Any vsr like / alias tools making it to rhino 6?

Breadth of the user base is another aspect which make Rhino somewhat unique, and a testament to its versatility as a tool.

From hobbyist to independent and corporate industrial designers to world class architects; all find a reason…even when the pros have other tools in the toolbox.

Now (and you knew it was coming, right) that the PITA Mac version gadflys and rendering dorks will be satiated in 6, let’s make 7 the ‘modeling’ update version…

…and we’ll take what we can get (and only bitch a little…:roll_eyes:)

The expandability is interesting, you pay just for what you need, but what happens if you end being plugin dependent? We all know what happens when a plugin starts to shine too much. I agree that the focus should be improving the modeling tools.

1 Like

I do not complain of Rhino, of its potentiality, of its cost, of its simplicity in doing many things … I complain of some development choices.
Nothing serious!

1 Like

Having been in the golf equipment industry for 36 years and a golf club designer since 1986, I can tell you…
Programs… which possess the features necessary to design and model the performance of clubheads… include Solid Works, Pro Engineer, Cattia, Rhino, Cosmos… source: How To Become A Golf Club Designer by Tom Wishon

Remember SDRC’s I-DEAS, late 80s? What a clunker that was! No chance for the pub before closing time ; )

I think 3rd. party plugins are a complete waste of time. I can’t think of any that has proven to be financially viable to stay in active development for long, they will either will be abandoned or acquired and then abandoned. Maybe they exist in other industries than industrial design, mainstream modeling. Now every time I see an interesting plugin, I fantasize a bit of how awesome would be to start using it, then I slap myself back to reality and move on.

I don’t mind the ‘rendering experiments’ development going on because they don’t seem to take much development away from core developers of Rhino/Grasshopper. I also respect that the semi-blind here find them useful, and free! (no hate mail please, I’m supporting you here)

I do wish layout would get more attention. But only if done by someone who understands layout concepts and goals. Things like multi-page flow and management are needed. Same for master pages, etc.

In general I want to see more core modeling improvements in RhIno. Better import/export, better referencing of external files (As compared to one-time imports), and a LOT better management of blocks at import, daily use and export.

Also in the SubD development I want to see some history based booleans. It makes no sense to detail shapes of clean SubD model destructibility by adding more detail and deforming the base shape. We need SubD bodies + Burn/other SubDs booleans. I think doing this work it would take a lot of pressure away from just pure advanced Nurbs development.

My usually-linked video of all what Rhino needs is still relevant:

I agree.

I disagree, this really depends on the plug-in. There are several I use all the time and have for years, notably things like RhinoCAM, RhinoTerrain etc.

–Mitch

1 Like

It depends, boltgen, math_3de, array curve plus, auxpecker, section tools, paneling tools, and many others are really great plugins.
Personally I like the system of plugins because it saves money.

We use 3rd party plug-ins. madCAM and RhinoCAM come to mind. And if my own stuff is considered “3rd party” then it accounts for about 60% of what we do as a company.

I think there is a sore spot when it comes to the plug-ins that were acquired by Autodesk then killed off. I have T-splines and VSR too, and I know they won’t make it to V6. It’s not a show-stopper for me, but I agree that there were some nice tools in VSR that hopefully will show up in Rhino one day.

Dan

Yes, that would be nice.

Philip

1 Like

It also allows Rhino to address certain areas that are not “core” such as CAM…

The chief argument is about where the “core” ends and extensions begin…

–Mitch

I dislike commercial plugins, but I like some simple, free plugins: BoltGen1.79 makes bolts. Math_3DE makes curves and surfaces from mathematical formulas. SeaHorseFoils makes cross-sections of aerodynamic foils. RhinoHair makes meshes looking like random hair pulled down by gravity. Rhinopolyhedra_1.0.15125.560 and rhinowaterman make almost infinite variety of polyhedrons (solids having flat faces). ArrayCrvPLUS and Auxpecker seem to be obsolete. I am happy with ArrayCrvOnSrf and SynchronizeRenderColors.

1 Like

Just to note that even a 3 line script can be made into a plug-in to add a command or function. So the range of what actually defines a “plug-in” and what it can do is incredibly vast.

–Mitch

1 Like

Maybe McNeel should have an agreement with would-be plug-in developpers; they get the tools needed if they agree to give the source code if acquired by Autodesk…

1 Like

I would like my work to get acquired by Autodesk. Then I could retire.:grinning:

But would you feel good about it? I mean really, deep down inside…

-Pascal

5 Likes

yup, this is what I was talking about: successful plugins might exist in the areas that we are not discussing here.

I always thought that CAM was an important part of ID - it was in the studio where I worked - and that architecture (things like RhinoTerrain) was fairly mainstream…

–Mitch

Depends how you work. For me and most designers I know it’s a lot more efficient to export a step file and let cam experts do the cam work, while I do more industrial design work. Even the same with 3D printing: if’s its a quick/small/simple part I’ll print it on my FMD. It it’s going to take long, have many supports or chance of fail I send it out and let #D printing experts deal with it. In my experience is extremely wasteful and expensive trying to do all the work yourself, unless you have nothing else to do.

G

1 Like