I know this has been a long standing issue, but is there any hope that “Make2d” is going to improve in the near future. I’m using a 2003 copy of SolidWorks on a Windows XP boot to do my 2D drawings, and this is for really simple parts. Just so I’m clear, it is quicker to save from Rhino as STEP, shut down the computer and then restart and reboot into XP, and then create my 2D drawing, and then shut down, reboot to W7, import back into Rhino to keep going. It’s not that Rhino takes a long time to create a 2D drawing, it is just that the output is garbage. How can a straight line that is 30 inches long come out as 23 segments?
I have the same workflow for any but the most basic filleting operations. There have even been a few times I’ve booted into Windows 95 to use Rhino 2 to do my filleting. How can software that is at least 10 years old be outperforming the current build of Rhino???
Is there any hope this is ever going to change or should I start looking for another 3d program? I realize this sounds belligerent but once again I find myself up against a deadline and Rhino, for as much as I like it and have invested in it, is forcing me to thrash through another all-nighter. Again, apologies for my angst, but there is no way that modern software should be outdone by ancient software, and there is no way I will get sucked into buying Rhino 6 without major improvement in these two areas.
Background info: the v2 cernel was not from McNeel, maybe it was Alias Wavefront. There was some trouble to write an own for v3. So, we talk about two complete different versions of the software.
Make2d is under very active development for V6. The absolutely best thing you can do is to send us models that work poorly - either because they take a long time, or because they give poor results.
I certainly wasn’t! But I believe someone in the company was - I don’t know what the status of that particular hint is at the moment - but we’re certainly reasonably close.
Is there a list or something of currently known issues, so we don’t flood your inbox with stuff, you already know?
I had some issues like:
camera flipping under certain conditions, Make2d would create an image as seen from the exact opposite of the viewport
simple but large geometries produce images that are magnitudes smaller than the original object, causing problems with smaller details and even simple features like the outline of a spherical part.
We use the Technical/Pen view modes for most of our drawings. There is something about having the line drawings coming from the actual model and not some 2d version that is obsolete as soon as something changes.
However, when we need a 2d drawing or set of drawings from various views, we use Make2d.
I’ve come up with my own toolbar to streamline the process. It’s a real hack, but I can do Make2d drawings from huge assembly drawings that would have taken an hour or more in a few minutes or less.
The concept uses the “OpenSelectedInNewWorkspace” command from PetersTools to open the model in a disposable Rhino session. Then I have buttons that explode everything down to surfaces and lines, sets viewports, selects visible, runs Make2d, and repeats depending on the button. Some buttons just do a single view and I have a couple that will do many. The Make2d for each view only works on the surfaces that are visible in that view(and all the lines). This speeds things up immensely!
I’ll post some of this if anybody wants it but it’s kind of specific to my needs… might need some work to fit into your workflow. There is nothing original, just automates a process of running make2d on only what is visible in a viewport(s).
I don’t have examples of either camera flipping or micro make2d images. I know I fixed some micro image problems for V5 but there must still be some things I’ve missed.
Please send some models demonstrating these problems.
I just sent a file that creates a Make2d way out of scale. I deliberately left the tolerance at the default “sensible” value. Tighter tolerance will give better results but takes longer to solve.
I can’t seem to find an example for the camera flipping. As far as I remember, this happened with cameras close up. Moving the camera away and adjusting lens normally helped.
edit: found an uploaded the file “flipping” the camera. Actually it looks like the culling order is inversed. That is, lines “in the back” are kept, lines “in front” are culled.
I have a couple of model that take very long to calculating due to the high number of faces, more than 2000 on a single polySrf.
It’s not a public project, so, if you are interested, I can send the file to you privately.
Riccardo
Please send it to tech@mcneel.com and we’ll make sure it gets filed. Please include your description of the issue too if you can so that info stays with the model.
