Grasshopper

algorithmic modeling for Rhino

A new version of Grasshopper is available for download
Several bug fixes and new components, nothing major altogether.

See the Grasshopper Help menu for a Version History record.

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia

Views: 1432

Replies to This Discussion

About the symbols for flatten/graft/expression/reparametrize:

While I agree that the differentiated visual feedback for hidden input options is a good improvement, I still have mixed feelings about hidden options themselves.

On one hand we have the pros:
- less components used in definition = better calrity (is this really true?)
- it's faster to add/remove an option than creating/deleting components and wires

On the other, in my opinion, these are the cons:
- inconsistency with the simple and user-friendly "feel" of the software, confusing for beginners
- the symbols are less readable on a larger definition screen
- as David pointed out - with more symbols ther'll be even more visual cacophony

Maybe there's a way to make the "hidden options" more visible and intuitive while maintaing their ease of use?

How about something like this:


I imagine it would work the same way it does now - you right-click on an input and set an option. But instead of symbol, a "mini-component" would appear near the input (like with the extract parameter option).

Btw, I see no reason why the outputs shouldn't have the same functionality:


Maybe this is just too much, but what the hell:

I like it.

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
I have a little problem when using 'Pt (point)' component.
After 'set one point' or 'set multiple points' , I can't select other types of point besides 'curve' type.

But... it's no big matter. Thanks.
Hey, its great.
It will be handle if selected (at one time) groups and components will move together in future...
also i had some problems with fillet component/
In regards to the indicators for Flatten, reparameterize....Something that I learned from a modeLab workshop, has proven to be a lifesaver! Instead of depending on an indicator that GH would produce, you can simply add a parmeter component, (in the screen shot, a curve parameter), then group it and label it "Reparametrize". This has proven to really make things easier, especially when exchanging files with other team members! Once again, ModeLab taught me this!

Silly question perhaps, but why are you reprameterizing?
The help text from the curve parameter explains it better than I can!
"Curve geometry can have any intrinsic parameter domain, depending on what subtype of curve is represented and the method of creation that was used. However, by enabling the 'Reparameterize' option in Parameter menu, all local curves will be forced unit domains (0.0 ~ 1.0). "

This was for a bench definition. I needed to control the width between the surface slats.

without reparameterizing:


With reparameterizing:

Hi Hans,

yeah, I saw this as well with some old files. I'll have a look to see what's up.

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
Ok, the problem is that the Pipe component has been superseded by a newer one that exposes a Capping input. I forgot to 'back-port' the Obsolete Pipe component in 0.7. I did so now, so starting from the next release, old files that use the Obsolete Pipe component will open fine again.

Thanks for reporting,
David

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
Hi!
Here is a bug with horizontal frames

Seems to work here, can you post a file that shows the problem?

--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
and it looks like mas add also works in a strahge way? Or it`s my fault?///

RSS

About

Translate

Search

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service