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

__________________
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain (1835-1910)

Ken Walton

By the way - where at in TX?

__________________
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain (1835-1910)

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

__________________
"Under certain circumstances, profanity provides a relief denied even to prayer." - Mark Twain (1835-1910)

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

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).

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering