Hi Michael ...

Here is an example.

Modeled in MoI (on a Rhino template containing render materials). Popped back into Rhino (with import).

Added trees are created by e-on (the free version) inserted with Rhino ... one tree sized and revolved with Rhino.

This rendering required 2 minutes with Octane for Rhino. This might have been able to be done with the Octane StandAlone but I don't yet know import and assign materials with it ... nor do I know how to import .obj files (the trees) into the stand alone version.

I don't consider this any kind of a finished render ... I need to do a lot more work on it and add detail but it is a quick and dirty illustration of MoI as an architectural tool.

I should add that I saved it as a medium resolution .jpg file for the sake of file size.

MoI rocks and Octane is pretty good, too. Simply great low budget tools.

cheers,
eric

Hello,

Though not in the architectural field I have found that MoI and Thearender work nicely together and some architects have made some pretty impressive renders.

http://thearender.com/cms/index.php/gallery.html

Agreed,

The only thing missing from the pipeline is UV mapping. Though MoI has basic mapping via styles, if one of them had a full implementation, you could go straight from one to the other, no third party required. What would be ideal is a Thea plugin where you could render from directly inside MoI.

Hello,

That would be the icing on the cake if UV mapping was possible, right now I'm inserting C4D R15 Studio into the workflow since I couldn't stand the modo workflow anymore and with Thea having a proper C4D plugin now I'm just waiting for LightMap to have their proper plugin integrated. That said, it would be incredible if Solid Iris and Lightmap made a bridge to MoI.

"In MoI I've been hoping so far to avoid those kinds of potentially confusing situations by keeping things simple and not having a sort of parallel material system to the layer system with individual override settings also thrown in as well.

Maybe in the future I will revisit that and see about adding in per-object overrides but I'm pretty sure that it would be better to work on some other organization mechanisms like hierarchical groups first to see if those used in parallel with styles will provide the kind of additional organization tools that you would need rather than some kind of parallel layers/materials/individual object override type system.

- Michael"

In the following please exchange group for layer or whatever other word you want to call it.

I complete agree here, keeping things as flat as possible is ideal, and per-object overrides sound messy. I'm using MOI 3D for designing interfaces for audio equipment and there are a lot of text labels. Currently these are all assigned to the same style, but I have to be careful to select each individual letter when moving words, which isn't ideal since I think of words as a single object.

Some form of grouping would be really helpful. I think it is nice to be able to keep things flat as well, so each group could have an option to either be linked / unlinked / locked / unlocked (whatever you want to call it), so that you can still easily move individual elements in the group, but also if it is locked move all elements together no matter which you select. Being able to have sub groups would also be very useful, this would allow switching of visibility between collections of objects possible, while still retaining their individual object names and styles.

By default when a group is created a bounding box and centre can be automatically computed, but being able to edit / reset these would be handy. That way for an oddly shaped word the I could manually position the actual visual centre (not the mathematical one) so that when I do something like a vertical centre alignment with another object it gets it will work without me having to manually re-position it just right.

Hi andrew, yeah I've been thinking that probably groups would have an option on them for "Select as one unit" which you could enable or not - if enabled the whole group would select and move together as one when any part of it was clicked, but if not enabled then pieces would behave normally and the grouping would be more for organization purposes and used from the scene browser instead of changing anything about selection.

I hope to dig into these areas in the v4 time frame.

Thanks,
- Michael

> I really would like to see what have you achieved with Moi - most of the examples posted at this forum are vehicles, mechanical pieces and product design. Almost never a building. That's why I've been wondering how could it be used in architecture.

Hi Soalheiro,

I'm using MoI as well for very complex architectural models. With complexity I mean amounts of pieces and level of details. My projects are mostly steel constructions, prefabricated/modular buildings. Usually a complete model consists of hundreds of unique pieces. Sometimes they get animated or rendered as single frame depending on clients' needs.



Above image is from one of my projects. Unfortunately I can't share 99% of my work because my clients won't let me. :(

I'm doing all the modeling in MoI and everything else in 3ds Max. I'm modeling piece by piece in MoI then build my hiearchy in 3ds Max. I love MoI because it's just a simple modeling tool. It's not bloated with unnecessary stuff. Because of this it's simple to learn, intuitive, easy to use, stable, etc..

Great, thanks Michael, that's great news! Like I said I'm making do, and use a lot of control + shift + drag for selections of all the letters in words, so it's not a deal breaker at the moment and I am still a very happy MOI user who can wait for such icing.