Wish: Display deviation analysis while using every tool that modifies a surface

I often wonder why the ! _Rebuild command has a deviation analysis, while ! _RebuildUV does not!? I use the latter multiple times a day and lacking this feature forces me to use ! _MatchSrfjust to make sure that the deviation is not way too big. The same happens when I use ! _RemoveKnot and ! _RemoveMultiKnot. :slight_smile:

Other essential tools that could hugely benefit from having an integrated deviation analysis are:
! _BlendSrf (deviation /gap and angle/ relative to the input surface edges)
! _NetworkSrf (deviation /gap and angle/ relative to the input surface edges and/or curves)
! _Patch (deviation /gap and angle/ relative to the input surface edges, curves and/or points)
! _Loft (deviation relative to the input surface edges, curves and/or points)
! _Sweep1 (deviation relative to the input surface edges, curves and/or points)
! _Sweep2 (deviation relative to the input surface edges, curves and/or points)
! _MatchSrf (deviation from the original shape)
! _RemoveKnot (deviation from the original shape)
! _RemoveMultiKnot (deviation from the original shape)
! _RemoveControlPoint (deviation from the original shape)
! _RefitTrim (deviation from the original trimmed shape)

Also, add “Global shape blending” for these surfacing tools, similar to what’s already implemented in the ! _Sweep1 and ! _Pipe tools.


I would also love to see this type of functionality in the RefitTrim command in V7

1 Like

Yes, exactly. It also needs to benefit from having a deviation analysis withing the command. Yesterday I made another topic specifically for the noticeable deviation that occurs while using the ! _RefitTrim tool. It should preserve the 4 corners of the trimmed surface and only re-calculate it edges and internal structure.

1 Like

If RefitTrim was to be SUPER DUPER cool, I’d say have an option of preserving the original structure of the donor surface (point count and degree) OR an option to set a tolerance for the resultant surface. This would be very analogous to the Refine option on MatchSrf.

We have made multiple requests in various topics here about having an internal “Rebuild surface” command inside some of the main surfacing tools (kind of what “Explicit control” in Alias does). Imagine running “Blend surface” and having the option to choose its control point UV structure and degree. That gives the user huge benefits to decide how to create the blend surface in the best possible way.

1 Like

What about the “Rebuild with (X) Control Points” options in things like loft and sweep? Those are of course defaulted to degree 3, but I would think that does at least something similar to what you’re asking? That’s also in the Sweep commands, but not Blend Surface, which I 1000% agree should have the option to specify point count and degree.

I think it`s very useful +1

Hi all - in general, once again, it seems there is a need for more interactive tools - I concur completely. I’ll see what I can do to promote that trend…



Maybe it could work like Congress…you set up a date for an office pizza party in Seattle in honor of a given proposed feature with beer, wine and soft drinks and all the users who want the feature of the day could make cash donations in the form of unmarked $10’s and $20’s.

Just suggesting and/or begging doesn’t seem to do much.

I support all requests,
I’m not going to be very greedy.

blendsrf and sweep, 1rail, 2ra, they should have explicit controls, to choose the degree and number of points of controls
, without forgetting the difference values.

matchesrf command needs more options for the choice of preserving the isocurv direction, for example, being able to choose two different options, (preserve isocurve and automatic) at the same time for all edges of the surface, and the possibility of see the deviation values.

there is also a really essential need, to preserve the direction of the third row of control points.
in the case of the curvature choice
matchesrf command must have an option to preserve the location of controls points.
(@Rhino_Bulgaria I saw that you already talked about this option in another topic)

I also hope that the edgecontunuity command allows you to analyze the edges at a time … without needing to select the edges one by one (this really tiresome and causes anguish and a waste of time.

1 Like

I wouldn’t hesitate for a second to give rhino some money,
to get these new commands and features.

1 Like

This is also an aspect of the software that I would love to see evolve.

Being able to better interact with a running command to make good decisions in real time would be appreciable.

Rodolfo Santos

Lets hope that this important request will not be forgotten and will be properly considered by “McNeel” for future improvements. :slight_smile:

1 Like