V6 wish: move, rotate and scale face with out changing the surroundings

Yeah, something like that. The visible (resulting) object is something like clipping frame visualisation of dynamic booleaning objects.


fwiw- it’s not (if I understand the idea correctly) necessarily a new capability. it just automates some of what is already available in rhino…

instead of manually exploding, extending, un trimming, moving, rotating, scaling, re trimming, rejoining, etcetc…

all of that would be occurring automatically …

and allows a designer to explore options more rapidly and freely.


less powerful?
have a look at this link: nx direct modeling
(not spaceclaim but siemens nx synchronous technology)

Sure, mesh fusion seems a handy tool for polygon modelers, but I think it’s save to say that modern, history free, direct modeling cad software is infinitely more complex and powerful.


Then it raises the question of where (or what objects) should be the control handles of the design attempts and transformations? The interesecting curves maybe (too complex in most cases)?
So, how one should know what is controling which shape, surface or cuts, section, boolean? Sketch based objects and history, like most of the solid modelers?

So if I create a rectangular plane, then it (in the background calculation) has to be treaten as an infinite plane.
Wow, just came into my mind that in such way a solid box could be the ‘positive intersection’ between (at least two parallel to each other) ‘negative boxes’ (like multiplication and power works in math)?! Now i think I need to go to sleep (here is 01:00 past midnight allready)

I think it is exactly what he is talking about.
The single manipulations of faces in the video I posted above seem very much like what holo isasking for.
Granted, I don’t think he is looking for the complex capabilities shown in the video (that wouldn’t be realistic given the pricing of those programs), but simply he looks for improvements when moving/rotating faces.


heh, that looks awesome.

seems like a combo of what’s being talked about here plus some great filleting capabilities.

fwiw, the meshfusion comparison wasn’t meant as a poly vs nurbs type of comparison… it’s the nondestructive live booleans I was meaning to point out and that idea could be applied to any type of modeler

Would the chamfered sides of the hole extend so that the top diameter of the hole grows larger, or would the hole extend as a cylinder? Either could be the design intent.

yes it is impressive, but it also has an impressive price tag :slight_smile:


NX is another universe (a modular program comprised of many specific programs – modules: surfacing, sketching, solider, mesher, renderer… what not). Is workflow is absolutely scientific (input data and terminology) for 50% of the command interface windows. I couldn’t catch with the NURBS part in its surface modeler so I gave up. Seemed like it always produces meshes or I do not know. It is a very crowded piece of software I even not sratched its surface.

the same thing as if you drew a cone then _Extend it… wider cone…

it’s obviously not going to guess a user’s wants to add a cylinder into the mix so if you want the shape to extrude into a cylinder, you’d have to draw it.

right… basically, any naked edge would extend until it hits something at which point, it’s trimmed to the intersection…

(and probably something like → if there isn’t an intersection available then it doesn’t extend… then another 50 or so odd rules to deal with various scenarios :wink: )

idk, it doesn’t seem impossible-- especially since we can do all the required steps ,manually, within current rhino but-

it seems like a big undertaking to get it right… all the boolean commands would (probably) be affected or reworked because of it, trimming & joining would change somewhat, the UI and some conventions would be affected, the display would have some changes, etcetc…

ie- it’s not necessarily “add this to rhino” – it’s more “change the way rhino works”… on a fundamental basis to some degree.

and if that assumption is anywhere close to correct then the question becomes “is it worth it over other areas that could be worked on using the same resources?”

In short: Yes direct modelling is what I ask for.
A good history with booleans would also be perfect, together with a historymanager, but that is not the topic here.
(And I see how that tool would work int the examples I made. But I am asking for a tool that also lets you move the bottom surface down.)

No. What I am asking for is purely “add this to Rhino”.
And when it is added, with it’s limitations and all, it can evolve into something more fundamental, when both the programmers and the users have the experience with the “light version” and if it seems to be a tool most designers need.

I made a simple script that uses Rhino tools to let me do these kinds of modifications, but it is a hack so it is not intelligent, it doesn’t know what surface edges to extend etc and since it uses “make solid” then it can return multiple solids after the edit. If I find it I’ll upload it so you can test it out.

When we see something in Rhino?
This is real solid modeling! Something has been done, a small step forward, but still not enough.
I wish that you could do in Rhino 6 modeling like in the video.


@davide76 That does look great!! When you said solid modeling, I was thinking about starting out with a cube, and extruding, booleaning, translating vertices etc. but this is much more interesting.

Would lvoe to see this / T-splines functionality back in Rhino

It would not be impossible to implement these features in Rhino!
The road was started with the command “solidpton”, it would be enough work on it.
Developers, take a look … and good luck! :slight_smile:

[quote=“Holo, post:32, topic:6823”]
In short: Yes direct modelling is what I ask for.
A good history with booleans would also be perfect, together with a historymanager, but that is not the topic here.
(And I see how that tool would work int the examples I made. But I am asking for a tool that also lets you move the bottom surface down.)[/quote]

i’m pretty sure there’s just some miscommunication going on with the terminology being used here…

because once i saw the video of ‘Direct Modeling’, in my head, i was like “oh, right- live booleans” but people are then telling me “no, i’m not talking about live booleans- i’m talking about direct modeling” :wink:

i guess it’s hard to talk about since the capabilities aren’t in rhino so i can’t just make a quick video for examples… (i could mock one in rhino using ,basically, stop motion but that’s a 1/2 day project )

there is a feature in rhino which does, on a basic level, show what i’m talking about and i assume, it’s the same thing you’re talking about (and to me, i see it as a live boolean but i’ll quit calling it that if it’s adding confusion)

that being… _ClippingPlane
draw a box, add a clipping plane, then move the plane around or rotate it…
at a basic level, that is what you’re talking about, right?

except the ‘new’ feature would be that the clipping plane isn’t just a visual plane… it would be an actual surface and it could be any shaped surface at that… with all the normal control points and, in many scenarios, it’s edges would Extend out until an intersection happens… etc.

1 Like

I think I understand what you mean.
Tools like Max and Cinema4D has had boolean as “history features” for ages, and the great thing there is that the object manager controls what is what. And you can boolean two complex parts, and edit them individually at the same time. Powerful stuff for some scenarios!

I’ll look into Modo’s tools, I saw a video once, I think you posted it, but I can’t really remember all the details. Edit: Found a link to Mesh Fusion modelling: http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/modo/plugins/meshfusion/
and that is not what I am asking for at all. But it is cool!

Sp to recap, what i am REALLY asking for is “just” an update to solid editing, but I guess that is clear :smile:

ha. I’m convinced I don’t know how to talk/explain clearly :wink:

but if you don’t see those first examples you posted as boolean operations then I don’t know what to call it.

when you rotate/move/scale the selected surface, the adjacent surfaces are constantly extending/intersecting/trimming to the position of the transformed surface…

this intersecting & trimming is what I’m referring to as boolean_ing… except, in this case, the intersecting&trimming would be happening in real time – ie live boolean.

that’s the same thing that’s going on throughout much of the NX video in the thread.

I think what it boils down to is that we would all like more integration of Rhino tools in sub-object manipulations. A lot of what you can do with sub-object selection and the gumball you could have done through previous through Rhino commands. MoveEdge, MoveFace…ect. In it’s current state sub-object manipulation is very limiting compared other Rhino tools. For instance you can’t rebuild a sub-object surface, you can modify it’s control points…

I call them trimmed surfaces. That’s what they are. Simply trimmed nurbs. How they became that, through trimming, splitting or by using any of the boolean tools, does not matter for the initial wish.

I guess the big difference is that if you move a boolean object then that entire sub-object will move, with all it’s sub surfaces, so they have to be linked together in some historical way. But moveface, rotateface etc does not need that. So that is why I am kind of sticking to my guns regarding what I call this. I wish for a surface manipulation that is free from any history.

I don’t mean to be difficult, so if I still come across as difficult then it is just because I don’t know how not to be :wink: