Author Topic: Rhino to 3DSMax  (Read 27908 times)

2018-06-12, 16:22:02

louisryko

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • 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: 836
    • View Profile
I always export as DWG

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

telemix

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 29
    • 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: 1702
    • 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: 51
    • 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: 1702
    • 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: 836
    • 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: 51
    • 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: 836
    • 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: 8046
  • 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: 1702
    • 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: 8046
  • 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: 507
    • 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: 507
    • 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.


2019-10-05, 16:07:07
Reply #15

arcmos

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Quote
There's no need to model walls in Rhino ? ... except that you can model way faster than in any Prog like Max or C4D.
Yes, could be. I refer to:
Quote
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.

2019-10-14, 13:39:48
Reply #16

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
Quote
There's no need to model walls in Rhino ? ... except that you can model way faster than in any Prog like Max or C4D.
Yes, could be. I refer to:
Quote
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.


Well, it´s always good to be able to model in different softs - and to use their particular strengths for the specific states of the project.

Funny... had not seen this post with the claim that "he works on REAL projects"...
As if other people do only phantasy projects... :)


2019-10-14, 15:04:13
Reply #17

James Vella

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 232
    • View Profile
on the triangles issue, have you tried the new rhino7 wip quadmesh plugin? It looks quite interesting.

https://www.food4rhino.com/app/createquadmesh

Also using the built in Mesh from surface/polysurface with some adjusted settings can do a pretty good job, not 100% but in this case I couldnt find a triangle.




« Last Edit: 2019-10-14, 18:29:48 by James Vella »

2019-10-15, 22:38:41
Reply #18

Designerman77

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 507
    • View Profile
on the triangles issue, have you tried the new rhino7 wip quadmesh plugin? It looks quite interesting.

https://www.food4rhino.com/app/createquadmesh

Also using the built in Mesh from surface/polysurface with some adjusted settings can do a pretty good job, not 100% but in this case I couldnt find a triangle.








Yeah, this setting I also use for organic or round shapes.
Creates a quite OK quad mesh.

2020-03-02, 10:42:26
Reply #19

Amin Arian

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Hello Experts,i suggest you to use "3ds" for importing basic an Qbic model into the 3ds Max.

2021-01-03, 08:33:23
Reply #20

kasrasha

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
The best way I found these years is: to have layers in 3ds Max, you have to assign a material to each layer in rhino ( only a separated named material with no color and texture works). then export it as 3d`s and it would work Just Perfect...

2021-02-18, 08:45:54
Reply #21

Buzzz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
Hi all,

I have been modeling in Rhino for many years and this is my best export option to 3ds Max.

Attached screenshots of the process.

Regards

2021-02-18, 09:07:39
Reply #22

louisryko

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
Holy Moly Buzzz,

That is the nicest import I've seen (tested it myself and boy, it's much better than anything I've ever produced).

The funny news is; as importing was such a hassle since my original post I've forced myself to learn modelling in Max properly. So now this info is kind of unnecessary for me these days :)

Good news; now know max, bad news; don't use rhino anymore :(

2021-02-18, 09:29:24
Reply #23

Buzzz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
ok.

Rhino is fast and easy to use in architecture. It´s true that having everything in the same program is better and futures changes in geometry.


2021-02-18, 16:52:12
Reply #24

John.McWaters

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 235
    • View Profile
    • JohnMcWaters.com
I've found myself modeling straight into 3dsMax more as well. Per usual, max does somethings better than Rhino, and vice versa. However, I still find he need to export from Rhino into max for objects that I generate in Grasshopper. I'm going to try this method next time I need that ability.

2021-03-02, 10:16:06
Reply #25

Architex

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Hi.. Found this interesting post here and i want to contribute because i use Rhino on my daily work and 3ds max at home.
Well! There was the MoI 3D in which you can add ngons on exports but today we have Rhinoceros 7 and their retopology + sub-D methods.
Although i have been struggling with this to.
What i found:
Simple geometries like regular extrudes, boxes, surfaces... All kind of regular solid its better to export as simple DWG.
All geometry goes clean and retain layers information. Perfect here.
Complex geometries, like curves, parabolas, hyperbolic, or any other curved surface object, let say, a wash basin, a tap water, a toilet, a car, or any similar, there is a need on this objects to be clean as possible. Mostly close and well modeled. After you can retopology them before export.
From here i found .STEP a good non kill curves. No faces triangulates. All viewport seems clean. But then when you need to convert to poly for Chamfer purposes or any other, we get Fuc...ked.
OBJ, FBX, 3DS max formats, some how is a mess but they retain all information in export.
If the geometry is a mesh you can select all edges and press "clean edges" in the modifier panel. The weld vertex.
Conclusions... Still today i never found a good explanation for this. As far i have found it is because of the NURBS Algorithm from Rhino department.
Its a pain to get rid of those tessellations in viewport.
If there is anyone with a googd solution let us know.
Cheers

2021-03-22, 20:09:42
Reply #26

Buzzz

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 159
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: 2021-03-22, 20:23:11 by Buzzz »

2022-08-02, 09:46:33
Reply #27

Architex

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
UP!

Lets keep this post open.
More info about this topic would be great.
If any one have more facts please come here.

Cheers

2022-08-17, 15:16:10
Reply #28

steyin

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 377
  • BALLS
    • View Profile
    • Instagram Page
I've been saying for years that a better solution would just be to develop Corona for Rhino already lol

2022-11-21, 12:31:39
Reply #29

WAcky

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
From my tests, it's no longer possible to export a clean and well-organized model from Rhino post Rhino 5.

Currently I run rhino 7 for compatibility and save down to rhino 5 for exporting. There was a small change in the obj exporter that means it's no good anymore. I have raised this issue on the Rhino forums, but I just get the forum-equivalent of blank-stares and the suggestions of how to work-around the problem just results in circular and contradictory logic.

In my opinion, in rhino 5, these are the best setting for exporting. It will give you object naming that is logical.