Hi Jean-Paul,

> What I like about the NURBS approach is the capacity to generate
> in a split second a huge and complex model made out of a few simple
> lines, as this is the way engineers created the real world planes and
> ships in the first place.

Yup, that's where NURBS is strong - that you can create a lot of shapes quickly by drawing just a few input curves, and using construction tools that use the curves.

With sub-d modeling you do have to kind of manage a lot of points floating around in 3D which is kind of a specialized skill. It's more spatially complex to work a big mass of 3D points than it is to work with 2D curves.

But the NURBS methods are best applied to shapes that are very well defined by their profile curves - when things are kind of melting/blending in many directions the profile of the shape is not really a primary definition of the shape anymore and that makes things more difficult.


> A viable strategy for the tough cases might be to get as far as I
> can with MoI and then switch to Modo for the finishing touches.

I think this is a good general strategy.


> Hence the emphasis on continuity. This being said, it appears that
> I may have gone a bit overboard about that because the limitations
> of the 3D-printing process (although already black magic to my
> bewildered eyes) make it so that a slightly noticeable continuity flaw
> on my computer screen might be entirely absent in the real world output.

Yes if your final output is going to be at a fairly small physical scale it would probably serve you well to kind of turn down the level of concern for getting perfect continuity.

If you don't worry about it as much, that will tend to free you up some more to build things in a kind of "skin the wireframe" type method like you were wanting to use here.


> Planes and ships, especially military ones, tend to be rather
> complex objects, but they are hard surface things.

Along with automobiles the exterior of those kinds of vehicles are kind of in a gray area where the shapes are becoming more in "organic" territory and less defined or driven by 2D plan curves alone.


> like for the B-29 front wheel, a component way more suited to
> MoI's capability, I guess.

Yes, definitely - that one is a perfect candidate for a profile curve driven approach.


- Michael