Two looong threads with lots of tips on MentalRay: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=183&t=429322 VRay-like interior renders with mental ray http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=183&t=303284 Mental Ray - Render Troubleshooting

My code was a quick example to show that you could get the correct angles. Of course edges=face.edges can easily be replaced with edges=face.outer_loop.edges or we iterate through the loops to get their edges in turn... BUT if its for only one vertex it's then easy enough to find the two edges belonging to that vertex [and that face] and run similar code on them to get the angle between them, using the face normal and vectors cross comparison to trap for concave corner angles >180 degrees... remembering to trap for ==180.degrees, as well as < and >...

Now I seemed to have corrected it. I had to ensure the vectors I used came in the same direction as the edge loop.

First post in its thread - get that from the Plugins Index [BIG red button above here]

I've got a personal plugin that does this. I shoot rays to test if the line crosses an edge. It works well enough. Though I am not triangulating from each vertex, but from the cursor. I could email you a copy if you want to see it in action. Chris

Also... the Simlab .fbx importer (90$) mentioned in this thread just converts geometry, no materials. So it is not more useful than the DWG importer in Sketchup which is free. Since 2011 Revit version,Autodesk changed the way it writes Collada and FBX files, so they only can be read by Autodesk products. Way to gooooooooooooooo Autodesk

mmm.... still catching up, Rich.

Yes the more I think about it, 2 Operation callbacks with an opflag parameter makes more sense, less documentation to maintain in the API pages... easier to program. Simplest all around.

I plan to start this week or next. I have ordered about 10 models from Shapeways, and plan to open my shop to start selling the first design I think is ready for marketing (just got the first test prints last week - more on that later, in another thread). I think their business model is great - for those who don't know, Shapeways allow anyone to sell things via a shop on the Shapeways site. It works like this: a designer models something, uploads the file to his/her shop, sets the price (cost from Shapeways plus markup), and promotes their product(via social marketing, blogs, etc). Customers come to the shop, place an order, pay Shapeways, Shapeways fulfills the order and pays the designer (the markup amount). Some pros: -zero cost to the designer -designer never has to stock inventory -Shapeways handles the money processing and any customer service issues Some cons: -Customer has to wait 2-4 weeks to receive the order while Shapeways makes it -Material selection is somewhat limited -Marketing is up to the designer, if you don't let people know about your product, nobody will buy it (this could also be seen as a pro...)

@alsomar said in [Plugin] QuadFaceTools: You see the model unsmoothed in 3ds Max just because your SketchUp model has unsmoothed lines. Despite the SubD subdivisions making the surface look smooth, if you can see the edges it means the lines are actually unsmoothed. In this frame I can see all the lines Nope. They are soft = false; smooth = true. The smooth attribute is the one actually welding the normals/creating smoothing groups. The soft is a Sketchup-thing only to separate "logical surfaces" which can be selected with a single click. In the legacy version of the exporter, the generated obj from 3dsMax was seen as 2 overlapped meshes: one with the properly welded/smoothed quads (BUT unwelded UV seams between each quad, despite the individual quads being perfectly in place in the UV chart) + one made of floating/unwelded triangles. In Blender the legacy exporter always worked fine (didn't test your fork against Blender, but I guess it could work fine). Another weird/interesting thing is that the same objects, when exported straight out of WrapR work 100% fine. [image: 1772915685108-16a21a1c-6526-4849-b21e-4f0317e7d105-image-resized.png]

If a vertex has four edges you trap that each edge only has one face [a taken]. If you get the vertex_normal and use a plane through the vertex.position to flatten [project] the vectors onto for the 4 edges being tested, can we ever get a zero length vector ? I think not, because the dot processing will never make a plane that's 'square' to a given vector - as there must always be some of the 4 edges spring off at angles...

Hey Dave, thank's for the feedback! @unknownuser said: Do you have the current version of TTLib installed? Nop! And that was it! I installed, and work's fine now! Thank You Dave!

@mac1 said: What criteria is used to determine smoothness is good enough?? RMS error or?? I was thinking that, from a user's point of view, one set a max angle. That the segments connecting each other would not exceed this max angle. Though, I am open to other definitions.

@arcad-uk said: Could solid state drives be an option in you NAS? Not sure how much cooling they need. yes, but I'm not sure if SSD HS's is afforable enough for the size I require.

@mtnarch said: Haven't had to bring anything back (yet) so I can't comment on restoring. What I like is that their apps looks clean and simple to use for browsing the backups, as well as the web interface. I find SpiderOaks' cumbersome to use when I need to access odd files when I'm away traveling etc. I want to use the service not only as backup but a way to get remote access to my data.

FYRoM - I believe. As they've recently come from Slovenia, Croatia, and Serbia. If they where in Greece they'd probably be able to work out for themselves if the trains where running. I can't find anything either...

Yea, tried that one - works, but requires exes. Was hoping for a pure ruby implementation.