Can Rhino model any object which polygonal packages like Maya are able to create?


You didn’t that I noticed either.

You appear to be pondering a future extended intersection of nurbs surfacing, with poly or SubD, as am I; the latter likely more promising. The OP’s obtuseness, with regards to poly/nurbs, has clouded an otherwise productive debate.

I suggest that it is in everyone’s interest to encourage Rhino SubD development to focus on the classical needs of nurbs modelers, if feasible, as applied. And as an extension, poly mesh to nurbs as well.


Thanks for confirming.

What you call obtuseness however, is exactly what for me made this thread interesting: It caused many people to explain the what they consider the same thing with different words and with different experience backgrounds.

Modeller3D (not the OP btw. – I said this wrongly too) would probably profit most from asking someone who speaks better English to translate this thread to his native language.

I think that everyone who wants to benefit from Subdivision Modeling can already find many powerful tools outside of Rhino, even fantastic free ones. We’re all getting older, there’s no need to wait.

The outcome, already as meshes may serve a production geometry in a few cases (think certain areas of jewelry of footwear design) and may still be very helpful in early stages of design development for those who need greatly higher precision in production geometry.


Yup, was the spark. Something may certainly be two things at once…:slight_smile:

Spot on! Either as appropriate forms, or when paired/levered with nurbs surfaces, such has, and continues, to find its way to molds and production part.

Lines will continue to blur.

(Tom) #144

yeah, at first I was a bit confused, because I own a Swedish “moose” and this one actually looks quite nice under zebra analysis. So my first conclusion was it must be a deer than…

(Tom) #145

I believe SubD’s made from Polygons are totally okay for concept. At least in my field of work you cannot keep one single surface from t-spline based concept drawings. So it doesn’t matter if you start from poly’s or bad nurbs patches. That doesn’t mean that Sub-D Nurbs are unnecessary. I personally favour the development of further Nurbs tools, rather then focusing on new technology. But I do understand that Rhino has a wide range of very different clients, so that it makes sense to implement Sub-D-Nurbs to offer features for those who need them.


Yes, I need the opinion of professionals. Features of NURBS, practice, I want to understand NURBS modeling. And now I understand :slightly_smiling_face:


That’s my whole point for years…

(Gustavo Fontana) #148

Just no one please tell this well known trues to the folks designing an dmodeling cars in NX, because you know, they are using ‘Cage Polyline Geometry’ in NX Realize Shape. Not SubDs… :wink:


Both - enhance nurbs tools, subD, mesh, please. Make v7 ‘the’ modeling enhancement focused update, IMHO.

Back to roots.

Concept modeling, correct …typically too loose and fast of a process to flow downstream. (Read - it’s likely @#$&*-up somewhere) Rebuild as nurbs.

And production car skins aside (I would not attempt to compete or debate against your frontline practical experience with that) carefully, skillfully crafted tspline derived parts are a production reality where useful/appropriate to pursue.

Done right, and applied appropriately, when looking at parts from the textured mold, you’d be hard pressed to tell if such was from a pure nurbs workflow, or one involving F360 tsplines. Done right is the key. However, in our case at least, there are typically always nurbs surface elements involved somewhere in the creation process.


And the work is cool (concept):

PS The system is similar to the SubD (in the screenshots).


I support! Then it will be possible to build more complex models (without a significant loss of time). :slightly_smiling_face:

(Tom) #152

very bad philosophy. A lot of current cad development is focused on speed modelling. Just some practical thoughts: You don’t really want to speed up modelling, because it creates the illusion of faster product development. Efficiency is good and fast sketching as well, but in the end you need the same time until something is ready to produce. Usually it just means a.) you do more variations in the same time or b.) you get smaller budget for concepting or c.) they want you to do it in less time, which again means less money or at least more stress. I went to a similar process with cad automation, and it has a bitter taste.


Visualisation. Not designing to dimensional and engineering constraints and then to toolmaking for production.


That’s a very good point.

Quantity over quality. I see it from interns or young professionals that can’t be kept very long for a proper design department position, because for them it is mostly about fast can-do-ism, floods of “kewl” Instagram pictures, meaningless trickery and soon forgotten.

Seeing the barrage of squishy shapes in portfolios, products that cannot be injection moulded in plastic or pressed in metal very much remind me of the days when Macromedia Freehand and Adobe Illustrator were new and everyone and their dog did swirly type along a path and other eye-cancer inducing quick tricks.


Some details are easily made in SubD, and something in NURBS. If you combine systems - modeling will be faster and better. Am I mistaken?


The keyword is some…sometimes…


Hi Hifred
Do you have perhaps an updated version [that you would be ok to share] of the GoRhino script you offered in this thread [from 2015] []
Here on ZBrush 2018 and Mac rhino the plugin will not load into the tool pallet.

Quote here are your instructions and the script from that time

with thanks


Hi Akash,
wow, I can’t even remember having shared this one…

Thus far I have not yet set this up myself for the Zbrush 2018 version but I can not imagine that something mayor broke, if it previously ran on your Mac. This whole thing is very silly.

I can have a look over the weekend (but I only have Windows here and can’t say in what form the App folders on Mac do differ). If this is urgent you should get quick help in the Pixologic Scripting forum: All you need is a Script which imports and saves an .obj with a defined name and path + a button. Let’s go on talking via PM as this is off topic here.


It is right! :slightly_smiling_face: And then the topic goes bad.


No. Polygonal modelling, in industrial design for 1st and 2nd tier companies, is useful in the initial stage of a project. NURBS surface and solid modelling in the following stages.