Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Can anyone explain "normals of the two polygons should be adjacent."?
The 3ds max help article on Editable Poly (Edge) has the following in the first paragraph:
"Also, the normals of the two polygons should be adjacent. If they aren't, you wind up with two edges that share vertices."
I searched around and haven't found any definitions of terms that will lead to understanding this. How can normals be adjacent (or not.)? How does a non-adjacent normals situation cause edges to share verticies?
Can anyone explain "normals of the two polygons should be adjacent."?
The 3ds max help article on Editable Poly (Edge) has the following in the first paragraph:
"Also, the normals of the two polygons should be adjacent. If they aren't, you wind up with two edges that share vertices."
I searched around and haven't found any definitions of terms that will lead to understanding this. How can normals be adjacent (or not.)? How does a non-adjacent normals situation cause edges to share verticies?
"Also, the normals of the two polygons should be adjacent. If they aren't, you wind up with two edges that share vertices."
I have to agree with you. This makes no sense to me either as written. I would just move on to the more useful parts of the documentation and chalk this up to bad technical writing.
"Also, the normals of the two polygons should be adjacent. If they aren't, you wind up with two edges that share vertices."
I have to agree with you. This makes no sense to me either as written. I would just move on to the more useful parts of the documentation and chalk this up to bad technical writing.
I think "parallel" should have been used instead of "adjacent" in the explanation. I'm not sure if the two normals should also have the same sense to ensure that there is only one edge between the vertices.
If the normals are parallel then the two adjacent polygons lie on the same plane.
I think "parallel" should have been used instead of "adjacent" in the explanation. I'm not sure if the two normals should also have the same sense to ensure that there is only one edge between the vertices.
If the normals are parallel then the two adjacent polygons lie on the same plane.
Thanks! That's just what I did, but I always try to see if I'm just missing something. It really sabotages the usefulness of the "help" when something like that is right at the beginning and given equal importance with the most basic definitions and data.
Thanks! That's just what I did, but I always try to see if I'm just missing something. It really sabotages the usefulness of the "help" when something like that is right at the beginning and given equal importance with the most basic definitions and data.
I played with flipping normals. It works on editable mesh - there is even a button that will flip one face. Each the of the faces have a different edge in the same place (clicking the edge shows the number, clicking again gives a different number.) HOWEVER I couldn't get editable poly to do this at all. Converting a mesh with flipped faces to poly resulted in the thing breaking into pieces. So. I don't know what problem the writer was trying to prevent by putting this line in the help, and it certainly isn't something that should be in the first paragraph.
I played with flipping normals. It works on editable mesh - there is even a button that will flip one face. Each the of the faces have a different edge in the same place (clicking the edge shows the number, clicking again gives a different number.) HOWEVER I couldn't get editable poly to do this at all. Converting a mesh with flipped faces to poly resulted in the thing breaking into pieces. So. I don't know what problem the writer was trying to prevent by putting this line in the help, and it certainly isn't something that should be in the first paragraph.
