Hello @kalanstrauss
I’m not certain what you mean here, but the question is whether you want the finished piece to look like it has been broken up into separate pieces, or whether you want it to look like one unbroken piece when it is assembled.
If you want it to look like one unbroken piece, then it is important to create the separation as cleanly as possible. The problem with Dynamesh is that it remeshes the entire form, which may cause softening of form and loss of accuracy as one piece transitions into another.
I instead recommend the use of Live Boolean. This will be more complicated to set up, but it will produce much more precise results. It does not alter topology any place except where the cut has been performed. The basic idea is that you create a cutting mesh object to create the “cut” in the mesh, and then use different combinations of settings for “subtract” mode or “intersect” mode to create exactly the pieces that you want. These pieces will be created as separate meshes in the Tool palette, while leaving your original geometry intact so you can make adjustments. The new pieces can be re-combined in a new tool.
What I think you mean here is that you would like to minimize the appearance of seams in the finished printed piece. To do this you would like the “bark” to fit together like a couple jagged puzzle pieces with a more organic join, so there is no artificially mechanical looking slice straight through the mesh. This is possible, but for the absolute best results it will require a somewhat complicated Live Boolean process.
The tricky thing here is to think in terms of the physical reality of your printed piece, and not in terms of the artistic piece. I recommend the following:
You actually want two separate components that you will eventually recombine:
-
A hollow cylinder “bark” component. This piece needs to have enough thickness to accommodate the limitations of the printing process.
-
A simple cylindrical “core” component so the pieces can easily and predictably fit together in mechanical fashion.
The “bark” component will fit over top of the cylindrical “core” like a sleeve, and then be recombined with the core to create a single, fused print piece.
This is because it will be easier to cut through and create the “puzzle” edge for the bark if it is a hollow cylinder and you won’t have the interior fill complicating your cuts. This will require more set up, but it will leave you with a more easily controlled bark component and a mechanically precise interior component that fits together perfectly and firmly. Creating these as separate pieces then recombining them will give you more control over each.
Please see the following image:
See in the above image that I have a hollow “bark” sleeve. I’ve completely enveloped one end with a 3D volume, then sculpted the intersection so it creates crooked “puzzle” dividing line. I can then use Live Boolean to create a new piece of geometry–one with “subtraction” active, and one with “intersection” active. This results in two separate new pieces of geometry that fit together perfectly.
You can then adjust these pieces independently of the “core” cylinder, and then recombine them with Live Boolean to produce complete pieces with a mechanically precise interior portion and key slots that fit together. You may wish to slightly increase the size of the core cylinder so that it intersects with the bark and will fuse together cleanly, and you may wish to slightly decrease the size of the cubical key so that it overcomes any swelling that may be a part of the printing process and still fits cleanly into it’s slot.
