T-Splines for Rhino end of life

is it possible to include at least some of T-splines capabilities in V6?

Which specific capabilities do you need?
What specific problems do they solve for you?

Please don’t read into this that we’re making any promises for V6. Any new tools would show up in the WIP builds first.
These answers will help us prioritize future development efforts.

I’ve put a lot of work in the development of the 1.0 Rhino plugin. As a really involved beta tester I’ve put hours n hours of work in testing, reporting and suggesting.

I feel cheated.


1 Like

T-Spines for Rhino ending was no surprise.

Well, why do you you think Autodesk bought it?

This was all discussed some time ago. Now the knife is being twisted in Mcneel’s back. What’s more, there’s nothing to stop it happening again and again. And again. Budding software developers visit here and can see a very willing (and free) pool of helpers for testing and developing their idea, nurture it and let it mature a little, and finally wait for Autodesk to come and harvest the fruit.

I’ll take this one:

Which specific capabilities do you need?

Advance sub-d for accurate design. Seek to develop sub-d workflow with tools to enable generation of forms with specific region parameter numerical definition.

While such can be done presently with existing sub-d tools (convert, match, snap to surface, loft) value will be added by any advance to the simplicity, speed, and effectiveness at numerically defining and controlling specific localized regions of a larger sub-d, especially if interactive with curve detail dimensional feedback/definition, rather than simple push/pull distance, etc.

Think network surf. One can define the radius of a curve to x, and the resulting surface will interpolate something very close at the curve region, if defining curves are adequate to do so.

Consider potential techniques to enable Rhino precision nurbs design when defining regions within a complex sub-d.

What specific problems do they solve for you?

As everyone knows…the problem with nurbs is the time it takes to define complex polysurfaces, and then the exorbitant time to iterate, edit, and/or make tweaks.

The problem with sub-d is efficient definition of design accurate forms - accurate defined as “this area needs to be x dim, radius, etc.”

Merge key elements of both, as best as humanly possible, to advance the art.



While T-Splines is very handy, some of the most powerful aspects would be the retopo tool, make uniform and fillet. I spend half of my time building things from scratch and the other half remodelling things, especially interpreting meshes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8M1htUP5wc <<< Very handy

I have a license for T-Splines but it still has a lot of low end functionality with unexpected problems. It’s a real shame that it’s dead in the water.

It may be prudent to just develop a really intuitive sub-d plugin without the need for T’s. To be honest, using standard sub-d skills with loops would be a great start and without the need to be fancy.

Sometimes I’ll send a complex model to Fusion 360 just to fillet it. The main thing I use Fusion 360 for is converting to mesh and filleting complex corners. I would say the number one bonus of a sub-d option would be the option to fillet setback corner and multiple edges converging!

If the first thing you guys set up was setback corner filleting you’d overhaul one of the most frustrating things about Rhino.

I write that with the knowledge that getting to that point would probably mean having a full functioning plugin, it’s not that easy but the holy grail never is :slight_smile:


1 Like

I agree with @MattE. This kind of issues are something that is making me feel bad about the software I love most, because I think that the supposed benefit of plugins with the best community of user and developer on the world is becoming an incredible disadvantage. Apparently at this time this great thing is giving others the benefits.
Like many others, I work with VSR and T-Splines (I’ve been beta tester of both) and I feel the power to deliver almost whatever I want with the control an flexibility I need.
I don’t know when this will happen again… any owner of these plugins today would think 100 times before buying plugins, on the other hand the original focus of Rhino was on modeling, and the core tools of the program didn’t evolve as much as the state of the art require during the last 20 years. Filling this gaps with plugins was great, you paid for just what you need and everybody was happy for a while, but now???
Grasshopper doesn’t look like an option for the kind of projects I do, for me it looks like an interesting thing to experiment and would appreciate if it lets others develop tools that add flexible and durable features inside Rhino.


Yep, nobody expected a giant plug-in eating ogre to come along… :scream:


That looks like the same ogre that ate my copy of Lightscape all those years ago…I’m still bitter about that…

(My point being that it’s not just plugins that are in danger, it’s complete software too. I expect Bob is constantly being followed by the Autodesk snipers…)

1 Like

indeed, Rhinoceros users can be rather generous beta testers, and these recent Rhinoceros plugin acquisitions have taken many by surprise. I actually purchased TSplines after i heard it was being acquired (currently using 3.6xx), but VSR-shape-modeling acquisition was a nasty surprise, that plugin was 1.5 times the cost of Rhinoceros 3d (though, in hind sight, one should have known).

I think that if the McNell wants to survive should change the development strategy as well as develop faster, as much as possible.
Grasshopper is interesting, but not essential, and I do not think a user chooses to purchase a license Rhino 6 principally for Grasshopper!

They serve over the SubD, good Boolean, the best performing fillet and tools surfaces more sophisticated. So that TSplines and VSR are just a memory!

McNeel, do not get eaten yourself by Autodesk! :slight_smile:

1 Like

no, Rhino 6 has lot more than grasshopper, new surfacing tools and improvements of existing surfacing tools, raytraced viewport (with cycles) is a very good improvement (though neon is also quite useful in V5), and it can use GPU, the SubD direction is good, things look much nicer in viewports… I don’t test V6 too much, but so far, pretty good, looks like a solid upgrade.

1 Like

Well, let’s see what future holds for us. So far I’ve been successful in never using an autodesk product since naval architecture school, back in the 80s. It was MicroStation then Rhino. Some Alias, but that was before they went to the dark side too.

Oh wow, after playing with the demo for a while, I was ready to buy Tsplines even though I was aware of a possible ending of it.
I’m still open to it… not sure though, if there would be a good alternative I would certainly considder that.
Yes selling for a reduced price will help me to jump on buying, I really do like Tsplines you know.

Regards, Robert


OMG! Is that the beautifully curvy body of VSR he’s devouring?..someone must stop this monster!

1 Like

Eheheheheh, wow! Goya… Autodesk eat Mcneel

Eliminate polysurfaces.

If polysurfaces are eliminated, all solids will be easy to edit.

1 Like