text:
Mesh rigged to skeleton deformed in pose
I have a human body mesh and a skeleton which I got from modding kit for a computer game. I am trying to mod a backpack into the game.
I followed a tutorial and parented a plain cube (my backpack prototype) to the skeleton. When I go into pose mode and move any bone from the skeleton, the cube gets distorted.

To check what I'm doing wrong, I imported an existing backpack from the game and did the same steps. When I change pose here, the backpack keeps its normal form.
So what could be the difference between my cube and the imported backpack?
What I did so far:

Parent my cube to the skeleton, selecting "with empty groups".
Go to weight paint, transfer weights from the human body mesh to my
backpack. There I selected "create Data -> nearest vertex" and
changed "Source Layers selection" to  "By name". I left the rest to
defaults. After this step, my cube had a vertex selected, as shown by
the bright circle in the picture below. Before that, no vertex had
such a circle.

The vertex selected is exactly the same that gets selected when I do the same steps with the existing backpack. It's a skeleton bone in the human's foot, because that's where the origins of both the skeleton and the backpack meshes are. So I assume "nearest neighbor" will always select this bone.
Why do poses distort my cube?
Edit: By default, the cube is blue in weightpaint:

So I choose the toe bone and paint the cube red:

The result: the cube is no longer distorted, but its position is off.

why did you even transfer weights? Just paint the neccessary bones yourself. You can check if the leg bone deforms the cube by selecting it while in weight paint mode. Also look for a tutorial on armature weight painting to learn the basic mechanics.

I updated my post. I have played around with weight painting before. I made the whole cube red for every single bone. This actually fixed the deformation but it also moved the cubes position. When I import it into the game and run around with a character, the cube moves back and forth while running. If it's all blue, the cube stays in position but deforms while running.

It matters which bone is weight painted. When I selected the bone closest to the backpack (a spine bone in the person's upper back) and then painted the backpack red, it stayed in position and did not deform anymore.

parenting or joining the backpack mesh to the mesh instead of the skeleton might be the right move for your need. When you parent the whole mesh to the skeleton it references all bones, you can also try parenting to a root bone. Joining the backpack mesh to the humanoid mesh will allow you to also make the correct deformations and parenting to the bones. I've found the humane rigging blender tutorial here youtube.com/watch?v=3J-XN38EnhQ&list=PLE211C8C41F1AFBAB. I hope this helps. Also consider giving a try to the blender cloud there is a lot of useful examples and tutorials. store.blender.org/product/membership


text:
House architecture- How to extrude or move a face along an edge
I am trying to create a roof overhang and am wondering if there is a way to move or extrude the fascia along the same angle as the roof? Is there a better way to create roof overhangs?

In 2.8,  create a Custom Orientation from one of the sloping edges of your roof, by selecting the edge before hitting '+' in the header's Transform Orientations dropdown.
Then, GY will constrain translations to the direction of the slope, if the new orientation is in use. (Which it will be, by default, after creation.)
Also, following @AnthoJack's helpful answer here, it might suit your workflow better, (having set your cursor to 'Surface Project' and 'Geometry') to set your standard Transform Orientation to 'Cursor' for longer periods. Then you can effectively set up temporary Custom Orientations from faces of existing geometry by simply dragging the cursor over them.
(In 2.79, it's: Select the edge: hit CtrlAltSpace with 'Use After Creation' checked: use GYY)

After pressing G or E for grab/move or extrude you can press X Y or Z to have the action go along that axis.  If you press X X, Y Y, or Z Z, the action will go along that object's local axis.  It will likely be Z Z  you need.
Edit:  In 2.79, it extrudes along the face's normal already and you don't need to press anything.
If you want to move a vertex or edge that lies somewhere in the middle of your roof, you can press Shift V to move it along the same angle.  Make sure you move the mouse in the direction you want it to slide, or it'll try to go along another normal than the one you meant.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Rigid Body Dynamic Animation Problem
I have been trying for way too long now to have a shape composed of a bunch of cubes struck by another larger rectangle type object. After surveying a ton of tutorials and the entirety of the literature on stack exchange regarding this problem, I am still stuck. Here is the issue.
The ensemble of cubes is free floating (not dynamic) and needs to maintain that property until struck. No matter my settings for the animated and dynamic key frames, I either end up with:

Cubes falling before struck
No collision occurring (they simply overlap, as if they aren't rigid bodies)
A dramatic though entertaining explosion of the cubes

Here are all of the different things I've tried (with no success):

Manipulating the Enable Deactivation and Start Deactivated options (for all possible combinations of the colliding and collided with objects)
Changing from convex hull to mesh
Animating the animated and dynamic key frames (for both and neither) and simply testing them when on and off
Fiddling with the collision margin and margin

I cannot seem to get this to work. I don't know what pictures to post because I've tried so many different solutions (and I don't know which wrong solution will give the most insight to the community). I will use Blend-Exchange to upload the file. Please help it would be much appreciated! This is my first ever created blend file and I want it to work!!
EDIT: Unfortunately, Blend-Exchange is having an issue uploading my blend file ("error uploading") so I am unsure what to do now
EDIT: Perhaps this will work (using PasteAll): http://pasteall.org/blend/index.php?id=51817

Thanks for the help Edgel3D, however, I still have a little bit of an issue. Using an invisible plane seems to be a good idea, but the issue concerns my stacked blocks.  As you can see from the image, my 'b' is composed of blocks that would not maintain their form when placed simply on an invisible passive plane. Note that the 'i' will swing into the 'b', and shatter it into its cubes. Furthermore, given that solution, would I be unable to animate the cubes prior to the collision? Thanks

I'm off to experiment with this.  Watch this space.  Would it be more prudent if we shift the comments relating to the answer given, down ino that ?  If I come up with a solution, it will be appended to that.

Godspeed you wizard. This functionality has been kicking my teeth in for months.

This approach took a shortcut in that the individual cubes forming the letter 'b' were all joined as one object.  The explode modifier was used to break it up.  This avoids the physics problem.
The shards that result from the explosion modifier have been rendered invisible in favour of cube shaped particles to maintain the illusion that the cube-stack is what is breaking up.
The explosion modifier and the original 'b' was, at the appropriate frame, switched to a second emitter, (3D &'B' shaped) that emits the same sized and coloured cubes as used to form the letter.

Note - there is an invisible catch plane placed just above the visible ground in order to catch the cubes as they fall.
When particle objects sit on the ground, they do so at their origin points.  This would usually be at their center, so they 'sink into the mud'.  To keep their feet dry this catch plane is set up with the required physics and a little higher than the visible ground which becomes just a prop.
-======================
After some two days of experimentation and with your apparent leaning to use the original cubes for the break up, I came up with this...
To use the stacked cubes in your uploaded Blend file, the timeline was set to frame 1, then each and every cube had it's physics reset by switching the Rigid body button off then on again.  That restored the physics.
As there are some 1040+ cubes only a quarter were actually processed this way.
In order to hold them mid-air, the Animation box is ticked and Dynamic box unticked, and both keyframed, again for each and every cube.
At the impact frame these two tick-boxes have to be keyframed again but in reverse.  The cubes then fall to the ground.
(ignore the green bar)

Granted it looks good but of the two methods, the Explode modifier gives far better control over the break-up appearance, directional bias, and general cube behavior.  With the letter solid it's also a simple matter to manually animate it's lurch on impact.
-==============-
You can skip the reversing tick boxes step, by rendering the cubes dropping from frame 1.  Animate a solid duplicate of the letter in a separate video and mix the two in the VSE.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Custom Dropdown List
I'm trying to integrate a cutom dropdown in my panel that allows to change between different display types for the created proxy objects.
The script runs without error but the dropdown is not shown in the panel. Also, I get this message in the console pointing to a certain line but I can't figure out what's the problem.
D:\XXXXXXX\XXXXXXXX\XXXXXXXXXX\scripting 2_8 wip.blend\Create Proxy Tools:326 rna_uiItemR: property not found: PROPS_UL_ProxyToolDisplayTypes.DisplayType_List

Edit: Here's a .blend with the script
https://1drv.ms/u/s!BH2oRah8e0Ptg8QA9G_pwLDWGUt9ng?e=2yp3rI

Your formatting is horribly broken. Please fix it, because right now I can't tell what's wrong from copy & pasting and what is actually wrong in your source code.

@rjg Ok what exactly is broken about it. As you can see, I'm not a programer. I just applied what I saw in tutorials. Any tips on proper form would be great

No problem. I was talking just about the formatting in your post. Linebreaks and indentation. Haven't tested it yet.

@rjg ooh, do you also mean just these guys '>'? I think that was caused by copying it out of the text editor... I will provide a clean version as soon as I have acces to a computer. Also, the script worked fine until I added the dropdown related code. I will try to mark that part for you

I shared a link with my test file. I hope this helps, sorry for the inconvinience

Try to correct all the assignments of your PropertyGroup from this bpy.types.Scene.ReduceVerts = bpy.props.FloatProperty (already registered per scene due pointerprop) to: ReduceVerts = bpy.props.FloatProperty. Also as of 2.8x we have to use annotations and there are naming conventions for panels, variables (PEP: ReduceVerts ->  reduce_verts) and whatnot... I'd recommend starting from here: How to create a custom UI?

@brockmann Thanks for this awesome reference. I got it to work perfectly

Cool, closing as dupe? Or do you mind posting your code as answer?

I would just close it since there wasn't anything special to bear in mind. It was just the formating that was a little bit off. Do I have to close it?

Leave it as it is and I can mark it as duplicate. You or the others can decide/vote to close it. Also check out the help center for general information: https://blender.stackexchange.com/help

Hi. I see you originally had the code in the question instead of a link to a file with the code. It really is preferable to have the actual code in the question. I know you've solved the issue now, but having code in the question allows people in future to be able to look at your code and see if your question is the same as theirs and whether the solution might also apply to them. That OneDrive link may disappear at some point making a comparison difficult.


text:
Updating custom file path in UI panel
I have an object property group with a ccustom filepath:
class PROPS_UL_ProxyObjectSettings(PropertyGroup):

    #create string property for Proxy Path
    proxy_path : StringProperty(
        name = "Proxy Path",
        default = "//Proxy.blend",
        description = "Define the directory to store the proxy object file",
        subtype = 'FILE_PATH',
        )

The addon will show this filepath inside the UI panel:
...
row.prop(proxy_object_settings, "proxy_path")
...

When I do it like this the filepath itself works but the box in the UI is always set to the default value defined in the PropertyGroup.
How can I show and update the filepath inside the UI panel everytime the active object changes. It should look like the following:
filepath = "//" + active object + ".blend"

Why even make this a property the user can edit?  Consider a rethink to make the directory and extension a property and simply put the context object name  property  inbetween in UI.

@batFINGER I admit the example too simple. My plan is to use the filepath to write a hi res object to another blend file and substitute it with a low res proxy object, then relink the hi res object at rendertime. Of course the user should be able to define a custom path that he wants to save the object to. Also, in case the location of the files change you would have to correct the path (stored in the proxy object) to tell blender where it can find the according object data. I assumed the best way to store this information is a custom object property.


text:
Why is the GPU not rendering normal map correctly?
I'm encountering this strange problem where if I render out my image in Cycles with a gpu the normal map is messed up. Perhaps inverted.
It renders fine with the cpu (top image is rendered with CPU, bottom with GPU)

Machine: Predator G9-591
CPU: i7-6700HQ
GPU: GeForce GTX 970m
OS: Windows 10
Version:Blender 2.77a
screenshot of the jean material node.

You mean on the pants' pocket, right?

Could you post a screenshot of your nodes for that material/texture?

I wanna say this is a bug...?

@someonewithpc a bug it can be (as is it just a rendering way difference), but hard to now if the pocket model (mesh, normals) cannot be checked....

How many 16/32bit textures do you have? If you have more than 5 and your normal map is one of them, it won't load as Cycles in 2.77 is limited to 5 "float" textures (which is anything not 8bit). This is not the case in the nightly builds on buildbot, if you want to try that.

Yea, I believe it is just a problem on the jeans. add a screenshot of the node.

Normal maps or other data maps' color space should be as Non-Color
also, I recommend turning off the Half-float Precision option for Normal maps.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Extrude Individual Faces (Corners) and Expand Without Scaling
Was hoping someone could help me out with this predicament.
I am currently making a video game within unity and most of the environment will be made of square tiles.
After having a frame composed of 4 rectangles, I want to extrude outwards to create the following object:

Only problem is that I would like the corner(black arrow) to be filled in with another square. Other methods are able to fill in the corner but not with square faces like I desire. For instance, a normal extrude will create an edge diagonal to the corner vertex.
Second problem I am running into...Is there a way to expand this frame while retaining the original scale. For example, transform this frame to the first.

Bonus Question:
I am fairly new to the whole unity and blender scene. Would it be more extensive on the game to tile game objects made in blender with faces or with materials made in unity. For example, in blender: have a 5x5 tile (25 faces) and apply a 1x1 material to each face of the object or have a 5x5 tile (1 face) and apply a 5x5 material to the face. Of course the first condition would increase the number of vertices greatly while the second condition would require my project to have 100's of materials but only applying 1 material per object.
I apologize for the poor wording in my questions. Have been confusing myself as well.
Thank you for any sort of help!

Please post different questions rather than one mega one.

Check the solution here http://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/56693/equal-extrusions/56694#56694 or try using a solidify modifier

Duarte, I appreciate the suggestion. With that solution it causes the empty corner like I previously described above. With the solidify, it causes an angled edge going from inner corner to outer corner. I was hoping for cube in that corner...or square faces to put it simply.

If the corners are empty it probably means your edges are disconnected, try removing duplicate geometry with W > Remove Doubles before adding thickness. As for the solidify modifier try the option Even Thickness

Regarding the texturing question, there will be no significant difference if you use 25 small texture files or one big one (in the case you specified), other than the slight increase in vertices. If you can keep all the textures for each face in one file, you might as well. The thing you want to avoid is having unused texture areas in the image files.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
How to join two 2D objects into one?
I want to join heart into plane. Both meshes are 2D (0 value in Y axis). I know that i could join one by one edges with alt+M but i have heck of A LOT EDGES, it would take ages to finish. How can i merge those two objects to be connected with edges. Thanks for all effort to help me.

Select the plane, then the heart and press Ctrl+J.

I need them to be connected with edges. I already made them to be as one object. My bad in question i said "object" now i fixed it. Theres one object with two meshes and those meshes need to be connected with edges.

Split the objects, extrude the heart through the plane and then use boolean/knife modifier?

First apply transformations to your objects (Ctrl+A-->Loc, Rot&Scale). Select your heart mesh, then the plane in Object Mode, then enter the Edit Mode of the plane, press Spacebar and type Knife Project. Extrude the plane a bit and give it a Remesh Modifier being in Object Mode. Apply the modifier, then delete extruded vertices. Finally join meshes with Ctrl+J. Correct some vertices position (merge them with Alt+M).


text:
Lights Not Affecting Scene
I'm new at lighting and texturing, so I've likely done something catastrophically stupid.
Got a relatively simple scene, a hockey puck slides along the ice. Started trying to add some volumetric lighting only to find that none of the textures are receiving light. When I turn Ambient Occlusion on, they all show up at full value. Ambient Occlusion off, everything goes dark.
I'm hoping this is as easy as I've accidentally touched a setting I wasn't supposed to or linked a node incorrectly, but I've uploaded the .blend since I have no clue where to begin with cause/effect on this.

Any help you can offer this despondent n00b would be appreciated.

Blender 2.79b
Cycles Renderer
using the Filmic Blender color management add-on, but I've found
no indication that it's the culprit.

EDIT 08/15/2018: I've discovered a new development. Objects with emission shaders WILL affect scene lighting, but specifically not lamps.

You were only displaying the first layer in your viewport. Make sure to highlight both layers when previewing.

Interesting. I didn't even realize those lights had ended up on that layer. Much obliged.


text:
How do I make both sides of a plane/mesh visible?
I've made a map for my game which the player can run about and also enter a cave, however the issue is that when I have the faces facing out, the cave becomes invisible and when I flip the faces the other way (using the ctrl+shift+n method in editing in blender) it makes the top/surface of the map invisible, showing the bottom of the map.
I would like to know how to make both sides of the mesh visible in Unity or blender to avoid this issue and due to copyright I cannot upload the file as it's for an upcoming game.
I'm asking this because everything I've looked at and tried hasn't worked for me :(
This is a screenshot to show what happens when I try backface culling:

After playing around a bit with Blender I was able to find a solution to the issue and I'm posting this here so it can help others too:
What you want to do is to make the external model(the main map) separate from the internal model(the cave) then go into Unity and put the model in. When you click on the model in Unity it will show you where the missing pieces are.
Using this as a reference, go back into Blender and delete the faces that are causing issues, then add more vertices and faces, save it, then go into Unity.
Delete the current model from Unity then re-import it(clicking re-import doesn't work for some reason) and check again in the model view. If you fixed it, you should be able to see the missing faces are covered either partially or completely. Keep doing this until your model no longer has any missing faces.
As for the cave or internal model, go into edit mode and press ctrl+shift+N to bring up the normals menu and simply check the box that says "inside".
This will make the faces visible on the inside of the model. Once you do that, just put the internal model inside the external, add a few faces, vertices and edged to connect them, flip them the right way and you're done :)
I hope this helps people as I was pretty stumped with this for a while :)

In Blender you can turn on Backface Culling in the shading tab of the Properties sidebar of the 3D View.
In Unity you need a special shader that can do Backface Culling. This feature is not transferable. Or you simply double the geometry, and flip the normals for one of the meshes then.

I tried this too and unfortunately it had no effect :(

It should. Can it be that you mean something different then? As told, when everything else fails then you can also work with two meshes, one with flipped normals.

I heard about that method and tried it too but it still behaved like it had normals only on one side.
Unfortunately it didn't work as it just turns the faces inside and makes the external invisible, giving the same effect as if I'd just used the Ctrl+shift+N method to turn the faces in :(
I've added a screenshot to show what backface culling does in blender as it's still showing up in Unity with pieces missing.

Have you understood that you use TWO independant meshes with that method? - As for your screenshot, it looks like some of the normals are flipped. In that case do a recalculate normals.

Yes I actually said that in my answer, since it's a temporary fix around the problem. As I already said I tried recalculating the normals and it gave me the same result as backface culling, which is why I uploaded the screenshot so please do not talk to me so rudely.
I'm still learning and most of the time I have to play around with settings to figure out how these things work when hours of googling, searching through forums and watching hours upon hours of tutorials don't work.
I post these here since I'm sure other people also get stuck on these and it helped me so it might help others

Rude? At the moment i just try to help. I gave all advice that could fit to your problem as i understood it. When the problem is still not solved then you should describe the problem better. Maybe you mean something completely different - To use two meshes is not a temporary solution, but a very common one. The other way would be to use a shader in Unity that can backface culling. But i already mentioned this before.

My mistake, I mistook your caps for TWO as patronizing me as I've had users do that to me before. I appreciate the help, I really do and in most cases people who do help are really nice while others, not so much. Again, my mistake.

My mistake too. The capitalized letters were not meant as yelling. Just at pointing at it in case you have overread this part.

That does make sense, I guess we both just misread the intent of it but again thank you for your help :)

authors: فاطمة العتيبي


text:
My model was animation ready then the hair stopped following the model
With my model, I finished rigging it, all of the hair followed the head and it was perfect. Then I added a skirt and rigged it and suddenly the hair is leaving huge chunks of it behind and now I'm absolutely crushed.
Why did the model suddenly play up on me like this? I tested it and everything was fine but now the hair is suddenly refusing to follow the model.
Plus due to copyright(since this model is for a game) I'm not allowed to upload or share it, which makes the situation even more grim.
Can anyone think of what is causing part of the hair to stop following the armature?
When I click on the vertex group for the head bone, it shows the entire head and neck highlighted with the parts of the hair also highlighted that moves but when I try selecting all of the hair and clicking "Assign" the neck becomes stiff and refuses to move like it did before. I'm seriously out of ideas at this point.

I found out her to fix it but I also want to explain the difference so this makes more sense:
Because I had edited the model(shoes, skirt, clothes) it made the model stop following the armature, so when I used Automatic Weights on it, the hair didn't follow the model's head like when I first tried rigging it.
To fix this and get the model's hair to follow it's head, rig it how you normally would(in this case, automatic weights) then select the armature and go into pose mode. Once you do this, select the headbone and then select your model again.
Go into weight paint mode and paint the hair so it's all red, then go back to the armature's pose mode and rotate the head to check if you selected it all.
This is how I got the hair to follow the model's head and because my model has several textured planes, this helped me avoid the nightmare of having to delete them all(and I have everything as one object) to remodel the hair, so I hope this helps you if you're stuck on this issue :)


text:
Blender closes when I right click in Object mode?
I've never encountered this issue before but I've finished making a model, created the armature then switched to object mode. Everything is working fine until I right click on the model(or anywhere) then the program just closes.
I tried opening the console window to see if it could tell me what the error/issue is but that closes too so I can't even see if this is a code or what.
Any idea what's causing this and how to fix it?
Please do not ask me to upload the model, under no condition will I do this due to theft in the past
I'm using Windows 10 on a MSI all-in-one touchscreen gaming PC and I've never had this happen before.
Update:
In blender it's just the model, I'm not making a movie, I'm just working on a 3D model for a game so the only thing in that scene is the model itself.
Update 2:
For some reason, the model file isn't doing it anymore. I deleted the armature, then brought it back with [ctrl] Z and now it's running normally :/ I can't access the console without starting blender so I can't check it but it would be nice to know why it did this in the first place.

Does this happen with any other file? If you hit Ctrl+Q what does the small box opening show as hotkey (the right side of the box)?

Check if this happen only on that pc, or if it happens on a fresh blender zip file. If only that particular file seems to have that problem, I would try to open a fresh new file, and import relevant objects from the problematic file, one by one, checking every time what is causing the right click issue... fixing, though, could be near to impossibile...

Is this scene very complex? Blender will take a long time to detect the object if the scene gets too complex, and it may get killed by the OS

This is not intended behavior, under no circumstances should any well behaving application close unexpectedly. It is likely a bug and should probably be reported as a bug to the tracker, although without an example file it might be difficult to reproduce the problem. See if you can recreate the problem with a simpler file you are willing to upload

@Rawcal It seems to just be this file/model that's doing it. I'll upload a screenshot of that small box when I get home.

@m.ardito I'm pretty sure it's the model itself but I'll give that a try and see if it works :)

you could start blender from a console, at least this would print out the last error message before Blender closes. Could point you the right way. So open a console first, navigate to the Blender folder, and start it from there. The console will stay open after the crash.


text:
Rigged Hair (non-particle) Distorted by Armature
With the model I've made for my game, I've finished rigging it and everything but now I've run into a problem:
My character has two thick bracelets(one on each wrist) one on the upper right arm/bicep and some shoes(the left one has a band/anklet above it)
Now the issue is, when I move the upper right arm, the bands follow properly but when I move the right forearm, the upper band bends as if it's attached to it but after checking the weight paint section(which I don't use much and I'm still getting used to) it doesn't look like it's attached and I cannot figure out how to fix it.
I have the same issue with the shoes too, when I rotate the legs, the shoes stay where they are and don't follow the model at all.
I can upload screenshots but due to copyright, I will not upload the model, thank you for understanding:
[![Property of CraftyMaelyss][1]][1]
[![Property of CraftyMaelyss][2]][2]
See what I mean? Also I took some screenshots of the weight paint and since I can't add more to the question, here's links to them:
http://sta.sh/21whv1rhxhpr?edit=1
Again, I'm not that experienced with weight painting but I've followed a few tutorials and it does seem to be working :(
Here's an example of one of the tutorials I tried:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBS1qy4jzTg
If there's another way to get these accessories to function properly, please let me know. In an older version of the model, all the accessories, clothes and such were separate objects but in this newest version of the model, it's all one object.

please upload your blend file to get analized

when uploading, please use http://blend-exchange.giantcowfilms.com/

@CraftyMaelyss without uploading, there is just one answer: your armature is influencing that part of the mesh, for sure. if you can't find where, you could try using  "custom weight paint range" setting in preferences, to better highlight weights on the mesh... btw, I was about to add an answer, but I fear of answers thieves, they would just copy my answer, and make it theirs... 8-s

@m.ardito When you have someone steal you're model and try to sell it, you wouldn't be laughing about it.

sorry, that was not a laugh, it was disappointment. imho, had you uploaded the file, below you would have found answers fixing your model minutes later...

If I could privately upload so one person could check it, then it'd be less worry for theft since if it did appear for sale somewhere I'd be able to find the thief immediately if they did P:

authors: Павел Кириллов


text:
How to avoid white lines in texture while resizing
Sometimes I need to downgrade the resolution of the texture of a model to optimize it for web visualization. To do that i just take the texture in photoshop and export them with a lower resolution and jpeg format. When I import the texture into blender again I get white lines in the edges of the texture. Why does this happen and how can I avoid this problem?
before resize:

after resize (I changed also the curves, the brightness change was intended):

The settings I use in photoshop are these:

I just set the scale to 50% (starting pixels 4096px, target pixel 2048), and set the Resample mode to "Preserve details", the rest of the settings are the standard one. What do I need to change?
here the white line in the texture after resizing:

Edit: in most cases the solution could be to resize using the right resample mode in photoshop (like nearest). In this case this was not the solution, the border of the islands gets distorted too much in any case after the scaling, so the solution was to manually change the UV using pixel snapping.

Ar the brigther Pixels line in the Texture? ... I would guess this is a problem in your PS workflow. I think this happens wenn you have a fraction of a Pixels while resizing.

Yes, the line is visible in the texture, i put a zoomed screenshot, It's a pixel size line.
What could I change in my export settings to avoid this?

To fix the source of your problem, you should check your resizing workflow as @J.Doe suggested. Check your resizing mode/ interpolation and your source/target resolution in your external image editing tool.
To fix a resized texture, go into UV Editor and turn on snap to pixel. This way the UVs cannot cut Pixels in half and generate this sort of bleeding.

The solution to fix it manually works pretty well, but I want to avoid the problem directly in the resizing workflow, not after the error has already happened. What should I change in my export settings? I put a screen of my export settings (I just set the scale to 50% (starting pixels 4096px, target pixel 2048), and set the Resample mode to "Preserve details", the rest of the settings are the standard one)

As this Stack Exchange here is not about Photoshop this is Off Topic. You might find experts here: https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/adobe-photoshop

Pixel snapping, or in more general, being exact is kind of your enemy here. Being exact makes you vulnerable to an off-by-one error. A safety margin is what protects you from such errors, hence my original one-word comment under your question (sorry! I consider my knowledge intermediate and happily give ground to true experts).
First part is simplifying the problem to an Image Texture node with Interpolation Mode set as Nearest. I believe you have it set, if you don't have the reported problem before scaling down your texture - but since we don't see your project, we can't say - perhaps you have a margin, but one too small (it becomes subpixel after scaling down), or maybe the original resolution is high enough that the artifact is not visible at the zoom level you test your setup in, etc...
1. Scaling down the texture
Create a plane, in Edit Mode S, X, ., 5, Enter to scale it to 50% width, ShiftD, Y to duplicate and move it "below" (in top view), as for shading, just use the 100x100 image texture shown in first row of the table below:
 Closest interpolation!
In UV Editing for one face S, X, ., 5, Enter to scale accordingly to mesh size, G, X, ., -, 2, 5, Enter to align to left border, likewise with the other face but without - so it's aligned to the right border...
Add Array modifier and we have our setup ready:
Starting with 100x100 texture, left and right halves with different colors:
 zoom on center of texture:

When scaling 50% down to 50x50 in Photoshop, using Bilinear resampling, the effect is exactly the same, so just posting the texture:
 and zoom:
With different resampling, there are some small artifacts already, but let's just jump to a case where it's much more visible, by scaling again 50% down, so now the size is 25x25:

texture
algorithm
zoom

bilinear

nearest

The antialiased region in bilinear version has been eaten by one of the regions (here: orange). What happened? First blue area had 50px width, then you divided it by 2 and it had 25px width, then you divided it by 2 and it had 12.5 px width. Because it's a raster image, the middle pixel could be either blue, orange, or an average (interpolation) of the two. Turning antialiasing off didn't help; using "nearest neighbor"  algorithm in Photoshop makes the middle column orange; it means ${0.5 \over 12.5} = 4\%$ of the surface that's supposed to be blue, now becomes orange. In some cases it can be quite visible, for example if two regions connecting on UV map don't describe two regions connecting in geometry, or if it's a normal map in tangent space as in this question: How do I fix these normal map edges?
Since Hamed asked in comments, let's prove it by comparing the two:
25x25 bilinear ______________________ 25x25 nearest neighbor

The bottom plane works, because orange region became "greedy". However as mentioned above, blue color lost 4% of surface.
2. Interpolation inside of Blender
You probably want to have interpolation enabled, however, due to how it works, points with coordinates between center of a pixels on an edge and a pixel outside the edge of a region, will have their color calculated as an interpolation of those two (or more) pixels; for example, looking at the problem 1-dimensionally, using the 100 px wide texture, if color is calculated for a point at x = 99.8% of width, since it's beyond the last blue pixel's center (which is at 99.5% of width, as it defines color between 99% and 100% of width), the color will be an interpolation of nearest pixel, and the next pixel, which is outside the region defined in UV:

And so in linear interpolation, the resulting color will be ${a \over a+b} \times c_1 + {b \over a+b} \times c_2$.
You could wonder why software (not necessarily just Blender) doesn't clamp the value so it's not interpolated outside its UV region, but it wouldn't solve the problem, at least not entirely: for example if you had a gradient, clamping would mean that for a distance of 0.5 px (and then again for same distance on the other side) the color would be constant, which you would absolutely see in cases like zoom-ins or animation.
Solution
Finally! With 100x100 texture loaded, create another UV mapping:

U, U again to Unwrap, in UV Editor UV menu -> Pack Islands, expand the pop-up and set the margin. Now bake with standard settings:

Now switch the UV to the new one by clicking on the camera icon next to it. Save your baked image, open in a program of your choosing, scale down arbitrarily (you can still scale down too much depending on how small your margins are, save the texture, load back in Blender, everything should work even in linear interpolation mode, no artifacts - however, in my UV map above, one of the boundaries touches the edge, therefore extension mode has to be changed to Extend - in Repeat, you get the same orange/blue interpolation problem, and in Clip you're interpolating with black on the problematic edge.

your definitions were true , but i didn't get the final part , how baking texture with margins fixes this problem ?

Ok , i edited my previous  answer with an example of what did you said , i'd be glad if you explain more why "turning antialiasing off" won't help ?

@hamed.design since the answer got some traction, I'll rework it and try to hit 2 birds with one stone (image texture node interpolation and how it causes color bleed + image texture scaling possibly outside of Blender and how it causes color bleed).

Your problem is "AntiAliasing" (AA) that happens due to resampling or when creating stuff in your application .

so you should make sure that you don't have it in first hand , for example in the picture below you can see i disabled AA for creating text .

and as the result i have a very sharp edge in my final saved picture

as for resizing an already exist Sharp image I prefer to open it in PS and from menus choose "Image > image size..." and tweak the settings a little.

I found these settings in resampling sharp enough for your purpose .

And the you can "File > save as > jpg" thats it ....

Ok a simple Update , Just tested what our friend is talkin about "near neighbor" here is a simple Blue-Red colors (600X900pixs) reduced to 10% and nothing changes :

And here is the final result as you can see a Clean (60X90pixs) final result :

When saving this option does not appear, where can I enable it?
I use "Export As" to save and resize a texture.

@Danzer i updated the answer please accept the answer that is correct since you dont have enough information about the problem

"Google it '' It's not an answer. This is not a photoshop forum, it's a Blender forum, and Blender is a software that can integrate many other softwares in its workflow, like photoshop. If you don't know the solution using that particular software you can suggest another practical solution (and no, "google it" is not a practical solution), even a solution that uses only Blender if you know one.
If you think I didn't give enough information just ask what you think is missing, I gave all the details I could, even detailed screenshots and tried all the solutions you have proposed.

@Danzer Sorry mate , but your problem happens due to antialiasing and you cant reverse it in blender (maybe you can thru nodes by increasing contrast ) and since your third party software isn't blender i can only help you with antialiasing problem ,  ( which you didnt prefer which version youre using that are different) btw , i'll update the answer tomorrow. , but can't you find the settings in your software ?

I don't want to reverse it, I want to prevent it from happening before it happens by using the right settings while resizing. I tried all the settings in photoshop without good results (there is no antialiasing option for resize or export, only "resample modes") so, if PS is not the right choice for the task, whic software is? Blender itself? Another one?

Jeasus ! alright i'll edit the answer

@Danzer Ok i edited the answer and make a full description of what you should do in ps , if it helps please accept the answer

I already said that I tried all the resample options for exporting with no good result, "nearest" was also tested.
Probably in most cases this solution works, like for seamless textures, but here, after my testing I think the problem is that the margin of the island in the texture gets expanded too much after resizing and the margin gets inside the island border. In this case the best solution is manually changing the UV using pixel snapping. Thanks for the help.

"reduced to 10% and nothing changes" - my guess is the coordinates of color region borders are divisible by the divisor you apply when scaling the image, that is, on your image if the red region has 50% height = 450 out of 900 pixels, if you scale the image down to 10%, 450/10 = 45 which still is a whole number. If you now scale down to 50%, 45/2 = 22.5, not a whole number, either AA kicks in, or one region is larger than the other (and so AA causes color bleed to both, "nearest" color bleed to one, but more significant).


text:
location of separate meshes breaks completely on export, with a black stripe from mesh to center
I have a simple character made with a set of animations in the action editor: a tpose, idle, run and jump.
However, my character consists of multiple objects, the main body, a helmet and a few different pairs of eyes.
In blender, The animations are as they should, with the helmet and eyes having an added constraint of being a child of the head bone.

However on export, the eyes and helmet are in place of the head, but the head is much lower than it should be, and a black stripe that's visible from the inside of the character's mesh seems to form from his side hip to the center.

Additionally, when playing animations, the main body moves, but the helmet and eyes stay in place.
The format I export the character to is .FBX

you need to specify what format you exported to. most likely your format does not support the blender-specific features you're using.

I use .FBX when exporting.

maybe this helps: https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/2.81/addons/import_export/io_scene_fbx.html


text:
Applying image texture to UV Map
I know how to apply an image texture to a UV map, but the result is unpredictable and often looks terrible.
Let's say I have a texture I want to apply:

...and lets say that, since it looks like a sphere already, I'd like to apply it to a sphere.  But not just any sphere...a sphere with a extrusion or two.
My UV Map clearly isn't a circle.  Even on a perfect sphere getting the image to look like the picture seems impossible.  Or the cube for that matter, given that the texture image shows no seams at all.
So how is this done?
Is it a lot harder to use an image like that that is already prepared than it is to simply paint your own UV maps?  Or is there some simple way of extracting parts of this image to be used in a UV map?
If anyone can point me to any youtube tutorials on this it would be amazing, thank you.  I can't find any.
Cheers,
A
below, example UV map of what I'm working with:

This is pretty broad, do you have a concrete example with a picture of the UV map that you are having trouble with?

I've added a UV image to the post as an example, as I can't put an image in comments.

Ouch, thats a messy UV map. You might want to have a go at marking seams and trying a more specific unwrap.

The shape is complex.  The UV map is always going to be a bit like this, but even if it were simpler please can you answer my original question?


text:
Create a curved circle with precise dimensions
If you imagine the external edge of a torus, all the way around, or you imagine a uniform cylinder where you then bend the vertical edge in uniformly to create a circle - that is what I'm trying to achieve.  A curved circle with specific measurements.
Specifically, I want it to be 4 units high (easy) with the swell of the curve precisely one unit thick.  In other words, say the bottom of the curve is at 0.00, then the widest point of the swell is at 1.00 before coming back in again to 0.00 at the top of the curve.
I imagine this could be done by trimming down a torus, but the "exterior/interior" radii settings on the Torus Dimensions don't appear to be accurate enough for my purposes - because the Torus inner edge swells in too, and I can't therefore use that to measure because I don't know the degree of that swell.
I imagine this could be done by bending a 4-unit-high cylinder, but I don't know how to...
Any help/guidance much appreciated.
Thanks,
A

A sketch / screen grab  might still help understand exactly what you're after ..

Done that...,,,

Depending on what profile you'd like, for example:

Semicircular, in which case the width has to be 2 if the height is 4
Elliptical, scaling the semicircular in X
An arc of a circle passing through (0,2), (1,0) and (0,-2)

You can create the surface of revolution from them

destructively, by using Alt R, the spin tool, adjusting settings for center and axis
or non-destructively, by assigning a Screw modifier to the profile, with 0 'Screw' setting.

For version 2, looking down Z:

ShiftA create Mesh > Circle, 32 verts, then, all in Edit Mode...
X delete half the vertices, retaining  N & S poles
SX0.5 scale to a half-ellipse
GX move the mesh with respect to its own object origin to get the desired major radius. (By default, the modifier will rotate around the object origin)
Assign a Screw modifier, as shown.

The advantage of using a modifier is that you can still make adjustments to the mesh in Edit Mode after assigning it, and see the results.

If you need more detail on a particular version, let us know

Yep, this is perfect - I'd like a number 2, please.  How do I make an elliptical curve like yours (with exactly 17 divides, incidentally)?

@Altissimus.. Done that.. :)

many, many thanks.  However, the main problem now is that it looks so much better than what I had before I am going to probably end up changing a bunch of stuff....  which means I also need the same thing in a straight line.  Is there a modifier I can apply to the curve (instead of screw) that will allow that?

This is really another question, but to get you kicked off, for a straight line,  just E extrude the profile.. you can also send it down any path you like.Look up the Curve modifier. Also consider the possibility of converting the profile to a curve, and using it to bevel another curve. If you get stuck, by all means post another question.

...Thank you :)

A curve with its control points precisely placed and a Screw modifier will do this.

Is this the shape you wanted?
Edit:
Sometimes the handles get swapped around, and that kinks the curve around on itself.  So move the handles around and see what effect that has on the curve to make sure they're coming out on the right sides.  If you move the control points (the handles get highlighted too) with G for grab, X, Y or Z for the axis and 0 or 1 or whatever you need, you can get them in a symmetrical place - you have control over that at least.  To get the handles arranged you can turn on Snap (the magnet icon at the bottom in Blender 2.79) and turn on Absolute Grid Alignment (the second icon along after Absolute Grid Alignment, you can move the handles to a fixed point on the grid so everything is properly aligned and symmetrical.  If you then want more or less curve you can move the handles to another grid point, keeping them symmetrical.

@cegaton  Aaah!  So that's why. OK.

So this makes sense but getting that Bezier curve to look "how I want" is just as much of a problem as the original problem.  Moving the handles can't be done by insetting numbers; when I put it to 0 degree of 90 degree rotation it's actually twisted something wicked - clearly I don't understand what the point of reference is for the angles the handles use, even though my pivot point is at 0,0,0.  Also, no way of controlling exactly the shape formed afterward.

I've added a comment on handles in the answer above.


text:
New animation on armature runs previous animation
I have an animation stored under one amature.  I wish to create another animation.  I select the new amature that I want to create the animation on (it is wholly separate from the first amature).  I hit "new" in the action editor.  As soon as I move past the first frame, the object animates with the original animation.
Why is this?  How do I stop this from happening?
ETA - Blender file is here: https://gofile.io/?c=mU1IBA
Reproduce the problem: with the Track Controller armature highlighted (it is when you open the folder), if you press i on the Location Transform to pin the initial position and then move the frame forward, the other armature translocates sideways.  I don't know why.  I don't believe it is connected to anything affected.
Thanks,
A
Video of my issue is here: Vimeo

hard to tell, maybe share your file (at least the armatures)

@moonboots file shared - thanks.  Comments in original post detailing the issue.

I also tried clearing ALL parenting.  I then tried to add a new animation on the Track Controller armature, and again it moved the other armature.  I really don't get that.  They're not even linked in the hierarchy.

Rename the controller bone in the Properties>>Bone tab to don't have the same as any of the another armature.

@FFeller I did this and it didn't make a difference.  Do I need to reset anything for it to take effect?

It worked for me in your file, I didn't do anything else.

@FFeller I've made the changes you said and it hasn't worked.  I've uploaded a video to the original post that shows my issues.  Please help?


text:
My animation has no keyframes but still moves?
I don't know what I've done here.  Basically, I've recorded one animation and want to record a second, but even though there's no keyframes showing the robot animates.
Also, the armature leaps to the side if you switch between armature/pose mode.
Short video showing the issues
I would really appreciate understanding what is going on here because if I don't know how to correct this it's going to be an issue with every animation.
Many thanks in advance.
A
Blender file:

At 0'41 your timeline shows a bunch of keyframes. Wouldn't they be the reason why everyhing moves?

you must have pushed the first animation into the NLA with the Push Down button (Dopesheet when it's in Action Editor mode). If you don't want it to play you can mute it or delete it in the NLA?

@moonboots That was my initial thought, but I don't think it's even that complex. In pose mode the root bone has no keyframes but once he/she selects the armature, keyframes pop up on the timeline

maybe he should share his file so that we can take a look

Kitkat @moonboots I appreciate your feedback.  As I said in my op, there is a pre-existing animation associated with the main armature.  However, when I move the other armature ("Track Controller"), the first animation plays.  But (afaik) it shouldn't - they're not connected, and the other animation is under the main armature. I have the separate problem that I was trying to highlight that when I select the first armature or the pose, the rig jumps out of position.  Why is this?  I'm new to this stuff so I'm sure I've made a basic mistake somewhere, but no idea where. How do I separate them?

please share your file: https://blend-exchange.giantcowfilms.com/

File shared @moonboots

You have 2 armatures, Track Controller (with only one bone, on the left of the machine), and Armature, which is all the machine bones.
Your Dopesheet is in Action Editor mode, it will only display the keyframes relative to the selected armature.
When we open the file, Track Controller is selected, and as it has no action, no keyframes are displayed.
On the contrary, we can see that Armature is animated. It's normal because an action has been assigned to it, and if we select this armature, all the keyframes of this action will be displayed on the Dopesheet.
If you want to close the action playing for a selected object, press the X button on the right of the action name. It won't be played anymore by the armature but it will still be selectable in the dropdown menu if you want it back.

When you close your file, every action will be saved as long as it has at least one user (one object or armature using it) or if you've assigned it a fake user (press the F button on the right of the action name if you want to give an action a fake user). Fake user is a way to make sure that the action you've created will be saved even if it doesn't have any user yet.
About le leap to the side: your bones come back to their rest pose as soon as you come back to Edit mode. If you select all these bones in Pose mode and press altG they will combe back to the same pose.

Ok...thank you...but that doesn't actually address my question.  I am trying to use one animation on Armature, and one on Armature 001.  I want them separate.  Currently, when I click on Armature 001, I don't understand why Armature animation is involved at all.  How do I get a second, separate animation?  As soon as I move the timer, the animation that I have starts playing.  But I've set up a new animation! So why is it even connected??!?

About the leap to the side - I want the "rest" position of the armature (which, for someone odd reason is out to the side) to become the current "pose" position - I understand that Alt G makes pose become rest - is there a way to make rest become pose?

The 2 animations are separate, it's just that whatever object you select, Armature will play its animation, because for the moment an animation is affected to this armature, if you don't want it to play, close it with the X button (in the Dopesheet / Action Editor mode, on the right of the animation name), you'll be able to reload it with the dropdown menu, or make it play later: click on the Push Down button and move the strip in the NLA. Please tell me if you understand.

Sorry, I'm still doing something wrong.  So I select the Armature and the "shorter idle" animation.  I hit the X to close it on the Action Editor against the "browse action to be linked" name.  Then I select the Armature.001 which has the "walking" animation.  When I play that, or move the timer, the "shorter idle" animation still plays.  If I click to add a new animation, then move the timer on to change the animation in pose mode, the "shorter idle" animation still plays.  This means I can't add a new separate animation.

In the version you shared, Armature 001 didn't play any animation because you didn't select any in the dropdown menu, if you select Armature 001 and, in the dropdown menu, select the action called Walking, Armature 001 will play Walking. If you select Armature and close Shorter Idle with the X button, it won't play Shorter Idle, unless you've clicked on the Push Down button, which means you've created a NLA strip, so maybe you created this strip by accident, open the NLA and check this out...

About ready to give up and scrap this.  I don't know what an "NLA strip" is.  I looked at the NLA and can't figure out how to turn off the "shorter idle" animation.  Some screenshots would help.  Some step by step instructions would be amazing.  I imported the model into unity and the animations play together, not separately.  Also, the track animation doesn't rotate the track, it transforms it - so it rips off the machine and heads off by itself without rotation.  Totally disheartened.

maybe you're going to fast, try to follow some basic tutorials about animation, dopesheet, nla...

I've gone through loads.  The problem is, none of them show you how to redeem errors.  I've literally spent hours on tutorials.  Hours.  That's why I've come here - looking for someone with experience to take a look at a video and a file and say "oh, you've done this...you undo it like that...screenshot, screenshot, job done".

well, I answered your first question and gave you the reasons why the robot seemed to animate with no keyframe, it was because you didn't select it, and why it leaped, it was because it was not in rest pose, now you say that your armature is still playing even though there is no keyframes in the Dopesheet, if this happen when you select the armature, as I said, the reason should be that you've pushed a strip in the NLA, but I don't see that in the file you shared, maybe share the latest...

I'm using the same file.  I'm even reloading it each time, to make sure I haven't done anything.  If you've managed to make changes that actually address this, perhaps you could kindly re-share the file?  But the biggest question, the only question really, is why the armature is playing even when there's no keyframes showing in the action editor.  It was, in fact, the first line of my op.

Again, there are keyframes playing in the action editor: select the armature called Armature, you'll see the keyframes of the selected action for this object. If you don't want any action to be played for this armature, select it, go in the Dopesheet in Action Editor mode, and on the right of the action name (Shorter Idle) click on the X button (Unlink this action).

I've edited my answer, maybe it's clearer?

It's clearer, thank you.  However, I explained I did all you said about 4 comments back - hitting the X and all that stuff.  It's still not working for me.  Anything I do is still resulting in that animation playing.  So, nevermind.  I've given up and scrapped the model.  Going to re-work the whole thing from scratch.  Just a shame that someone can't clearly explain the interrelation between armature/animation/nla/whatever when things go wrong.

if you hit X all the keyframes should disappear, is it not what's happening for you? About the interrlation between armature/animation/nla/whatever, it would be too long to do in this forum, all I can say is that the animation you'll see in the 3D scene will be the one selected in the Dopesheet, or, if there is not, the one in the NLA.

If anyone else reads this looking for answers to similar problems:
A solution for the "leaping rig" is here: My Rig Changes Position in Edit/Object Mode?


text:
how to keep your model scale from an animation?
I was animating a model and noticed that on a frame that the scale there looked a lot better then the current scale my model has by default. What I would like to know is how to I apply the scale of the model in that frame so that it's now the model's permanent scale if that makes sense?
This is the default model scale:
[![Model and character design are property of CraftyMaelyss][1]][1]
And this is the scale I want my model to be:
[![Model and character design are property of CraftyMaelyss][2]][2]
I read somewhere that Ctrl + A should do it, so I tried it and it didn't work. Does anyone know how to do this?

Upload your model to blend-exchange.giantcowfilms.com so other may try with your file.

If I get your question right, you were animating the model INCLUDING the scale channels, right? If that's the case, all you got to do is go to the specific frame where you like the scale values, and in the transform panel right click and choose 'Clear Keyframes'

@aliasguru, you should post an answer.

Choose the object (not the armature), go to the frame you want it to be and apply the armature modifier.

I tried that but it didn't work when I changed the window from animation to default or changed from pose mode to object or edit mode :/

I have not understand from the question that the object is manipulated with armature. See the answer now - it was modified.

That's what I'm saying, I tried that and I tried it again just then to test it and it still didn't work :(

You said you applied "cntrlA". I say you go to modifiers and apply the armature modifier of the mesh.

It's still not working :( I'll just maybe start from scratch and try again since nothing seems to help :(

Its a pitty to make all from scratch. Select the mesh in question. It had a modifier, right? Armature modifier, right? Go to the frame you want. Make it a new keyframe. Go to modifier and apply it. Delete all the other keyframes. Look what hapens. You have some animated patents attached to this mesh?

-1; sorry for downvoting, but this isn't needed and will make it impossible to pose the character.


text:
'Limit selection to visible' suddenly not working in user perspective?
So I'm working on my model, same as normal and go to select "Limit selection to visible" which makes all the vertices visible and select-able. Except they're not.

I've taken a screenshot and you can actually see the "button" for it is highlighted like it's on but isn't working.
I had a look around and saw someone make a similar post except theirs is for the Ortho view, not the user perspective. Is this a glitch or some sort of setting I need to fix?
Update: I also notice the further I scroll away from the model, I can see the back vertices as if it were activated.

I opened a new project to see if this was an issue with the program itself or to do with the setting in blender. It works normally with the new project but in this current project(that are shown in the screenshots below) the limit selection to visible doesn't work. Based on this I am pretty sure it's something to do with the settings.
While I appreciate temporary fixes, I really need to know how to properly fix this issue so I can get it to work normally again.
Update:
This is how it normally works for me, I open the program and it looks like this before I press the button and after:

Now when I try to "disable" it by pressing that same button(exactly same as I always have done) nothing happens and only becomes partially visible,like in the screenshots of the issue above this.
So telling me I just need to "disable" it (when I've explained that I literally cannot do that for whatever is causing the issue) is not helping at all.

Where's the option for that? To my knowledge I haven't done anything that could have caused this effect and even when I try enabling/disabling it still doesn't work either way :/

Sorry, I misread the question.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way...it is "limiting the selection to visible" (the verts up front) right now. It sounds like you want to disable it. Also you might want to fix your normals (Select All > Ctrl + N).
Let me clarify:

When the button is disabled you can "see through" it
When the button is enabled it appears opaque

Thanks but I really need to know how to get it working again since it's vital for the current model I'm working on and my normals are just fine, I double checked to be sure. I really don't want to come across as rude but I just need to know how to fix this asap :(

It sounds like the problem is with the clipping settings in the properties panel and the scale of your model. What you said in the edit to your question sounds normal - there are some strange things that start happening when you zoom in this far. If you just need to select those verts, try switching to wireframe view or hiding the faces in front of them (Select Faces > H)

I didn't even think to switch to wireframe mode, thank you! :D Also, what's the default setting for the clipping distance minimum? I changed it because it wouldn't let me get very close before part of the model vanishes but I'll try setting it to default to see if that fixes the problem P:

The default is 0.1. Please accept my answer.

But your answer doesn't solve the main issue of how to fix the problem with the limit selection not working as it used to(even though you've given me a temporary fix) I still need to know how to properly fix this issue. I opened a new project to see if it was the program or not and it works just fine, so it has something to do with the settings.

Alright, I looked at the new screenshots you posted...you have this enabled. You need to disable it. Sure when you zoom out the verts that are close behind faces will start showing through (this is a "problem" in most 3D programs). Notice how the large parts of the head never are see through.

And to disable it, you just click on it, basically turning the button on/off enables and disables it. I'm adding new screenshots to show how it usually works up until this problem.


text:
How do I make material textures visible in the Render window?
Okay so I've made a blender model, added textures and recently I've started adding materials but now the textures aren't showing up the same as what I'm seeing in the 3D window.
Blender Default Window:

Rendered:

Comparison:

I know that I need to assign a texture to a material, which I have done but it's still not showing up how I want it to.
I'm not a pro at Blender but I wouldn't consider myself a beginner, so if anyone can provide screenshots with their instructions(such as checking boxes or settings) I would greatly appreciate it :)
Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong here?
Also by request, I cannot upload or share this model, sorry :(
@Dimali I believe so, here's a screenshot of it:

@Dimali And here's a screenshot of the settings:

Does the texture have the image assigned that you have UV unwrapped?

@Dimali I believe so, I've added a screenshot of it to the question, since I can't find an option to add a screenshot in my reply comment.

Ok. What are your settings in the "Mapping" Section of the texture? Coordinates: UV?

@Dimali I've added another screenshot of the settings if that helps :)

I don't understand what you mean by default window and rendered in the first two images. Are you wanting to get the eye textures back in your 3D view?

I assume you did not mix up the following: "Rendering" is what you do when you click "Render" -> "Render Image" (=F12). You can activate or deactivate textured preview in your viewport by using textured view or solid view with or without "texture solid". Your second image is showing the viewport with deactivated textures, the comparison image is done by using viewport (left image) and rendering as in pressing F12 (right image), correct?

Am I mistaken or are you viewing in "Solid Mode"?  Looks like it in the pics.  At bottom, click on the little white ball and select "Material Mode".

@Dimali That's right, that's what I did. Also with the second screenshot, I was showing the materials weren't showing the textures that were assigned to them correctly.
They do show up when rendered, however it still looks very different compared to the 3D viewport with the textured shading on.

@LetTheWritersWrite What I'm trying to do is to get the rendered model to look the same as it does in the 3D viewport with the textures on.
When I render the model, it looks very off and not at all like it's appearance in the 3D viewport, which is the issue.

@Edgel3D That makes the model in the default window look like the rendered version(which is a really cool tip for the future, thank you :D) What I want to do is make the rendered model look like the default version.
See the third screenshot with the default and the rendered comparison? I want the rendered model to look like the default, since it looks very weird when rendered.

Turning off specular or reducing specular intensity will get rid of the highlights that don't appear in the viewport. As for your texture problem, I'm not sure what the reason is.

I don't generally use the textured view for this reason.  The "material" mode represents how things will look with OpenGL rendering and also Blender Render.   Good luck with that.  A screenshot would at least capture what you're seeing, albeit a poor one.


text:
Stiff cloth/canvas like simulation
Disclaimer: Im not very experienced with blender.
Ive been working on a little project for a video and i am inclined to use a cloth simulation for it. The subject of the video is filling a BigBag (Stiff plastic canvas fabric, see this video for reference).
So far i have a single layer surface cloth simulation, with some mball stuff to simulate filling it and deceiving the viewer with a particle system to emulate it filling.
However; the simulation does not look real enough. The fabric is flimsy and moves to much. Also, because it has zero thickness; it looks very... grocery bag like.
So im just looking for a way to take it to the next step!
A few things i need help with and tried myself:

To give the bag some realism, i tried to solidify the body, it has a lot of self collision and really weird vertex hell.

Added some pressure to the inside, which made it look like everything but a bag.
To get an accurate sim, you need a lot of faces to correctly display. My current problem is that the amount of faces becomes very concentrated at the i.e. corners which then acts really weird with lets say pressure.

Getting a stiff material.

I have been tweaking settings but they just do not make any sense at all. Is there a comprehensible guide that explains it? I have seen a lot of youtube video's but none really explain which setting does what.

Im currently also working at about x15 scale. I've read that that works with the bad self collisions etc.
Thats about it!
Thanks in advance!

Hello and welcome! Can you edit your question and add a screenshot of your work? How does the topology of the bag look like? Have you used a pin group? Here's a quick test I made: https://i.sstatic.net/p58FA.gif

Wow @Blunder, that is seriously impressive! Its actually what i am looking for. This following link is what i have so far: https://imgur.com/a/T9rbqT4 It doesnt work as i would want. Yours is more what im looking for, also the loops where it hangs on is a challenge for me. Does it still work with solidify on it? Sorry for the barrage of questions! Im just really excited. Oh and thanks for the welcome!

Yours looks great, too. If you want to make the bag stiffer you might reduce the number of vertices else you get this fine silk look. The loops should work with the Solidify modifier on them. I may post more details later.


text:
Rigid Body simulation with constraints exploding
I'm making an industrial lamp armature that is going to fall and when it hits the ground it will break.

What I've done is make the mesh and connect everything in a Rigid Body simulation with constraints. I used mostly fixed constraints with breakable enabled and tried playing around with the weights in a logical sense.
I also read that everything will probably work better if i scale it with double digits. However, if i do this, how can I scale it back down to the sizes I want.
I gave everything a Mesh Shape and upped the substeps (200) and solver iterations (50). Yet still, everything explodes and moves absolutely bonkers at frame 1.
I have scouerd many forum and youtube video's in search of clarity and a solution to this problem but to no avail. I hope I'm not just stupid and overlooked some possible solutions on this or another website but i am really struggling!

you add your blend file by opening https://blend-exchange.com/ and follow instructions

what constraints do you have? and why?

@Chris I have used mostly fixed constraints, so that it is a single object until it hits the floor. I have added the file so you can take a look!

So there are a few problems that I'll mention, but the real problem is just that you're expecting too much from Blender rigid body physics.
First thing we want to do is check for unapplied scale on any objects.  In your case, yes, there is at least one object with unapplied scale.  This will screw up rigid body simulations.  So we'll apply scale on all objects.
Second thing we need to do here is look for any reversed normals.  Normals are how your physics simulations know what is the inside and the outside of a mesh for purposes of computing collisions-- that is, what is a rock, and what is a cave?  If we turn on face orientation in viewport overlays, we can see you have a mesh with reversed normals:

We can fix those normals by entering edit mode on the offending mesh, selecting all, and recalculating normals (ctrl n for me.)
Third thing we'll do is set the rigid body physics cache to something larger than 3, so we can actually get enough frames on the simulation to see what's happening.
But the real reason why it's exploding is because meshes are starting in collision with each other.  If we look over here:

We can see that those meshes are already in collision.  Where are they supposed to go?  They get propelled through each other because it's the only way to get them out of collision.
Now, in this particular case, we have an RB constraint with disable collision, so this particular pair is okay-- but your plan is to have them break apart later, and the RB constraint is fixed, so if they're in collision now, they'll still be in collision later.  Any time we do anything to enable collision, this structure is going to explode.
And, not every combination of objects has a fixed joint disabling collisions between them.  The collisions that are not disabled by constraints are what is causing the explosion at frame 1 (at least, after taking care of scale and normals.)
However, even if you get these meshes out of visual collision, they are still going to be in collision, because "mesh" style collision-- which is your only option here, considering the concavity of the meshes-- isn't based around only the mesh that you see.  Instead, mesh collision has an invisible thickness, which it needs, because otherwise, everything would just teleport through everything else.
Indeed, at this point, if we adjust the objects to take everything very clearly out of collision with each other, our physics work properly:

Our objects fall straight down, just like they're supposed to, rather than exploding on frame 1.  The only problem is, we don't want to adjust their positions like this.
The reality here is that your meshes are too detailed, and too close, to use your unedited mesh objects as rigid body colliders.  Instead, use physics on non-rendering abstractions of your rendering meshes, and then parent your rendering meshes to those objects:

If we use physics on these cubes, rather than on our rendering meshes, we can use "box" collision instead of "mesh" collision.  Box collision is much more reliable and performant than mesh collision. And the collision is what-you-see-is-what-you-get: there's no hidden margin that surrounds the collision.  The cost is that the collision doesn't perfectly represent our mesh, but we can approximate that mesh to whatever level we need for our particular render.
Note that boxes are not necessarily the best choice-- what's important about boxes are that they're collision primitives.  That is to say, they're calculated mathematically.  Other collision primitives are sphere and capsule, and either one of those will work as well, and give you different behavior.  You should pick which primitive to use on the basis of whichever best represents the shape you're trying to emulate.  (Cylinder should be a collision primitive, but it's a non-standard one, and I've had some bugs with it, so I'd recommend sticking with capsules instead.)
Now, as for using a big scale for physics, there are two reasons to do this.  One is that it shrinks that invisible margin used for mesh collision.  That's a mixed bag-- you get collision that more accurately matches your visual mesh, but at the cost of rigid bodies teleporting through each other on collision (at a velocity, relative to their size, that they wouldn't if smaller.)
The main reason that using big objects leads to better physics is because the distances are larger, so the forces are smaller, relative to the size of the objects-- like gravity.  At a 1m=1unit scale, Blender's gravity is Earth gravity.  But if we use a 1cm=1unit scale, Blender's default gravity is only 1% of Earth gravity.  Smaller gravity means that meshes are less likely to acquire high velocity, so they won't teleport through each or penetrate too deeply before Blender notices the collision; they won't stretch on their constraints to the point of breaking before Blender notices and pulls them back where they belong.

Thank you very much for taking your time to write such an elaborate and detailed explanation. The problem solving you applied is amazing (with the cubes rather than the mesh shape, and ill work with that from now on). I'm a little bit bummed out to find out that the RB engine in blender isn't up to what i'm asking. Do you know of any software that does? (Houdini / 3dsmax maybe?)

@ChrisHolstein I don't know, I'm sorry.  In general, 3D rendering physics is about making pictures in a reasonable time frame, not about making perfect physics; for real physics, consider looking into engineering software.


text:
How do I make the area brighter so I can see vertices in really dark areas or angles?
I'm working on a model in blender and in certain angles, there's shadows that cover vertices and edges, making it really hard to see what I'm doing unless I go in at a really awkward angle.

Since you mentioned vertices, then I'm assuming you're talking about the viewport solid shading, right? Why don't you just use matcap shader, or change the color of the background from user preferences?

@Georges This happens regardless of what view I have, with material, textures or solids, so that's why I parented the second lamp to the camera (I'm self taught, so there's a lot of basic terms or tricks that I'm not familiar with yet) but thank you for the awesome tip :)

Nice trick, but is there a way to attach images or link .blend file so I (and other people) can understand the situation better? Also when it comes to Blender, who isn't self taught :)

@Georges I just updated the main question with a 2 part screenshot tutorial :)

I found a really handy trick for this and maybe it will help someone else out too.
First, make a duplicate of your lamp.
Then position that second lamp so it's Behind your camera, not in front (really important)
Parent the lamp to the camera by dragging and dropping the lamp onto the camera in the hierarchy.
Finally, press 0 on your keypad to go into camera mode, then press Ctrl + F to go into free camera mode and move about normally.
You'll notice now that you have much more light then before and if you have multiple viewport windows open, you can even see the camera and lamp move around together (so you can see it working, not that useful but still cool!)
When you finished all your work on your model, delete the lamp :)
Hope this helps somebody out there! :)


text:
While editing my model, my camera jumps?
So I'm editing a model and for a while now, the camera seems to "jump" to a different view whenever I click. I'm using the shift+F method for moving the camera, I'll move the view to see some vertices better to continue working and when I click the mouse to stop using the camera it jumps to a view that is really off.
For example, the area I'm working on(on the model) is the area I've circled in red and this is after I've pressed Shift+F and in free-roam camera mode(I think that's what it's called)
And this happens when I click to exit free roam camera to work on the model

So any ideas on how to fix this? I've changed the clipping distance minimum so I could get this close to edit(otherwise the vertices vanish) so please don't say to go to default, otherwise I can't do the internal work on the model.
Update: I know clicking with the right mouse button resets the initial position and no, I've been clicking with the left, not right button.
Update: The fix/answer was posted in this question:
Walk mode camera "jumps" back when stopped
In short, scroll as far in with the mouse wheel as you can, then it won't happen. That causes the camera to jump.

When you say "And this happens when I click to exit free roam camera to work on the model"... if you use the right mouse button you will come back to your initial position. Use the left one to validate your current flying position

Yes, I do click with the left mouse and I know the right one resets the position but what I'm saying is, the camera always does this regardless.

Can you reproduce that behaviour with the default file ? Or does it happen only with that one ? It would help if you upload problem file and include a link here. Either way you can use Numpad period or Shift+B shortcuts for centering view, see http://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/696/how-to-reset-the-center-of-rotation-of-the-3d-view-when-it-is-not-the-center

I cannot upload the model because it's for an upcoming game and I've had past experiences of people stealing them but from what I've seen it's just this file that's playing up.

Walk mode camera "jumps" back when stopped
The fix/answer was posted in this question: Walk mode camera "jumps" back when stopped
In short, scroll as far in with the mouse wheel as you can, then it won't happen. That causes the camera to jump.


text:
How do you cast very dark shadows?
I'm working on a space scene in blender and I've run into an issue with my shadows. In normal planet scenes, the shadows on the planet are so dark you cannot see the rest of it. With mine, even when I turn the sun lamp off or put it on 0 it's still not dark enough to hide the rest of the planet.

I checked to see if it's the settings but from the looks of it, everything seems fine, so I'm really at a loss.
I've used a UV sphere to make the space scene like in this tutorial if it helps at all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWSeBoIDJV4&t=551s
I'm starting to get the hang of blender but I'm nowhere near being a pro so please include screenshots to help explain your solutions to this problem.

Shadow is absence of light: is there any other light source other than this lamp? Is the World emitting some light? Could you show the World tab? How's your object's size compared to the size of the lamp? BTW, the "Cast shadow" option in disabled for this lamp.

You may need to change your world settings to reduce the background ambient light in your scene.

If your doing a space scene, there isn't an atmosphere to emit or bounce light. therefore make sure the world's light is set to absolute black and from there you have full control of the lights that comes from our sun or your main light source.
Tip: set the size of your sun to something between 0 - 0.05, it makes it sharper and gives the illusion of a very huge object, study the physics if you want to understand why that happens.
Till next time


text:
Why are my model's clothes collapsing in on itself?
I've just finished doing some animations for my model for my Unity game and I noticed that on the top, it sort of collapses on itself (see screenshot provided) and I'm not sure why it's doing this.

I had a look around and everyone talks about how the model's clothes clip through the body but not the clothes itself.
The top only has 1 layer, it's not a box shape but I believe I have used one of the modifiers to change the thickness of the material(I was following an online tutorial but removed the cloth simulation due to it causing more errors then it was worth but even after removing the cloth simulation, the material kept the same thickness)
If screenshots could be included with any helpful advice, it would be greatly appreciated as I still consider myself a novice when it comes to blender :)
Also please note that due to this model appearing in an upcoming game, I cannot share or upload the model, sorry.

Can you confirm that we see here the inner part of a rigged cloth which has thickness?

Please be descriptive about what the image shows (you can edit your question using the [edit] link below it) or upload a clearer image. It is difficult to tell which part of the image is clothing and which is the underlying model.

Sorry, I realise I uploaded the wrong screenshot D: It's been updated with the proper screenshot that I meant to originally use.

The simplest solution is to remove the inner faces of the clothing model, since they should never be seen when worn on a character. In game development, its in your best interest to exclude any faces of a model that will never be seen, so you don't bog down your frame rate with excess geometry.
If you absolutely must keep the inner faces of cloth on your character for whatever reason, then your issue exists in the outer vertices of the cloth having more or less influence than the inner vertices. You'll want to improve your vertex weights to accomodate the thin thickness of the cloth.


text:
Is it possible to leave an object unrendered?
This does sound strange but let me explain.
What I'm trying to do is an animation in blender that involves planets rotating and when I render the footage it looks okay except for one object, which looks better unrendered.
This object is a sphere with the hair particle effect but instead of hair strands, I've swapped them for uv spheres to make stars(I was following a tutorial) and when I rendered it, it didn't come out with the same realistic stars, just some very bland basic dots.
So this "space" sphere that acts as my background is what I want to leave unrendered while the rest is rendered.
This is the tutorial I followed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWSeBoIDJV4&t=312s&list=PLrK_z0ZJOEyGDSGgNlr0Bk37rCXFchk4I&index=81
The issue I encountered with this tutorial is when he starts using nodes which doesn't work on my version of blender and I don't know what version the instructor is using P:
Also due to copyright I can't upload any part of this model.
Update:
I just upgraded to version 2.79 and I cannot find the render cycle option in the menu, is this what you meant?

You probably forgot to switch from Blender render to Cycles.
To switch from Blender render to Cycles, simply click on the drop-down menu near the top of the screen. It's right next to the little blender logo icon. Select "Cycles" Render from the list and you should be good.
Unless you have a version older than 2.42 (which was released in July of 2006), you have nodes. It's just a matter of opening the node view and selecting the correct material.
To open the node view, divide the 3d view area into two and then switch the second view's editor type to Node Editor.

I couldn't actually find it, so I took a screenshot and added it to the main question.

By default blender is in 'Blender Render' (just on the right of Scene on your screenshot) change it to Cycles Render

You need to choose the Cycles dropdown as in the picture to enable cycles.

More details on Cycles here:
Enabling the cycles render engine
As for restricting rendering, you need to disable/restrict render for that particular object in the inspector panel as pictured below. However, this will make sure that your object itself is not seen.

Therefore, your only fix for what you want is I suppose to remove any material you have on that particular object, which will make it "unrenderered" technically because the material is what gives you its texture. You could leave the material on and remove the texture too.


text:
Nodes: How do I make a node render layer transparent?
Update: I realised I didn't have the background transparent in one of my layers but then encountered the real problem.
With the scene I'm creating that involves space, I've done some stars and planets however this is where the problem lies.
The stars are appearing over the planets like a top layer would. I've only just started using nodes recently but before this I could go into the render layers section in the default window and disable sky which would give me a transparent background but now with the nodes enables it seems I can't find this option anymore.
Does anyone know how to do this with nodes? Screenshots would be incredibly helpful as well :)
Also due to copyright I can't upload the model or any part of the file, sorry guys :(

Possible duplicate of Is it possible to render and composite certain materials before others? Without any more information this is probably the best you can get.

Make a new file with a sphere (representing a planet) and stars and share that?


text:
Why do loose parts of clothing keep stretching after rigging?
I know this may seem like a duplicate but it's not because I've gone through so many tutorials and nothing fixes this problem.
I've rigged up my character and small parts of their clothing(like high socks, long collar on the shirt, things like that) will stretch towards the center when I test the armature and I've gone to weight painting and painted the offending vertices and meshes but it still doesn't fix it and I am really, really stuck here.
I've been stuck on this problem for literal months going through well over a hundred tutorials and getting nowhere. Also I cannot upload or share the model at all due to copyright.
I really need help on this and I definitely need screenshots to help explain things. I cannot duplicate or recreate the problem because again copyright reasons.
I've tried Automatic weights, I've tried envelope weights, I've tried empty groups, I've tried armature deform, I've tried everything I have found or could think of but nothing is working to fix this major issue.

Edit: Here is a quick drawing on a template to help explain it. Any loose parts such as the higher part of boots or long collars on a shirt or long hair will cause this stretching towards the center of the model to happen, regardless of direction. It's like there's a magnet near the center of the model that these loose parts are being pulled to, no matter what I do.

It very difficult to diagnose the problem without an example. Can you perhaps create a simplified example (unrelated to your copyrighted model) that exhibits the problem? Or perhaps draw some images that make it clearer what is happening?

@RichSedman I added a rough sketch to help explain the problem.

Are the 'small parts' separate meshes to the main mesh? Are they soft body/cloth? Are they parented to the main mesh? Parented to the armature? Do they have a different scale (try 'Ctrl-A'/Apply Scale)?


text:
Line art overlapping object
I have a simple scene. This is a screen capture of the viewport:

The tea cord is over the cup line art (it is right). When render, the line art become over the cord:

Why is this happening and how can I avoid it?
This is the file for review, if needed.
Thank you.

I think that's because of the line thickness, the endpoints are rounded and since the render is zoomed out a little compared to the preview, it appears they are connected when they are not. Try lowering the line art thickness

Good point. Unfortunately, with a minimun thickness of line art, results the same.

@Gorgious: That's the first time ever i knew something better than you here :D But you are still gorgious!!!!

@Chris hehe, nice catch ! Cheers :)

check "Z" in passes-data:


text:
How to restore shader to RGB node in menu
The shader to RGB node disappeared from the menu in the main project scene.

I can create a new scene and it does appear there.

If I place the node in that new scene, I can copy and paste it into the main scene. Despite this, the node still does not appear in the menu.

This is the blender file
Thank you.
EDIT
Although this question gives also the answer to mine question, one cannot be substituted for the other. The answer is related, yes, but the question is different. If a user sees that his node has disappeared from his menu, he can find my question with the corresponding solution, he would never find the other question, since for that he would have to know that it is a problem related to the rendering engine.

This shader works in Eevee only, you are currently in Cycles.


text:
Strange behavior in rigging method
When linking a bone as a pole target, the arm twists. Then I can straighten it, but when the two bones are linked, the first thing that happens is that it becomes deformed.
Is this the normal behavior?

In the screen recording it looks clearer than in the screenshots (YouTube)

It's probably because it doesn't know how to orientate the IK bone, change the Pole Angle in the IK constraint to something like 90 or -90°:


text:
Line art modifier affects random objects
[EDIT] Someone told me a fix using masks and collection mask. I'll answer with the fix asap
I have a grease pencil object with a line art modifier that modifies a collection called "40":

The problem is that the modifier affects some objects placed OUTSIDE the "40" collection. In this screen capture I marked the black lines that should not appear:

Here it is the file for review
Is this a bug or something I'm doing wrong? Thank you.

It's the intersections from the other meshes apparently the line art modifier also considers the intersections from meshes that are outside the selected collection which is weird. If you uncheck The Intersection checkbox under the modifier, they'll go but you will also loose the intersections for your collection.

As I told you in the comment, You can uncheck Intersection but you will loose the intersections from the selected collection too (you can try it to see what I am talking about) so it may not be an option.
While playing around with your file tho, I managed to find a somewhat decent result :

As you can see the unwanted lines are gone and you still have the intersections in your collection.
You need to leave Intersection checkbox checked for the following to work.
In the modifier, you have a section called Intersection :

The little box that you see there allows you to mask the collections from the modifier. I don't really know how those work but if you tick the first box (or any of the others), the unwanted lines disappear :

But you'll also loose the intersections that you want to appear.
To bring them back, there is a section called Chaining :

If you tick the first checkbox : ,
you'll bring back the intersections while keeping the unwanted ones away :

As a disclaimer, I have to admit you that, I don't completely understand how/why it works, I just played around with the settings and kind of stumbled on this by accident so this may not work with other scenes but it seems to work well with this one.
I am not sure, either, if this behavior is a bug or if it is really what is expected to be like. Anyway I hope I helped you.

I may found an easy way out. :) You can select the object you don't want to have a line art on, and select Line art > Exclude.


text:
Texture doesn't reach all surfaces
This is a texture that am trying to color with but it doesn't looks like it reaches out all places. There are places that I can't color with.

Update
Since I got a really good comment on that said to me to use the UV Editor to Color the texture and it got working this is a not bad solution for it. I was upsetting on with the vertices thinking that the issue was within they and this is the fourth time I try to do this. again thanks n.n

What happens if you try to paint those faces in the UV Image Editor instead of the 3d viewport? Does the paint not apply there, or do you find it does recolor the pixels?  Sometimes the Occlude and Backface Culling can cause the 3d view to miss when painting - for a solid fill like this, you can try temporarily turning those off to see if the paint shows up on the faces.

thanks it did it n.n.


text:
UV Wrapping not correct - it takes the upper side, but is not the same expected result
I'm using Blender 2.76b1 for learning Blender and I'm following this tutorial for make a hammer in Blender:
Blender 2.8 Beginner Textures and Materials Tutorial
In the linked tutorial, at the 2:22 mark, the handle of the hammer is unwrapped, but, I'm not able to get the same UV unwrapping results as is shown in the video.
This is a screenshot of my progress - to me, it seems like is only unwrapping the upper side of the handle of the hammer:

I followed these steps:

In "Edit Mode", I selected (with Ctrl+A) the handle of the hammer - which is a separated object (cylinder).
In a new view, select "UV/Image Editor" , open the "wood texture image".
Back in the 3D view (with the selected cylinder), press U and select: "Unwrap".

I got the result shown in the screenshot.
First I got: "object has non uniform scale unwrap will operate" message, but, after applied what is said in this answer, the message not longer appeared, but, the UV unwrapping has the same results (shown in the screenshot above).
I don't know what I'm doing wrong. Can someone see what I'm doing wrong?
This is the .blend file:

and this is the URL of wood texture image - all textures used in the video are shown in the video description.

1 I'm using this version since my computer hasn't the recommended system requirements.

He's using 2.8, He must have used a cylinder to make his handle, by default cylinders are already correctly unwrapped in 2.8, as shown in the video, it's not the case in 2.7.
The best thing you can do I guess is to choose a front orthographic view, unwrap with the Cylinder Projection option, then select the top and bottom circles, simply unwrap. Now scale and move the UV islands the way you want.