# Transfer UV maps or Join as UVs?

I'm trying to apply textures to a 3D character that I have modelled following a tutorial where has been used blender 2.66.1,while I'm using blender 2.76. At a certain point,I see there are differences between versions. As you can see from the pictures,if I do "CTRL + L",the last item is called "Transfer UV map",while in the tutorial the same feature is called "Join as UVs". I'm not experienced but I think that since there is a difference,I have to follow another procedure than that used on the tutorial. Also because,on the tutorial the 4 claws are the same size but my model has 4 claws of different size.

I have separated (with P in edit mode) claws from the rest of the body and this is what happens when I try to transfer the UV maps of two claws :

So,what should I do at this point ? thanks.

• Do you have any modifiers associated to your claw objects that were inherited from the original mesh? You probably want to disable them and see if your geometry straitens out. Also you probably need to kill your vertex groups on your claws as well. You are in a pretty big mess, because you are manipulating the vertex indices, and you are doing this to both your claws and at least the foot mesh that it is attached to. You will probably have to rebuild them as needed. Once you have this strait, Ctrl+L will most likely work for you. – Rick Riggs Mar 16 '16 at 7:03

The operator name from "Join as UV" in 2.66 is the same as the one used in 2.76 for "Transfer UV Maps" - bpy.ops.object.join_uvs() which would indicate that the description has been changed to better describe the function that is performed while the function performed is the same, meaning you should use Transfer UV Maps in a newer version of blender to do the same thing.

In the current release it is described as

bpy.ops.object.join_uvs()
Transfer UV Maps from active to selected objects (needs matching geometry)

While back in 2.66 it was described as

bpy.ops.object.join_uvs()
Copy UV Layout to objects with matching geometry

If you also want to compare the source code you will find that the description used in 2.66 and the description used in 2.76 is the only part of the operator that has changed.