Hi Burr, so I guess it looks like SolidWorks may not read points from a text file like that directly, but there is a SolidWorks plug-in that you can get that will do it, from here:

http://www.sycode.com/products/points_import_sw/index.htm

- Michael

Thanks for looking into that...

I am a Solidworks user. There is an add-in that comes with Solidworks Premium called ScanTo3D. As it's name suggests, it is primarily designed to deal with point clouds coming from a 3d scan source. However it will read an OBJ polygon file and convert that to a point cloud. There are several subsequent options, but you can run a guided wizard that will attempt to create Nurbs surfaces from this cloud. However, the surfaces are untrimmed so you have to trim and knit yourself. I'm not sure of the utility of this as you end up with a Nurbs object that has no parametric history or dimensions and is therefore not really editable except with SW's deform tools. The main use I suppose is to use as a pattern for rebuilding.

Note that referring to add-ins in Solidworks is not the same as you might be familiar with. These add-ins are not (mostly) 3rd party but part of the DS product, it's just that you are able to load and unload parts of code if you need them or not (e.g. the renderer or the FEA tools).

I wouldn't even think of trying to import a Poser figure in to SW as a point cloud!!!

Hey thanks Steve,
Great input for me....And yes, converting organic polygon data to NURBS is a poor choice... However, I am still optimistic about Integrityware's new tool, and seeing where it manifests...

Just do it the old-fashioned way. ;)

>> Why don't you integrate the .obj/ importer in MOI. Why
>> an independant add-on ?

>I'd be afraid that people would think that MoI supported polygon mesh data when it didn't really.

Hmm, sorry, but "stupid" ;) user can think a lot and I wouldn't limit the software to much for they. If you would allow to load mesh objects for presentation use than in the next step you could allow to export meshes with kept layer structure (3dm). As a meshing-only-user I miss this feature a lot. Any chance to get it in v3? Please.

Micha

Hi Micha,

> If you would allow to load mesh objects for presentation use

But that's the problem - currently it is not possible to load mesh objects in MoI for presentation use (as a shaded mesh display rather than as lines).

I do not currently have the mechanisms in place for various operations on mesh objects like selection, snapping, etc...

There is also a lot of potential for confusion in trying to support both mesh and NURBS objects since they are very different ways to represent 3D objects and it isn't easy to make all the NURBS tools work on mesh data instead.

- Michael

Hi Micha, the other thing I don't quite understand is why you are so intent on loading the mesh data back into Rhino. Rhino has some issues with handling mesh data in general - there are various restrictions like you can't use n-gons, and you can't have welded mesh points that have joined vertices but separate UVs and normals for each face.

Most people who are "mesh only" users are generating meshes to go into some more full featured polygon modeling program like Modo or Cinema4D. For these programs using OBJ or LWO format is the way to go - these formats handle mesh structures that are not allowed in 3DM mesh data (n-gons and welding).

Why are you so intent on trying to use Rhino as a mesh modeling program when it is not really a particularly good thing to use it for?

- Michael

I use MoI to create high quality and light meshes for rendering. MoI helped me often to get projects with complex models be done. :)
Also the MoI mesher could help to create light clean models for 3D PDF creation per simlab rhino plugin.

My biggest problem is, that I can't mesh all NURBS objects of a scene and the layers are keeped (best also the material names). If the meshes could be written to a 3dm file too, than this should be easy possible. Or could you enable 3dm mesh export without to think about the question of meshes in MoI?

Hi Micha,

> Or could you enable 3dm mesh export without to think
> about the question of meshes in MoI?

Yes, exporting mesh data as opposed to importing mesh data and handling it during normal modeling time in MoI are kind of separate things.

But I still have not really thought of a way to present a "meshed 3DM" file concept in the regular file dialog box that would not be potentially confusing. It would be a kind of 3DM file that you would export to that MoI would then not be able to read back in again, it could potentially lead someone to actually lose their NURBS model data since they could think "oh, I'm saving to a 3DM file so all my objects will be in there just as any regular 3DM model save", but for the type of 3DM file that you're asking for it would contain mesh data only and not be loadable back into MoI.

It's a kind of strange thing to try and fit into the program UI.

Note that Rhino does not have any kind of special "Meshed 3DM" file type to save to either...

- Michael

I understand your thoughts about the user faults. So, couldn't you not try add advanced features per ini file switches? A little ini switch could allow that a "Mesh2NURBS" 3dm is shown at the export UI (maybe only at the export, not the save dialog). If this is selected, the meshing dialog will popup. Only advanced users would use the ini switch. And as a last warning for the user - if the meshing UI popup, it's a good sign that a mesh is saved only. ;)

When you export moi stuff, you can select which items to export. You can do it by styles or by object name, for instance. You can save those as separate mesh layers, then import them separately into one scene in say, Modo or C4D. You can create your layers there as you go along. I agree with Michael - Rhino is the last application I would use to handle polygon meshes. It's not designed for it, and no other app uses .3dm as an import format for poly meshes.

Hi Micha,

> So, couldn't you not try add advanced features per ini file switches?

It's possible, but in general .ini file switches work better as a switches that modify some existing behavior rather than enabling some large new feature area.

Having a large new feature totally hidden from all users unless they activate a special switch is just not an efficient way for me to develop stuff - it involves me doing a lot of work which is not likely to affect very many users since it would be such a hidden area.

When an .ini switch just modifies some existing behavior to help advanced users, that's a lot different kind of a thing as far as my workload goes, because a behavior modification is easy for me to implement. An entirely new way to save files is not the same amount of work as a small behavior modification though.

I'm not saying that it will never be done, but if the only way to implement this easily would be making it by default a completely hidden feature that only a few users would ever turn on, that just makes it hard for me to justify working on that area as compared to features that are more easily accessible and used by more people...


I'm pretty sure that we've had this exact conversation at least one time before...


- Michael

Hi Micha, so you wrote: "A little ini switch"

So the .ini switch itself is little, that's true - the problem is implementing the functionality that the .ini switch would then enable.

Please realize that just setting a switch does not make anything happen to a program - I have to write program code in order to make the program do any particular special things.

So it's not really just a "little" thing involved here - you're talking about implementing a major new file export feature...

- Michael

Steve wrote:
"When you export moi stuff, you can select which items to export. You can do it by styles or by object name, for instance. You can save those as separate mesh layers, then import them separately into one scene in say, Modo or C4D."

Like I sayed, I need the meshes for rendering of complex models like train interiors with many details or big ocean ships. Here at my webpage you can see what I mean ;)

http://www.simulacrum.de/

The complex models are meshed per MoI. I use MoI for meshing very often!

And I think I'm not the only user how need it. For example Cinema4D and the IO plugin - "Rhino.io is a connection and import/export plugin, that lets you directly open and save native Rhino files (3dm) from within MAXON CINEMA 4D."

http://www.rhino.io/

The IO tool open the 3dm file and uses the Rhino render mesh. Here I see a strong weak point of the workflow, where MoI could help a lot. The Cinema4D user could save the NURBS to a mesh 3dm with all layers and open it per IO. The meshes could be clean and low poly and not so crapy like from Rhino.
The same workflow is known for Modo:

http://www.rhino3d.com/resources/display.asp?language=de&listing=4480

It's a pity that the great NURBS mesher can't be more used for scene with a lot of layers, without to export/import layer by layer.

Yes, we talk about it in the past, but as I have seen this topic here I thought it's a good time to talk about it again. This thread was started from an other direction of need, but it show, that user like to mix NURBS and meshes in 3dm files. I hoped the pressure of the v2 beta time is gone and it's a good time talk about this feature again with more success.

So, we have two needs for meshes in 3dm:

* mesh export for rendering in Rhino3D, Cinema4D, Modo. Since MoI dosn't support render plugins, this export-for-rendering is interesting for MoI user too, not only for meshing-only-user. A MoI mesh-2-3dm would match current workflows, it's not a quick idea of a single render freak only. ;)

* MoI user would like to show her models in an mesh object content like people, trees&plants, cars ... all this stuff that is needed to present design or architecture models.

The question is too - will MoI be closed for mesh import for ever? If not, why not go the first step in v3?

Hi Micha,

> * mesh export for rendering in Rhino3D, Cinema4D, Modo.

Well, Cinema4D and Modo are already completely covered - use OBJ export to go from MoI into Cinema4D and LWO format to go from MoI into Modo - that's what Cinema4D and Modo users already use for mesh transfer.


> The Cinema4D user could save the NURBS to a mesh
> 3dm with all layers and open it per IO. The meshes could
> be clean and low poly and not so crapy like from Rhino.

They can already do this without that plug-in - just simply export from MoI to OBJ format and import the OBJ into Cinema4D. Layer assignments are preserved as material assignments into Cinema4D and you are also able to use n-gons and true welding unlike 3DM format.

3DM format is not a good way to store mesh data - it does not really make any sense to export meshes to 3DM format to go to Cinema4D or Modo when the OBJ or LWO formats are able to do it without having the limitations of 3DM format (again, no n-gons or proper welding in 3DM format is possible).


> The question is too - will MoI be closed for mesh import for ever?
> If not, why not go the first step in v3?

re: "why not go the first step in v3" - as I described earlier, it's because it requires some work for me to produce a 3DM mesh export, and there is not a good way right now to incorporate it into the UI in some normal way...

There are already many steps in place for mesh export since MoI v1 - I've worked hard to have very good support especially for the OBJ and LWO formats which are normally used by people who are exporting to mesh based programs already. Layers in MoI are preserved as material assignments when exporting to OBJ and LWO, and both formats also support n-gon polygons and also true welding.

- Michael

Consensus is that the Rhino IO plugin for C4D is not worth bothering with. This is because it reads Rhino's display mesh, which is not very good for importing (no welded vertices, etc). It's fine for working in the Rhino viewport. Rhino itself can export OBJ files which are a lot better.

Hi Steve, so the main thing that the RhinoIO C4D plugin can do for someone is to bring over stuff that is not able to go into an OBJ file like lights and cameras.

So if someone has put in a bunch of effort setting up additional stuff like that in Rhino instead of waiting to do it in Cinema4D then that could be useful to have that stuff transferred over.

But yes just for transferring geometry only I can't see why you would want to do that.

MoI does not set up lights or cameras in it, so that aspect of the plugin won't be of any particular use for trying to use 3DM files to transfer mesh geometry from MoI into Cinema4D - that won't be gaining anything and will actually lose functionality, particularly n-gons.

- Michael