Hi Brian,
[quote=“BrianJ, post:20, topic:18206”]
here is of course always more we can do in any area…[/quote]
Well, none of the wishes I here brought forward indirectly falls into the creamtopping category.
Were talking about truly fundamental stuff here… Not being able to join surfaces to a solid would be a matching example transferred to surface modelling.
Well, it is not exacly difficult to find applications which are greatly more capable in UV-Unwrapping than Rhino, but that’s expected. This feature is still very young and in an experimental state at best.
What one needs to realize is:
Even the best third party Unwrapper performs just miserably on dense meshes exported from (any) Nurbs program. Their slicing tools and flattening procedures are optimized towards SubD-geometry, without exception.
Also unwrapping in a third party program inevitably means that one needs to declare a model finished before doing so. One exports a mesh out and imports a mesh back in – that sucks bigtime: Any change in the Nurbs model means that one needs to repeat from scratch the UV-process in the 3rd party program.
UV-mapping ideally could happen in early development stages of the Nurbs model already and allowed for conceptual renders. As soon as the model evolves one could adjust the existing layout, so that it grows better alongside with the Nurbs-model (that’s also why the current modal implementation of the Unwrapper is a poor choice). Of course one can work this way in any mesh modelling app.