Rhino good enuf?

[stevenL]

Just a quick question. I have been using Lightwave for a bit, but I recently got a copy of Rhino to model architecture with because I needed a more precise modeler.

 

However I have been reading the forum and I see alot of people using Acad and ArchiCad,...just wondering if it would be worth it/ or necessary to switch modelers before I get in too deep with the learning curve. Or is Rhino perfectly sufficient for what I need?

 

Thanks

[kingeldar]

i guees people usig acad or archcad are like me peops who need to create architectural documents also

(quoted plans & sections)

if udon't need don't bother with an architectural softthat ain't no modeler

but an archi soft turned to 3d.....

(but i'm a sort of newbie so i'm maybe sayin sumetin' stupid there.. my expetience's short in cg only an architect, young architect)

[ch83575]

Rhino is very cool! Most people use AutoCAD because that is what they first learned to draw with (on the computer at least, dont want to step on any old peoples toes ) or that is what they learned at their cad-monkey accademy. Rhino uses double float precision, just like AutoCAD and Pro E for that matter, so precision is there. Also with "lino", a new plug-in, you can create very good line drawings for standard drafting output. You can also use penguin for NPR rendering and flamingo aint too shabby either. The only thing you really cant do is high end rendering (though flamingo is getting close, and rhino does export to pov-ray which is super cool) and animation (i haven't used it, but i have heard that bongo sucks). All in all it is a cool package, dont worry, you arent missing anything without Acad!

[John Dollus]

Not to mention the fact the Rhino is MUCH more affordable than AutoCad.

[Ken Walton]

Hmmmm... I think I'd like to see some of the senior people on here (Jeff for one - when he gets back from vacation)comment on this one. I think it's a pretty good question, and I remember asking something slightly similar about a year ago. To this day, I still have problems trying to get things as accurate (not to mention simple) in max as I could in Rhino (my last post was about something like this). The last time I used Rhino was version 1 and I could not get a real "clean" model into max - I'm sure they've made significant improvements on the exports since then, and there's always polytrans... I use ArchiCAD now (if I can get the damn thing running again) for most of the modeling I don't do directly in max - but ohhhhh how I long for the simplicity, snapping features and precision of Rhino...

 

If you're good with Rhino and you know enough about arch viz and rendering methods - for instance, what and how you need to model and what you don't (I think the latter is more important) to pull off the scene - you could probably create a highly detailed and accurate model ready to go into your animation package in no time at all.

 

Can't wait to see what the other folks here have to say...

 

Ken Walton

[Ken Walton]

By the way - where at in TX?

[Ken Walton]

Well, now I'm not so sure - I started up Rhino this morning and tried to set up a simple room scene - it actually took me quite a bit longer than if I had used Archicad or max. I'm also still running into the export problem. Given that its been a good year since I've done anything with Rhino, I must just be rusty... but right now (without knowing what improvements have been made in the last couple of versions) I'd lean towards having either autocad/ArchiCAD plus your 3d package. Really suck when you compare either of those packages' price tags with Rhino's. I'm not a lightwave user - tried it once but couldn't do anything - but the people I know that use it swear by it - I was under the impression that its modeling tools were quite nice (maybe for more organic stuff though, I'm not sure)...

 

Ken Walton

[stevenL]

Thanks for the replies. I think its clearer now...I think..lol. I do plan on using Lightwave for rendering, as its what I have, I'm familiar with it and it does what I need for rendering.

 

My main concern was being able to interact/interface with clients who insist on a cad program (ie.Acad, Archicad). And I need a more precise modeler for architectural purposes, though Lightwave is a good modeler and excellent at organic stuff. I already have a copy of Rhino, but havn't really played with it that much. Seems like a lot of people doing this kind of work are using programs like Acad and Archiicad and thought I'd ask.

 

Btw, I'm in Houston.

[STRAT]

well, we've recently bought in a seat of Rhino because one of our staff is a Rhino modeller.

 

Here's the gig -

 

As you probably know, Rhino is very cheap, extremely fast to install/load/work with, and lets you model very very fast.

 

from a mesh point of view it's almost like working with acad's solids. here's where the problems begin.

 

as i say, it can model up a complex model in a fraction of the time autocad can. but, rhino is purely spline NURBS based. pure and simple.

Everything you model in rhino is created from splines/NURBS. Excellent if ur doing organic shaped stuff, but VERY inefficiant for architecture, where there's like 80% regular straight stuff.

 

Rhino models do convert over to other 3d apps quite nicely, but boy do you have a HUGE pointless mesh.

 

The goal in 3d is generally to have the most cleanest, efficiant mesh you can. this aids in faster regeneration times and perfect rendering quility with regaurds to light leakage and shadow bias.

 

But as i say, by it's very nature, Rhino isn't a polygonal modeller, so obviously you get a shed load of polys. Ok, so you can semi-control the polygon look and feel, but this is highy in-accurate and a very ammaturish way of working. The polygon settings are fairly complicated to understand, and the resulting polys are fairly random even when fully understood. IT JUST DOESN'T GIVE YOU THE COMPLETE CONTROL FOR EXPORTING A MESH AS YOU SHOULD BE ASPIRING TO.

 

Dont get me wrong, Rhino can be used for architecture wonderfully, but keep it within Rhino. dont export the mesh. Get Rhino's flemingo photoreal renderer. That too is the biz!

 

But for exporting ur rhino mesh into max/viz for example? i wouldn't bother unless the architecture ur modelling is pretty small and simple.

 

You could learn to draw your splines efficiantly, and export different elements of the building in different layers to limit the poly count. but this is most time consuming. If you export all the model as a whole, which includes curved elements and straight elements in the same mesh be prepaired for pretty big, pointless mesh sizes.

[Ernest Burden III]

I will add one thing--Over the years I have tried MANY 3D apps, and not liked most of them. I got on-board with Rhino during the v0 beta testing and loved it. I still don't use it for much, unfortunately. But what I really liked about it was the CAD-like interface and working methods. That, to me, is worth a lot. A rich feature set and a counter-intuitive working process is not what I like to see. (That is exactly where I find myself learning to use FormZ to model currently).

[John Dollus]

The new Npower translator is supposed to solve the translation problems bewteen Max and Rhino.

[Fran]

I use Power Translators to open Rhino .3dm files in VIZ 4 and Max 6. I had practically given up on VIZ, but gave it another try after I found PT. I have found the brep surfaces to process radiosity and render faster than the max native nurbs or imported IGES files. They also processed and rendered faster than meshes of comparable detail. Once you get your Rhino nurbs into max via PT, you set the tesselation level and nothing is lost in translation. I model 98% of the props in my scenes and demand a high level of detail. With breps, level of detail is view dependent - stuff far away is automatically tesselated less than things close up. With a static mesh, the mesh is there no matter how far you are from it.

 

Of course, there are tricks to learn to get optimal 3ds files from Rhino for architectural viz. Split surfaces around windows and doors to avoid "web" meshes that cause shadow artifacts. Things like that. Efficient modeling is easier for me with Rhino than it was with AutoCAD.

[Ernest Burden III]

I model 98% of the props in my scenes and demand a high level of detail.

As a side note, Fran, can I convince you to offer your great 'props' on the CGA eSTORE?

[Fran]

Hi Ernest,

 

I'll see what I can come up with. I looked at the model selection in the eSTORE and it's a little sparse on furniture and accessories.

[bwilson]

Hey Steven,

 

I first got on board with Rhino starting about 6 months for both v2 was released for nautical engineering/production and recently architectural concept design and visualization. It is easy to adapt to, has very powerful modeling features and is extremely accurate and affordable.

 

As far as integration into software like AutoCAD it works very well. I typically work one on one with project manager in the architectural firm I work for to develop conceptual studies. The Make2D command is one of my favorites for integration with ACAD. Once the architect finalizes a design we developed in Rhino, I generate 4-views in rhino and export the paths to DWG. From there the others working on the project simply plug the block directly into their production AutoCAD drawings. That process saves us tons of time rather then having drafters figure out some of out complex designs.

 

I started out using ACAD for 3d modeling, and I find it to be time consuming and cumbersome, and I'm sure others here will agree with me on that.

 

To comment on some of the posts here that state that the mesh generation is mediocre, I disagree. I have had great success with rendering meshes imported into Max. Simply adjust the polygon slider quality when exporting to 3DS to the quality that is fitting and then optimize the mesh in Max on complex geometry such as arcs, extruded splines, etc. As long as you have an efficient model to generate meshes from, you will have great results. If your models are not efficient, you meshes can really get out of hand during 3ds conversion. A tip would be to convert your complex meshes independently of the simplistic square meshes. Convert your square meshed at the lowest polygon setting, and eye up the more complex meshes for best results and lowest polygon counts.

 

Rhino is without question a valuable tool to have in your skill set.

 

[ February 22, 2004, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: bwilson ]

[STRAT]

Originally posted by bwilson:

Hey Steven,

 

To comment on some of the posts here that state that the mesh generation is mediocre, I disagree. I have had great success with rendering meshes imported into Max. Simply adjust the polygon slider quality when exporting to 3DS to the quality that is fitting and then optimize the mesh in Max on complex geometry such as arcs, extruded splines, etc. As long as you have an efficient model to generate meshes from, you will have great results. If your models are not efficient, you meshes can really get out of hand during 3ds conversion. A tip would be to convert your complex meshes independently of the simplistic square meshes. Convert your square meshed at the lowest polygon setting, and eye up the more complex meshes for best results and lowest polygon counts.

 

Rhino is without question a valuable tool to have in your skill set.

this is ultimately the bottom line. the better a rhino modeller you are the better the mesh will be.

 

but as i said, even given you become an ace rhino modeller, you still dont get total mesh control. you cant predict EXACTLY the mesh structure, or explain it's 'randomness' when you see the mesh previews.

 

but as long as ur a good modeller, and systematically export meshes in optomised stages you'll get good results. to a point.

[3dp]

hmm two post in 1 day from me....

as a occasional rhino user (i love it i just wish more projects would suit it)

i've always tened to use it to model componets and then assemble them in max (this applies more to my hobby projects of cars and bikes)

by planning ahead and being comfortable with the program you soon find ways to optimise models but bottom line is it's nurbs and really not the best tool for primary architectural model work (then again iuse max as my main tool and that usually get a reaction too)

i point out how much nurbs in max sucks and it's very easy to overblow a model @ rendertime without some serious woking up surfaces

[Ernest Burden III]

One problem with the current versions of Rhino--symbol/block support. You will read that Rhino supports blocks. It does, but the part that isn't made clear is that it cannot import blocks from another program. It can only make its own.

 

I use instancing of symbols/blocks quite a lot. An example is to make a low-poly version of a chair used many times in a restaurant for early view studies, later, I will swap in the final version, or the 'new' version (client changes). With blocks, all instances simply 'replace' themselves in exact position/rotation. But if you cannot IMPORT a file with blocks in place you could only get the most out of that Rhino feature by building native.

 

I assume v4 will allow importing blocks, but for now, its an incomplete feature.