[caryjames]

Have you checked out Tsplines? I am using the plugin for Rhino but they also have a SolidWorks plug in. So far I am very impressed - this may bridge the gap (no pun intended ) for you!

[Polyxo]

thanks for the files .. !

here some rendered results, still not yet happy though. you can see those seams still quite clearly.

I think the issue is that even though there's a lot of polys added in the blend shape, there are just about 8 rows of polys and the rest of the tesselation is planar on those 10 rows, not again following the curvature. Additional smoothing of the vertex normals fails like this obviously.

Are there any settings for this in Rhino ? I guess you can go higher with the polycount .. ?
Can spheres be converted to polygons 'tetrahedrically' or always following the param lines ?

This now looks familiar to me. While I might be wrong this looks like a limitation of Maxwell with Smoothing of certain types of Meshes.
The Renderer quite in general seems a lot more optimized to deal with Meshes output from Subdivision-Surface Modelers.
Non subdivide-able quad-dominant meshes or even meshes with long Triangles as they may be created by Nurbs Modelers or also SketchUp
can perform a great lot worse. This is especially true with Displacement, so that I never use Displacement with Maxwell at all (rendering
from Rhino).

I would suggest that you send that Geometry and the Cameras as mxs to the Developers.

[Polyxo]

Have you checked out Tsplines? I am using the plugin for Rhino but they also have a SolidWorks plug in. So far I am very impressed - this may bridge the gap (no pun intended ) for you!

While Tsplines are nice solving that problem with them seems pretty unrealistic.
Even the super simple object Yolk supplied can not get transferred easily to Tsplines for as long as they don't support trimmed Geometry.