Hi Clement, I liked your solution . I will have to try and see if I can do that group of surfaces that way. --Mark
A bit off topic, but what tool are you using to get this edge analysis?
Xnurbs should publish a trial version, so every single user can check the effectiveness, personally I will never give a 3d file, either publicly or privately, for confidentiality of company files, so I have to check in private, if xnurbs it’s something really useful. The discussion has become really too exaggerated, and users have not tried the program yet!
Sorry for incorrect English.
I do not understand XNurbs marketing strategy, what is it, a secret of State? If the user has no chance to try a modeling tool, what would it do?
If I understood it correctly, they would have a Rhino version ready within a month or so.
I will patiently look forward to that.
yes I am curious too, looks to be very useful
Hi @SamPage, it is a custom tool with no name yet, which is still in development…
Since Mark did not want to reply “@XNurbs, could you please demonstrate how you would fill the other side ?”, so we have to spend some time to do it (Mark: I guess that you tried to avoid the awkward, but you started it.)
The following shows XNurbs uses a single NURBS to do this model. With XNurbs’s capacity, a designer may consider a different layout!
Here is the model.
For XNurbs, the operation is very simple, just select the curves. (For this model, to get the best result, interactive designing is needed. We are not designers, so we only use the simplest way to do it on the fly.)
While this is trivial for XNurbs, I guess no designer in this thread want to try it. Is there anyone who still claim XNurbs is a filling tool? Maybe JKayten could give us some examples to show XNurbs for different operations/applications.
I am going to poke on @JKayten.
GratesPract ___xnurbs.IGS (663.4 KB)
Projecting curves technique
I am already sold that your plugin has merit and use, however this is not very good is it?
I would be willing to give you some network curve examples but would also repeat the call of others that you should release some demo, even if unfinished, so we can run some tests of our own.
closer inspection reveals further defects, concavities caused by mismanaged curvature.
Thank you for your message. Now I can read and understand it.
For XNurbs’ users, few would be willing to show their design using XNurbs. I can see why they do not want to show the screenshots of their real production model: the screenshots will show their surface layout using XNurbs!
Then please do show me a better one.
Have you read the original post at Projecting curves technique?
(I heard that JKayten gave up on Rhino Mac, partly because of this problem which he/we couldn’t solve it. So why didn’t you help him?)
As I already said “For XNurbs, the operation is very simple, just select the curves. (For this model, to get the best result, interactive designing is needed. We are not designers, so we only use the simplest way to do it on the fly.)”.
So the bad input curves from the user wouldn’t get optimised for “minimal energy” after going through xnurbs?
*ah, as for me not helping him I help when I feel like it/have the time I’m not paid by mcneel to forum moderate or by xnurbs to promote. sorry
For the bad input curves, XNurbs will also generate the smoothest solution, which satisfies all input. In other words, it will give you the best solution under all cases, including the bad input curves.
Don’t want to waste my time on this anymore. As I said, some guys’ attitude slows down the release of XNurbs a lot, and we even made it clear “it would NOT be available for everyone”.
I was the one making those bad input curves. I was eyeballing the edges for the blend-part to something that looked kind of “relaxed”. Well, it wasn’t very relaxed. In any case, I guess there are two options in a case like this (professional modellers may correct me):
- Try to cut the edges for the blend in a way which lets the final blend be more relaxed ( iterative process).
- Try to add some helper curves to bring down the surface near the edges to avoid having a transition so abrupt (manually I could make the transition at the edges very smooth, but ended up with stressed creases on the surface instead).
This was a tricky one I can tell. To me it looks like alternative one (iteratively find a better edge line) testing it with XNurbs could fix the problem in only a few minutes. Doing new blends manually for each iteration would take days (I spent several days on this getting as far as can be seen in the link)
So it will take the bad geometry submitted by the designer and generate the best possible outcome using that bad geometry.
It will not fix the actual geometry.
Thanks for clarifying.
The attitude you have I dont get at all, but thats your choice.
If you don’t have any designers in your team you should definitely get someone. We, the potential customers, don’t know what your software is capable if you offer a. no demo, b. no design relevant use case.
Don’t expect us to help you, without getting any value back. We also don’t promote software not knowing what its potential is. In my understanding you have created an advanced “patch” functionality. If you say this is not its biggest advantage then you need to prove this to us. Nobody spends hundreds of dollars without validation.
Surface modelling is difficult and models are not made within minutes, rather within days or even weeks. Only a few people will or even can share them for free. Arguments like “efficiency”, “speed” etc. are not advantages if it doesn’t create the required quality. People don’t necessary need faster tools, they often just don’t want to do the boring stuff. If you don’t understand how designer/engineers think or want (or at least having someone in your team) , then this will be the biggest disadvantage of XNurbs. Great tools are made in close ties to its user.
This looks interesting. A tool to match trimmed surface edges would be highly appreciated in Rhino.