thanks LePapa. i’ve brought some things into Blender, and Shapr creates some seriously weird faces, at least the way i build things at my newbie stage. Simpler objects would help, of course.
for Second Life, the path through Blender almost makes sense: i just hate Blender. 
I’ll look into Unity tools, maybe there’s something i can divert to my purposes.
thanks!
Ron, thanks for sharing Codea app name, just got it and whole new opportunities pops up for my projects. I am happy like unpacking Xmass present.
great. they have a good forum, i hope to see you there!
Have you even tried a tutorial from some competitors even as far back as 2010 feature set? I have and I find that Shapr3D is barely scratching the surface. I’m not expecting 1:1 comparisons but the little things really start adding up. It’s like having a Norman Wade out of calibration, your just making a simple job hard. Measurements need to be better and simpler. If you can undo you have a history tree, why can’t we access it and make changes?
Hi @JasonBelec, undo and feature history are not related. Undo is basically storing the previous states of the model, and allows you to roll back to a certain point. Once you modify something at that point, the “future” steps are discarded. Design history stores the modeling operations, and allow you to change parameters in those operations, and then reapply the following operations.
Shapr3D is a direct modeling tool, that requires a slightly different mindset as a history based tool, but not less powerful, it’s just different: https://support.shapr3d.com/hc/en-us/articles/115001425653-Parametric-vs-Direct-Modeling-Which-is-better-
We are releasing new features in Shapr3D every two weeks, and many of the things mentioned in this forum thread are on our roadmap for the next 12 months.
Is the roadmap published anywhere? I know a lot of software companies prefer not to publish such things because it creates expectations, but I think having something like “for next release”, “2-3 releases away” and “longer term” would help us understand the direction you’re heading in.
We don’t have an open roadmap (partly due to the reasons you mention).
What I can share is that the next release (3.37) will be a smaller one with a few bug fixes and updated video content. We are currently working on a major overhaul of the basic interactions in the app, that will come out in the next couple of months.
It would be delightfully useful to be able to scale an object separately on X, Y, and Z.
Alignment / snapping would be nice, for assembling parts.
I’d like to support the (difficult) idea of editing in the undo chain. It would require that each step in the chain record, not just the object state however you do that, but a representation of the command done to get there. In a related situation, I retrofitted undo/redo in a system that wasn’t intended to have it, beginning by inserting a Command object that recorded the direct edits and then called whatever the UI had previously called directly. So the UI created Commands which were then executed … and also saved.
It turned out not to be very hard. Possibly there’s some creative way to do something similar here.
Being able to easily snap and align objects (including imported objects):
— for example importing a screw into an assembly normal to an engine manifold face that is not aligned with the world coordinates…when importing an object, give us the option to place it be default on the world coordinate or onto a construction plane or axis. Some adjustment for 90 degree rotation might be needed depending upon the orientation of the imported object, but just getting the object imported in the right coordinate system (of the desired placement face defined by the construction plane) would be helpful.
Hi everyone.
Sorry to repeat what others have said, but you could look at it like it’s another vote for such features.
I think it would be fantastic to be be able to design assemblies within Shapr3D, but obviously the problem is that there would need to be different CAD formats available, but we have cloud computing so it’s not an issue. It would be extremely useful to create an assembly - at least inside the app - and then add motors, etc and analyse motion and that sort of thing. With physical analysis, we could actually move an assembly by dragging a part and seeing how it moves. Over time, we could build on this by moving a part and then using the model geometry and the data gathered during the analysis, we could fire that all off into the cloud and then find out what the stresses are on particular parts of the model. If a part is not seeing too much stress, or seeing too much, we can make changes to the model and then re-run the analysis. Cloud computing and HPC opens up so many possibilities for us.
I think a rendering solution would be fantastic, as Shapr3D is an excellent tool for concept development, so it’s a natural next step in the process.
3D printing slicing would be fantastic, but I can work around this using an online slicer after exporting the model as an STL file.
Most important for me, absolutely essential, would be a feature such as “face relate” constraints, where you can select features and align them to other features. Of course, equally vital to me is dimensioning. I would love to be able to add GD&T/GPS callouts to features - Along with “face relate”-type functions, it helps to maintain design intent all the way from the design and modelling to manufacturing and inspection. I’m thinking like this: If I add an angle relationship between two faces, the process could be: pick a face to use as a datum -> pick the face to apply the angle to -> specify the angle -> specify the tolerance -> confirm and apply the callout. This process would make geometrical tolerancing inherent, rather than something that has to be done separately. If you decide not to apply any GD&T, you could just click on “do not apply GD&T”. If you decide later that you want to, you can select the constraint/tolerance and then tick the box to apply it.
I could go on and on, but I think that’s a good start!
One thing I haven’t seen in this thread is the ability to specify the radius type? I’d love to be able to select a curvature continuous G3 radius instead of the standard fillet.
G1, G2, and G3 selection would be my top request.
I’m excited by the other features in this thread as well!
Same issue here…looking forward to a resolution or work around.
I would love the numbers to no longer be hidden behind the pencil. Slows down every step if the way when i am champfering.
Also any features that mimic illustrator more refined would be great!
Making an easier way to design for glass cutting. I mainly cut glass with a minor modification to my X Carve.
Also textures and lighting may be too much, but a small gamut of general materials.
if i could associate simple materials by number to subsets, Shapr3d would be really useful to me. as it is, i’m basically paying $240 because it’s cool and i want to support it. i won’t do that twice.
I’d like to see different rendering options, like shiny and satin finish metals. Since I’m mostly making jewellery, being able to show off my designs in various colour options would be awesome.
Is there a way to store designs in folders? My collection of designs is not well organized … folders would be helpful.
You can save any file to iCloud, and create folders there.
Thanks Tom.
That works, after a fashion. Would still prefer to keep designs within the app. But, it isn’t a priority.
Thanks, again
Rick
Hallo,
In my opinion it would be nice to have better selecting tools and in addition I often loose my selection when I do a step back.
Loopselection or a lassotool like in UMake would be a good addition.
Hi @mac_andre thanks for your feedback! We are working on selection improvements but no eta yet. What do you mean by loosing your selection when you do a step back and what would be the expected behaviour in your opinion?