Isoparametric aesthectics

This issue is arguably petty, but I’m going to put it out there.

As you can see in the shot, the number of isocurves generated gets a bit dense. If I extract the surface I can rebuild it to a cleaner and lighter surface, but then it will no longer join the bordering surfaces. The orginal surfaces were created with clean minmimal control point curves but there’s still a generation of excessive isoparas IMHO.

I was able to make the inside a bit lighter, but the exterior is a nuisance.

Pedestal.3dm (2.0 MB)

Is there a modeling approach in Rhino that eliminates the need to be constantly rebuilding components to minimize control points and all the artifacts that come with it?


If you’re rebuilding multiple times it now makes sense why your models are always a little bit out of whack and difficult to control. I’m pretty sure isocurves, knots and control points are all different things and those terms aren’t interchangeable. Perhaps someone can chime in with a reference on what each of those items are. I do know that constantly rebuilding is certainly not going to help you when it comes to keeping things balanced and lightweight. You’re going in the wrong direction if you’re doing that and many times will be left with a needlessly complicated and inflexible model.

I’m not rebuilding multiple times. But I do check whatever curves I’m going to use to create surfaces to make sure they’re as simple as possible.

RhWin here. I find ‘removeknot’ useful in many similar situations.

If you like clean & simple surfaces you must-must-must build from simple curves.

Pedestal_PG.3dm (108.1 KB)


1 Like


Every one of those profile curves could be created using the simple one marked in red. I’m not sure how those other curves ended up that way. More points do not equal better surfaces.

Every profile cuve used was indeed produced from one original. That is every one used for the exterior surfaces.

It’s after shelling that things became a mess on the inside. I extracted the very heavy surfaces created by the shelling process and rebuilt them. And even made new edge curves from the rebuilt surfaces!

I thnk points were regenerated when I blended to an unrebuilt surface. OOps.

I suppose I should have copied the curves used for the exterior and simply scaled them down to fit inside the form and blended the edges, but even with the simple curves used to make the exterior I ended up with an excess of isocurves near the ends

I think one should be able to leverage components already created to make other components, but this always seems to make a mess. There’s this aspect of Rhino that seems to generate ever more information to reach the same conclusion.

That’s what I’m trying to point out - duplicating edges or face boundries make curves that are loaded with control points and cannot be reliably used for modeling.

This is in my opinoin a significant problem - that is - the chore of constantly having to inspect every curve and surface throughout the modeling process.