Sharing of "experimental and exotics" Nurbs models

Next
 From:  mkdm
8138.1 
Hi everyone,

During my Nurbs modelling experiments, popped into my head the idea
of creating a thread where, if you want, you might share all your experimental and exotics Nurbs models.

Here's a bunch of url of a 3D doodle that I made yesterday, a sort of Extraterrestrial plant (ET Plant).

The .3dm file is quite big, about 95 Mb zipped.

All screenshots were captured using different lighting presets.

The screenshots :

http://take.ms/1Aheo

http://take.ms/jJm5i

http://take.ms/PuSoy

http://take.ms/k6Jvl

http://take.ms/pcket

http://take.ms/sQl7m

And the zipped .3dm file

http://take.ms/XUiVS

See you,

- Marco (mkdm)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
8138.2 In reply to 8138.1 
Cool model Marco, thanks for sharing it!

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  mkdm
8138.3 In reply to 8138.2 
Hi Michael,

Thank you for the pep talk :)

That "doodle" it's just a very coarse one, created in 15 min regardless the correct alignment of the seem edges (I mean "correct" in relation to boolean operations),
and without advanced filleting/blending.

Anyway....I guess that with the upcoming "instances support" feature of the next V4, it would be easy to create an assembly
for a "greenhouse" of that plant.

I would like to ask your advice :

Usually, as a final stage of my modelling process, I save two versions of the the model.
One, the original, as is, in the case I want to continue the modelling, and the second one on which I run these commands :

1) shrinktrimmedsrf
2) merge (edges)

I do this way for cleanup purposes, especially after many boolean/trimming operations.

Is this a correct technique ?

Best,

- Marco (mkdm)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
8138.4 In reply to 8138.3 
Hi Marco, well I guess it depends on what you plan on doing with the second model. Doing that should reduce file size but you would then not be able to use some techniques like recovering original surfaces by an "untrim" if you needed to do repairs later on. It sounds like you have that covered by having another version saved without that but by having 2 versions aren't you ending up with more disk space overall used up than if you just had one version saved?

It's kind of hard to answer your question very well because what's correct or not depends on your particular goals and uses of the model.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  mkdm
8138.5 In reply to 8138.4 
Michael thanks for your reply.

You're right, maybe in my previous post I didn't make myself clear...

Let me explain.

> Hi Marco, well I guess it depends on what you plan on doing with the second model....

I know that with the cleanup model I loose the chance to do some things, like untrimming or repairing,
but my intention is to use the cleanup model only when I have totally completed the modelling process, and I want to use the model
for its final purpose, that is, assembly, exporting, rendering...

Instead, I will use the original model if I have to continue to operate on it.

Well...given what I told you, my questions is :

Is it a convenient techinique to run the "ShrinkTrimmedSrf" and "merge" commands in order to get a cleanup model ?
(I refer in particular to the "merge" command)

Thanks for all,

- Marco (mkdm)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
8138.6 In reply to 8138.5 
Hi Marco,

> Is it a convenient techinique to run the "ShrinkTrimmedSrf" and "merge" commands in order to get a cleanup model ?
> (I refer in particular to the "merge" command)

Well, you can if you want to, it probably shouldn't do any harm.

I guess I can think of a case with surface models where you probably wouldn't want to do it, like if you have a planar surface that's a rounded rectangle made up of lines and arcs and it's a standalone surface not joined to anything else. Running merge on that type of surface will merge together all its edges into one single edge since the lines and arcs were smooth where they touched but now you've got one single segment instead of separated lines and arcs, and that means that the lines will be degree elevated and be made up of more points than when they were simple 2 point lines and some of the logical structure of the object is gone.

Personally if you have a structurally sound object I'd generally hesitate to mutate it by automatically doing these things unless there was a lot to gain like if the edges were very badly fragmented or if the active area of a surface is very tiny compared to the full surface.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  mkdm
8138.7 In reply to 8138.6 
Michael, I really want to thank you for this very useful teaching!

> like if you have a planar surface that's a rounded rectangle made up of lines and arcs and it's a standalone surface not joined to anything else.

Just out of curiosity I've done an experiment with that single planar srf you were talking about,
and I verified that happens what you told me.

After the "merge" command the single edge has changed its topology losing its internal structure.

I guess that, in general, this is not a desirable result.

> Personally if you have a structurally sound object I'd generally hesitate to mutate it by automatically doing these things
unless there was a lot to gain like if the edges were very badly fragmented or if the active area of a surface is very tiny compared to the full surface.

I understand now!
I will do as you told me.
That is, I will use the "merge" command only on restricted area and/or on very badly fragmented edges.

One last note.

I've experimented that it doesn't seem to be any relationship between "ShrinkTrimmedSrf" and "merge" commands.
That is, I've seen that the final result of the "merge" command isn't affected by the previous "ShrinkTrimmedSrf" command.
Or, at least I've seen this behavior in relation with the simple experiment on the "planar surface that's a rounded rectangle".

It this interpretation correct in general or does it differ case-by-case ?
I think for example to situations where I could run "ShrinkTrimmedSrf + merge" or only "merge" on joined surfaces...


Thank you very much again and have a nice day!

- Marco (mkdm)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
8138.8 In reply to 8138.7 
Hi Marco,

> I've experimented that it doesn't seem to be any relationship between
> "ShrinkTrimmedSrf" and "merge" commands.

Yes that's true, they work on different types of sub-objects - ShrinkTrimmedSrf will only change the "underlying surface" of faces and does not make any modifications to edges, while Merge only does modifications to edges (currently - I'd like to also have some way to merge 2 adjacent surfaces as well but I have some hope to add merging functionality into join rather than keeping them as separate commands).

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  mkdm
8138.9 In reply to 8138.8 
Hello Michael,

Thank you very much for your help and your valuable teaching.

I can tell you that in my career as a ISV (independent software vendor) I've known many
colleagues (ok, not so popular like you) and very rarely I've found someone that, like you, is constantly striving to help and teach
his customers.

I think I'm not exaggerating if I say that the most prominent aspect of your Moi3D is this forum and your direct support.

Software born and die every week but professionalism can't be bought in the market.

Thanks again and best wishes for your job.

- Marco (mkdm)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
8138.10 In reply to 8138.9 
Thanks very much for the kind words Marco, I really appreciate that!

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
 From:  mkdm
8138.11 In reply to 8138.10 
You're welcome Michael,

Have a nice day,

- Marco (mkdm)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged
 

Reply to All Reply to All