Claes Lundstrom

The limitation of meshes means that a typical 3D scan is out of reach for editing, as they have way too many elements. Other limitations include the fact that you can't edit more than one mesh at the time, which would make it way more usable. On the other hand, it allows you to nudge control points with the arrow keys, which you can't do with NURBS objects, making editing far less usable, and feels like an inconsistency VS meshes. More than one NURBS object at the time can't be edited at the time, a surprising limitation, as you can do it with most other programs dealing with NURBS.

.... or making a little more 3D 😉 fountain base2.vwx

Wasn't that Julian Carr's plug-in ?

Convert the twisted 3D polygon to NURBS to either Push Pull or use the Shell command

Unreliable communication between apps is for sure a problem. One reason is the wealth of file formats available, which means that developers need to spread out resources to support as many of them as possible, instead of having one format (or at least as few as possible) that works well. My approach, as a small developer of a 3D app, has been to focus on one format, and trying to keep it as simple as possible, while being well structured and organized. The result has been something that just works with most receiving apps I have tried it with, causing a minimum of work in the receiving app. It has given me the freedom to choose the rendering app that works best for my particular needs. That's how it should work, at least in the best of worlds......

I really don't understand why there has to be one app that does everything. In my world, I estimate it to be somewhere between 10 and 15 apps in my core sphere of tools. That doesn't mean having expert knowledge in all of them, or use all of them daily. It's perfectly ok to have "need to know" skills to get things done. When evaluating a given app, I typically evaluate how well it interacts with other tools in my sphere of tools, how reliable the interaction is, the quality of what it does, and how quickly it gets from A to B. As an example, I almost never use VW for NURBS or mesh modeling, but almost always when I need solid modeling. I prefer VW for 2D drafting and documentation, where I export material for after processing from my main modeling app. I use VW for architectural modeling. I typically use a third party rendering app (not Blender or C4D) as it delivers good quality renderings quickly and also delivers augmented reality models well. I use the Affinity line when I need data focusing on the printing industry. I would not use Affinity Designer for CAD style 2D drafting, as it's inferior to VW in this respect. I also Photoshop as it does AI better than Affinity. And so on.... My point is, why does it have to be ONE app only ?

Hate to say it but I basically almost never use RW anymore. It just takes too long to get from A to B, even though not mainly being into very high end renderings. More volume I guess, with massive numbers of decent quality renderings per year. The best of the competitors provide fast realtime renderings almost instantly. You get instant feedback on changes in textures and light. It makes a colossal difference in the time needed to get things done, if you think of it as part of a professional business.

I have done a fair number of real production designs of these types of very large tents, but to be honest, I never use VW for these jobs. I have also received designs from some of the specialized apps for these jobs, and I can't say that I'm all that impressed with what they have delivered. Quite often, these models need more cleaning up work than it takes to model it from scratch.

I may be wrong, but it looks like you have a problem with drainage. It's never a good idea to have completely flat areas, as it may cause huge water collecting areas in fabrics structures. Panels look a bit bumpy too, but it could be the rendering. I use cross section curves to fair the shape, which can be done in VW, even though it's rather tedious since you don't have dynamic cross sectioning. Also, have you analyzed the panel layout, so that each panel fits into a given material width, and having a minimum of waste ? Using NURBs can be a problem, as they can cause misalignments between panel edges, and this can cause a lot of problems. Having matching panel lengths and alignment marks guarantees a good panel assembly, in my experience.

At least stopped producing it. It seems to be a bit over-engineered, and therefore way too expensive to reach large volumes. Rumors have also claimed tat they have paused development of the high end model and instead focusing on a less expensive model. On the VW side, I suspect that you could import models into it in several file formats. Apples' Reality Converter app could perhaps serve as an indicator. VW's export to that app works so so in my experience. A dedicated communication link would probably work better, should VW decide to support it.

Would be interesting to hear how well VW interacts with the Vision Pro. I use augmented reality models quite a lot though I don't have a Vision Pro.

What I miss more than anything in Renderworks is realtime rendering, that is, the ability to show the result of actions almost instantly, or at least giving a hint where things are going. This is especially important for me, as I typically generate huge volumes of product presentation images and simple videos, where I usually spend less than ten minutes on preparations and renderings per object to get a decent result, and perhaps twenty minuts on a five second animation. Such a fast workflow makes a huge difference. That is why I very seldom use Renderworks.

I too go elsewhere for boat design, both for basic 3D modeling as well as unfolding (I work a lot with really complex unfolded shapes). VW does however work well for me as a supporting app for example for detailing. Boat design includes a lot of detailing in both 2D and 3D, especially if the project grows in size. I also use VW for solid modeling parts, and preparing parts for 3D printing. The picture shows a 10.5 meter long boat made in stainless steel, where all unfolded parts went directly into production using laser cutting directly from my unfolded patterns, with no problems whatsoever. You just need to trust the output, as it quickly gets to be expensive if it fails.

It's not there in Fundamentals, so only in some versions. I don't know if has evolved much over the years, since it was released as I never use it, despite using unfolding a lot. It always felt a bit like a half hearted to be honest.

Plasticity looks good on the videos and the price is competitive. Gave it a quick test, and found it less intuitive than an array of other similar apps. Could either be more powerful with more features to figure out, or just trying to do things differently, for the sake of being different, rather than improving things. The latter is more often seen in many apps, unfortunately.