share it
make sure you have inflate vertices on, then offset backwards to get back to your intended surface.
like @theoutside mentioned you just need to toggle the Inflate Vertices option since you aren’t “really” working with a valid mesh, you’re working with fragmented pieces of meshes. When Inflate is enabled the vertices of the input fragments will be used, when its not enabled then shrinkwrap is going to try to stretch around those fragments and obviously things will be too thin with too many open gaps and you’ll get what you had in your example.
It’s also a name that’s wasted on a Backup Service sadly.
+2 for Rhinocommon implementation. This is a gamechanger!
Fantastic! Incredibly powerful in combination with QuadMesh. Really looking forward to play with this in GH / RhinoCommon!
This looks great. but could it be possible to have something like a boundary to it? that would improve it greatly. I need watertight terrain models from messy inputs all the time, but I never want or need a surface on the bottom half of the model. for road and similar projects where you make a dtm from many inputs that are of varying quality
Do you have an example 3dm that describes your suggestion?
I just made one that shows what I mean. the goal is a dtm for road planners for example, and I get a mess of inputs. for it to work, the mesh needs to be one sided, like the blue one is, but with the other bits wrapped together with it. A workaround I think would work is to just add a massive box under it, so it’s easy to split it afterwards, but it would be a lot better if it worked like that from the start. I know a lot of people in the “civil” world would love a function like this
example.3dm (3.1 MB)
Edit: if possible, it would also be very good to have it keep the original vertices where possible, as some of them come from drilling to find bedrock for example, and then it’s vital that the vertices that are based on that stays the same. Geologists are very picky about stuff like that 
Dendro, is that you?
Hallelujah!! This is what I need! Thank you Rhino developers!
I work a lot with mesh data and sometimes the mesh is just bad; instead of trying to fix the mesh, shrinkwrap is usually the faster and better option.
I just tested it on a mesh in which I had a lot of duplicates that I struggled to remove and it worked like a charm. Now I have one decent mesh. Thanks a million!
Can you also put it in Grasshopper please?!
You’re the best!
I’m not certain that shrink wrap is the right tool for this task for the simple fact that shrink wrap will always result in a closed mesh vs any form of mesh plane. It seems like some form of mesh drape with boundaries and internal hole filling would be more suited for the task. Certainly something we can keep in mind as we tackle some of these more complicated remeshing tasks.
some kind of mesh drape like that sounds great.
Hi,
first - thank you for interesting new tool. Looks very promising. 
My first test object is a seat cushion of a train seat. I don’t want to increase the size, but without an offset I don’t get a closed object. Could be nice, if the scattered look could be avoided.
Here I used an offset, the surface is closed but the size is much to large. I expected a result where the whole object looks like in a shrink wrap foil. I miss to define a hole size which makes inner holes closed.
I expected a result which looks like if I would take a kitchen foil and wrap around. A single surface option could be nice so that it looks like known from QuadRemesh.
Hi @Micha
One way you can use now to fill in openings without making the object larger is to shrinkwrap once with a large positive offset, then shrinkwrap that result with a negative offset of the same magnitude
(like the process described here How to smooth a curve but preserve area? - #2 by DanielPiker)
What type of offset? Negative offset in the Shrinkwrap dialogue box? Or just a typical mesh offset?
Shrinkwrap with offset r, then shrinkwrap the result of that with offset -r (in the shrinkwrap dialog box)
This gives you a solid like you’d get if you tried to mill the shape with a spherical bit of radius r.
More volume style tools are on the roadmap.
Please try the new mesh booleans in v8 and report any issues you have here.