I wonder what those who have experience with xNURBS think at this point. Is it highly useful? Does it make surfacing easier or better? Does it do things you can’t do with the standard tools? Does it help you focus on designing interesting forms without having to worry as much about such difficult matters as good patch layout? Does using it cause problems later for such things as offsetting, filleting, conversion to mesh/subD, etc?
Unfortunately, I activated my trial and used it up and didn’t really give it a proper try during that time. I didn’t know enough to really evaluate it then, for one thing. I am trying to decide whether or not to buy it. I asked for a trial extension four days ago, but have yet to hear back.
I am also a little concerned that it could go the way of tools like VSR. I don’t want to get used to something and then lose access to it or be unable to upgrade Rhino in the future because of it.
Hi @JNO512 ,
I am quite happy about it.
It helps a lot to quickly build surfaces with awkward boundaries.
I contacted the support for some questions / suggestions and did always got a prompt feedback.
I think there are some videos on their website which shows the plugin capabilities
It makes it easier. Think of it as better patch command. Is it better to patch, instead of creating traditional corner fillets/blends etc? No, I would definitely disagree here. But, it depends on your type of work. Most of the modelling task do not require to have proper surface layouts, so a fitted surface patch is okay, as long as it yields smooth surfaces. So yes for simplifying work and making your life easier, I would take it. But don’t expect better models. Its a trade-off! And last but not least, if a shape is looking good, it is always the result of all the surface involved, not just the ones in the middle. G2 is not everything!
Hi @TomTom
does the lasted version of xnurbs support grasshopper and have xnurbs Components or API? For creates c# if yes?
How does we using xnurbs.dll in grasshopper C# components?
I’ve been curious about Xnurbs too. But the models I see are always without the isocurve lines. I always wondered if it does stand in replacements for things like blends and fillets, but with better controls, like apparently VSR had.
I didn’t realise there was even a trial version. Doh!
I personally don’t own a copy, but we have carefully tested it in my old company. I know there was a request for GH, but not sure if this has been done. I remember seeing this in the forum. But I might be wrong.
The reason why we did not choose it, was that in my previous work we had strict requirements in surface quality. It wouldn’t pass these validations. Even if those were too harsh in many regards and often anything else than rational, you had agreed on those. But this is a very special business, and these constraints are simply not present in many other industries or use-cases. Btw, I was not against this tool, because we wasted lots of time on corner fillets for design stages, where it simply did not matter. But you know, if your customers are used to get your finest bottle of wine, you can’t just give them grape juice. Even if it looks the same, tastes well, and reduces their bill.
typical case of poor and uninformed management decisions, or where the management was not clearly informed enough over the benefits to make a better decision. i just read this by coincidence, but things like these upset me just so much.
anyway i wonder if xnurbs is going to be around for a little while longer since there is no response from the developer in 2 years and all questions seem blown in the wind.
They very recently (summer time?) made an integration for Plasticity. I just think since the unfortunate forum interactions two years ago (regarding quality of the output and… not great interaction perhaps), they gave up on this forum.