Hello. I have modeled an entire Architectural 3D model and when I exported it to Twinmotion (by direct link) I chosen “Collapse By Material” on the Collapse section. Since I have separated all the material on the Rhino Model it will save me time when configuring the materials, so I think it’s the best workflow for me.
Here is my Rhino model, but when i collapse it by material into twinmotion, the objects that have multiple materials becomes only one object with one material. See the example:
What I have to do to use this collapse by material workflow?
If you use Rhino + Twinmotion how do you work between them?
I hope I get some advices here
I Just found that the collapse setting don’t matter to this. All objects with multiple materials becomes an object with only one material. This is chaotic i don’t know how to proceed. I’ll have to explode all my modeling?
I don’t use TM myself but if I understand correctly, you have a polysrf in Rhino that you have assigned sub-object materials to, correct? If that’s the case, it sounds like TM can’t understand that type of material assignment. What happens if you Explode the polysrf assigning materials to only joined areas and transfer that?
It might be back faces as Nathan said. To show me just that object, select it in Rhino and use the Export command to save it out as it’s own 3dm file. Or just use the Dir command on it yourself to see which way the normals are facing.
The only way it starts appearing is pushpulling tha surface and making it a solid.
But this way of modeling doesn’t make sense to me. In architecture, if I have a wall that is a solid, and I can have different paints on that same wall, it doesn’t make sense to me to create separate solids for the wall paints. Not to mention that it would be exhausting. I imagine there must be a smarter way to solve this.
Here’s the file if someone want to try something… PaintFaceProblem.3dm (689.3 KB)
Use the command SelBadObjects and that polysrf gets selected. Use the command ExtractBadSrf and select that polysrf to separate the problem srfs. Delete them and I bet your transfer to TM will work.
On the left side is the object of the problem. On the right is the solution I got, but I don’t like because it takes time and makes a poluted model. And more on the left is just detailing what i did.
So I dont get any Bad Object on the problem object.
Okay, I misunderstood the issue then in your shared file. My guess then what I mentioned initially which is that TM doesn’t understand sub-object materials from Rhino. Use the command RemovePerFaceColors and remove the sub-object rendering materials from the polysrf. Then test in TM again. If that works, I’d suggest asking the TM forum for how they suggest assigning materials in that case.
It appears that Twinmotion doesn’t understand NURBs (closed solid polysurface) with different materials.
When I exploded the solid polysurface closed, only the surfaces that used the default material for that polysurface continued to appear. Surfaces that had other materials are gone. And yes, they have their normals facing the camera (I even put the materials in twinmotion as two sided materials).
Considering that I created test surfaces and applied the materials and twinmotion read them, the problem is not with reading surfaces, but with Nurbs with multiple materials.
Now the question is: how do people who use twinmotion survive?
I’m using D5 right now. Twinmotion is an excellent option if you can manage to get it to work.
As far as modeling single polysurfaces with different elements, it’s something I rarely do and even more rarely if whatever I’m creating is going outside of Rhino. I try my absolutely best to have one material per object. It is a limitation of course but I work around it. I also think that you lose the ability to do custom texture mapping when you apply multiple materials. Maybe only to the second material. Or maybe I just don’t know how?
Sometimes I’ll “embed” a second object inside another one like this:
I downloaded d5 but for now I can’t afford the Subscription. D5 understood the sub-object different materials correctly, but without the pro subscription i’ll not have acess to the library and that save a lot of time. Maybe in a while I’ll be able to afford it and start using it.
Thanks for your suggestions.
I’ll try this one. Here you Copy the surface, then Gumball Extrude, then select a surface and Gumball Scale and then finally BooleanDifference?
PS: Sorry for asking easy thinks. Maybe you do it a different way than I was thinking and I like do learn different ways to model xD
I should have mentioned that I’m only using D5 because I’m paying for the subscription. Otherwise I would be all about exploring Twinmotion. The price is right (free!!) but also has some pretty amazing features rivaling the more expensive render engines.
I’ve been gusing over D5 but recently been a little let down with some of the AI features not working. If I’m paying the subscription fee and it just refuses to work that’s a little annoying; I should get money back no?
I was going to let my subscription just run out and work in Twinmotion for a while but I let it renew accidentally :-S . My fault as D5 is pretty clear about renewals and gives you plenty of warning. So anyways… I’ll use D5 one more month then maybe back to Twinmotion.
I assumed you paid the subscription. I actually think it’s very affordable compared to other prices in the industry. My case is that I recently resigned from my job and I’m trying to start a business on my own, so it’s a time of financial instability and Twinmotion is the best option here lol. But if even you are considering returning to TM, I will insist on adapting my modeling.
I’m paying but not earning any revenue from it… (well barely). So… It’s nice having Twinmotion ready and waiting.
The trees/plants in Twinmotion seem a little better. It takes me ages to get vegetation into the (trees/bushes) scene with D5 because it’s so hard to find the right trees. Twinmotion can actually age the tree from sapling to full grown. That’s pretty amazing (especially for free).
I’m setting up my drawings/templates in a way that hopefully works with both render engines. That’s the key I think: Picking a rendering engine and adjusting your workflow to cope with whatever you get when you import your models into the render engine.
Hi @Gustavo_Soares_Silva I don’t have the same problem in Twinmotion as I always make sure my Rhino model only has closed polysurfaces or extrusions, instead of open surfaces.
In my workflow for architectural/interior design, I use VisualArq with Rhino and, therefore, if I need different paint finishes on the same wall I split the wall according to the finishes. This works well in Twinmotion as it recognise the different parts of the wall (i.e. core blockwork and painted plaster on both sides) as solids, and it’s also fast since I only need to draw the walls as a line in the plan view.
I normally work in this way also with Rhino solids, since I produce my drawings directly from Rhino (I ditched AutoCAD) and therefore each element I model is detailed as it should be in a constructive manner.
Now, I understand this takes more time than the usual workflow of making 3D models for fast rendering purposes only, but it has a lot of advantages over the whole process since you don’t have to draw everything on the CAD later when you need the drawings.
It is also more accurate and helpful in troubleshooting design mistakes or limitations in due course.
Anyway, if for any particular reason you prefer to model just for the renders then I suggest you to use the offset surface command in Rhino (with “solid” and delete origin surface options to “yes”) using a very minimal offset distance (less than 1mm, check your tolerance settings allow for it).
In this way you can very quickly select your individual surfaces and turn them into very thin solids, which should solve your problem.
Let me know if that helps.
