I like the clean design of the landing page. I downloaded it and started the app and it needs an OBJ file to even do anything, so I wasn't able to play with it at all.
It would be cool if it included sample OBJ files to entice me to find my own later. Otherwise I feel like I just hit a wall immediately in the app will probably not try it again.
The way I tested was search Thingiverse for "angular" and download an STL, then convert it online to an OBJ on the first search result for "stl to obj"
Sadly, some of the crenelations on top of it are just cubes with 2 sides missing that would be impossible to attach to the folded up rook. I imagine there is a ton of loss between a file for a 3D printer, a random convert to Obj with no settings, and this net maker, so I'm not unsympathetic to the problem. It's just that this is a printout that would not be foldable into something useful.
So weird for me to see this popup now on HN as I happened to dig through an old downloads folder a few minutes ago and saw an install file for Pepakura (13/11/2014), and wondered where that sort of thing had ended up... .
I wrote something like this for windows 20 years ago, a friend of mine used it to make some cutout models for an art exhibition.
It's an interesting problem to try to solve. Anything but the simplest model requires more than one cutout, which you then (in my app at least) have to position by hand onto sheets of paper for printing. Performing the unfold to minimise the number of separate sections was not something I even attempted.
As someone who is not into papercraft I'm intrigued, but it feels like it's not for me. If the app was advertised as having a small selection of simple models to get started with, people in my position might be more interested in trying it out.
If I built a Mac app, the reason would be that I use a Mac, as do a lot of other people, and native apps are a lot more pleasant than non-native apps. I don't really understand why it's "restrictive"? There is no restriction happening.
You can vibe code an app like this, relying on OBJ import (no editing apart from cutting/opening constraints), in possibly half a day.
If you doubt me, take, me up on it.
Sure, I have 35 years of experiences writing computer graphics code but I am certain I would just need to provide functional description input to Claude or Codex for this.
Zero architecture or deep 3D know-how.
The only challenge/interesting part is what happens with non-planar polygons (>3 vertices). I.e. deciding if they can be unrolled (approximated with a cylindrical or conical surface enough to 'work' when cut from paper that does not stretch).
You can alleviate this problem completely by always triangulating befor calculating any unfolding solution ofc (and get zero curved surfaces in the resulting paper model thusly).
The rest is rather trivial.
I'm not saying this isn't great, I just don't understand how you could ask people to pay for it, in early 2026.
I like the clean design of the landing page. I downloaded it and started the app and it needs an OBJ file to even do anything, so I wasn't able to play with it at all.
It would be cool if it included sample OBJ files to entice me to find my own later. Otherwise I feel like I just hit a wall immediately in the app will probably not try it again.
The way I tested was search Thingiverse for "angular" and download an STL, then convert it online to an OBJ on the first search result for "stl to obj"
Specifically I tried this rook from this chess set. https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5994219/files
Sadly, some of the crenelations on top of it are just cubes with 2 sides missing that would be impossible to attach to the folded up rook. I imagine there is a ton of loss between a file for a 3D printer, a random convert to Obj with no settings, and this net maker, so I'm not unsympathetic to the problem. It's just that this is a printout that would not be foldable into something useful.
Some items on thingsverse provide .obj files; like the king in this chess set...
https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1078513/files
(n.b. under the main image viewer click the "files" tab to explore individual files/extensions)
So, like Pepakura? https://pepakura.tamasoft.co.jp/pepakura_designer/
But for Mac! I fonder the difference of the free and paid version through.
You can put "for Mac" in a turd and it'll reach front page in a day.
Doubly so if the app looks like it works well and would be interesting to HN readers!
So weird for me to see this popup now on HN as I happened to dig through an old downloads folder a few minutes ago and saw an install file for Pepakura (13/11/2014), and wondered where that sort of thing had ended up... .
No!
This one is called Unfolder, it's a different app, made by a different person, etc...
More than one app per category can exist, and that's good!
I wrote something like this for windows 20 years ago, a friend of mine used it to make some cutout models for an art exhibition.
It's an interesting problem to try to solve. Anything but the simplest model requires more than one cutout, which you then (in my app at least) have to position by hand onto sheets of paper for printing. Performing the unfold to minimise the number of separate sections was not something I even attempted.
Oooo this might be useful for doing geometry unwrapping for laser cutting
Why is this not a web page?
Beautiful landing page. I wonder if it uses the OCCT unfolding algorithms or something similar under the hood?
I remember something like this was huge for rc planes 10-20 years ago as you could then make a plane out of thin bendable foam
You'd make a 3D model from 3-views then use something like this to unfold it
You're thinking of the same app i used to use! I think it was a Japanese app called Papakura? It's what helped me learn 3d modeling back in the day
From another comment: https://pepakura.tamasoft.co.jp/pepakura_designer/
This is lovely and very slick, but you can get equivalent results for $0 with Blender and Export Paper Model.
That has the benefit of letting you create/edit/export the model in a single application instance in a single workflow that is easy with practice.
This is really cool.
As someone who is not into papercraft I'm intrigued, but it feels like it's not for me. If the app was advertised as having a small selection of simple models to get started with, people in my position might be more interested in trying it out.
What a fantastic idea. Developers who enable others to create art are artists in their own right!
Good artists enable others, great artists enable only Apple users.
Unfolder? But I barely even know her! Jk, awesome project tho! Makes me wanna make cool packaging for products
This is great - reminds me of the golden age of cool little MacOS apps
Mac only. Is there any reason this couldn't be a web app? And seems pretty restrictive to just have one platform, a desktop Mac.
If I built a Mac app, the reason would be that I use a Mac, as do a lot of other people, and native apps are a lot more pleasant than non-native apps. I don't really understand why it's "restrictive"? There is no restriction happening.
The author had to decide between making something excellent for some people or mediocre for everyone, and chose the former
You may use Pepakura if you’re running windows. Not sure if a web or linux alternative exist.
The same could be said about pretty much _any_ software.
You can vibe code an app like this, relying on OBJ import (no editing apart from cutting/opening constraints), in possibly half a day.
If you doubt me, take, me up on it.
Sure, I have 35 years of experiences writing computer graphics code but I am certain I would just need to provide functional description input to Claude or Codex for this.
Zero architecture or deep 3D know-how.
The only challenge/interesting part is what happens with non-planar polygons (>3 vertices). I.e. deciding if they can be unrolled (approximated with a cylindrical or conical surface enough to 'work' when cut from paper that does not stretch).
You can alleviate this problem completely by always triangulating befor calculating any unfolding solution ofc (and get zero curved surfaces in the resulting paper model thusly).
The rest is rather trivial.
I'm not saying this isn't great, I just don't understand how you could ask people to pay for it, in early 2026.
No you should vibe code an app like this and prove yourself. Then see if people actually use it.