Michael,

I'm looking forward to the full release! I played with the current beta a bit last night and it seems great. We used to have a MOI 1.0 license at my old studio, we used it to remesh some CAD files from Oakley so that we could render them in modo. (attached) Looking forward to actually using for creation as well. (I didn't render these, I only handled the conversions and remeshing, renders were done by Chris Morris http://www.luxology.com/community/profile.aspx?name=Chris_Morris)

Wow, gorgeous renders there Seb, I'm glad MoI was able to help out with some portion of that stuff too!

- Michael

Beautiful result!

Nice :)

Really hope you enjoy using MoI, Seb - it's my favourite modelling program! The workflow is so much nicer than anything else I've ever seen :)

Thanks for the kind words everyone. I was able to crack it open earlier in the week for a few minutes and actually play with it. I actuallythink it might help me revisit and old personal project that's been languishing for years. Time will tell.

No matter what I do with it, I'll make sure to post it here.

"When you are working on models that are more organic and not very well defined by 2D profile curves, then those are the types of things that are better suited for poly modeling instead."

Michael does this comment include guitar design?

Thanks, N

@VG, while waiting for Michael to comment this is my humble opinion.
Having build guitars myself I'd say that they are a mix of a mechanical and organic object. Thus one could say there isn't a right or wrong answer to this.
However, as I'm sure you're already aware of, if you think in terms of a "subtraction" process (removing material from a wood blank), I think it's more in favor
of NURBS modelling rather than polygonal. Routing a body and the various pockets (booleans), beveling the edges (fillets), constructing a neck with "profile" gauges (loft), all terms very similar to what one is used when working with MOI.
I'd say stick with MOI, because you are already producing awesome results!

My 2 cents.

PS: sorry if my wording seems a bit strange, English is not my native language.

Hi Neil,

re:
> Michael does this comment include guitar design?

I would think no - if significant portions of the model are constructed from 2D profile curves then NURBS modeling is a good fit.

But consider a human face - there isn't any single 2D curve that primarily drives its shape at all, not even something like a side profile because the shape is constantly changing. That's more of the type of thing I was referring to.

- Michael

There are things that are gray areas that incorporate both organic and profile driven elements too though. Vehicles can tend to be like this, where it's not so clearly in either domain.

- Michael

immortalx, your English is most likely better than mine. :) Thanks - really like how you put that. Having spent a year working with Fusion 360 - happily just now getting to feel a bit familiar with MoI. As you implied MoI or NURBS modeling is a different mind set - which has only recently begun to sink in. One thing that has become evident is that regardless of how frustrated I get - MoI is ceaselessly interesting and a lot of fun. The forum here is the most helpful around. My wife thinks I'm addicted - she may be right. Also, it is beyond me how Michael Gibson manages answering all the questions with all the other plates he spins - it is rare indeed to have that kind of hands on owner these days.

Thanks Michael, my work is flow picking up as the program becomes more familiar - and it seems that guitars are a productive initiative in MoI. (beginner opinion). One Rhino user on YouTube called Fusion 360 "confining." That comment makes sense to me now.