Feature Suggestion - Multiple File Export

For Developers,
I am curious if you are considering adding a feature for multiple file (including text file) export in ShapeDiver browser. This would be very usefull for companies that are using nesting cnc´s for panel processing that have panel labeling capabilities. In many systems in order to synchronise nested panels with label information nesting needs to be done in their native software and that means that each part (file) must contain both gcode and data for labels. This is essentially how any cabinet making software exports files - one file per part.

In addition with custom text file extensions like .hop .cid .cix .mpr .tcn and others (which are basically text files) it would unlock a possibility to directly send files to any proprietary nesting softwares which means that many hard furniture making companies could skip their furniture software and go almost directly to manufacturing.

Thanks in advance for your response

Exporting multiple files is on the roadmap and will probably be implemented some time this year. Just as an early poll about this feature, how many files would you typically need for the type of projects you would use ShapeDiver for?

About the text file extensions, at the moment there are no plans to add more, because it would quickly get out of control. If you are using the API to request the file export, the extension can then be changed programmatically as well without too much trouble before the file is sent to manufacturing.

I would say that up to a 1000 files should cover most of the projects involving panel processing.

Thanks for the feedback, we’ll let you know when we work on this feature.

I would like to suggest exporting in .obj file as well as pdf. Those formats are standard in many industries and applications.

1 Like

We are planning to add several formats for importing and exporting soon (see also this topic). We’ll make sure to add obj as an available export format for meshes.

We are still reviewing whether exporting pdf makes sense, and how this feature would look like. This will take more time.

I’m currently working on a project where (Vector)-PDF-Export would also be a much needed feature.
Have you come to a conclusion if you are going ahead with implementing this?
Do you know of other people who had or have this requirement and found a workaround?

1 Like

We are still exploring possibilities to export PDFs from the Grasshopper plugin. It would be relatively low effort to add support for the pdf format for vectors or bitmaps, but our concern is that this would not be very useful in general, as most of our users would like to define a full pdf template and fill it with data and/or sketches directly from Grasshopper. This version of the feature of course requires much more work.

There exist indeed many workarounds that some of our users are implementing, depending on the level of complexity. Some services like this one allow to define advanced templates and fill them using an online API. This is appropriate for generating quotes or order summaries. If the goal is only to export a single vector drawing or bitmap as pdf, there are simpler solutions, such as the Google Docs API for example, which is free.


Dear @mathieu1,
I’m a bit confused about your reply here. Is my understanding of your statements correct:

A) It would be easy for you to implement PDF-export functionality if all content on the PDF is GH-generated vectors and/or bitmaps.

B) It would require some effort for you to fill a predefined PDF-template with content or generate PDF’s with advanced content like forms, etc.

For the project we are working on we need to provide an option for the user to export fabrication plans. Just curves and text. This would fall under Category A. If A is correct, is there any chance you could implement this feature soon? I think there are a lot of people who have this same exact requirement.

Best, Simon

1 Like

We agree that this feature would make sense, however it is currently not at the top of our roadmap and I can’t give you a reasonable release date for it. If you are just exporting curves and text, I would suggest to export the files as DXF and use one of the available REST APIs online to convert dxf files to pdf. Here is an example (which is not a recommendation, since I didn’t try it… but there are many others): https://developers.convertio.co/

1 Like

I would strongly suggest setting this feature as a priority. At least just a basic pdf export.
Almost all of the people I that uses my models ( and companies that I make stuff for) ask if I can put in a pdf download button.

To which I have to answer “NO”
They ask “why not? Isn’t that a standard file format?”

I am not a web developer, and I don’t want to pay for or want to get a custom WP plug-in build.

If it is easy to do a simple pdf export. Then set it as a priority!


1 Like

Some news about this: we are working on a PDF export feature and it will be released in the near future.


Thank you for the update, Mathieu, that is very good to know!

1 Like

That is great news!

I will also add that an export basic pdf of lines, curves, text and dimensions would be very useful to us.

1 Like

Hi Mathieu! Is there a release date for the new version of the shapediver components with the export PDF function? I am developing some products where this function would be very useful.

Realistically, a couple more weeks. We are in the final testing phase.


The version 1.7 of the ShapeDiver plugin has been released, including a beta version of the PDF tools.
Download it here: https://www.food4rhino.com/app/shapediver
And watch a video tutorial about the PDF tools here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps5xR_ERZV4

1 Like

thanks! I’m testing now

@mathieu1 any updates on multiple files export? We need to export at least 1 dxf and 1 stl file at the same time.

Is this possible now? I notice in the ShapediverExportEmail component for the file type it says “Format(F) as tree”, suggesting you can add multiple file endings, but once you connect 2 file endings the component throws an error.

You mentioned in January 2019 that it would be implemented “some time this year”.

This is the error: