Well… It kinda depends. If I were to be ordering stock to recreate the branch or even if I were making a covering for the branch. I’d have to order at least 6 inches of material to cut down.
So I think it matters most how you are intending to use it.
That’s not how it works with soft bodies though, method B represents potential useable length when pointing down. It’s only distorted because it’s pointing up. For rigid bodies, I’d agree.
Method A on account that that would be the maximum usable length
As a skilled carpenter who’s used to measuring wood, this is the only answer.
Well… It kinda depends. If I were to be ordering stock to recreate the branch or even if I were making a covering for the branch. I’d have to order at least 6 inches of material to cut down.
So I think it matters most how you are intending to use it.
Oh you’re a skilled carpenter? How much wood have you cut in your time
Half as much as they have measured, is my guess.
THIS ia getting philosophical… i mean, first of all, things don’t need to be cut perfectly in half every time they’re cut.
But then your answer is probably an estimate/approximation.
HOWEVER… when you cut one piece of wood into two, is not 100% of the wood cut into?
So either this carpenter measures 50% of his wood aimlessly, or you, sir, are a LIAR
I believe they were alluding to “measure twice, cut once”
🫠 I concede
Measure twice, cut once
That’s not how it works with soft bodies though, method B represents potential useable length when pointing down. It’s only distorted because it’s pointing up. For rigid bodies, I’d agree.
So… Non rigid?