Rhino-4

[jbshorty]

Originally Posted by Schbeurd

JBshorty !

I just have one question for you as I know you are a regular poster on MoI forum...
Why would a Rhino user also use MoI. I mean the new version of Rhino seems so powerful that I'd like to know where MoI seems more suited to meet your requirements. There's probably nothing in MoI that you can't do in Rhino so I wonder if it's a matter of workflow, ease of use or... ?

Hi Schbeurd! So far i have not used Moi to model anything. Because i am already very comfortable to do everything i want in Rhino, i would get very little benefit from learning to use both (even Michael has said this). But the kernel that is being liscensed from IntegrityWare is very powerful (same kernel for Rhino's Power Solids plug-in). So you know it can handle some tricky fillet situations. I use Moi occasionally to get past a little hiccup in Rhino's intersection code (which is much improved now, but still not perfect)... Also the UI of Moi is not to my liking (i have already voiced this in the Moi forums). I know it's a major attraction for some people, but it's not my cup of tea. I like Moi's streamlined toolset. I like it's auto-helpers. I like the mouse-over highlighting. What i don't like is how you can't turn these things off when you don't want them. I prefer to keep more control at my fingers. I like command line input. And i like using modifier keys to control snapping, ortho constraints, vertical dragging, etc... But i keep my eye on Moi because i think it has a lot of potential. I try to be helpful if i can to its users (many of them new to nurbs), even if i don't use the particular software for many things. And i'm glad that Moi captured the attention of many subd people who never wanted to learn Nurbs modeling. So that's why you see me posting over there... i think you are a Rhino user as well, no? Obviously a user of Amapi. So why do you use Moi ?

shorty

[Schbeurd]

Originally Posted by jbshorty

i think you are a Rhino user as well, no? Obviously a user of Amapi. So why do you use Moi ?

shorty

Hi Shorty !

I'm not a Rhino user. But I've installed the demo of version 3 and experimented a lot with it. I think MoI will be sufficient for my modeling needs but I'm considering buying Rhino as well. That's the reason for my question.
I'm using Amapi Pro (I bought it not so long ago when there was a special offer for Polyloop.net members) but I don't really feel at ease with it. I'm using some functions that are currently not implemented in MoI like Coons and Gordons surfaces. I create the curves in MoI and then import the .3dm file in Amapi...

[jbshorty]

Originally Posted by Schbeurd

Hi Shorty !

I'm not a Rhino user. But I've installed the demo of version 3 and experimented a lot with it. I think MoI will be sufficient for my modeling needs but I'm considering buying Rhino as well. That's the reason for my question.
I'm using Amapi Pro (I bought it not so long ago when there was a special offer for Polyloop.net members) but I don't really feel at ease with it. I'm using some functions that are currently not implemented in MoI like Coons and Gordons surfaces. I create the curves in MoI and then import the .3dm file in Amapi...

Actually one of the other reasons i pay attention to Moi is that i hope it's direction will be a little different than Rhino, and this might reflect in it's toolset. Like today, i just noticed the new beta has added functions to slice up models using planar curves. These are very handy. I wrote some tools a few months ago to do all these things in R4. So Michael sees what is missing in Rhino the same as i see it too. One program will never be all things to everybody, so it's good to have choices...

[Butch]

Originally Posted by Schbeurd

I create the curves in MoI and then import the .3dm file in Amapi...

This is what I miss in AMAPI!
That easy, flexible creation of curves.
You click a starting point, enter distance and then move a cursor in any direction and just click to confirm the distance enetered in the begining...
Thats just the way it should BE!

[WillBellJr]

As a Rhino v2 owner, I'm glad to see v4 finally dropped!

It's so tempting to upgrade after seeing those videos - I've downloaded the v4 eval but I'm just wondering how v4 will work in my XSI and Lightwave pipelines?

I've always had issues with Rhino's tri-heavy exports. Granted, for mechanical models and stuff that won't bend, I guess that's a moot concern since ultimately everything is triangulated before render anyway...

But I do wonder if there's a format that I can use other than OBJ to import into XSI (and optionally Lightwave, Cararra) - I believe XSI supports Iges (have to check that again) but I'm just wondering what's being used here to render their Rhino models and what's their art pipeline?

I believe the upgrade for me is $295 v2 -> v4 so I'd prolly be a fool not to bite now before the deal is up and refresh my Rhino investment (I had NO interest at the v3 upgrade)

But being that I've invested in XSI, ZBrush and others, how many-a-modeler does a person need!???

-Will

[jbshorty]

Originally Posted by WillBellJr

But being that I've invested in XSI, ZBrush and others, how many-a-modeler does a person need!???

-Will

I think you have to make the decision based only on whether Rhino 2 satisfies your requirements for Nurbs modeling. It's not really comparable to a poly modeler...

shorty

[WillBellJr]

Agreed - I haven't used v2 in ages since I've moved on deeper into the poly world and that's my concern...

Obviously I'd be able to make mechanicals way faster in Rhino but my concern is getting those models into say XSI or LW and being able to texture/render them nicely (successfully).

I can certainly do my ship designs and models way faster in Rhino so that's the temptation for me to go back but again, if I can't get the models rendered then that's a waste of my time and monae.

Granted, I'll be making some tests tonite with the v4 beta but again, I was wondering what others were using to render?

I can't see myself buying Maxwell or the other Rhino renderers (for obvious reasons) but it would be nice to take a Rhino NURBS into XSI as a NURBS without loss of quality...

-Will

[jbshorty]

i am just starting to learn Modo rendering, but not sure if i will use it for my Rhino models. I'm considering to buy Maxwell or Brazil to handle my Rhino work. Not ready to make that decision yet... McNeel does have another rendering engine in development called Toucan. In fact, it is the core display engine of Rhino 4 and i was told they will resume development now that R4 is being shipped. It looks very promising. Some key features are SSS, DOF, Post-process DOF, Ambient Occlusion, Anisotropy, render passes, blurred reflections, caustics, etc...Follow this link to see some examples posted a while ago by one of Rhino's developers (before he started to work for McNeel). I wouldn't hold my breath on this one though, it could be a long while before Toucan sees the light of day. I am hoping McNeel will just stick those features into the base Toucan engine of Rhino ...

http://www.reconstructivism.net/

shorty

[mayito7777]

What is the problem with Flamingo? Is not a good renderer?

[jbshorty]

Not IMO. There is a public WIP of Flamingo 2 which addresses some of the shortcomings of Flamingo 1.1 (drag-n-drop, post-process DOF, HDRI, soft shadows, GI, real-time previews, etc...) But honestly i can't see why McNeel wants to build two competing engines. A lot of the new features of Flamingo 2 overlap the Toucan features already put into Rhino 4 core. So if i were McNeel, i would drop Flamingo and just install the whole Toucan engine into Rhino. It may not be as good as Maxwell, Brazil, or VRay but having Toucan built in will attract many new users to Rhino... Here is a link to the Flamingo 2 page in case you are interested.

http://www.flamingo3d.com/nr.htm

shorty

[mayito7777]

Thanks, and I agree with you, but I think that to implement that you will have to raise the price of Rhino 4. Don't you think?

[jbshorty]

The difference might not be so big. I think the sales of more Rhino liscenses could offset the lost revenue of Flamingo sales. Plus, i think it's a waste of resources to build competing products in the same house. they should focus on building one really good (and fast) engine.

[WillBellJr]

Well I want to animate around my Rhino models so for me, that means, XSI, Lightwave, Vue Infinite or Carrara 5 Pro.

I'm at 22/25 - two OBJ (NURBS) exports came up blank in XSI, iges came in but all the polysurfaces are seperated and cracks are visible...

Granted, I can go with OBJ (Poly) and that seems to be my only hope but you would think for such a capable modeler, XSI would be on the export list by now - time to raise my voice (and questions) over there...

Granted, I can prolly go LWO or use another format that my Ultimate Unwrap 3D supports and convert that way but that's certainly something that should not be happening in this day and age.

Well after all of this, I should prolly just load back my Rhino v2 and work it out that way cause at the export level, apparently there isn't much difference between the versions (unfortunately )

-Will

[dooki]

Hey Sketchy,

Regarding working in one viewport. You do know that you can double click on the top-left tab on any viewport to enlarge it, making it one main view port. Then just double click on it again to go back to one view port.

-Dooki

[jbshorty]

willbelljr - I've never had a problem exporting OBJ from Rhino. No cracks, no missing objects. Maybe it's your specific mesh settings causing a problem?... There is a new obj importer/exporter in development for Rhino 4 (it is available as a plug-in from the Rhino Labs page). eventually this will evolve into the default exporter. Some details about it:
http://en.wiki.mcneel.com/default.as...eel/ObjIo.html

dooki - there are some additional ways to make a one-viewport workflow in Rhino 4 (using tabbed viewports, custom viewports, floating viewports, and CTRL+TAB to flip through the main views, assigning hotkeys, etc...). I explained a bit more detail in earlier posts in this thread...

shorty