Author Topic: Rhino to 3DSMax  (Read 6758 times)

2018-06-12, 16:22:02

louisryko

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
I know this has probably been discussed to death for the past 10 years... BUT, I still cannot find a suitable answer or solution to the problem of importing a clean model to 3DSMax from Rhino.

My goal is to have surfaces imported so they are non-triangulated. I would also really like to be able to edit the imported models (specifically with chamfers) - something which I'm struggling to do.

I know plenty of people model in and import from Rhino... whats everyone's preferred method?

Many thanks!

EDIT... I should note: I'm only wanting to import simple geometry - for example: walls (straight 90 degree corners) which are solid/capped polysurfaces. Nothing fancy. I essentially want to import walls, then chamfer them in 3DSMax. Any 'complex' geometry will be imported and unedited, basically.
« Last Edit: 2018-06-12, 16:50:14 by louisryko »

2018-06-12, 21:55:15
Reply #1

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 425
    • View Profile
I always export as DWG

2018-06-13, 02:22:38
Reply #2

telemix

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
SAT format is good for solid models.
SAT imported as "body object", is true solid model.
Apply edit mesh modifer, not edit poly. And do not convert to edit poly, it is kill all normals.

To get non-triangulated faces, you can use "Moi3d" for reexport.
« Last Edit: 2018-06-13, 02:37:44 by telemix »

2018-06-13, 11:46:10
Reply #3

pokoy

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1478
    • View Profile
SAT format is good for solid models.
SAT imported as "body object", is true solid model.
Apply edit mesh modifer, not edit poly. And do not convert to edit poly, it is kill all normals.

To get non-triangulated faces, you can use "Moi3d" for reexport.

Sorry but there's so much wrong information here it needs to be corrected.

Use STEP or IGES for Rhino.

If you're on Max 2014+, you can import both formats natively, they will come in as Body Objects. With Body Objects it's possible to change tesselation at any time since the original NURBS data is kept and tesselated only for viewport display or rendering (even renderers that render NURBS directly will tesselate them).

With Max 2017+ you can also import NURBS data with the ATF importer (Autodesk's own NURBS kernel) which will work better for some cases - however some drawbacks are that you won't be able to change tesselation afterwards and the resolution slider is the only parameter, so you have less control over how the data gets tesselated.

To use ATF, use 'convert to geometry' set to ON from the dropdown in the importer dialog. To use Body Objects, use OFF.

The limitation where normals were discarded upon converting to Editable Poly has been lifted a long time ago, there were many undocumented changes in the last few years and converting to E-mesh and E-Poly will retain surface normals now.

Chamfering or any other manipulation of NURBS in Max is not possible, Body Objects are very limited in what you can do with them, even Undo doesn't work reliably. If you change something, make sure to save first ;)

One note if you're using Corona for rendering. If Corona uses the shadow terminator fix (which is does by default) surface normals from NURBS will render with artifacts. To get rid of these, your only option is to disable the shadow terminator fix.

My personal adivce - there's no benefit in modeling the walls in Rhino, it'll probably cause you more headaches than needed if you aren't used to NURBS meshes in Max, they have their own quirks and you need to know how to solve them.
Unless there's something specific you need that you haven't mentioned.

2018-06-13, 15:09:53
Reply #4

louisryko

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile

Sorry but there's so much wrong information here it needs to be corrected.

Use STEP or IGES for Rhino.

My personal adivce - there's no benefit in modeling the walls in Rhino, it'll probably cause you more headaches than needed if you aren't used to NURBS meshes in Max, they have their own quirks and you need to know how to solve them.
Unless there's something specific you need that you haven't mentioned.

Thanks for the thorough advice pokoy.

I'm using Max 2018.

This might be a fair bit of a departure from the original topic, but I'll go anyway: ....I'm new to 3DSMax, so excuse my ignorance. Do most people model in max? I'm a long-time Rhino user and - like most people with my experience in Rhino - absolutely hate modelling in 3DSMax. It's a complete pain. It's inaccurate, it's unfriendly. However, I do understand that this is an unpopular opinion.

I know companies such as The Boundary model the architecture in Sketch-Up, then import to Max. I totally get why - its easy, its accurate and many architectural companies use sketchup for their 3d needs. Similarly, as an architect - I was taught in Rhino. I consider myself a Rhino expert. So modelling in anything other than Rhino is basically out of the question for me. Additionally, as I work exclusively with architects, on REAL projects, I require accuracy. I receive most models in Rhino. So this is why I'm needing to import from Rhino to Max.

I find it totally strange that I can't cleanly and easily import to Max from Rhino. I want to build the basic architecture in Rhino, then edit it in Max (with corner chamfers etc, for added detail as an example).

Now that rant is over - I'll continue trying STEP and/or IGES as suggested... Though from 1 full days worth of experimentation, I can't say any process is preferred over another...

2018-06-13, 16:00:48
Reply #5

pokoy

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1478
    • View Profile
IGES or STEP will both work, I don't expect major differences. There are certain cases where surface patches will come out better in one format so if you see problems, try the other.

The main difference is that Rhino is a NURBS modeler and Max a polygonal modeler. I agree that accuracy in Max stinks if you're used to work with a NURBS app. It's important that you set up your units correctly in Max, probably best to use meters for both system and file units, then accuracy will be good down to a millimeter.

Even if you hate modeling in Max, for simple things like walls I'd still advise to learn how to do it in Max, it's just way faster than going back and forth between the two apps. If you really want to stay in Rhino you'd need to remove any triangulation form faces you want to chamfer for example since the triangulation will prevent chamfer from working properly.

As already suggested above, MoI3d (Rhino maybe as well) can export NURBS to polygons (FBX or OBJ in case of MoI3d) instead of triangles so you might want to try that as well. The drawback would be that you won't be able to change tessellation in Max since you export polygonal data instead of NURBS.

That said, chamfering in Rhino is superior with complicated geometry. Max 2017 and later version have a useful chamfer modifier, so it's possible to change values quickly on the fly.

There are archviz companies completely relying on Max for creating models so it's perfectly possible. But yes, it's a different thing than NURBS and you need to spend some time to be fast and efficient.

2018-06-13, 16:38:23
Reply #6

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 425
    • View Profile
In my opinion it's just not worth it to use iges or step for simple geometry. Dwg is surprisingly good.
Only for product design is worth using iges.

It's true though that in order to chamfer edges cleanly in max you will need to modify the triangulation sometimes.

2018-06-13, 16:44:27
Reply #7

louisryko

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
It's true though that in order to chamfer edges cleanly in max you will need to modify the triangulation sometimes.

Thanks Lupaz,

Would you mind explaining this process?

Cheers,

2018-06-13, 17:16:11
Reply #8

lupaz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 425
    • View Profile
If you need to chamfer an edge cleanly, you will probably have to manually clean the mesh. I don't think I can explain the process. It's modeling techniques.
Usually very small chamfering won't cause visible defects for archviz purposes.

2018-06-15, 12:10:16
Reply #9

romullus

  • Global Moderator
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 6264
  • Let's move this topic, shall we?
    • View Profile
    • My Models
The limitation where normals were discarded upon converting to Editable Poly has been lifted a long time ago, there were many undocumented changes in the last few years and converting to E-mesh and E-Poly will retain surface normals now.

That's nice to hear, i'm working with max 2016 and explicit normals are as fragile as ever :/
I'm not Corona Team member. Everything i say, is my personal opinion only.
My Models | My Videos | My Pictures

2018-06-15, 13:18:35
Reply #10

pokoy

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 1478
    • View Profile
The limitation where normals were discarded upon converting to Editable Poly has been lifted a long time ago, there were many undocumented changes in the last few years and converting to E-mesh and E-Poly will retain surface normals now.

That's nice to hear, i'm working with max 2016 and explicit normals are as fragile as ever :/
They should definitely be kept when doing this in Max 2016. Still a lot to be asked but unfortunately all the (small) changes to normal handling were never documented publicly so it's trial and error. Attaching/detaching still breaks them in 2019, though.

2018-06-15, 14:03:27
Reply #11

romullus

  • Global Moderator
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 6264
  • Let's move this topic, shall we?
    • View Profile
    • My Models
Just tested it and indeed normals are kept if i convert straight to editable poly (FINALLY), but edit poly modifiers still destroys them. Well, that's already big step forward, hopefully one day autodesk will fully address normals isues in 3ds max.
I'm not Corona Team member. Everything i say, is my personal opinion only.
My Models | My Videos | My Pictures

2019-10-05, 14:58:25
Reply #12

arcmos

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
I also experimented a lot with Rhino to 3ds Max or Vectorworks to 3ds Max. In case of Rhino I also made the best of experience with the DWG format.

2019-10-05, 15:07:49
Reply #13

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 296
    • View Profile
SAT format is good for solid models.
SAT imported as "body object", is true solid model.
Apply edit mesh modifer, not edit poly. And do not convert to edit poly, it is kill all normals.

To get non-triangulated faces, you can use "Moi3d" for reexport.

Sorry but there's so much wrong information here it needs to be corrected.

Use STEP or IGES for Rhino.

If you're on Max 2014+, you can import both formats natively, they will come in as Body Objects. With Body Objects it's possible to change tesselation at any time since the original NURBS data is kept and tesselated only for viewport display or rendering (even renderers that render NURBS directly will tesselate them).

With Max 2017+ you can also import NURBS data with the ATF importer (Autodesk's own NURBS kernel) which will work better for some cases - however some drawbacks are that you won't be able to change tesselation afterwards and the resolution slider is the only parameter, so you have less control over how the data gets tesselated.

To use ATF, use 'convert to geometry' set to ON from the dropdown in the importer dialog. To use Body Objects, use OFF.

The limitation where normals were discarded upon converting to Editable Poly has been lifted a long time ago, there were many undocumented changes in the last few years and converting to E-mesh and E-Poly will retain surface normals now.

Chamfering or any other manipulation of NURBS in Max is not possible, Body Objects are very limited in what you can do with them, even Undo doesn't work reliably. If you change something, make sure to save first ;)

One note if you're using Corona for rendering. If Corona uses the shadow terminator fix (which is does by default) surface normals from NURBS will render with artifacts. To get rid of these, your only option is to disable the shadow terminator fix.

My personal adivce - there's no benefit in modeling the walls in Rhino, it'll probably cause you more headaches than needed if you aren't used to NURBS meshes in Max, they have their own quirks and you need to know how to solve them.
Unless there's something specific you need that you haven't mentioned.



There's no need to model walls in Rhino ? ... except that you can model way faster than in any Prog like Max or C4D.

I always do architecture (and lots of other objects) in Rhino, export as 3ds to C4D, untriangulate - works fine.
Most surfaces come as one poly, except those with cut outs, of course.

I had done a lot of tests and comparisons regarding export formats. Igel, Step, etc... were mostly much bigger from file size.
So I stick to 3ds format.


2019-10-05, 15:15:17
Reply #14

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 296
    • View Profile
In my opinion it's just not worth it to use iges or step for simple geometry. Dwg is surprisingly good.
Only for product design is worth using iges.

It's true though that in order to chamfer edges cleanly in max you will need to modify the triangulation sometimes.



At one of the design offices where I worked yeas ago, they used STL export format for amorph forms.
Disadvantage: big data size and multiple objects were imported as one object.

After lots of tests, I came to the conclusion that 3ds format works fine (in C4D). And why should it not work equally well in Max?
Give it a try.

For straight, boxy objects without curved surfaces, set the degree to 0.
For amorph shapes, set the degree value to 9 or 6 if you want it smooth.
Normals are almost never flipped in 3ds format - at least my experience.

If you want to get almost only quads, there is also a combination of export settings... which I don't have in mind... but I could check it out.