he he he, yeah I kind of mean it that making boxes with radial blends is silly, but I’m also mostly being very sarcastic. Fillets should work. and by work I mean we should be able to fillet, change radius, unfillet.
2 Likes
This is with Moi3D. Some fine Portland-based artisanally-crafted filletology. Enjoy!
4 Likes
That right there is a perfect example of what I would hope that Rhino can do. The interface is nicely laid out (but could be better even) - it’s doing NURBS (not solid) filleting on that. It interactive. And, it seems to work!
Yeah, that is the least I would expect too. We are 20 years into Nurbs modelling already, so no excuses are good excuses for failing at this point IMO. (Even though I fully understand the complexity of coding and handling stuff like that, glad it’s not my job 
)
If I were to dictate Rhino’s top 6 focus points for the future it would be (in random order):
1: Simplified surface tools (UI that merges loft, sweeps, patches, blends etc with continuity for all, live previews as default and ability to add and remove input from selection)
2: Sub-D modelling with box/smooth modelling toggle (allways have the ability to work in box mode) and good edge sharpness controll.
3: Fix Surface tools that needs to work and add warning on everything that goes wrong.
4: Fix make2D
5: Handle complex files and nested blocks fast in all displaymodes, at least on nVidia hardware.
6: Visual historytree with gui to alter all inputdata (mirrorplane, copy distance, extrusion length, fillet edge, ability to alter extrusion profile, all data that history already needs to know for it to work)
Personally, for me, there is a line between what I think Rhino should develop for the platform itself, and what is best served by a 3rd party vendor. I don’t think that sub-d modeling is core to Rhino, for me that’s something that truly is best served by other vendors. Just my two cents, but that’s where I would come down on that.
-Sky
I fully respect that point of view, and shared it until T-splines was bought up. It is such a powerful way to model and represents a fast way to sketch up and model complex organic shapes. To me it makes a lot of sense in a competitive market. When Rhino came out it was power tools, available on normal computers for a budget price, now that gap is closed by most competitors and even surpassed by some, and SubD is evolving in V6, so I wish they go the full length on the UI so it becomes a great tool.
Edit: That said, I am not actually talking about Sub-D as in meshes, but as in a way to model Nurbs, like T-splines, Clayoo and PowerSurface for Solid Works. If we have to rely on 3rd party then cross working on mac and pc can be a problem.
When I read this the first thing I thought of was yes McNeel please give me Sub D and take my money. I am relatively new to Rhino and after 3 years I now try to work in SubD as much as I can simply to avoid filleting in Rhino.
That said my level of knowledge in Rhino is quite low and I work on jewellery that in general does not need the level of accuracy that I am guessing many others do.
OK then, you’re now redeemed in my mind.
Sure, super big fillets are generally goofy, unless one is putting a ball round on the end of some .5" wire rod form or something. (did that today)
I was imaging a cluster !@#$ where, on an injected ribbed part, you needed .02" fillets around all the ribs for flow, and your guys are banging away doing it with blends because the boss…
…and if the fillets don’t work, you’re bonked.
http://discourse.mcneel.com/t/filletedge-edit/28269
Huh…have we been preaching to the choir? (regarding future fillet edits at least)
A few points to make:
-
Even as a former (and sometimes current) T-Splines user, I still see the amount of people who want to use sub-d modeling in Rhino as a very small fraction of the user base. I think that to develop these tools to the level that they are in T-Splines (which, although going to the dark side still exists as a Rhino plugin) And Clayoo would take McNeel a long time and a lot of resources. Also - Considering that T-Splines is still being sold to Rhino users by Autodesk, and that Clayoo is still an active product, there are TWO options on the market right now for Rhino users. I’m guessing that from McNeel’s perspective, it would be a huge investment to create Rhino native sub-d functionality, and what exactly would be the ROI on that?
-
If I could do all my work in sub-d’s, I just wouldn’t use Rhino, I’d use a sub-d package - probably modo. Really, Rhino could spend all of their resources on developing sub-d, and it would never come close to what modo is in that sphere, which is totally understandable. I tell people all the time - unless you have customers who NEED NURBS surfaces, don’t bother with NURBS surfaces! Really, for all the reasons outlined here, why would you work in NURBS unless you have to? This is not specific to Rhino in the slightest - If you wanted to do say character development, I would say use something like zbrush. It’s all about having the right tool for the job. NURBS isn’t always the best tool, regardless of platform.
Again, all of this comes down to opinion, and I totally get that not everyone is going to agree with me. But at some point you have to draw the line between core Rhino functionality and niche plugin technology. For me - sub-d is on the 3rd party plugin side of that line.
-Sky
1 Like
How many people would by happy now if t-splines were apart of mcneel’s Rhino? How many people would by happy if VSR were apart of Mcneel’s Rhino ? You have to pay for inovation . Break-through’s don’t come around that often.
I have used Rhino since V4 , so not so long . I watched an Alias cross fillet video . It took an hour to do it and it took a lot of doing and un- doing. Maybe complex filleting is just plane hard .
Last thought. I like to route for the underdog . That is why I like Rhino. It is private owned and am sure they are all hard working. The people who answer questions all day are very kind and considerate . FWIW
I think Sky in right on, and this is probably not that different that how the folks at McNeel see it.
I think that (after many years of using SubDs and seeing how other designers never catch-on with in) slapping around a cube to make a model of something you have either in your mind, Ina sketch next to you, or as a reference to reverse engineer is stupidly unintuitive.
I see the conversion of topology types between nurbs<>subD as a way to drive complex geometry results to inputs that modelers, designers, students are familiar with. In other words you so the same curves-based surface modeling and same primitives-based solid modeling but when needed (like the fillet example that started this drama) you have SubDs to come to a lean, watertight and infinitely smooth solution.
If 800-2000 nerds around the world want to do the cube-extrude-select dance to design stuff they can always pick from the existing collection of broken toys and market failures.
You are talking about two very different products.
T-splines is a joke: slow like molasses, crashed constantly (a fix was alway coming in the next version, always), really poorly designed and limited toolset and it never worked in something more complex that a rubber ducky or a tweak on a car gender or something. A full car? A detail human head? No chance in hell. Trust me I wanted it to work, it just never delivered.
VSR had some really nice nerd tools for surfacing, but adding a ton of complexity to the interface that does not make a lot of sense to probably 99% or Rhino users. And again that type of complexity is much much better resolved with an underlying robust, responsive, stable (really well thought out and well coded) SubD engine.
Yeah you have to pay for innovation, and I’m pretty sure Bob pays people quite well and it has some really talented bunch. To the point that they see either mediocre or behind its time technologies and they pass on it. Unlike ASDK that has to show Wall Street that “they pay for innovation” and they still have to clue how to ship a decent product.
So I think things in Rhinolamd are not so bad folks, I’m mostly excited to see a cleaned up interface as Holo mentioned. And I’d love to see a lot more things that make documentation, exploration, collaboration much much easier and fun to do. Also a better integration of GH and Rhino vieports would be nice (example: I want the goddam slider on the surface that it’s affecting, on th viewport, no is a rat’s nest of wires)
Hahaha! No I was thinking more for concept work and A-surface of cosmetic parts. B-side of parts: whatever does the job. I personally for my jobs (only prototyping, I don’t ship anything) I model with no fillets in concave parts/cavities and tell the modelmakers what tool aloud to run on the part to get the fillet. For convex edges I tell them to break the edges with sanding. I’m lazy, I know.
heh… if you’re going to show Moi videos, show how to draw lines etc in Z… that’s the goods 
re: this particular filleting thing… it will probably be fixed now that the model & example failure has been shown, right?
idk, it could be a case of it looking simple to humans but difficult to the computer? there are probably some opposite instances of that too… things that look crazy to us are easy for the computer.
or- is the idea/conversation here more about whether or not the underlying logic is flawed? that if some new algorithm were created, it would handle more situations properly with less reliance on a coder tracking down a whole bunch of situational failures and dealing with the problems individually?
ok, a slight amendment to that statement.
if rhino opened by default to Perspective viewport then it would feel not cluttered at all…
4 viewports? a little bit cluttery ; )
(that said, on windows, you can probably set it to always open in a desired single viewport… right? can’t do that on mac right now)
Yep, mine always opens in a single and I have macros set up to toggle the view. I rarely work with more than one viewport open.
1 Like
one approach to the workaround:
hmm.. i don’t know about that.. i’ve seen it.
they sit in a room, brew good coffee, draw things on dry erase boards, have an array of tasty snacks available, skype their buddies, model stuff in rhino, eat lunch at cool little cafes, then go hang out at the snowboard company down the street.
; )
@jeff_hammond
I think what your workaround shows best and foremost, is that it is really silly that rhino can’t do it on its own
Norbert
2 Likes
The example of how Moi3d is treating this kind of filleting situation is so much more damning to Rhino than any funky NX or solidworks or whatever video.
Norbert
1 Like
We can say that Moi3d, at least for fillet and Boolean operations, is better than Rhino?
Rhino: Move it!