (potentially impacting performance later on). On the other hand, if it is helpful then it's a nice feature.

I see a few options:

Remove the face set creation from the trim tool completely

Always create face sets in the trim tool

Add a tool option for whether to create face sets

Add some more global "Enable Face Sets" in sculpt mode that can be used by more tools

I would vote 1, 3, or 4.

> In #103052#1457780, @HooglyBoogly wrote: > @JulienKaspar I think there are possible upsides to both behaviors-- the new face set might not be wanted, so it may be a waste to create it (potentially impacting performance later on). On the other hand, if it is helpful then it's a nice feature. > > I see a few options: > 1. Remove the face set creation from the trim tool completely > 2. Always create face sets in the trim tool > 3. Add a tool option for whether to create face sets > 4. Add some more global "Enable Face Sets" in sculpt mode that can be used by more tools I would vote 1, 3, or 4.

TheRedWaxPolice commented

2022-12-09 19:38:33 +01:00

In #103052#1457777, @hoanguk wrote:
When using 'Face Set from Visible'. I was expecting to see face sets created immediately on whatever I could see. Did not expect this to be the behaviour designed. Yes, it seemed to work this way. This should be documented in the online manual of how the feature works. Quite confusing to my normal understanding.

Yeah, face set from visible is a little confusing...
When you have parts of the mesh hidden, it behaves as expected, but when you have nothing hidden, it acts like a "clear face set" and removes all the face sets if you have any... but it seems like somehow it also creates an "invisible" face set on the entire mesh... 🤔

> In #103052#1457777, @hoanguk wrote: > When using 'Face Set from Visible'. I was expecting to see face sets created immediately on whatever I could see. Did not expect this to be the behaviour designed. Yes, it seemed to work this way. This should be documented in the online manual of how the feature works. Quite confusing to my normal understanding. Yeah, face set from visible is a little confusing... When you have parts of the mesh hidden, it behaves as expected, but when you have nothing hidden, it acts like a "clear face set" and removes all the face sets if you have any... but it seems like somehow it also creates an "invisible" face set on the entire mesh... 🤔

Julien Kaspar commented

2022-12-12 12:44:41 +01:00

Member

For now I think it would be best to go for 2. Just because this is most useful for this tool.

Later on, making this a tool option would be a logical extra feature.
But I'll mention this to the rest of the module and see what they think. 4 should be considered more.

For now I think it would be best to go for 2. Just because this is most useful for this tool. Later on, making this a tool option would be a logical extra feature. But I'll mention this to the rest of the module and see what they think. 4 should be considered more.