Boatstalker.

I have been using Blender for rendering and noticed that it does export in VRML 1.0 and VRML 97 format.

Perhaps you can import into Blender ( there is a Python script (Blender Importer) in the Stand Alone Utilities, located on the Scripts page and it works very well) then export to you other program, And of course Blender is as free as a bird.
Maybe this might solve your problem.

http://kyticka.webzdarma.cz/3d/moi/ Custom Commands at the bottom.


Best wishes.
Malc

> Moi's n-gon meshes are not suitable for subd smoothing because the
> extra vertices which create the n-gons are not matched up to the vertices
> on the coneccted faces.

Hi Jonah, that's not correct, there should be a complete alignment between all vertices of adjacent polygons across a joined edge.

If there is any mis-matching, then either you have an unjoined edge in your NURBS model there, or you've run into a bug.

Can you please post an example of the non-matching vertices that you're talking about so I can see what is happening for you?

- Michael

sorry, i phrased my statement incorrectly. It's not the vertices which cause the smoothing problem. It's the edges which don't meet up at the ends. Most of them form a "T" where the edge terminates, which is not ideal for subd...

jonah

Hi Jonah, maybe what you mean here is that the underlying quad mesh (before it becomes n-gons) is not perfectly aligned between all surfaces?

By this I mean the quad "posts" that form polygons internal to each surface.

That quad structure follows the UV layout of each surface, so it isn't typically feasible to get identical quad structure between different surfaces that meet along a trimmed edge instead of along a natural surface edge.

Things like cylinders or spheres with symmerical cuts can often align along a natural surface isoparm, but when you just boolean 2 shapes together it isn't typical for the surfaces to meet at an isoparm.

It's basically the same problem as trying to reconstruct a complex model made up of booleaned parts by using only one single big untrimmed surface.

So certainly MoI's mesher won't do that, but every vertex on every n-gon there will be a matching vertex on the adjacent face though, making a "water-tight" mesh.

In the future there will be a few things I can do to increase quad-structure alignment in some different cases, like for fillets that have a plane on one side and a curved surface on the other side.

Doing all matching quads along every edge is a lot harder problem - it means creating a mesh that is not initially aligned to the natural UV grid of the surface, which doesn't really fit very well with some of the normal processes of surface algorithms such as splitting surfaces into smaller ones which has to happen along UV iso boundaries.

- Michael

Hi Jonah, it is kind of a general problem that arbitrary n-gons and subd do not mix well, regardless of a "perfect" vertex alignment.

Part of the sub-d process involves taking a centroid of the polygon, and if your polygon is not a convex shape, it won't have a nice centroid-ization to it.

Here's an example:



From an n-gon structure standpoint, that is pretty much a perfect mesh structure with a minimal amount of vertices. Yet regardless if you try to sub-d it, it will work but the result will be ugly as pieces radiate toward the centroid of the n-gon and kind of fold over the concave areas.

For nice sub-d-ifiying, you don't really want minimal vertex count n-gons at all, but rather a set of convex polygons even if that requires adding a lot more points to the entire mesh.

It's a completely different thing... Just more vertex alignment does not solve the problem.

- Michael

Hi Malc,

Currently, Blender doesn´t import NURBs .

However, take a look at the German video on ESubs (extended subdivision surfaces). Imagine modeling with MoI featuring an ESubs kernel and the possibility of being able to click a "convert to subdivision surfaces button" which would convert the NURBS model to SDS for further refinement. Imagine the possibility of being able at the click of a button to go to NURBS mode and SDS mode back and forth directed by which modeling method suits you each time, until your model is perfected.

http://www.cgv.tugraz.at:28888/CGV/research/NURBSUBS/_id246b1_

Best Regards,

Boatstalker

Boatstalker.

So what you are saying, is that when a file is imported, it is converted to a poly mesh and does not retain the Nurbs and thats not what you want.
I have very limited knowledge of programing, so I find it hard to grasp all the different formats.

I am basically an amateur artist that finds 3d modeling an extension of my artistic capabilities and quite a challenge sometimes.
Blender is a challege with it's millions of buttons to learn, whereas MOI (Thankyou Michael) is a joy to use, so I tend to use the software and hope that it comes out ok, without having to understand how I got to the end result.


That software certainly looks awsome.

Hope you succeed in your goal.

Regards

Malc

boatstalker, you might want to try this. not sure if it will work but it seems promising. let us know;-)
http://www.freedesign-inc.com/products.html

Hi Michael. I understand it is more complex than what i mentioned, it was just the minimum example of a simple object which could be exported from Moi and be ready for sds (or at least with minimal amounts of mesh refining)...

jonah

Some thoughts.

>I have added Sketchup file I/O to the wiki wishlist.

I am a big fan of the rush/pull tool my self , www.sketchup.com, www.3dvia.com/shapeit, With Models Ready for Microsoft Virtual Earth , Oh yes lets keep Microsoft happy too, haha very funny.
But anyhow I see Moi as an professional app and not as an BART SIMSONS TOY, Don't get me wrong but I dot see any reason for a Moi/SUp/Moi link, (they should meet else were).

Moi has already reach the professional circles and that is were it should aim at. Modo, 3dsmax,SolidWorks, bunkspeed, Maxwell... users love it, even Rhino users ask help from Moi.
Yet Limited supported formats, the ones there ROCK.

>Well, if you buy it, it makes it more likely that I will be able to stay in business and eventually be able to handle your request instead of going out of business! :

I wish I had a huge Studio to fill it with Moi, but that is not the case, although my check is ready.

>Hi xrok1 - I do want to experiment with what you are describing in the future (direct drawing on to surfaces)

yes pls.+1

>http://www.wtools3d.com/swf/tutorials/RTboolean/RTboolean.html + Some cool tricks on Inserting Doors and Windows http://www.ilexsoft.com/highdesign/media.html + http://www.visualarq.com/

Yes to somethink like that, but Micheal we can do better.

Hi XROK1

>boatstalker, you might want to try this. not sure if it will work but it seems promising. let us know;-)
http://www.freedesign-inc.com/products.html <

Actually I already have FreeDimension ;-). As an organic free form modeling tool it is brilliant. Using it is pretty much like sculpting some kind of a digital clay or jelly. The concept it´s based on is equally brilliant (adaptive/dynamic polygon mesh surface interpolation between (2+n)-sided patches defined by interconnected freeform curves). FreeDimension is polygon mesh based and it is an excellent concept modeler, especially when it coms to free flowing shapes.

However, if you want to make precision "man made like objects" NURBS is the way to go and MoI´s unique brilliant user interface makes it the modeling application of choice.



P.s. FreeDimension has the ability to export NURBS if the iges exporter plugin is purchased, so FreeDimension + MoI might be a quite powerful combo in the hands of a skilled artist/designer.

Hope this helps.

All the best,

Boatstalker

If it has not been mentioned before,

Carrara6Pro (probably any version) just LOVES working with MoI stuff, especially in the Vertex(Poly) room.
I usually save as IGES files from MoI as it makes shading (shading domains) a breeze in Carrara.

Carrara6 Pro, MoI and 3D Brush (and PhotoshopCS3 Extended)

The only way to live!

sounds complicated. me no like..

I would also like to see some form of link between SketchUp and MoI, or some way of importing meshes into MoI. Naturally it would be nice if the imported meshes are converted to Nurbs on import, so you don’t have to think about the difference between the two types of objects. From the user perspective we shouldn’t even need to understand the difference between mesh, Nurbs, Sub-D, ESub, T-Splines etc. It should just be geometry, regardless of how the computer understands it. Maybe the Esub will really bridge that gap… Hopefully already in MoI 1.1 ;).

I just started to play with MoI a few days ago, and with my SketchUp skills I was directly able to model a nice ring. What I can’t do is cut diamonds, but I was able to find a brilliant cut in DXF. I would need that mesh in MoI to do the fitting.

I also have Rhino and T-Splines, got them just two days before discovering MoI :( . I can go from SketchUp in obj to T-Splies, and then convert to Nurbs, and then open the 3dm in MoI, but then I loose the sharp edges. Or can I convert to Nurbs some other way? I was thinking a Boolean union of a Nurbs box and the diamond mesh would do it, but doesn’t...

Copying as much of the SketchUp workflow and tools is another thing I second. The inferencing of directions, push/pull etc. Having all of that in MoI would be wonderful, but I know many of the tools are unfortunately patented. On the other hand I don’t think Google is interested in Nurbs, or even proper curves, so maybe they will let you use them for a small fee.

Import your Sketchup file into Rhino
run command "MeshToNurb"
then run command "MergeAllFaces"
then Copy/Paste into Moi...

Also i don't think you can patent a feature of a software. You can only patent or copyright the software code. So this similar push/pull type of function can be found in other programs such as Alibre 10. and also Rhino can push/pull polysurface faces under the right conditions. I see no legal reason why Moi can't have a similar function...

jonah

Thanks Jonah,
I was looking for that in all menus… but I now have my diamond in MoI.
Guess I still have a thing or two to learn in Rhino…
Sheik

Hi Sheik, one difficulty with doing this automatically is that a diamond is kind of a special case, in that it is supposed to be made up of planar facets.

So a conversion from mesh to NURBS where each polygon becomes one facet works fine for this case.

But often times polygon mesh files are intended to be a simulation of a smooth surface instead of one with planar facets. Trying to convert one of these types of mesh files into a NURBS object where each polygon becomes one little tiny NURBS plane will not work very well. The NURBS structure expects smooth surfaces to be made up of larger smooth surface patches instead of tons of little facets.

- Michael

Hi Michael,
Well I decided to get MoI, even if I fear this decision will keep me from taking the time to learn to use Rhino. I guess I will be using Rhino only for things I can’t do in MoI, but actually I will still primarily be using SketchUp.

I can imagine turning a faceted mesh surface into a one smooth Nurbs surface will need some serious coding. I wouldn’t mind an easy solution, and make the mesh becomes a big bunch of faceted Nurbs patches. I would only want it for reference, and maybe some Booleans.

Rather new to the whole Nurbs world I still don’t know exactly what you can and can’t do with them. Some simple stuff surprises me like; I can select an edge or face of a simple box, but I can’t move or rotate it (like I can in SketchUp). Is that difficult to implement with Nurbs?
I actually suggested SketchUp would add “Jell-O-mode” to the transforms. It would be similar to “soft-selection” transforms in some modellers: move (or rotate or scale) the top of a box, then define a distance for how rigidly you want the rest of the geometry to follow, and shaping would be like playing with jello Everyone has played with jello, right? No need for separate transform commands. (Somehow I think this would be easier with Nurbs, as you would need to add and reduce faces for this in a poly-modeller)?
Adding edges, moving them and push/pulling the new faces is a very fast way of modelling, which I would eventually like to see becoming possible in MoI.
Add the possibility of turning some faces (or edges) to be curved (tangent, G1, G2 etc.), thus turning the original surfaces and edges to a control cage, you could do very powerful box modelling (similar to T-Splines).
Oops, I guess I was rambling for a moment there, but this is such an inspirational product.
KIS, and think of new ways of making modelling more fun!

if you already have Rhino 4, then you can do many of your "Jell-O" transforms using Rhino's UDT functions. Also there are commands such as rotate face, scale edge, etc... This is not an easy thing to handle in Nurbs, because transforms will rip apart the seams in a polysurface. With polygons, transform functions don't have to worry about retrimming, tangency matching, and surface rebuilding as they do in Nurbs. Polygonal modelers just move vertices, which should be pretty easy. Nurbs require the object to be analyzed, rebuilt and redefined.

Also Tsplines is a great converter, but only for meshes that have a subd-friendly topology. If you try converting from Sketchup meshes, i imagine the results will not be what you hope for...

jonah