sität der Kreativwirtschaft) den heurigen "3D Austria Tag" ankündigen zu dürfen:Vortragsprogramm:Einlass ab 9:009:30 – 10:30: Virtuelle Landschaften mit VUE xStream Vortragender: Helge Maus (pixeltrain)10:45 – 11:30: Interaktive Anwendungen mit Unity Pro Vortragender: Dietmar Godina (Playpublic)11:45 – 12:30: Praxisbeispiele & Neuheiten zu Rhino 5 Vortragende: Albert Wiltsche und Markus Manahl (TU Graz)12:30 – 13:15: Mittagspause13:15 - 14:00: Praxisvortrag: Architectural Rendering mit VRay, 3DStudio max und Photoshop Vortragender: Martin Frühwirth (Atelier Frühwirth)14:15 – 15:00: Praxisbeispiel: Mercedes A-Klasse Präsentation mit Cinema 4D & V-RAY Vortragender: Niki Vuckovic (immortal-arts)15:15 - 16:00: Praxistipps & Neuheiten zur Adobe CS6 Vortragender: Martin Dörsch (Adobe)16:15 – 16:30: Adobe Team Cloud & VIP Lizenzprogramm Vortragender: Markus Fiala (CG Shop)16:45 – 17:45: VFX-Workflow für Guerillas - Hollywood mit SynthEyes, Cinema 4D, und AfterEffects & Plugins Vortragender: Helge Maus18:00 Ende der VeranstaltungIm Foyer werden wir Infostände von Autodesk, Chaosgroup (V-RAY) und Rhino haben - nützen Sie die Gelegenheit und informieren Sie sich - neben den Vorträgen - auch persönlich an den Infoständen bei unseren Experten!Die Teilnahme ist KOSTENLOS, aufgrund der begrenzten Platzanzahl ist jedoch eine Anmeldung per e-mail an office@kkkc.at erforderlich.…
uld be much better than Rhino at huge mesh collections. I'd personally try free Autodesk Meshmixer and ZBrush first but most designers are more familiar with rendering programs like Maya or 3DS Max. I'm not familiar enough with architecture to suggest a list as only Revit and Sketchup come to mind.
Looking more closely, CAD Exporter is only for 2D curves and points, how silly, and it requires baked geometry in a Rhino layer:
I could write a Python script to export an STL but that would be a large ascii format file instead of binary. Better to use OBJ to retain quad faces, too.
Ah, well, OBJ files are also ascii format when exported from Rhino, so it would be quite easy to make a script to export those directly to disk from Grasshopper. Here is one box, 10X10X20 in size, with quad faces:
# Rhino
o object_1v 10 10 20v 10 10 0v 10 0 20v 10 0 0v 0 10 20v 0 10 0v 0 0 20v 0 0 0f 5 7 3 1f 5 6 8 7f 3 7 8 4f 2 4 8 6f 5 1 2 6f 3 4 2 1
If I have time I'll make a little script to write such OBJ files unless you can find a native Grasshopper plugin for direct OBJ export in full 3D for meshes.…
ception:Retrieving the COM class factory for component with CLSID {B0D0A647-983E-485B-9A69-45F0382F0D9C} failed due to the following error: 80040154 Class not registered (Exception from HRESULT: 0x80040154 (REGDB_E_CLASSNOTREG)).
Note the previous comment I did the Unblock with Doodlebug CC 2014 and it worked on Windows 7. At home here I am running Doodlebug CC 2015 with Illustrator v. 2015.3.1 release on Windows 10.
Shot in the dark: maybe needs a namespace declaration to work with Windows 10?
Thoughts on a solution? …
ay how many valid permutations exist.
But allow me to guesstimate a number for 20 components (no more, no less). Here are my starting assumptions:
Let's say the average input and output parameter count of any component is 2. So we have 20 components, each with 2 inputs and 2 outputs.
There are roughly 35 types of parameter, so the odds of connecting two parameters at random that have the same type are roughly 3%. However there are many conversions defined and often you want a parameter of type A to seed a parameter of type B. So let's say that 10% of random connections are in fact valid. (This assumption ignores the obvious fact that certain parameters (number, point, vector) are far more common than others, so the odds of connecting identical types are actually much higher than 3%)
Now even when data can be shared between two parameters, that doesn't mean that hooking them up will result in a valid operation (let's ignore for the time being that the far majority of combinations that are valid are also bullshit). So let's say that even when we manage to pick two parameters that can communicate, the odds of us ending up with a valid component combo are still only 1 in 2.
We will limit ourselves to only single connections between parameters. At no point will a single parameter seed more than one recipient and at no point will any parameter have more than one source. We do allow for parameters which do not share or receive data.
So let's start by creating the total number of permutations that are possible simply by positioning all 20 components from left to right. This is important because we're not allowed to make wires go from right to left. The left most component can be any one of 20. So we have 20 possible permutations for the first one. Then for each of those we have 19 options to fill the second-left-most slot. 20×19×18×17×...×3×2×1 = 20! ~2.5×1018.
We can now start drawing wires from the output of component #1 to the inputs of any of the other components. We can choose to share no outputs, output #1, output #2 or both with any of the downstream components (19 of them, with two inputs each). That's 2×(19×2) + (19×2)×(19×2-1) ~ 1500 possible connections we can make for the outputs of the first component. The second component is very similar, but it only has 18 possible targets and some of the inputs will already have been used. So now we have 2×(18×2-1) + (18×2-1)×(18×2-1) ~1300. If we very roughly (not to mention very incorrectly, but I'm too tired to do the math properly) extrapolate to the other 18 components where the number of possible connections decreases in a similar fashion thoughout, we end up with a total number of 1500×1300×1140×1007×891×789×697×...×83×51×24×1 which is roughly 6.5×1050. However note that only 10% of these wires connect compatible parameters and only 50% of those will connect compatible components. So the number of valid connections we can make is roughly 3×1049.
All we have to do now is multiply the total number of valid connection per permutation with the total number of possible permutations; 20! × 3×1049 which comes to 7×1067 or 72 unvigintillion as Wolfram|Alpha tells me.
Impressive as these numbers sound, remember that by far the most of these permutations result in utter nonsense. Nonsense that produces a result, but not a meaningful one.
EDIT: This computation is way off, see this response for an improved estimate.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 12:06pm on March 15, 2013