Real life product design examples made in Rhino

For me, Rhino is like a painter’s sketchbook.
One may argue if a painter even needs a sketchbook if his job is to paint on canvas. You can go straight to painting without sketching and trying your ideas, but it is very limiting. On the other hand, you can have amazing sketches, but most of the time you really need to go on the full-size canvas. Good luck with making canvas out of torn out pages from your sketchbook.

Also, you can find ideas from the sketchbook more open and interesting, but you are making living out of selling paintings, so you are once again in the store buying god damn paint.


I know of several boat designers for whom Rhino is their primary or only design software.

I love some people’s desire to argue with me has no limits, but it’s becoming annoying…

How many compared to the most?

Also, how much they struggle to get their work done?
How much time it takes for them to complete simple tasks compared with same tasks done in other software?
How much plugins and customizations they use?

I can bet they don’t do every single thing in Rhino.

If you wanna prove me wrong get all your facts right

1 Like

Don’t get me wrong, Rhino is my favourite CAD program since version 2. :slight_smile: But as a NURBS surfacing program there is still room for improvement. As @ivelin.peychev mentioned above, various major modeling tasks in Rhino take much more time than the competitor programs, or lack the same functionality. I already mentioned the most urgent ones that make Rhino difficult to achieve Class-A surface quality.
“Edge approximation” is extremely important, because it lets the user build much simpler adjacent surfaces with greater manual control over their shape.
Being able to examine the surface transition with static Zebra or light mines analysis is also a key feature that Rhino does not have at the moment (unless you own the VSR plug-in for Rhino 5).
Also, the X-nurbs plug-in is a great example of a proper “Patch” tool that’s far superior to Rhino’s native “Patch” command.

Another extremely important, but non-existing functionality in current Rhino versions is the ability to set user-defined limits to the surface structure (number of degree and spans in the U and V directions) while running commands such as “Match surface” (no matter if using the single edge or multi-side option), “Blend surface”, “Sweep 2 rails”, “Sweep 1 rail” and “Network surface”. And, being able to run static Zebra or Light lines during the execution of these commands. This combination alone would make Rhino very capable for Class-A surface modeling and will vastly increase its usefulness and user base. :slight_smile:


the story never ends. funny to see it progressing

Yeah… but perhaps it should continue in a different thread? I thought this thread was for linking to product examples that use Rhino, not discussions about the merits of Rhino (which does seem to follow me around, I admit). @Pascal @wim or another moderator could perhaps kindly break out the last 12 posts… perhaps oh, I don’t know… merge it into this thread or perhaps even this thread where the last “outburst” happened? :sweat_smile:


Hello Everybody, I am a newbie here though I have been using Rhino intensively for over 15 years.

I don’t know if this qualifies but the entire early development of Peugeot’s i-Cockpit interior concept was researched and designed with Rhino.

Today, all PEUGEOT cars has adopted this unique i-Cockpit interior.

Rhino was used for following reasons:

-Fast and easy manipulation of 3D geometry with precision.

-Ability to exchange and share with other engineering software.

-Perfect balance as a design tool between, engineering and styling.


Some example of early study here:


very strategically put but very important word :slight_smile:

1 Like

and, the finished products here:



I don’t think I would have any problem using Rhino for the finished product, especially for an automotive interior. It is just that, major automobile companies tend to use the established industry “standard” tools such as Autostudio and Icemsurf.
For exterior automotive surfacing, in my opinion, Rhino still needs a few extra functions to do the job 100%. -But it is still feasible.
Above early 3D dashboard, images are really 3D sketches which took just a few hours to build on Rhino.

1 Like

The sad truth is that if you look at what is coming in Version 7 in terms of continuity analysis, it is still far inferior to VSR’s approach a decade earlier. Especially in terms of user friendlyness.

If I remember correctly, a few years ago, I read that McNeel is not very interested in the “automotive” aspect in Rhino, so, at the moment, let’s forget about class A surfaces, refined Alias instruments and the like.
I think Rhino’s development is going the way towards other priorities: SubD and Grasshopper increasingly integrated into Rhino’s tools. To manage many more aspects at the same time it would take not 100, but 1000 developers, and I don’t think McNeel can do it … they do their best …

i have seen you many years theorizing about rhinos developers intentions. i really wonder if you have no other aims in your life.

A few years ago I had the luck to work in a company with Rhino 5 + VSR and I was blown away by the huge difference in surface quality that the “Edge approximation” tool allowed. Also, the static Light lines analysis was capable of revealing even very tiny wavy areas of surfaces that the regular Zebra analysis was difficult to achieve due to its nature to move the stripes relative to the camera angle.

On-topic. Car dashboard panel designed with regular Rhino 5 (no VSR):


Certainly. You too always say the same things: I express them with greater impetus, you with “delicacy”. But we speak the same language, everyone!

there is nothing great about goo-ing up the forums with repetitive philosophical non stick glue.

are you using fillet surface on these?

Guys, PLEASE keep this kind of discussions in PM’s or at least out of threads like this. It is just a bunch of noise to all of us and clutters and eventually kills topics like this. This thread is about products designed with Rhino, not imaginary theories about what the developers are up to or ranting about others comments :slight_smile:


hm, NO :smiley:

by the way, i tried anaglyph glasses on your avatar… is that supposed to work? :crazy_face:

Surface quality check is certainly one area that needs improvements. For Example, icemsurf which you can rotate environment and lights around the model in very high definition display just as you would in a real world.
To me one of major lacking tools in Rhino is ability to match a surface to multi surfaces (not on the edges but on the surfaces it self) and being able to edit and adjust it freely yet accurately. Also, I often find my self cornered when I have a patch of surface that needs to be matched on more than one edge at the same time.