hmmm... nice result thanks. yes that's truth not as easy as blend but nice result. thanks again

Hi andras,

You must split the cylinder up into 8 surfaces,and the right solid must be
open on the side you want to blend.

Hi andras,

It works also with : Loft

Hi Andras

Another one. This is using a loft set to loose. I used all the profiles to build the loft.

Jamie

Hi andras, like Paolo mentioned above it is possible to use Blend for that if you split up the closed part into pieces, so that there is a one-to-one matching of edges.

But you don't actually need to split all the surfaces up, you can just split the edge only into small edge pieces by selecting the edge and using the Trim command with the "Add trim points" option to place the dividing spots in.

After you have split the edges you can then pick pairs of edges between the 2 pieces and use Blend.


But it can be better to use a more structured approach (something like sweep or network with some additional guide curves) than Blend when trying to make something between pretty different shapes.


In the future I do want to improve Blend so that it will be able to work on a series of edges directly inside of Blend rather than only between a pair of them.


- Michael

yes all right. I know all idea of guys. just I was not sure I suspected a secret twaek (like newMerge :) )

>But it can be better to use a more structured approach (something like sweep or network with some additional guide curves) than Blend when trying to make something between pretty different shapes.

Michael, it can also be done with Loft, as some examples above.
Loft would be much better with a "Guide curve" or Rails.

Hi Ralf,

> Loft would be much better with a "Guide curve" or Rails.

That's called Sweep in MoI - Sweep lets you pick profile curves like Loft and then also rails to guide the sides (if you pick 2 rails, if you pick 1 rail it is used as a single path curve).

- Michael

Hi Michael,

Daily practice with Loft and Swep... in a production environment.
Therefore Loft with the "Rail/Guide Curve" option would be very welcome.

Hi Ralf,

> Therefore Loft with the "Rail/Guide Curve" option would
> be very welcome.

Could you describe how Loft with a rail curve would be any different than sweep?

Some programs use that term "Loft with guide rail" to mean the same thing as MoI's sweep tool.

MoI's Sweep tool takes a set of cross-section profiles just like Loft, and then you pick rails. So it's like a "Loft with guide rails".

- Michael

Hi Michael,

I transferred my recommendation in the wishlist: Loft with "Guide Curves/Rails".

- Ralf

Hi Ralf,

> I transferred my recommendation in the wishlist: Loft
> with "Guide Curves/Rails".

Could you describe a bit about what that actually means though?

As far as I know Sweep in MoI is the equivalent of "Loft with Guide Rails" - so you don't need to wish for it, Sweep is already a function in MoI under the Construct tools...

But if what you are talking about is different than Sweep could you describe or show how it would work? Maybe an example model or something?

- Michael

Hi Michael,

> Sweep is already a function in MoI under the Construct tools...

I am aware of this and I know the difference very well.
My wish is Loft with "Guide curves/Rails".

Btw.: Here is a real example of our daily work with Moi3D,
that means we do not use Moi for the first time... ;)

Hi Ralf,

> My wish is Loft with "Guide curves/Rails".

But what is "Loft with Guide curves/Rails" supposed to do?

I am not familiar with how that tool is supposed to work, I need for you to describe it to me (maybe post a simple example model?) so I can understand what you mean by that name.

- Michael

Great model by the way! :)

- Michael

Is this an example of loft with guides?

Wonderful model Ralf,

Is this for something that will be made for real?

Hi Everyone,

>Loft with Guide Rails<

Aside from Sweep, I'd of thought that even a simple Network would produce similar results?
Here's an example of the same set of curves, but one as a Sweep & the other as Network.
Only difference is that the Sweep version automatically produced Caps for both ends.

regard Colin

Hi Colin,

Show the points for both of the objects and note there is a difference.

Hi Colin,

> Aside from Sweep, I'd of thought that even a simple
> Network would produce similar results?

There are several kinds of cases where they can be very similar.

But they go about generating the surface in different ways.

Network kind of treats all the curves more equally - it's sort of like lofting in each direction and combining/averaging those into a single surface. The result is somewhat more equally influenced by all the curves combining together.

Sweep on the other hand actually slides the profiles along the rail curves, so there's kind of a more "rigidity" about the profile shapes since the profiles actually march along the rails in steps (while simultaneously morphing from one shape to another when there are multiple profiles).


Here's an example where you can see the difference a bit more:



Here's Network on it:



And here's a sweep (short pieces as profiles, long ones as rails):




Here you can get a bit of the feel that Network is somewhat more like a kind of membrane stretched between those curves (not totally but somewhat more like that), while with sweep the profile shape remains stronger since it is the piece that is more directly being copied and rotated around.

Of course also a big difference is that you can have a larger number of curves for Network.

- Michael