I’m afraid that it would take a huge amount of GB and video editing to make such a timelapse video. 
Also, keep in mind that I usually modify almost all surfaces after their creation, so the process is very slow. I don’t rely on Rhino’s automatic surfacing tools such like “Blend surface”, “Sweep 2 rails” etc. Modeling a car body takes a lot of hours to me. Some other people may be considerably faster, but everyone has their own workflow depending on the modeling technique. It’s always a balance between speed and quality.
1 Like
I’m not allowed to do that. It was made for a customer. 
Also, keep in mind that I usually modify almost all surfaces after their creation,
Modifying surfaces without introducing distortion is also a black art. Can you describe what you mean by that. modify how? with what tools?
I mostly use “Rebuild surface” and “Rebuild surface UV”. “Add knot”, “Remove knot”, “Remove a control point” and “Insert a control point” are also handy in certain situations.
Another way to modify the surface structure is by using certain settings in the “Match surface” panel that will alter the number of control points based on a set tolerance. For example, if the scene tolerance is 0,01 mm, most of the time “Match surface” with the “Refine match” option set to “Distance: 0,02 mm” gives tight enough result that could be joined within the scene tolerance, without adding way to many control points. Using the native tolerance for “Refine match” often adds an excessive amount of control points that are basically not necessary but make the model heavier. Seems like Rhino aims at making the surfaces mathematically accurate at the cost of added control points that sometimes may produce wavy areas, whereas Alias prefers to keep them visually pleasing, smooth and simple.
In areas where I notice that a blend surface needs too many control points to properly fit to a split surface edge, I use the “Match surface” with its “CurveNearSurface” option accessible via the command panel, because it lets me match the surface on the target surface, without taking into account the split edge that inevitably requires multiple times higher number of control points. Many Rhino users don’t even know about the existence of the “CurveNearSurface” option, because it’s somewhat “hidden” there and the name suggest that it requires a curve to be used as an input. In fact, pressing Enter before selecting the target surface skips the curve selection step and allows you to directly match the edited surface to the former.
“Refit surface to tolerance” is the command that I rarely use, because “Rebuild surface” gives me a better control.
11 Likes
Wow. Thanks for that. Very informative
1 Like
TRANSLATION INTO RHINO-SPEAK:
Rebuild surface = Rebuild command
Rebuild surface UV = RebuildUV command
Add knot = InsertKnot command
Remove knot = RemoveKnot command
Remove a control point = RemoveControlPoint command
Insert a control point = InsertControlPoint command
You probably mean FitSrf command.
MatchSrf documentation is here: MatchSrf | Rhino 3-D modeling
It says: CurveNearSurface option… You can also press Enter to skip selecting a target curve and only select a target surface. In that case, the edge to be changed is pulled to the target surface and the pulled curve is used as the target.
2 Likes
Yes, my bad. “Insert knot” was the correct command. Not sure why I wrote “Add knot”. 
I used my memory to describe the commands as they appear in the tooltips, not the way they are activated via the command line.
Lets hope that the “Match surface” command will be upgraded for Rhino 7 to include the following:
-
Ability to match a surface on two or more adjacent target surfaces with the “CurveNearSurface” option (currently possible only on trimmed or untrimmed surface edges).
-
Ability to choose a direction for the pulling to a surface with the “CurveNearSurface” option (it’s extremely useful in Alias, as shown at 10:57 in the video below).
Trying out Rhino for the 2nd time and not good hearing this negative stuff about Rhino3D surfacing along with a YouTube video that compares 3DS Max vs. Rhino3D vs. MAYA vs. etc. But, what I want to say here is about how you cannot tell me that a flat circle in Rhino cannot get a surface put within it! …U got to b kiddin’ me LOL! At least a fill in that is flat must be possible! But, so far as the hobbyist I am I’m finding FromZ Pro v9 to be a bit better than Rhino3D since it has no errors and each tool has a right click help thing to it. Rhino3D has more plug-ins and extras so it is a powerhouse compared to FormZ Pro… so something to consider. For someone like yourself who wants fast, easy automotive design work done but without much learning, then FormZ Pro might be best for you: www.formz.com
You can use the “! _PlanarSrf” command to fill closed planar (flat) curves or connected polylines.
What do you mean by “it has no errors”? What kind of errors does it not have that Rhino has?
From the Rhino User’s Guide: Rhino User's Guide
Get help any time
The Rhino Help file is the major resource for detailed information on specific commands.
To get help on a specific command
-
To get Help for a command, press F1 while the command is running.The Help window appears with the specific command topic visible.
-
On the Help menu, click Command Help .The Rhino Help will display in a dockable panel.Click Auto-Update to dynamically display the Help topic for the current command.
-
Find the answers to frequently asked questions at: Rhino Support.
A very common mistake new users of any software make is to assume it works just like some other software they are familiar with.
4 Likes
Rhino has an error with something where you have to redraw the screen by a command listed on the bottom of the ‘features’ webpage for Rhino 6… very specific to edges or corners or something like that… I forget how it was worded now… but not to mention how Rhino v5 had “100’s of bugs” according to that same webpage on Rhinos website… even prior versions of FormZ never had that many errors/bugs in it from what I have heard.
cool story
7 Likes
So this error is something you read about about but have not experienced yourself?
Perhaps McNeel is more open about their list of “bugs” than some other software developers. They certainly are more tolerant of criticism on their forum than some others.
1 Like
_Weld?
I do not think so look Unity for example or open source software. Some bug reports are private and lost in time.
yes, probably… and yes, I agree that McNeel is more open/honest about past bugs compared to most other CAD software companies… and yes, I have not experienced this bug myself (but it sounds like I would have to do extra work with certain modeling just to make it look good with the use of another command)
There was a reason I said “some”.
Any idea how open Autodesk is with bug reports and similar?
All software has bugs. For example Alias boolean has the same bugs still there also in Maya. If you fix a bug you must be careful not to make new bugs. Bug fixing is complex.
1 Like
Rhino’s developer, McNeal, is very, very transparent about any bugs. On top of that, they are user-friendly and kindly take criticism and suggestions for future improvements or added new functionality. I have never seen any other software company to offer such an incredible direct support. They even write custom scripts requested by individual users! The Rhino community is also very friendly and helpful, as you can see by reading this forum.
9 Likes
Overall is a very good product. But needs more developers for bug fixing! Bug fixing in Rhino takes years in some cases. The user must report it and push for fixing.