3D Software?

[dubeau]

dubeau wrote:

---

My opinion about them:

Lightwave: One of the best for modeling. Interface is cumbersome (Takes time get used to) and texturing is in another part of the software.

Maya: Great modeling. Interface decent. Texturing insanely difficult, especially when dealing with alpha and multi textures.

Poser: For characters only.

3ds Max: Same as Maya.

C4D : The most easiest software. Easy interface and easy texturing. However, modeling has limits and doesn't have a decent texture map import/export.

CAD Autodesk: For architects

After Effects: 3D Text and websites

Update:
3Dmax: Got around it. You have some limitations with modeling, but not has extensive then Cinema 4D. Figured out textures. The best site i found to learn 3DSmax was this one: http://www.mrbluesummers.com/

I stopped using C4D, mainly because at how the software would corrupt a model when doing Boolean or trying to cut hole in a shape.

After Effects is also a software where you can put overlay effects on movies, like water, snow, lighting and more...

[Today]

There hasn't been an official announcement yet, but any 'wavers who haven't heard about it yet probably want to try googling "LightWave11.5"

Looks like modeler is finally getting some much needed attention, and the bullet dynamics and flocking tools are getting some pretty cool updates as well

[Sumghai]

Interesting thread - I came across this discussion whilst mulling over whether to post a question for you pros out there.

I myself have only ever used parametric modelling CAD programs like SolidWorks, due to my engineering background, and I'm comfortable specifying exact dimension, extruding sketches and sticking in chamfers / fillets than the mere thought of tugging/deforming meshes.

Up until this point, SW limited me to CADing up 25th Century versions of various Trek props and knick-knacks e.g. combadges and hypos.

It seems to me, though, that the majority of modellers are geared towards stuff like 3DS / Blender - I guess it's something to do with meshes being much easier to deal with by renderers than the additional data that comes with parametric feature-based CAD?

Amongst the things I'd like to do one day are:

• Various canon and Star Trek Online ship classes and rendering various space scenes
• An explorable Intrepid-class interior (sort of like what Lewis Niven is doing with the Ent-D in Source)

However, I've found myself in a dilemma:

• Should I make use of my existing SW skillset by doing all the modelling in SW, and then import the geometry into Max / Blender for the texturing, etc?
• Or should I simply stop being a wuss and learn to work with meshes directly in Max / Blender like everybody else is doing?

[Gep Malakai]

CAD data imported into a polygon-based program requires extensive cleanup and/or rebuilding. The process that converts parametric data to a polygonal mesh is inexact, to say the least, and the resulting mesh usually unsuitable for professional work. Since you'd have to learn poly modeling to rebuild it anyway (or invest in decent retopologizing software, which still takes time to learn), you'd be better off just jumping in to modeling directly.

[The Librarian]

I'm in a similar position to Sumghai, in that I'm most familiar with parametric modeling and have built a model I'm fairly happy with in FreeCad, but it's not really suitable for details like windows and doesn't do textures at all. I find Blender absolutely bewildering, though; it seems way too complicated for even fairly simple shapes.

Are there any other (free) programs that are similar to parametric modelers where I can slap in some dimensions into a sketch and rotate/extrude it, then cut in details? Just as an example, in FreeCAD I could create an profile of a saucer section, then rotate it to create an object.

[Metryq]

The Librarian wrote:

---

Just as an example, in FreeCAD I could create an profile of a saucer section, then rotate it to create an object.

A "lathe" operation is very basic and found in every 3D app I've ever used. You can create with a parametric CAD modeler, if you wish. Most have a function for exporting polygonal models for formats such as STL (for rapid prototyping). Some exporters are better than others. 3D forums or your own trial-and-error are the way to learn what works best for you.

I would recommend learning the native modeling tools for whichever package you choose, as some of the native "entities" will give you flexibility that an imported polygonal model may not.

Blender looked interesting to me the first time I saw it, but I didn't pick it up seriously until recently. The feature set is so good, I just couldn't brush it off anymore. Although the interface is improving, one really should learn the common key shortcuts. GUI controls are just so darned slow.

There are so many Blender tutorials (books, web pages, wikis, videos, etc.) that it is hard to know where to begin. I've tried many books. Many will drag you through a detailed look at the interface until your eyes begin to glaze over. Even long-time 3D users want to jump into a new app and just use it. Learn by exploring. The following video tutorial lets you do just that—learn the navigation while exploring some advanced features:

Ice Text Tutorial

And a simple, yet not sleep-inducing, book is Blender 3D Basics.

Also, Andrew Price's tutorials are excellent.

[TowerPower]

Does anyone know of a good starting tutorial for learning the basics of 3ds Max?
I am a beginner and want to start learning.
Thanks,

[TowerPower]

Wanted to say thanks to Donny for his advice. Have not heard from anyone else. Saw an article yesterday stating that Doug Drexler started out in Adobe Illustrator.

[Halmirdax]

Thanks to all this discussion I'm downloading Blender. Sounds like there is a lot that can be done with it!

[Halmirdax]

Blender is not for the faint of heart. But I'm looking forward to the insane amount of time it's going to take to work out how to do anything, love at first sight.

[kennysmith]

my question to you is this do you have a like or the full name of that web site or the program i can see if it can work for me?.

[B.J.]

^Not quite sure what you're asking with that broken English, but there are several links in the third post of this thread. Some of those might be outdated, though.