I expect creases to work in the current build and tested lots of complicated crease cases over the weekend. I failed to test the simple case you found, so my expectations were a bit too high for day old WIP-ware, sigh.
It appears that in the current build the Creases=Yes option works when the interior crease has 2 or more input mesh edges and fails with there is a single input mesh edge. I’ve filed bug repoirt http://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-30028 and will fix it today or tomorrow.
The “simple” input you’ve set up makes an edge with dart vertices at both ends of the edge. This turns out to require some special handling.
If you unweld adjacent edges, you’ll get a crease.
All the known bugs involving missing bits and gaps in the limit surface are fixed with source code revision 123715. If the daily build system is working well, any Rhino with a build time after 10:00AM March 31, 2015 should have all the fixes.
Enabling this only gives access to two different types of Daily builds - the Trunk (Daily) and the Service Release (Daily) - but not a Weekly. Is the Weekly release the same as the one we normally get?
And does the Service Release (Daily) apply to the Serengeti WIP?
I don’t really recommend people use daily builds. If @dalelear has a build he wants you to test, he can send it. We work to make our weekly builds reasonably stable. Between that, all bets are off. And if we miss a week, there’s a reason - something is really bad and we don’t want customers to have it.
I just found this post…
this is going to be awesome -> a real gamechanger! I played around with it for 15 minutes ( please see attached result…)and for the WIP state it is right now, it worked great… point editing works well apart from the occasional occurring “gaps” …
is it possible right now to extrude the (control) surfaces ? Or is it reglemented to control point moving at the moment?
keep on the great work!
Hi Andreas - you can sub-object select (Ctrl-Shift select) a face on the control (which is a mesh) and gumball extrude it. It helps, for now, to keep the actual subD thing locked or on a locked layer, to avoid annoying picking confusion.
Thank you very much Pascal for these extremely handy informations, just tried it for another 15 minutes and it is amazing!
Now the gumball finally really makes sense to me, and it is so nice that a lot of mesh modification procedures are already working nice along with subD editing…
I remember quite vividly some discussions about y shaped pipe junctions in the rhino group
Words can not express my joy enough. I look forward to seeing the results. I use Modo and rhino combined in my work flow currently. Being able to expand sub d into the rhino world will be fantastic. Will the sub d surfaces be translatable to other sub d modeler like Modo?
Typically yes. The catch is that the model be in quads. I build in Modo all the time, save as Rhino 4 , open in Rhino, convert to a TSpline the convert to nurbs. It works quite well. I have also started building a form in modo, exported to rhino, converted to TSpline adjusted the mesh to fit to specific items and taken it back into Modo for additional modeling. I do this because modos sub d modeler is superior to TSplines and performs much faster. At this stage, Modo and rhino compliment each other so well. For those of us in the film industry, bridging the gap between nurbs and sub d is very helpful. We often go back and forth with vfx who all work in Maya, Modo, 3d Max in ploys or sub d. Giving them a clean light weight mesh would be a big deal.
Now I’m no expert on what’s under the hood but so far I’ve made this process work.
Now as for the format, fbx is used quite a bit and seems to be the most stable. obj and collada are used a lot as well and work in most cases. I typically share my files as fbx unless other wise requested. If it’s going to Modo, rhino 4 is the file type of choice, it works great.
Thanks for the feedback. If you have some simple models in Modo, it would be helpful for me to have a screen shot of what they look like in Modo, an FBX and an OBJ export of the model from Modo. This will let me run a few simple tests. The screen shot helps me evaluate what important information Modo might not be including in the FBX or OBJ file.
I’m also interested to know if you export FBX / OBJ from Modo and the read the file back into Modo, does all the information you care about persist? The answer to this question will help me evaluate what we can hope for in supporting Rhino 6 SubD object to Modo transfers.
If you are comfortable sharing some simple models, you can email the files directly to me at dalelear@mcneel.com or post them here if public visibility is not an issue. Anything you email directly to me will be kept on my computer and not be shared in any way. I will not put any shared files in our bug reporting system without your prior consent.
We do have ways in Rhino 6 to deal with polygons having any number of sides, as long as this information is in the FBX or OBJ file. I am particularly interested in understanding issues involved with preserving crease/dart/edge modification information. If possible, please include a model with creases or other edge modifications you commonly use.
Thank you for taking the time to test SubDFromMesh and help us understand what we need to do to deliver something useful.