Hello James,

the flowObj node have to be changed to multiprocess. At the moment - only one target. The second problem is, that you try to use a rectangle as base surface. Try using SubDiv/selCenterPlane. I will have a look, to change the node to multiprocess in the next days.

Have a nice day
Karsten

Hello James,

very untested!!!

Have a nice day
Karsten

p.s.: Very interesting experiments here - thanks to all!

Hi Karsten,

One day I would like to buy you a beer!

Thanks again
-James

Hi Karsten,

I have analysed the code of your new "mFlowObj" node in an attempt to create a "mLoft" node
that can multiprocess lofts on multiple targets. I'm afraid that the task is beyond me.

If & only if this is a copy, paste & minor edit to the code you have already written for "mFlowObj" node,
and you can see the benefit of a "mLoft" node's creation, I would appreciate your expertise.

Thanks in advance, and for all you have done for me.

-James

Hello James,

looks really great. I think about the multiLoft node, but it is not so elegant to handle like pointarrays, because the additional informations in pointarrays be absend here. So we need an additional input to give them externally. In detail we need to split the objectlist members (curves) in separate groups to loft them. It depends on the workflow of creation which information are given. So we can split the objectlist by a value of curves for every loft or the amount of lofts. So we can evaluate a value from a pointarray xlength/zlength, manually or something else. Complicated, if you want to process numarrays for that, if you want individual numbers of curves for each loft. What is your idea about creating the loft curves? I don't think that the multiprocess mechanism in mFlowObj is needed for that node - maybe the short+ mode can do that, but I'm not Max.

Have a nice day
Karsten

p.s.: If you use e.g. orient short+ we can use the the target pointarray to evaluate the infos - maybe! Or use it direct?

Hi Karsten,

>>the additional informations in pointarrays be absend here..................Complicated<<

I feared that this may be the case. However your mFlowObj node appeared to me to sort multiple items in an object list for unique processing, and so if this info could be called upon again, further processes may be performed individually on each object. But I can see node would need some input instructions.

I have attached a couple of .nod files:

panelWall.nod
The application of extrude after mFlowObj to faceted surface
produces extrudes in a single direction. This is to be expected and may well be desirable. However it would be better if there was a means by which each extrude was normal to it's own surface. Perhaps a "Offset/Shell" node would be an alternative means of achieving this result.

PanelShellLoft.nod

Initially, not having achieved the desirable result with extrude, I returned to original panelShell node, thinking perhaps if there an outer array of facets with their attached curves and an inner array, that a loft may be able to be performed between the outer and inner curves.
(i have 3 layers of obj array of curves here: rectangles and circles on outer surf and smaller circles on inner surf)

Naturally though, moi wants to loft all curves in a single loft. There would need to be a "BundleObjs" node analogous to "BundlePts", but as you say>>not so elegant to handle like pointarrays<<.

.>>I'm not Max.<<
I know, but what you have built upon Max's foundations has been amazing!

-James

PS I know you are "not a pattern guy", but nevertheless you have furnished us with an outstanding tool for pattern creation: mFlowObj node
for which I am eternally grateful.

Hello Friends
Finally weekend Clear.....
I saw updates to Knots ...
Given my familiarity with the English it will take some time
to understand the development ...
I send you this test file on the last node
A good start a week to all
best
al

Hello Al, Hello James,

looking to your results - I think we are going in the right direction. I have take a look to multiprocessing Loft. I have a buggy version running, that also process the typical input, but I have to do some test and think about the different aspects of the possible inputs - sometimes there are also knots in my brain, not only nodes:-) When I think I'm ready - I have to make an example nodefile and will post it. But maybe there are better solutions.

Have a nice day
Karsten

p.s.: I hope Max can give a support about this theme and some programming rules to bring some of the nodes into the core development.

Hi Karsten,

>>multiprocessing Loft. I have a buggy version running.....When I think I'm ready.................will post it<<

Thank you so much for this. You're a gentleman and a scholar!
-James

Hello James,

very untested, but seems to work:-)

Please, have a look in the example to understand how it works and if the workflow is useful.

Have a nice day
Karsten

p.s.: Gentleman? - my wife has sometimes a different opinion;-)

Hello Karsten,

Thank you for new node, it will be a great addition to the toolkit.

I have been attempting to achieve the lofts between curves appended to faceted surfaces. To simply things, I have reduced it 2 object arrays: OUTERcircle - INNERcircle. I used BoundingBoxes node to get ptArray info and then BundlePts to get targets for mLoft. The result is closer to the intention but not quite there: see attached image.

Interestingly, I discovered that Sweep node already does multiprocessing, and it is a promising avenue to go down. If it performed a sweep between start profiles and end profiles, it would produce the desired result. Unfortunately, it only recognises the outer curve as the profile input: see mLoft_Panels.nod

I can't tell you how thrilled I am about the great leap forward catalysed by your multiprocessing nodes: mFowObj, mPathArray, mLoft & it seems Sweep.

Keep up the good work
-James

Hello Karsten,


**UPDATED nod file**



Using sweep together with mFlowObj it is possible to produce multiple extrudes
with variable profile inputs with differential orientation and extrude distances.



However because sweep node only registers the starting profile the object array
has a contiguous side and a stepped side. The swept planes are all parallel to the rails,
and hence interpenetrate where concave and separate where convex.

They would taper in or out where appropriate, if the sweep node registered the end profile.
And the end side would appear contiguous rather than stepped.

I may have made a mistake with my setup.

Let me know,
-James

Hello James,
Looks really great, closer to that what you want, but not the ending. Caused by my inadequate english I misunderstood some of your statements. After a closer look to your node files I think, the easiest way would be a variable input length for curve groups like in the bundlePts node - like you already mentioned!!!. For a standalone node it is possible, but I don't know if I can integrate it to the existing. I have to check it in the next days.
Nevertheless I think the tests and experiments here helps to find solutions, gives example for people that want exactly such a result and shows what is possible in general.

Thanks and
have a nice day
Karsten

Hello Karsten,

>>Caused by my inadequate english I misunderstood some of your statements<<

To clarify I made simple sweep nod file attached.
Sweep factory allows multiple profiles, giving result in image below,
but sweep node only recognises the start profile. see simpleSweep.nod



Is that clear?

Your response is appreciated

-James

Hello Karsten an James

Given the recent significant developments
redoing the test , I think for exactly orienting objects
in target areas, you could use Offset and then Sweep
unfortunately, currently with only one profile.....
It would serve a Sweep Node MultiProfile and whi not MultiRail...
or, more simply use the actual Loft Node
with a Node similar to (Bundle Pts ) but that groups
curves instead Point-
I've been clear......?
I hope you understand.....
best
al

PS-Sorry for my bad English
I do everything to be understood ...
but it is not always so simple
I have to thank San " GoogleTranslation "

Hi James
while doing the post, I saw your
I would say that we are on the same frequency my friend
have a nice day
al