To jbsjorty:

Thanks for answering

3. I think this is not a problem, if I understand correctly you think that connecting the curve to the solid makes it difficult to reproduce the curve... No, I guess this is a matter of a new "extract" command or similar.

9. What I said is that MOI will name the objects by default and we just change the name. Every app does that... Of course we have to be able to control the naming of the objects we need.

12. For every command there is a default option. Let's keep the present way as the default way and add an option... This doesn't increase the "clicks" if you don't need it. Also the option of a copy or not is not very important but nice to have. We can always have a copy and erase the initial curve after mirroring.

Michael, I am very interested to hear your opinion about the curve-solid connection.
Also, the ability to undo some changes and control the modification history (No 6) because -at least I work like that- i often need last minute changes and I can't reproduce the solid from the start just to correct the fillet I did some days before. Also, there is no way to remember the dimensions and the values for each one of them (fillet radius, cirle radius, extrude height etc).

If there is any reason you don't want to share this info I understand, it is a software under development so no problem :)

> what is important is that when changing one clone, every other clone
> object will change accordingly. That's the important part of that wish...

Hi JTB - the part of your wish about making a clone by the copy command is available right now - that's what is mentioned in that other thread.

To make a clone that updates, use the Transform/Copy command, then select the new copied object, then run Edit/History and push the "Enable Update" button.

After doing that, you will have clone objects that will update when you edit the original.

This works because when you do the copy, the history of the copy command is stored on the copied object. But by default history updates are turned off for the results of copy - if you turn on updating for those objects then the history will kick in when you edit the original object.

You can do the same thing for several other commands as well - for example after you do a mirror, you can enable history updates on the new object, and it will then update when you edit the original.

But this does not work right now for Array though, there is a bit of a complication on certain operations that generate multiple outputs in one go, such as Array. Eventually this will get tuned up to work in a similar manner.

- Michael

> Michael, I am very interested to hear your opinion about the curve-solid connection.

It's an interesting idea, but it is pretty different than how every other history-based modeler that I know of works - you're talking about a sort of history reversal there where modifying the output of a command would backtrack and change the input to it. That's reversed from the normal flow of modifying inputs and reapplying commands to generate new outputs.

Is this something that you are imagining only applies to just moving the output? Or would you imagine that other operations should backtrack to the original object as well - like if you have a rectangle and extrude it, then fillet an edge of the extruded box, would you expect a fillet operation to backtrack to the original rectangle as well? That would be extremely difficult to achieve.

The complication that Jonah mentions is definitely a concern too - going back and modifying the original curve could then have a ripple effect that causes modifications to any other objects that are also constructed using that curve.

Here's a scenario where a curve-solid connection would cause a problem - let's say you draw a rectangle and you then extrude it into a box. Now you want to keep this box but edit the rectangle slightly and produce a new box. So you grab the box and move it away off to the side so you can get back to your curve to edit it to produce a new second box. But if the curve moved with the box as you describe, this wouldn't work. This is kind of a general problem with embedding too much history connections into things by default - suddenly what should be simple actions (move the box to uncover your original curve) end up behaving in unexpected ways. That's why many operations in MoI have history updates turned off by default (like copy for instance), because the history can sometimes get in the way of just doing simple things.


> Also, the ability to undo some changes and control the modification history (No 6)
> because -at least I work like that- i often need last minute changes and I can't
> reproduce the solid from the start just to correct the fillet I did some days before.
> Also, there is no way to remember the dimensions and the values for each one of
> them (fillet radius, cirle radius, extrude height etc).

I want to try and add this in eventually, but it will be quite a bit of work, it means that there has to be a lot more information stored than MoI currently keeps track of, and there will be quite a bit of user interface work to provide a way to manage that information.

But what you're describing here is exactly how a "parametric solid modeling" type of CAD program works, such as SolidWorks, Pro/E, Alibre, or Inventor. You may want to look into using one of these types of programs for doing this type of solid modeling - they can handle frequently changing fillets or connectors or holes a lot easier than MoI can right now.

This hasn't been a top priority for MoI partly because this type of thing is already handled very well by those other types of programs.

- Michael

Michael, thanks for the info about history update command, very useful
That reminds me of another wish, a basic manual so that we don't have to discuss problems already solved ;)

There is a big difference between what I say and what history update does.
With a real cloned objects set, you can choose one of them and everything changes. With history update feature, as I discovered you have to know or remember which was the first object because you can only change this, the others are not connected.

Anyway, I was expecting that kind of answer, that there are some CAD-like modelers that do what I want.
The reason I like MoI is exactly this, that with a simple UI, no commands, just use a mouse or tablet, and simple dragging you can do almost everything and have a fast and good quality 3d preview.

My ideal MoI future would be the current UI, with the MAX modifiers stack (sorry don't know how Inventor works) and some AutoCAD detailing (dims, hatch etc) I know that MoI is very close to Rhino, I have only tried the demo for 1-2 days so I guess there is not much to say. I can't suggest any tools you might want to add for character modeling and sculpture because I don't do stuff like that.
Also a full API for rendering plugins so that I can use my favorite renderer Maxwell!!! I can do this already, since you have obj and 3ds export.

So, as you can see, I like MoI's modeling tools and UI and this is the basic part of an application. I don't know if you are familiar with MAX or if you can suggest a better way but I think that controlling the changes and even canceling some of them is very important.
What I mean is that MoI is a great app but easily apply changes and updates is very basic because most of the times we don't decide for the product so the client is always right. Right?

Aha! You want to have a way how to change every other clone by manipulating not only the "parent", but also any other clone. I am afraid that there can always be only the relationship between parent and child (clone).
Do you know any application which works in this manner?

Petr

How else can you identify the parent circle from a group of 30 circles when you open the file a week after? Maybe there is a way with a command like "find parent" but this is not the issue, I think what I say is the only way. And yes, I know that MAX does that.

There are things I like and things I hate in MAX but I'm afraid this is my only experience from advanced 3d modelers

Hexagon allows bilateral cloning from parent to child (or vice versa). But it's limited to direct editing and transofrmations of the poly mesh. In regards to editing the input curves, that can only be done on the parent object and the changes will carry to the child objects...

jonah



"Aha! You want to have a way how to change every other clone by manipulating not only the "parent", but also any other clone. I am afraid that there can always be only the relationship between parent and child (clone).
Do you know any application which works in this manner?

Petr "

My wishes (some of them have been mentioned in other threads already)

Illustrator Import/Export. (I hope it will be in with V. 1)
Some sort of boolean operations on closed planar curves (for example union ten overlapping circles would be easier than using the trim command)
Text tool
Curve projection (again, we can use the trim option as a workaround but if find this quite tedious...)
Coons and Gordon surfaces.

I think I would be more than happy with these features... ;-)

Then maybe some parametric presets for "special" curves (cogs, stars, flowers, and of course spiral and helix...)

And I agree 100 % with the following :
Object groups, names (and colours !) + option to unhide only selected objects and not all at once...
Closed loft...

So Michael, As you can see, there are a few things to keep you busy for the coming months... ;-)

> With history update feature, as I discovered you have to know or remember
> which was the first object because you can only change this, the others are
> not connected.

Some programs use a more formal mechanism for making clones, called "blocks" or "instances", where you define a group of objects as a type of master object, then you can insert an "instance" of that block which is treated as a clone of it. This kind of clarifies the relationship and there are usually some kind of special tools that let you browse through the master objects, and handle updating them, etc.. This type of mechanism probably would solve what you are asking for here. I can see doing it eventually but it is probably going to be quite a while, I would think maybe like V3...


> Anyway, I was expecting that kind of answer, that there are some CAD-like
> modelers that do what I want. The reason I like MoI is exactly this, that with
> a simple UI, no commands, just use a mouse or tablet, and simple dragging
> you can do almost everything and have a fast and good quality 3d preview.

Well, you could use a combination - use MoI for the early stages of a design when you want to have the quick and simple environment, and then bring that design into one of those fancier CAD programs for handling the later stages.


> My ideal MoI future would be the current UI, with the MAX modifiers stack
> (sorry don't know how Inventor works) and some AutoCAD detailing (dims, hatch etc) <...>

It will probably get pretty close to that eventually. But it will take quite a few years before all of that type of stuff is in place. Many pieces will come in rather slowly and carefully to make sure that they don't add too much complexity to the current system.

- Michael

Michael, thanks for your answer, I can't do what you suggest because I can't afford to buy software like MAX because I don't really need it.
What I could do is use moi for modeling, export to obj for Maxwell rendering and use AutoCAD with 3ds export from MoI to make some detailing and dimensioning.
I believe this is easy.

Please let me add to small things.
I didn't write about text model because since I mention dimensioning you would do this anyway.
I would like to have dxf export too, Autodesk decided that 3ds format is limited and we can't have 3ds import in Revit and AutoCAD 2007

> I would like to have dxf export too, Autodesk decided that 3ds format is
> limited and we can't have 3ds import in Revit and AutoCAD 2007

I'm probably going to try that for V2. But it is odd that Autodesk won't support .3ds format since it is their own format, and also dxf and dwg have some even worse limitations in them for meshes than .3ds - .3ds is limited to 65535 points or faces in a single mesh object, and DXF/DWG is limited to 32767 points or faces in a single mesh object.

So if they don't want to support "limited" formats, that would mean they shouldn't read in DXF and DWG files either!! :)

It would be better if these programs supported the Wavefront .obj format, since it does not have any mesh size limits in it. I think if you look around there are some .obj importers for AutoCAD available.

- Michael

Hi JTB,

>How else can you identify the parent circle from a group of 30 circles when you open the file a week after?

You can
1) mark the parent object with a point object or
2) allocate a specific area of the modeling space for placing the parent object

I admit this may not be seem too attractive to you...


>And yes, I know that MAX does that.

There is a relationship between the parent and child and child and every child or parent in MAX?
So you can grab child's control point of object, move it and the parent object and every child updates?


Petr

It's MAGIC!
This is from MAX 's help files

Copy method: Creates a completely separate clone from the original. Modifying one has no effect on the other.

Instance method: Creates a completely interchangeable clone of the original. Modifying an instanced object is the same as modifying the original.

Reference method: Creates a clone dependent on the original up to the point when the object is cloned. Changing parameters for modifiers that were applied to the object before the object was referenced, will change both objects. However, a new modifier can be applied to one of the reference objects, and it will affect only the object to which it is applied.

I mentioned before that there are things are love in MAX and things I hate... This is absolutely a nice thing to have.
Another thing is that the copy command is in some way an array command too. For example, you make a box want to copy it 1 meter to the right. Before the command finishes, you see a dialog where you choose the method (copy,instance,reference) and a number of copies spinbox. If you set it to 5 for example you get 5+1=6 boxes each 1 meter from the other. Nice isn't it?

Max has many commands and methods because it has many capabilities. I am just trying to choose some of them that are easy to add to MoI not because they are Max's features but because I've found them useful. I would never add a wishlist item for animation because it is too early but I would like to see more flexibility like the one I just described.

More wishes...

http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI

http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI

Import SVG outlines.

Text shape support.

Drag an object over a surface, and have it snap to the normal of the surface.

Extrude relative to surface normal.
Draw a curve on a surface.

From these two, we get some common polygon modeling functionality in a CAD modeler. Draw a closed curve on a surface, and then extrude it.

From an older post... a small wish

The way we make arcs using 3 points is not the easiest. I believe it should be : 1. Start point, 2. End point, 3. Third point.

> The way we make arcs using 3 points is not the easiest. I believe it
> should be : 1. Start point, 2. End point, 3. Third point.

I can certainly change it.

If anybody likes the current way better, speak up!

- Michael

While the current mesher for obj export is nice, large flat areas get divided irregularly or not at all. The resulting mesh is a poor choice for importing into Zbrush or Mudbox if you want to detail those places.

What would be nice is a setting to allow subdivision of large flat areas. There is a option called "Avoid Larger Than", but it seems to have no effect in subdividing large flat areas. Would it be possible for there to be some method to divide a flat area into patches of quads?

Also, could we have a mesher export option to export a model as a mesh that represents x-y-z slices of a object? So I could say "Export mesh a mesh using 10 slices per x unit, 10 per y unit, and 10 per z unit"? This would give a nice regular mesh of tris/quads suitable for zbrush detailing.

Arc has Start On End

Circle Start On End or Start End On
Seems stricly the same?

Maybe something useful will be the possibility to move "one" of the 3 points before close the function Circle (or Arc)?
Because when you select "Show Points" you have many points of the "curve circle" (or Arc) !
And move a point of "Show point" of a circle is not the same than move one of the 3 points construction :)