Ok, I got it! but sometimes I forget the command!

I don't know how it got so far as V4, but the views are wrong. In many cases, right and left, front and rear are arbitrary. But in cases of cars, boats (most anyway), etc., there is only one way. If I orient a model so that the front and rear agree with "Front" view and "Rear" view, then "Right" and "Left" are wrong. If I orient right and left correctly, then "Front" and "Rear" are wrong. It's simple to remember that "Front" is rear, or "Right" is left, but why should this be necessary?

Hi Tim, the MoI views follow the standard view names used for engineering drawings for the past hundred years or so.

The names come from the viewer's location. Imagine that you are sitting at a square table with an object on it. If you move your chair to the next side of the table towards your right hand direction that will be the view from the right. If you move your chair towards your left to the next table side then what you see will be the view from the left.

This is used in a generic way for all objects, it's not something that makes sense to change just because the object happens to be a car or a boat.

Here's an illustration from "Essentials of Drafting", Carl Lars Svensen, first published1918, third edition 1945, page 73:



- Michael

Big thanks, Michael !

The 1919 edition is freely available from this source, also as pdf file:

https://archive.org/details/essentialsdraft00svengoog

"
Openlibrary_edition
OL20611713M

Openlibrary_work
OL13149754W

Pages
239

Possible copyright status
NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT "

Hi Ken, thanks that's really cool to have that PDF version!

I found mine at an antique store in Wiscasset, Maine, with "Property of U.S. NAVY" stamped on the inside.

Another cool old one I've got is "A Manual of Engineering Drawing for Students and Draftsmen", Thomas E. French 1918. Looks like that's available at archive.org too!

I've also got:



That's even there too search for "Practical geometry LE CLERC" !

- Michael

YES: here you go:::
A Manual of Engineering Drawing for Students and Draftsmen:
https://archive.org/details/amanualengineer01frengoog

and new finding:

Practical Geometry, Or, A New and Easy Method of Treating that Art ...
- Sébastien Le Clerc - dated 1727 -
- also as pdf...!
https://openlibrary.org/books/OL20545882M/Practical_Geometry_Or_A_New_and_Easy_Method_of_Treating_that_Art_...

Yes, I'm an engineer and I had many years of mechanical drawing. But when "standards" violate 'reality', which is 'right'? I'm not looking to argue this point. If there are two contradicting ways of doing something, maybe we could have a choice, that is we could select the view names that we like. BTW, as I'm sure you know, there are two different methods of projection, the American way and the European way. Trying to go back and forth between them is very confusing. And it isn't that one is 'right' and the other is 'wrong'; they both make sense when you understand the 'logic' behind them. Well, I wanted to point out a contradiction, and we can leave it at that. BTW, I'm very happy with V4!

Hi Tim, I'm not necessarily against making it an option. There are some potential complications though since scripts can refer to viewports by name as well and I'm uncertain what the side effects could potentially be if the script API didn't have uniform behavior.

A thin layer that only changed the labels in the UI and not anything else would not be too complicated though.

- Michael

Hello Michael.

What about my request for V5?

"For V5 (or I hope in the next builds of the current V4) I have this request:

A TRUE OBJECTS "INSTANCING AND GROUPING/PARENTING"

That's will be a HUGE leap forward!

Thanks."


Are you planning these long awaited things?

Thanks and have a nice day.

Hi Marco, I don't have any fixed plans yet, so I can't comment on whether a particular feature will definitely be in v5 or not.

That's an area that I would like to work on, but it is unknown how much work it will take. I will need to do some exploratory work before I will know more about it.

- Michael

Ok Michael and always thanks for your frankness.

But, and I hope not to sound too complaining...

Could you tell me, in broad terms, which new (really new) feature are you developing/planning for the next releases of V4/V5
And if you have a rough roadmap.

I ask you these things because, even if the new V4 major release is a great product and compatible with 64 bit, it's been years that Moi3D doesn't get any real new modelling feature.

I hope you understand my point of view...

Have a nice day.

Hi Marco,

re:
> Could you tell me, in broad terms, which new (really new) feature are you developing/planning for the next releases of V4/V5
> And if you have a rough roadmap.

I'm sorry Marco, like I wrote previously I don't have any fixed plans or any roadmap set yet. So I do not have any of this information to give you right now.

MoI v4 did introduce SubD model conversion which enables new modeling workflows, I would think that should be considered a modeling feature.

- Michael

OK, Michael.

"I'm sorry Marco, like I wrote previously I don't have any fixed plans or any roadmap set yet. So I do not have any of this information to give you right now."

Really, I don't know what to say...

I'm really sorry to hear that.

Sorry Marco, unfortunately it's quite difficult for me to know in advance exactly how long any particular feature area will take to implement. I need to do some exploratory work before getting a better understanding of it.

Until I'm able to do some of that I just can't make any promises for exactly what will be in v5.

- Michael

I don't have time to provide drawings, but here is a quick summary: There are two systems of projection, for representing a 3D object in 2D; generally called the "British system" and the "American system". They are both "standards". They are both 'logical', in how they work. What is not very 'logical' is this: Assume the "Front view" is the front view of a car. In the British system, the left view will show the left side of the car. In the American system, the left view will show the right side of the car! I was taught the American system and used that until I left aerospace in 1998. So I feel safe in saying that the Brits got it right and the Yanks should have left well enough alone. You can adhere to a standard, but you have to decide which standard! Life is complicated. (For anyone who wants more info on the two systems, I am referring to 'The Motor Vehicle', by Newton, Steeds, and Garrett, tenth edition, 742 pages, Chapter One: 'Engineering Drawings'.)

What about creating MatchSrf in MoI3d? Would it be useful for MoI users. I know that is possible same thing with blend but MatchSrf could also be useful.

I`ll keep my finger crossed also for analysis tools (curvature graph, zebra, check continuity on curves and surfaces). I know it`s much but I think it`s a right thread to dream ;)

One "fairly basic" thing I would like to see in MoI is converting points on a curve between sharp corners and smooth curve points. Full on spline curves with tangent handles like in 2D drawing softwares would be great too.

Don't know if it's a reasonable or sufficiently popular ask; of course it's merely an ask:
SVG output.

Certainly there are a bevy of 2D vector apps, but MOI is exquisite, accurate, and handy.

If, not... I am happy continuing to paste 2D curves into Affinity Designer.

Fillets without limits (it`s 123design still available to download and test for free here: https://web.archive.org/web/20170202170834/http://www.123dapp.com/design ):

What is the N° version of this 123D ?