Hi PaQ,

And thank you very much for your suggestions!
I answer here to your post http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=8090.54

> You shouldn't care that much about ngones or tris, just add a subdivision level to your mesh before import/conversion.
>By doing that, you will always end up with a full quad mesh.

Yes, I agree with you but by doing so I certainly will increase the total polygons count, and in my experiments
I'm trying to work with less polygons as possible, in order to obtain the lightest Nurbs objects.
Clearly in relation with the level of details I need for the particular object.
Only if I need I will do a SubDiv step in most detailed area of the object.

> What's important, is to 'hide' as much as you can any vertex that is not connected with 4 edges.
> The surface quality in those 'poles' area will always be a problem (surface continuity problem, or pinch).
> By hiding, I mean avoid to place those vertex where there is a big curvature change.

Also in this case i agree with you. The poles area are always a problem...
In fact in my example this is clearly evident.
But, what do you mean with "hiding" vertexes ?
Could you please be more precise ?

> I have to say that MAX SubDiv script is doing an amazing job in that area, way better than anything I have seen so far.
>It's very obvious in your example, the middle area where 12 edges are connected to one vertex looks much better
> (I would even say perfect) with Max's script than Rhino result.

Yes, Max's SubDiv is amazing in treating this situation!
But I'm testing the SubDFromMesh Rhino V6 command, mainly for two reasons :

1) I have a commercial license of Rhino too and I'd like to make the most of it :)
And I'm also very curious about what McNeel will give us in the long-awaited official V6 version.

2) Max's SubDiv + ImportObj scripts are very slow compared to Rhino, especially with mid-poly obj (> 1000 faces).
(And I have i7 4790K 4.4 Ghz, not a monster but...)
After all Max's SubDiv is Javascript while SubDFromMesh is compiled into Rhino...
And furthermore, I want to test the possible results obtained converting mid/high-poly count Quad+Tris obj into Nurbs,
in order to find a decent workflow to manually produce a simplified Nurbs version of high-patches version.

Anyway, thanks a lot and have a nice day.

- Marco (mkdm)

Hi futagoza (STEFAN),

and thank you for your test.
Very interesting to see what ViaCAD Pro 10 beta ca do...

I will continue to experiment with a decent workflow for "Low-Mid-Poly-SDS to Nurbs" conversion.
Using both automatic and manual operations.

Nice day!

- Marco (mkdm)

You're welcome Marco.

One thing i should mention is that ViaCAD Pro requires their separate product PowerPack Pro, which offers this functionality and much much more. PowerPack Pro is however included in the beta for testing purposes.

Regards
Stefan

Thank you for the clarification, STEFAN.

Nice day,

- Marco (mkdm)

Here is a link, in case you like to see or try out new features:

http://www.masterviacad.com/index.html

Regards
Stefan

Hi everyone,

...Anyway....regarding all the job "Obj to Nurbs"...

It's clear that all the efforts are justified only if it should happen that it's necessary to carry out additional manipulations of the obj model
inside the Nurbs environment (for example booleans, filleting, trimmings, blending etc..) and we want to treat the original obj as a real Nurbs object.

Otherwise, if we don't need to do those stuff, all those efforts are totally useless.

Nice day,

- Marco (mkdm)

Hi everyone,

That's a meaningless doodle made in 15 minutes for fun.
Simple "Obj to Burbs" workflow, made by using Max's ImportObj + SubDiv scripts and doing some little nurbs modelling (fillet, trim, boolean).

Here's all the links :

Scree cap 1 : Moi's whole model : http://take.ms/GJeLu

Scree cap 2 : Nurbs main actor : http://take.ms/FGZiW

Scree cap 3 : Imported obj from NVIL : http://take.ms/YPP7w

File 1 : Zipped whole 3dm file : http://take.ms/KWpSk

File 2 : Low-poly obj from NVIL : http://take.ms/N0gMB

Nice day,

- Marco (mkdm)

Another Workflow! :)
Rocket 3F (OBJ)-->Fusion 360 Tsplines (IGES)---> Moi (3DM) = Nurbs
(i know that is a direct bridge Rocket --> Moi : it was for see what happend inside Fusion! :)
Artifacts' lines on the top round is just due to the bad angle position of the view!


Rendering Fusion 360 till Moi has one! ;)
(absolutly not any regulates anywhere)

Hi Pilou,

Et voilà...Moi's jewelry!

Funny!

- Marco (mkdm)

Hi everyone,

...and that's a 10 minutes job with 3DCoat.
A random painting, sculpting, and rough renderings of the "Obj to Nurbs" objects of my previous post.
(http://moi3d.com/forum/index.php?webtag=MOI&msg=8095.23)

Large view
http://take.ms/Ag3Tm

Detailed view
http://take.ms/BiLig

Nice day,

- Marco (mkdm)

Big size indeed!
Any idea of the time of the rendering itself?

About 7-8 min of total render time in 3DCoat (for all renderings).

...the complete job took 13-14 min...not 10 :)

Ciao Pilou!

- Marco (mkdm)

Hi Marco,

Sorry for the delay,

About the surface 'complexity'

Once you have a patch simplification in the conversion process (like with T-Spline for Fusion or Rhino, Cyborg3D, etc),
pre-subdivide the mesh before converting it will change nothing about patches arrangement. In other words you will get the same numbers of patches,
they will just have more 'points' in the underlying structure. And what is important, is to reduce the number of patches, to help smooth further modeling task (trim, fillets, etc).

So yes for the moment it might concern you with max script ... but not so much if you are using other conversion tools.

By hiding vertex, I mean fighting with the poly topology to avoid nasty placement of those poles. It require a bit of modeling practice.

++

Hi PaQ,

And thanks for your reply.

> Once you have a patch simplification in the conversion process (like with T-Spline for Fusion or Rhino, Cyborg3D, etc),
> pre-subdivide the mesh before converting it will change nothing about patches arrangement.
> In other words you will get the same numbers of patches, they will just have more 'points' in the underlying structure.
> And what is important, is to reduce the number of patches, to help smooth further modeling task (trim, fillets, etc).

I agree with you but unfortunately, I don't have a commercial version of T-Spline, and frankly I don't like it so much.
(And I don't use Fusion).

I much prefer Clayoo and I tested it for a while but it's too much expensive...

But for the moment, in order to use Max's SubdDiv, I'm testing reverse SubDiv tools of NVIL and, in general,
I'm trying to model using only quads.
For this particular case, where I don't arrive with my hands, 3DCoat really helps me, with its retopo tools.

> By hiding vertex, I mean fighting with the poly topology to avoid nasty placement of those poles. It require a bit of modeling practice.

I don't know if I already have that modeling practice. Could you please post some screenshot or some simple .obj file,
that shows what you said ?

Thanks a lot and have a nice day.

- Marco (mkdm)

Hi Marco,


For instance to can avoid the ugly top pole pinch from you test model with a topology like this ?

Hi PaQ,

> For instance to can avoid the ugly top pole pinch from you test model with a topology like this ?

OK. Now I understood what you said.

In certain situations I already do that type of topology.

For example here's a link of my NVIL screen cap of a simple sphere.
http://take.ms/XLkdR

But I know that the challenge is to do manually that type of topology...

Thanks for your suggestion.

Ciao!

- Marco (mkdm)

Hi everyone,

After testing more deeply T-Spline within Fusion 360, I decided to include it into my current workflow,
when I need to convert Low Poly Quads into Nurbs object.

I will use "convert" feature of T-Spline, inside the "Sculpt" room in Fusion, in order to obtain a Nurbs object,
with a fewer number of patches compared to what we can actually get with (always very good) Max's SubDiv.

Nice day,

- Marco (mkdm)