SubD discussion


When will V6 be available? Also, will t-splines be a part of V6?


Tim Clemens
Manager of Product Development
Swimways Corp / www.swimways.com

Sorry, never.
T-Splines was bought up by Autodesk. It was never a plug-ins we owned or controlled.
Autodesk shut it down and quit selling it in early January.
T-Splines has ceased to be.

Will you provide a sculpting tool similar to the sculpting tool in fusion 360?
Anything that will help you sculpt organic shapes with points, lines, and surfaces?


Tim Clemens
Manager of Product Development
Swimways Corp / www.swimways.com

@tclemens here a link about some Sub D talks maybe that could be interesting for you John moved this to another thread in case this may be confusing. anyway here the link

i have not tried it hoping this will make its way into the mac version once it gets moved on.
i am also not sure if this will be released in the final windows version at all but this it at least a direction which could fulfill a wish of many i assume, even though i personally would enjoy seeing something going more in the direction of NURBS rather than polygons.

The SubD development will not be in V6, but it will remain in the Rhino WIP going forward until it is complete enough and mature enough for inclusion in a released version.

This discussion should move to a different topic. This is not about Decals in Mac Rhino.

Hi John,
can you do your best to make sure subD is supported as it is now?
Being able to convert a mesh to subD goes a long way!


There isn’t anything directly I can do.
What is there now will stay in the WIP.

That code has not been touched since shortly after the announcement was made back then, and will not be touched again until after V6 is released.
Then I believe the plan is to get going on that project again.

Yeah, I understand it is not up to you alone, but maybe you could help bringing up the topic (on like every meeting! :slight_smile: ). The only thing I really wish for is that you keep the current support for the SubD surfaces and let us use the SubDfromMesh command.

Rhino 6 will live for a long time before it is replaced by the next version, so having something that can save our butts is much better than having nothing, as you can see from this wip image:

The thing with WIP’s are that they are not production safe. For the same reason people shell out for Xeon processors: Stability and predictability. The way Rhino 5 is now, it is a fully reliable softare. Rhino 7 wouldn’t be production ready for many years, and not having any support for SubD by then would be really sad. So PLEASE let us mesh to sub d conversion in Rhino 6.


What did I miss? Are you guys thinking about not having this command in V6? Please don’t tell me that. I’m planning to have regular humans using this command once V6 is out. And these guys will not use wips. We need that command. Please.

That’s the idea currently, yes. The SubD ‘test’ command would only be available in the WIPs.

Just so that I understand what you are saying - are you using that command currently? I’ve just gone through all your posts that contain the word SubD and cannot really tell if you are actively using this for something. Other than conversion from SubD cages that are produced in an other application, that is. That might possibly be enough to warrant the continuation of the command in the released RH6 version - I dunno.

… and I guess that is 3 year from the point where more work is done on the SubD engine in Rhino…

Hi Wim, yes I do all my SubD modeling in Modo. Import low-poly cages as OBJs, convert in Rhino V6 wip. I’ve had a few issues of bad conversions but they are attributed to bad mesh imports (with split faces or naked edges) but running meshrepair tools fixes that.

I could convert in Modo’s SubD to Nurbs plugin but the results are very junky, unreliable, crash-prone. It’s a terrible option.

I could also convert in Tsplines in V5, or in Fusion 360. But then my success rate goes even lower. I have a much higher change of getting an error message than a successful conversion.

Those other options seem to work ok for objects of the complexity of a spoon, bar of soap or a rubber ducky. I model more complex topology. And the Rhino converter is the best option out there. I don’t mind to be always on wips, but I wish I could send cakes for conversions to non wip-users. More importantly I don’t want to go a week without a whip cycle if this command won’t be on a released V6. This is as important to me as having T-splines is to others. But in this case McNeel can do something about it.



Could the WIP test command also be a GH component that could be used in the production version of RH6?

so am I getting right that Rhino 6 won’t have those SubD options that are implemented in the wip build? HUGE disappointment. And probably it will prevent me from updating - the remaining features are way less important to me in my daily workflow.

BTW - with the current WIP is there an option to convert subd mesh to nurbs? Atm the only option I found (via _SubDFromMesh command) turns each poly face into separate patch - which is almost as bad as nurbsfrommesh command (well , haven’t checked how it handles continuity, so it might be slightly better). Power SubD to Nurbs or Tsplines handle such conversion much better - as they group polyfaces into much larger patches.

1 Like

It is possible that once V6 is out, that the future WIPs will only be available to actual buyers of V6 licenses… At least I hope so. --Mitch


Just curious - how are you using the current functionality of SubDFromMesh in your daily workflow?

@Helvetosaur : sure, I fully expect it - that’s how it works now, isn’t it?

@wim : I’ve just started using it so no definitive opinion there.
I’m mostly talking from a stance of what could sway me towards updating. In my workshop subds are used extensively. And if we would have a good subd to nurbs workflow inside of Rhino that would take Rhino’s power to another level IMO. It would made the gap between dcc apps and industrial cad substantially narrower - which I think is quite noticeable problem nowadays.
I might be missing something (haven’t chewed through complete list of the new features / enhancements), but the things in V6 are not really making me want to spend money - as so far I haven’t found ones that would boost my work. I know many will appreciate Cycles - but as I render rarely and when I do it is being done in Modo that’s not a bait for me .

The question - or better request - at hand is not if SubD functionality can be further developed and included in RH6 but if the current test command (SubDFromMesh was an hidden test command that was accidentally released to the public) should be in RH6 as-is. From your answer, I take it the current implementation in the WIP will not put you over the edge to part with money for an RH6 upgrade.

But why not to include it “as-is” and polish it in one of the updates?
Even at this point I consider this feature useful. I can bring subd mesh from dcc app to Rhino to tweak draft angle for example . Something that is very tricky in dcc apps as those do not have a proper tool / shader setup (there are workarounds , but usually they do not work in “live” viewport, usually you can see draft in the render by setting up gradient with a surface slope as an input - but it is rather cumbersome).

Because in it’s current state, it does not meet our standards for a released and supported tool.

That’s the whole point of the Work-In-Progress process; to develop and release tools that help our users get their work done. The SubD tools are an early Work In Progress, not much more than a start on proof of concept tools.

ok , I get it and apreciate it that you’re not taking the route many other software (especially game) companies have taken and you don’t release beta as a finished product.
But my point is SubDs are IMO super important addition - especially considering Autodesk killing Tsplines (which was expected despite their initial promises). NURBS are not going to be even close with their versatility when designing complex organic shapes (no matter how awesome nurbs booleans are and how well they fare when working on hard surface models).
Other CAD packages seemed to notice that as we see subd additions to those. Having to wait who-knows-how-long to get those implemented in Rhino will make it significantly less relevant, no matter how much I love it.