I’m not sure what would need to happen. Just saying that we need to look at the cases where PRT->Frost->PRT was used and if any of the small tweaks made in the objects would be lost. There might be things that would need to happen on the voxel data inside the tool that we wouldn’t have access to (without exposing the voxels). Simple stuff like filtering, or morphological editing, hole filling, etc. We can figure out the volume or surface area easily when it’s voxels, but when it’s particles it would be too later to use that data. Just thinking out loud. Need to test.
OK, testing, noticed something right away… Any of the meshing modes that involve thresholding the limit surface… 0.50 might not be the ideal crossing for the extent of the particle generation. If you move the limit, say to 0.01, you will get more particles, and you can cull them later with a KCM sampling the SignedDistance channel, but the normals will be wrong anyway, since the normals at .01 will be different than the normals at 0.90. Which leads to another “bonus” of having this wondertwin tool, you could get the normal for each particle from the voxels at any distance from the surface.