Hi,
I've been using replicate_path_along_path.py (v0.7 which is the current one) and finding it really good and useful. However I've just got a result with a small area of spacing I'm finding confusing while using a source path that's a rectangle half the width of the base path. If I add to the source path (in this example I added an arrow) to make it the same width as the base path I get the spacing I was expecting. I am using the following settings both times:
The length of copies 0
Number of copies 34
Tapering 0.0
Distort the copies to follow the Target path? Yes
Merge the copies? Merge all copies to one path
Use reversed version the the Target path? No
The spacing is identical except in the one place. Is this expected behaviour? Thank you.
I've been using replicate_path_along_path.py (v0.7 which is the current one) and finding it really good and useful. However I've just got a result with a small area of spacing I'm finding confusing while using a source path that's a rectangle half the width of the base path. If I add to the source path (in this example I added an arrow) to make it the same width as the base path I get the spacing I was expecting. I am using the following settings both times:
The length of copies 0
Number of copies 34
Tapering 0.0
Distort the copies to follow the Target path? Yes
Merge the copies? Merge all copies to one path
Use reversed version the the Target path? No
The spacing is identical except in the one place. Is this expected behaviour? Thank you.