Hahaha! For the record: I don’t love the idea of using Creo but we are still seriously considering it. I don’t see Autodesk getting to the level of refinement and complexity I need in a timeframe that makes sense for us. And Bob&Co are too busy with other stuff. So I might need to find something more mechanical/parametric to complement the Freeform Nurbs (Rhino) and freedom SubD (Modo) work we do.
I think stuff like this is very very useful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfBN9mobefc
Yea, baby!
It’s also a fillet beast. It will chomp almost anything you throw at it that is not completely whacked, including your Rhino STEPs, and ask for seconds.
G2 fillets? Based on distance, instead of angles?
C2 continuous chordal…
that’s also very useful. I guess what we need to test next is how well Creo handles complex SubD models imported from Modo (OBJs). Fusion360 fails miserably at this, only converts simple stuff.
Dunno
Like with Creo, you probably had your blinders on, at the time, when I suggested tools to approach that. (hint - you’ll need to pay ADSK.) But to be fair, that was Grasshopper mesh to F360. I’ve never tried Modo to F360. Your mileage may certainly vary.
Here’s another fillet (rounds) gift. User produced, 30 min - covers a lot of ground with regard to what can be achieved. Never mind that he uses flat surfaces in his demo. All your fancy-pants designer surfaces should work just the same. Mine do.
Happy Friday! Guinness time…
This was a life saver for my client-engineer, we showed him today how to take our sharp Rhino files and do some C2 magic.:
Thanks!
G
Hi guys. Is Mcneel aware of Matt Sederberg’s new tech U- Splines? Coz i emailed him asking about the possibility of creating a T- Spline - like plugin for rhino and he replied “Not at the moment but maybe in the future”. I wonder if mcneel wants to collaborate again coz i hear it’s the future of surface analysis and has big implications on structural analysis etc.
I found myself in the same situation and recently made the upgrade from V5 to V6. I figured it was risky but I still decided to make the shift. It turns out that when you upgrade your Rhino 5 version to V6, you will still have access to your Rhino 5 version. Essentially, when you upgrade to V6 you will get an additional serial number (So far my access to my old Rhino 5 version / serial has not been revoked). But to be honest, if you use T-Splines, upgrading to V6 may not be worth it. I love V6 but I have to admit I still use V5 75% of the time… just because T-Splines is awesome!
I have to say, I am also very disappointed about the SubD feature not being released in V6. I was really looking forward to using SubD and I was expecting to see it pop up later in a future service release. It seemed to work amazingly well in the WIP6 version.
Yes, no doubt about it. This T-Spline / SubD technology is slowly taking over this entire 3D modeling industry.
The SubD functionality that was available in the RH6 WIP is still available in Rhino 6. The commands are test commands and need to be typed completely - they do not auto-complete.
For an overview of the status of SubD, see the document that is linked to from this post:
Thank you so much. I did not know anything about this. This is amazing!
It’s not amazing yet. It’s early development!
Subsequent development will be added to the V7 WIP.
SubD commands in Rhino 6.8: SubDFromMesh, SubDivide, ToNurbs. Sub-object selection: hold down Ctrl+Shift and click. Shift adds objects to the selection set. Deleting control point makes a hole. Dodecahedron (mesh object made by Rhinopolyhedra plugin) is good starting point for simple SubD object. Dual Geodesic Icosahedron Patterns are good starting points for moderately complex SubD objects. Rhinopolyhedra QuickHull command is useful for making complex mesh and SubD objects.
To download documentation, click this link:
then click File, Download as, and PDF Document
Another McNeel publication with no publication date, and it pertains to a dynamic subject in a high state of rapid flux (in McNeel development time). It reads like the year-old version and so it’s tough to know whether it IS the year-old version or whether it was just updated yesterday. It would be helpful if you went through it and made it clear what is definitely included V6 and working (even though not autocompleted) and state once again that this set of commands will not be changed in V6. Then update the section on V7 WIP to reflect whatever has been done since last year. Or if nothing has been done that’s included in the WIP let us know.
Then date the publication so we will know a year from now that it’s stale.
Most of the document was written more than a year ago. Some updated early 2018, as implied by this forward looking statement*
I think that if you’d re trying to read this as a contract and as a hard commitment to deliver something specific at a given time you are setting yourself to disappointment.
McNeel team gets good stuff done, sometimes, eventually. But nothing happens fast. And my advice is always the same. Whatever works for Rhino for you today is all you have. And maybe someday something will be better.
Also you will not see any statements that SubD is included in V6. It’s unfinished, unrefined, unstable and barely useable. More importantly: unsupported. So instead of bitching that it’s a hidden eater egg, be thankful for it. It’s only there because we begged for it.
Also in 3D software nothing that happens in 1 year is stale/obsolete, in fact it’s barely getting stated.
I think SubD in Rhino will be pretty awesome but it’s going to take a few revs of getting builds, shaking our beards that they got it all wrong, do a bunch of work ourselves to explain why it’s all so wrong and eventually it will right.
So let’s enjoy the ride! I heard the fall update (imminent now) will be really awesome. If it happens 
G
I think you are reading more than I intended into what I was trying to say:
The documentation about SubD needs to be updated a little more frequently to keep pace with the development and needs to be time-stamped so we know when the DOCUMENTATION is getting stale compared to the development status.
Since the V6 status is now static, the section about it should be separated from the section on V7 WIP development status and made unambiguously clear.
I’ve been using Rhino long enough to know how long they take for development projects. I also know they don’t need any help, however well intended, in defending their reputation.
I do have an issue with McNeel’s tendency to publish documentation without dates (time-stamps) which then sits around on the web for quite a while making it difficult for readers to know the timeliness and applicability of the document. Most other companies date their documentations and revisions as standard practice. Many companies are required to do it by government regulation of their industry or ISO certification.
BTW: Here I’m using the term “documentation” to refer to EVERYTHING published about a subject, not just user manuals or help.
That’s a very good point. Yes I was reading that putting a date on document was a form of setting and demanding some timeframe and accountability. Which in software development makes little sense, especially for McNeel.
I do agree that things should be dated for context. A lot of documents, help files, etc, are very old (many years) and nothing hints that, except inside information such as having seen the same thing yourself years ago.
It’s a google doc which automatically has information about when it was created as well as last edited. I can see these dates when I look at the details section on my iPad.
I can’t see any way to show these details in Safari, although it shows the document itself.
