Feature request: "Modify point" tool in Detail mode


#21

One way solving the movable point is to create move point from Operations. It is a copy of a point and you could move it freely.

I think that it solves your basic problem with current dev version.


#22

Yes, agree this is exactly how i see it. Really advanced professional adjust a method to own purposes. Like musician that not only play a music someone else created. Actually this is big topic. But i also want to say we should be flexible as possible if it fits our goal.

Combine two ways hard, but create a fork in workflow possible.


#23

Yes, i also agree, it should help. But i see different problem here. Some users just know/use/like little bit different approach. And here, i think, more personal taste problem. I also don’t like change a way if it works for me. What we should not do it is to say users how they should make patterns. We will display how we can resolve a case, but take it or not will decide a user. Some will go and i am perfectly fine with it.


#24

@tailored:

You wrote:

Put in measurements Print Make a try-on/muslin Check adjustments Go back to your Valentina pattern and use your adjust points.

I wrote:

  1. decide, which pattern making system (PMS) to use
  2. take individual measurements
  3. draw a basic shape based on the PMS
  4. print it, sew a test garment and see how it fits
  5. make adjustments to the printout as a result of no. 4: perhaps narrow the shoulders, lengthen body parts, slightly move darts for shaping etc.

Basically, I don’t really see much differents regarding our starting point. It is all about how the last step, the adjustments based on the muslin, can be incorporated into the pattern in Valentina.

From what I understand now:

-> You prefer a system where you integrate every single control feature into the pattern in draw mode.

-> I would rather like to leave my basic pattern draft as it is and make the necessary adjustments in a second step or (better) mode, where I can clearly differentiate between the basic draft and the changes I have to integrate after making a muslin and checking the adjustments.

It is simply a software workflow issue, nothing more. In theory, we both think of the same process and that’s fine!

But, in the end, I think my proposal as it has evolved beyond my first post in this thread now has some additional benefits. You can not only use it for fitting adjustments, you could also use it to perhaps create different style variations based on the same pattern draft not having to adjust a single measurement or increment value, but only by moving points around, creating new darts as you go just for design reasons: think of a basic women’s shirt, that you want to change into a waterfall shirt. You would have to massively change your basic draft if you want to integrate this, it might perhaps even not be possible at all to alter your pattern, instead you would have to redraw it from scratch. My idea (if we had a new “design” mode) could let you alter the detail parts the way you wish (cut, slice, rotate, insert new elements, delete parts, etc.) without having to mess with the basic pattern at all, because all those alterations would be applied to the basic pattern in a second step and this is the real beauty of it: creating design details based on a calculated, parametric pattern and not a more or less dumb CAD draft :wink:

This could also lead to the possibility to gather many different design variations inside a single *.val file based on the same body measurements and adjustments.

It would even improve your workflow the way that your highly customized and adjusted pattern is now open to free design work - I admit, this would even be better than my way of doing this :slight_smile:


#25

I don’t see a point to fight which way is better. I see this idea interesting, but going beyond current workflow. But maybe we could determine separate small steps to make it real. Because now idea is really huge.

Design pieces is very interesting idea, but now we can achieve a lot with just modifying a draw. For now i will concentrate on this workflow, but will keep in mind your proposal. We need more flexibility.


#26

Don’t get me wrong. I never meant to fight! I only wanted to clarify things…


#27

I told this not for you, more abstract. :slight_smile: You got my attention and for now this is very good achievement. I like your idea.:+1:


#28

I’ve been thinking a lot about this. This issue describes a ‘use case’ of this feature: