Hi Burrman,

>>I read that as a typo and think they mean 1,900.00 Euros which is roughly $2,500<<

Looks like you are correct. Have you insider info on this LOL.

Hi Oliver,

> Is MoI actually pluggable?

You can write script extensions for MoI but not a complete C++ type plugin yet.

I do want to open that up in the future, but doing all the documentation and also support work to help other developer is a very time consuming area of work.

Right now I'm still focused on working on more "end user" type features for MoI first before I'll be able to turn attention to developer-oriented stuff like a plug-in SDK.

- Michael

personally I do not get it, MoI has a great mesh exporter...why should we pay extra for a render that support NURBS? what are the benefits?

@neo

Well because rendering NURBS directly is always better:

> Perfect geometric precision, reflections look so extremely good and real, which you cannot achieve with triangles
> Even huge files load fast like hell (since no tessellation is required)
> Remove an error source. Errors you see are really in your model not in a conversion

Regardless of the NURBS support RenderGin is an awesome renderer on its own. While I understand that MoI is a really cool modeling application (which we don't even want to be) I believe we can help making the best out of those models: perfect presentations!

Well, Michael, would you consider adding a proprietary export format to Moi that only works with RenderGin?

That seems like a solution that would solve both problems, and would allow Numenus to create a MoiRenderGin that only renders Moi3D models.

-TS-

Hi TwinSnakes,

> Well, Michael, would you consider adding a proprietary
> export format to Moi that only works with RenderGin?

That could be possible, but it's actually quite a lot of work to come up with a totally brand new format.

It could be possible instead to do some detection of whether a 3DM file was written by MoI or not, for example MoI writes a different message in the header description label of the file and has a couple of MoI-specific chunks of data that are normally skipped by other programs reading the geometry out of the 3DM file.

It would probably be pretty easy to detect 3DMs written by MoI by looking at that stuff.

- Michael

Hi,

I agree that the idea of some new or modified file format sounds like a good solution. I agree that adding a new proprietary file format would be a lot of hassle not only for Michael but also for us. However, modifying the header of a 3dm file would be easy, but just too easy, since you could easily go around this and change the header of every other 3dm file as well.

Another thing that might be worth considering is adding the ability to MoI to directly save into our own proprietary file format. If possible we could work together on this. Writing out just the information we need (i.e. NURBS and material) should not be too much work indeed.

- Oliver

Hi Oliver,

> However, modifying the header of a 3dm file would be
> easy, but just too easy, since you could easily go around
> this and change the header of every other 3dm file as well.

Well, in addition to the header you could also look for a couple of pieces of "user data" that MoI writes to the file to store some of its specific information. The user data will have a particular UUID identifier on it.

You're certainly not going to get any other CAD program that will write out the same combination of header text plus specific user data that MoI generates.


> Another thing that might be worth considering is adding the
> ability to MoI to directly save into our own proprietary file format.
> If possible we could work together on this. Writing out just the
> information we need (i.e. NURBS and material) should not be too
> much work indeed.

That could be a possibility, but in my experience anything dealing with file format support can easily end up to be a lot more work than initially expected. To do a good job with it usually involves quite a lot of testing.

Also since MoI version 2 has already been released, if we went this way you wouldn't be compatible with the current version of MoI and would only work with a future version I guess...


If you use the other method of identifying a 3DM file that was written by MoI, you would actually be compatible with both the current MoI v2 version as well as MoI v1.


- Michael

Also, if the goal is to make a special version offered to MoI users, maybe instead of focusing specifically on restricting file format support you could do something like only make it run if MoI is installed or something like that. Just another possibility.

- Michael

I prefer Maxwell because of its quality. I think any possible mesher advancements should be prioritized over specific formats.
Just my 2c.

Sorry but I don't understand what Augenblick has to offer compared to something like Air for Rhino ... the price is really scarry :S

Sorry for the late reply, but we were quite busy inishing the beta. I opened up another thread for the public beta release, but for quick reference, the download link is http://www.numenus.de/download_en.html.

To answers:

@Michael: okay sound like a good idea. I would say we'll have a look what MoI users think about the software and if it is liked by at least some (or many) then we should think about the next steps. I really would like to see some special MoI version, since I believe we are a really cool addition to MoI.

@PaQ: I did not have a close look at AiR before, but I downloaded the demo and gave it a shot this morning. I tested it only for 10 or 20 minutes, so its not really a thorough testing, but I couldn't see anything groundbraking. What do you like about AIR whats missing in RenderGin/Augenblick? From what I have seen I would say we have strong advantages in rendering speed and of course NURBS quality, since we do not need to tesselate. We also support a lot more file formats and our OBJ support (which they also have) is far superior in terms of speed and quality. I also don't like their user interface, however I know that this is a matter of taste (and I might not be thaaat obective :) ). And maybe more important: workflow. When you open a model in RenderGin is look cool instantly and it is very easy to assign new materials backplates envmpas etc...

Cheers,

Oliver

Hi Numenus,

Well actually air also support nurbs very well (reyes dicing, so you don't have to worry about meshing) ... and well, it's a renderman compliant renderer.
But for sure it's not realtime ...

So far I haven't get any success with the superior obj RenderGin import, (maybe rendergin dont support ngones ?) ... and I have to admit I don't have the
will to beta testing stuff for the moment. Looks like I can't import nurbs either in demo mode, so it's not easy to evaluate the software ;)

Soory, I must have missed something. I thought Rendergin worked with Nurbs models. I just downloaded the beta and cannot find any way to open anything other than OBJ files. How do I import a MOI file? The alpha version had 3dm files as an option. This has disappeared.

Also it won't load large OBJ files exported out of MoI. How do I use this application?

Hey PaQ,

is it possible that you send us the OBJ file causing problems? We will use it internally only of course. It is also okay to send only parts of the models if the issues are reproducable.

Why can't you test the NURBS in demo mode? Is your evaluation (30 day trial) running? we had expirienced issues where they trial won't activate correctly. If you are running in "free mode" (displayed in the welcome window) then please send us your Installation-ID (to be found in the License Manager) and I can send you an unlock code which will give you the 30 day trial.

Best,

Oliver