Jump to content
  • 1

Improved NURBS, 3D Fillet, 3D Chamfer


Kevin McAllister

Question

For NURBS - I would like commands like the Loft Surface Tool (Revolve with Rail, Surface from Curves, Fillet Surface, Extrude Along Path etc.) to create dynamic objects, where you can interactively move and edit the contour and rail curves to change the resulting shape at any point after its creation. (ie. Cinema 4D Loft NURBS, Lathe NURBS, Sweep NURBS) These creation tools should also never fail but instead propose a solution that works.

For 3D Fillet - I would like this to create a dynamic object too, where you can interactively change the fillet radius at the beginning and also the end of your fillet. I'd also like it to never fail when a radius doesn't work. Instead of failing it should create a fillet with the smallest/largest radius that is possible.

For 3D Chamfer - I would like this to create a dynamic object too, where you can interactively change the chamfer size/angle at the beginning and also the end of your chamfer. I'd also like it to never fail when an angle or size doesn't work. Instead of failing it should create a chamfer with the smallest/largest size/angle that is possible.

KM

Link to comment

14 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee

Submitting a few requests for this now, to keep it in smaller bites:

1) Interactive reshaping UI for NURBS surfaces.

2) Better error management, instead of a flat failure, either show what is causing the failure or create an object as close as possible.

3) Interactive UI for 3D Chamfer and Fillet adjustment, even after the operation has been completed.

4) 3D Chamfer and 3D Fillet should be created at the minimum or maximum possible if the entered value is beyond that value in either direction. (I think this one was submitted already but I will check.) at the very least giving visual feedback of what the minimum or maximum would be.

Benson Shaw said:
A question: Does that interactivity have to create a significant CPU/GPU overhead? Right now, the NURBS are fairly efficient in both creation and render.
Kevin McAllister said:
The Auto-Hybrid in VW on the other hand causes a huge hit to overhead, especially if you have more than one. I suspect its all about the underlying foundation and the skill of the programmer.

Interactivity/usability is the future so VW needs to overcome this somehow.

I have noticed the same. It seems container objects such as groups, solid subtractions/addition and Auto Hybrids hit a wall when they're initially generated or updated, but if you remove their guts and paste those out into the document, the speed increases dramatically.

I would want these changes to increase the interactivity of objects as well, but the slowness inherent in such objects currently should be resolved first.

VE-93684

Link to comment
  • 0

Benson,

I share your concern. Interactivity is the norm in C4D and doesn't seem to cause any issues with overhead. The Auto-Hybrid in VW on the other hand causes a huge hit to overhead, especially if you have more than one. I suspect its all about the underlying foundation and the skill of the programmer.

Interactivity/usability is the future so VW needs to overcome this somehow. Even low end programs do it better these days.

Kevin

Link to comment
  • 0

Hi Jim,

Note that your #1 is a little different from my original wish about NURBS. I don't want to reshape surfaces so much as have an approach that updates when I update the original source shapes. I would suggest looking into the Rhino history command. For example, I would like to be able to double click on a lofted NURBS surface and edit the originating curves much like you can edit the profile curve of an extrude. When I exited the editing mode the loft would be regenerated using the adjusted curves. This is different than tools to edit an existing NURBS surface but not starting with the source curves.

Cheers,

Kevin

Link to comment
  • 0
  • Vectorworks, Inc Employee

It would totally fall under that wish in my opinion too, but I'll put it in as a separate request anyway.

Something smaller like navigation ability while in those selection modes is likely to be integrated much more quickly than a broad change to the way navigation inherently works.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...