Tracing Made Easy in Rhino3D

[@Yurikyurik]

i appreciate the time you are taking to make these videos, thank you master! i am learning a lot, just need to practice more. sculpt low match high!

[@joebabb504]

Just wanted to take a moment to thank you sooooo much for all your videos. I started watching the ones about surfaces and sculpt and match and learned quickly to apply what you've shown in this video about tracing things. I sometimes end up tracing outlines of things and I used to use interpolate curve. Now I follow your example and am getting much better results along with using the Match command and curvature graph. I've been using Rhino3D for 2 or 3 years now and wish I had known about this stuff when I started. I haven't used Blend Curve much but now see how I could benefit from it. Thanks again.

[@Rhinoceros3d]

another great video! thanks Sky!!

[@ghassankanaan1767]

👍👍👍👍

[@ibraheemareeda7706]

Thank you very much for that was very helpful to me.

[@msdosfx]

"Quickly" ?!? Thanks for the vid, but this is really the best illustration ever of why Rhino needs a better handle curve tool that more closely matches Illustrator. It would take 6 seconds to precisely trace this in illustrator with 5 control points. I found this vid in a comments section on Rhino's forum about how Rhino doesn't need to improve its curve tools. Imagine if you were trying to trace something a bit more complex than a simple wing. I love Rhino and work with it for my job and for personal work, but Illustrators pen tool is so much faster for precise tracing. Like 20 times faster

[@thirtysixverts]

There are serious downsides to using Bezier handle curves to make surfaces - this is why in Rhino it's better to construct your curves this way. If your goal is to make 2D tracings, then yes, it's faster and easier to do that in Illustrator. If your goal is to make surfaces, then this is the better way to structure your input geometry. All of this is to say that I respectfully disagree with the idea that what Rhino needs is handle curves as in Illustrator - the end goal of Illustrator and Rhino are very very different.

[@HS-cm1pd]

@@thirtysixverts You can end up with identical b-splines whether using bezier or using a different creation method to create the curves. It is patently untrue that somehow the nature of the curves is different. This is what I hear from many, but I don't know why everyone wants to defend the ham-fisted implementation of the handle curve tool in Rhino compared to every other 2D design program. Obviously Illustrator and Rhino are very different tools for different purposes, but it doesn't change the fact that the implementation of the handle curve tool in Rhino needs some simple improvements that could probably be easily implemented if it weren't for hubris. Besides, it's comparable to having a complaint about how a mesh tool works in Rhino, then having everyone explain that Rhino is for NURBS.

[@thirtysixverts]

@@HS-cm1pd Let's say you have a b-spline that defines a complex shape that requires it to be degree 5 with 6 points. To make this same shape with bezier handle curves, you'll need multiple segments - correct?

[@msdosfx]

@@thirtysixverts No, all one curve. The degree of the curve is one less than the number of points (handles) that define the curve

[@msdosfx]

check the handle curve tool in rhino. it works based on Bezier, but as soon as you select the line and turn on the control points it is identical to any other curve in rhino. My complaint is that this tool should be easier to use, like illustrator and other design programs.

[@hiteshchoksi3494]

Great

[@billygreggory7899]

Why does the InterpCurve mess up the lines? Could you use interp curve and then rebuild?

[@thirtysixverts]

InterpCrv just loves to create curves with far more points than one needs, and it's highly dependent on where exactly you pick your points. Usually what happens with InterpCrv is people go for "accuracy" and pick way too many points - then the result is just bad curvature. You COULD certainly do what you say - InterpCrv first, then rebuild, then after you rebuild you'd likely want to do some point editing to refine the shape. Which begs the question - if you're going to end up point editing it eventually, why bother with InterpCrv in the first place?

[@billygreggory7899]

@@thirtysixverts Gotcha. That makes alot of sense. Thanks for the explanation