Is there anything like Constraints (so-called in Maya) in Rhino? For example, I would like to tell a certain point to always snap to a given curve point in Rhino. Then, when I modify the curve, the point would automatically follow to it’s snap point. Is such a thing possible in Rhino? I’m using Rhino for MAC, but this is a general question
You could probably do that in Windows Rhino using the Grasshopper tool, but not in Mac Rhino that I can think of.
You might get close using History but if you tweaked the line with the midpoint you’re interested in too much, it would break.
So the short answer is no, not like you described.
Dividing a curve with points with history enabled seems to hold up well under quite a bit of curve transformation and editing. Works well on deg1 as well as curvy curves.
I know its not the kind of constraints David is looking for but might be useful if trying to constrain to easily divisible lengths.
Come on guys. Aren´t you buying any kind of constraint solver??? What happened to Rhinoworks or Rhinoparametrics (please don’t answer “grasshopper”, for it is no direct stuff on the geometry)
Rhinoworks and Rhinoparametrics (I think that’s right) are not and never were our plug-ins. I don’t know what the status of them is.
The closest thing we have that are our own tools, is Grasshopper.
There is nothing stopping a third-party developer from using our extensive SDK to write this “constraint solver” you describe.
They will need to decide if that is a commercially viable development effort.
Since these constraint solving tools already exist in mature form in other applications, there is less opportunity for a developer to go down that path.
Since these constraint solving tools already exist in all applications, there is less opportunity for rhino to be taken into account
That isn’t accurate.
Constraint managers are bread and butter to mechanical design solid modelers. They are less valuable to industrial design surface modelers like Rhino.
It is generally a losing strategy to develop a product or tool that already exists and is well received. The other application(s) set the standard for the tool so at best, the new development can only copy it. The application developers can do a variety of things (patent infringement lawsuits or dropping their price), to combat and likely doom the development efforts of the competitor.
Does that make any sense?
I heard talk in the distant past of bringing in Kangaroo 2’s constraint solver directly into Rhino without going through GH… Still being considered? --Mitch
“They are less valuable to industrial design surface modelers like Rhino.” (WTF?? No comments.) Even Autocad has constraints. Probably even Windows Movie Maker will have constraints next year. A better integration of Bongo could be the solution (gumball etc…)
Talking bout stacks of parameters on every geometry: RhinoParametrics, why don´t you buy the core application?
“I heard talk in the distant past…” Most of the people I know learn Rhino for Grasshopper, and Grasshopper for Kangaroo. Again , a better (and straightforward) integration of kangaroo within Rhino could be the solution. Somebody please call Daniel Piker and say hello.
One thing is complete overseen here - geometric constrains would help to get animation setups easy done. A complex mechanic animation is so difficult to setup per Bongo now. Per RhinoWorks it could be easy done. But RhinoWorks isn’t available anymore. But the geometric solver of RhinoWorks can used (licensed) for developing a Rhino plugin.
So, it would be great if the RhinoWorks or the Kangaroo constrain solver could be integrated. For animation it’s a must for industrial design surface modelers like Rhino.