We just added a new QuadRemesh technology to the Rhino 7 WIP. Along with the SubD to NURBS capability Rhino may be able to reverse engineer these shapes:
So, here is a intake scan ready to go to SubD and then to NURBS:
There is additional work that might be needed. Give it a try:
3 Likes
The sub-D stuff I’m seeing lately in V7 is amazing!
A long time ago, I delt with similar challenges, and for Rhino3d I can tell you this might be still the best economical option aside from more powerful options: RESURF - RhinoResurf, unfold mesh, mesh to NURBS, point cloud to NURBS surface, mesh to solid
3D printing, scanning, reverse engineering, etc. , becoming more mainstream these years – I just wish ppl would hurry it up a bit.
We find https://mesh2surface.com/ to be very good at this. It doesn’t come up often, but when it does, this is the tool we use.
Dan
1 Like
Maybe true, but I don’t have $1500 laying around just to add-on more software, for the sake of one tool, so I can compare geometry that Rhino should be more than able to calculate already, but noooo Rhino still falls short.
yay evolution.
1 Like
The reality is tools are costly when you start getting into specific functionality.
$1500 for a reverse engineering tool is modest, DesignX is roughly $10000 or more for an industry standard tool.
Rhino offers a lot of functionality for the price and it only fair to the general user base that they have not added significant development costs for features that most people won’t use.
Why should the average user have to pay for a feature they will never use?
2 Likes
There’s many features I don’t use. That doesn’t mean I’m paying for them. I’ve been using Rhino since version 2, 3, but mostly 4 and 5 and some 6.
I’ve been around long enough to know that Rhino has pretty much always been the same price around $1k or less in most cases.
I guess that explains why version 6 took many years too long, and 7 is finally what 6 should have been.
Maybe we should all be paying more so we can get more.
Or, maybe it’s not about that at all. Maybe in order to keep up with the waves of evolution, Rhino should continue developing features in order to compete well in the industry all together.
The reality is I’m very well versed in all the reverse engineering tools the industries have to offer. This isn’t about whether I can move forward, but this is about whether I can do an analysis with Rhino that it should be able to handle, so that my workflow can flow well with Rhino.
Sure, I can use RapidWorks or some other standalone package, or even find a plugin to invest in. But, Pascal has a script, broken script, but still there is a script.
So, maybe someday when he has time to take a look at the broken script then maybe he can fix it, and let me know. That would be great 
I see now 3dsytems bought out almost everything, great that should end well for all us users.
I wonder when Rhino will be bought out.
2 Likes
The Point Deviation is not intended to be used to compare an entire mesh (scan) to a nurbs surface. Its called point deviation for a reason.
You must be the all mighty creator of ‘point deviation’ and so you may hereby declare what it’s intended for and not intended for?
What’s ‘an entire mesh (scan)’ to you? 1 point, 1k, 100k, 2M, 5M? Closed? Open? Manifold? yada yada?
It’s called point deviation for a reason? You mean like to analyze point deviation from a particular 3D entity to another?
K so, here lemme upload the geometry from another thread to here, and we can all see if yall can find a solution to the matter?
Cause ultimately this isn’t about the particulars of this plugin or that plugin or this terminology or that terminology, or who can do what with what other software.
This is about, hey can’t Rhino extract a color contrast analysis from one 3D entity comparison to another? Or no? I mean it is the 21st century, right? And version 7 is supposed to be amazing right?
How long did version 7 take to build? Can it contrast the variance between 3D shapes or no?
srf_deviation_err_sample.3dm (2.6 MB)
Polyworks or Control or even CloudCompare will do what you want
Whether Rhino should offer comparable functionality is entirely your opinion.
I’m sure you’ll agree that there’s a range of different 3D softwares for a reason. There are areas of focus that some do that others don’t and vice versa. So “you” can be this way about something that you specifically want OR you can choose to get the tools that actually offer the functionality today that you need. Better yet you can write some code and create the functionality that you say you need. But pointing at Rhino’s developers as to the reason that you’re being prevented from achieving the goals seems a bit disingenuous. When working on different aspects of a software there is only but so much time that can be spent doing “everything” and the amount of clients that may need this level of functionality that you’re looking for may actually not be the best time to coding ratio at the moment especially considering that there are softwares than can do it.
Take for instance…I’d LOVE it if Rhino could have dynamics in it (particles, fluids, fire, smoke…etc) but that’s not gonna happen so then I’ll use Blender or some other software to do that side of things from a model that’s been exported from Rhino into Blender. Holding on to only a table saw when there are times when a drill press is needed doesn’t make the table saw any less useful.
Just some 2cents
You continue to miss my point and disregard my opinions with your own opinions.
Wonderful paradox you’re manifesting here.
Of all the software the world has to offer, I wouldn’t use either of the ones you’ve mentioned.
But that’s just my opinion – in case your opiondar didn’t alert you.
As I’ve stated before, I am well versed in RE. I’ve used RE software for almost 15 yrs.
You keep changing the subject with nonsense.
The focus should be, can Rhino be made to compare 3D geometries or not? If not, then what can be done to make it so?
Other software is irrelevant. Especially to bs ones you’ve mentioned.
The only other software I’d use for this had been acquired by 3Dsystems – that’s what I’d use – in my fracking opinion k bruh?
yeah this is usually the most common argument in matters such as this.
I used to raise hell about the crappy 3D space navigation functionality over 10 yrs ago, and got some similar nonsense response.
over 10 yrs later, the 3D space navigation is still crap, and no one listens.
But oh how wonderful it is for all the other features they’ve added, weeee sub-D’s but still can’t navigate proper 3D camera constraints cause no one listens.
ppl just want to have safe spaces and whine about disingenuous sensational virtuism.
I will 100% agree with you that Rhino’s camera navigation has always been a thorn in my side when compared to navigating other 3D apps. In fact I’d almost say that it’s way more infuriating that the camera navigation hasn’t been fixed rather than trying to get something in the software that is “extra”. But I accept it for what it is and just keep it moving.
But you’re both upset that nothing has been done and you’ve also chosen, just like you’re saying that others have done, to stay in your corner and do nothing about it. So you might want to save that high and might horse your on and bring it down a notch or two.
There’s only one option here and you don’t like the answer…tough. But if what you need to do doesn’t exist where you are then you will have to go elsewhere. Have you even looked at other packages like cloud compare or MeshLab…both are free an very capable. So now where is your excuse going to be since you don’t have to spend any $$ to buy it?
The fact that no one has responded for one month I think is a reflection on the seriousness of consideration.
speech sensoring is on their agenda.
current customers and aspiring customers look forward to that I’m sure.
The fact that people respond or not to anyone’s topic means very little, and you don’t tend to see ‘official’ responses to vitrol, after 20 years they know there’s no point.
2 Likes
And how is that not valid? The ‘to do list’ is in to 5 digits. Rhino’s a niche product within CAD in the first place, and this topic is a niche of a niche.
By which you mean “it’s not like this other software I use, which is intended for a different purpose.” I can assure you if it was changed there would be plenty of complaints.
Here I’ll attempt this again and make it PG-13 for you. Hopefully everyone can handle that level of language. If not I’ll try to make it karen compatible again later.
[quote=“arthurys, post:54, topic:24470”]
I accept it for what it is and just keep it moving
[/quote] i’ve been there done that, normalcy biased doesn’t accomplish anything.
[quote=“arthurys, post:54, topic:24470”]
stay in your corner and do nothing about it
[/quote] right cause sensoring my speech doesn’t obstruct anything hauh
[quote=“arthurys, post:54, topic:24470”]
high and might horse your on and bring it down a notch or two
[/quote] so you’re telling me to back down and submit to the cabal hauh just accept the obstruction
[quote=“arthurys, post:54, topic:24470”]
if what you need to do doesn’t exist where you are then you will have to go elsewhere
[/quote] I’ve been using CAD/CAM/CNC/RE/FEA software technology for decades. I go elsewhere all the time. You’re truly missing the point and you should get off your high horse and focus on Rhino’s potential future where we may not need to go elsewhere
[quote=“arthurys, post:54, topic:24470”]
Have you even looked at other packages like cloud compare or MeshLab…
[/quote] of course. have you not looked at anything that’s been said. You listed programs that aren’t Rhino. Therefore irrelevant. If I wanted to waste my time and energy on other software than I’d be there instead of here. Time is money. And mental capital is not infinite. I’ve dedicated over a decade of both to Rhino. Turning my back on Rhino is not in my interest. Hopefully I wont be forced to.
[quote=“arthurys, post:54, topic:24470”]
both are free an very capable. So now where is your excuse going to be since you don’t have to spend any $$ to buy it?
[/quote] Time is money. Not every CAD/CAM/CNC/RE/FEA software program in the world is worth everyone’s time or money – including mental capital.
[…] my level of expertise on the matter of reverse engineering capabilities is top notch. For anyone interested in reverse engineering I recommend only a few brands: NextEngine, Creaform, and INUS Technology. There’s others too of course.
But this is about Rhino. This isn’t about going elsewhere.
[…] and the workflows that should be possible in 2021 and going forward.
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]
[…]