 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:4979af16@news.povray.org...
> Hey, didn't Rune or somebody recently do a swish website redesign? Can
> anybody remember the site address?
http://runevision.com/
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I'm still puzzled by Benny boasting about having a German girlfriend even
> though he didn't speak German yet... How the hell does *that* work?? o_O
In Germany everyone learns English at school, and a lot more than any
foreign language you learn in an English school. My girlfriend (who is
German) speaks English better than me, we had a 16 year old student in our
office last year, she spoke English pretty well.
> Well, it *did* seem to have some pretty extensive texturing facilities...
> I spent most of the time playing with that. However, as far as shapes go,
> it seemed to only handle polygon meshes.
Ummm yeh, it's a mesh based modeller, what do you expect? Those spheres and
cylinders you rendered were actually made up of triangles (you can control
the number of triangles in some property box somewhere, and it can be
different for real-time editing and rendering).
> Our library tends to be very sparse on computer books.
Go to a bigger one then.
> (Every day I see manufactured objects of such complexity that it seem
> completely clear that whoever designed them must be using something a tad
> more sophisticated than any of the software I've seen so far.)
Just watch a bit of this to see how Catia works with making basic parts:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb2A9OKCAUc
They design whole planes and cars with this software so it has to be quite
sophisticated.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> I'm still puzzled by Benny boasting about having a German girlfriend
>> even though he didn't speak German yet... How the hell does *that*
>> work?? o_O
>
> In Germany everyone learns English at school.
Hmm. I guess Benny left that part out. ;-)
>> Well, it *did* seem to have some pretty extensive texturing
>> facilities... I spent most of the time playing with that. However, as
>> far as shapes go, it seemed to only handle polygon meshes.
>
> Ummm yeh, it's a mesh based modeller, what do you expect?
OK. So... how do you build anything nontrivial with it? Just adding
endless predefined meshes together doesn't seem very flexible.
>> Our library tends to be very sparse on computer books.
>
> Go to a bigger one then.
Oh, yeah, *sure*. Because, I mean, there are libraries *everywhere*,
right? :-P
>> (Every day I see manufactured objects of such complexity that it seem
>> completely clear that whoever designed them must be using something a
>> tad more sophisticated than any of the software I've seen so far.)
>
> Just watch a bit of this to see how Catia works with making basic parts:
>
> http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb2A9OKCAUc
>
> They design whole planes and cars with this software so it has to be
> quite sophisticated.
I'll have to wait until I get home, but... this should be interesting.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Ummm yeh, it's a mesh based modeller, what do you expect?
>
> OK. So... how do you build anything nontrivial with it? Just adding
> endless predefined meshes together doesn't seem very flexible.
There are many modifiers for working on meshes. The general work-flow I use
(and I am by no mean an expert in mesh modelling) is to draw a fairly blocky
low-vertex mesh by adjusting vertices by hand to get the correct shape, then
use the subdivision-surfaces modifier to smooth it, making tweaks along the
way if necessary.
You can also use NURBS, which are roughly speaking a 2D surface version of
bezier curves, they are quite handy for modelling smooth stuff, see here for
an example:
http://www.blendernation.com/tutorials/blender-3d-beginner-tutorial-dolphin/
Or you can copy a shape from several 2D photos/pictures if you have them,
and build up the 3D mesh, this is quite popular for making cars:
http://c4dtuts.com/misc/modeling-a-car/
> Oh, yeah, *sure*. Because, I mean, there are libraries *everywhere*,
> right? :-P
Did you go to this one?
http://www.mkweb.co.uk/mk-libraries-network/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=26803
If that isn't big enough then I guess you'll need to travel to a different
city. There's a library in Cambridge that has a copy of every book
published, but I doubt you'll need to go that far for a book on 3D Studio.
>> http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Rb2A9OKCAUc
>>
>> They design whole planes and cars with this software so it has to be
>> quite sophisticated.
>
> I'll have to wait until I get home, but... this should be interesting.
Watching other people do stuff on YouTube is actually a cool way to learn -
assuming you know roughly how to use the software and can spot what icons
and windows they are clicking on etc, I wouldn't suggest learning from
scratch via YouTube.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>>> Ummm yeh, it's a mesh based modeller, what do you expect?
>>
>> OK. So... how do you build anything nontrivial with it? Just adding
>> endless predefined meshes together doesn't seem very flexible.
>
> There are many modifiers for working on meshes. The general work-flow I
> use (and I am by no mean an expert in mesh modelling) is to draw a
> fairly blocky low-vertex mesh by adjusting vertices by hand to get the
> correct shape, then use the subdivision-surfaces modifier to smooth it,
> making tweaks along the way if necessary.
I've never really understood this. I mean, yes, theoretically by moving
individual polygons one at a time you can construct any possible shape.
And, theoretically, by drawing individual pixels one at a time you can
construct any possible image, so what do you need a 3D package for? :-P
Seriously, to build anything of any complexity using just polygons, you
would need hundreds of billions of them, and there's no way you can
manually place that many polygons within a single human lifetime. There
has to be a better way...
> You can also use NURBS, which are roughly speaking a 2D surface version
> of bezier curves, they are quite handy for modelling smooth stuff, see
> here for an example:
>
> http://www.blendernation.com/tutorials/blender-3d-beginner-tutorial-dolphin/
This sounds infinitely more plausible. (Although I can't actually make
much sense out of the tutorial... I guess I'd need to actually install
and run Blender.)
>> Oh, yeah, *sure*. Because, I mean, there are libraries *everywhere*,
>> right? :-P
>
> Did you go to this one?
>
> http://www.mkweb.co.uk/mk-libraries-network/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=26803
Yes.
> If that isn't big enough then I guess you'll need to travel to a
> different city. There's a library in Cambridge that has a copy of every
> book published, but I doubt you'll need to go that far for a book on 3D
> Studio.
Presumably you also have to be a member first.
> Watching other people do stuff on YouTube is actually a cool way to
> learn - assuming you know roughly how to use the software and can spot
> what icons and windows they are clicking on etc, I wouldn't suggest
> learning from scratch via YouTube.
Have you watched that one of Tim Absath drawing the Christmas edition of
Ctrl+Alt+Del? That was pretty amazing... Still, it was speeded up
several times. ;-)
However, all I really "learned" from watching that is that
- Tim is a ridiculously talented individual.
- His "special secret" is simply to spend hundreds of hours tweaking and
retweaking every individual iota of image over and over until he's happy
with it. It took him, like, 6 days to draw *one* picture!
In other words, there's nothing he did that a normal human being could
duplicate.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I've never really understood this. I mean, yes, theoretically by moving
> individual polygons one at a time you can construct any possible shape.
> And, theoretically, by drawing individual pixels one at a time you can
> construct any possible image, so what do you need a 3D package for? :-P
>
> Seriously, to build anything of any complexity using just polygons, you
> would need hundreds of billions of them, and there's no way you can
> manually place that many polygons within a single human lifetime. There
> has to be a better way...
Yeh, like using all the mesh operators in 3D packages! Like I said, build a
rough mesh by hand with maybe 100 or so polygons, then use the 3D package's
smoothing tools to semi-automatically add more polygons to make the mesh
smoother. Most 3D packages will do this interactively, so you can wiggle
about the vertices of the original low-resolution mesh and see instantly how
the final smoothed mesh changes.
> This sounds infinitely more plausible. (Although I can't actually make
> much sense out of the tutorial... I guess I'd need to actually install and
> run Blender.)
It's the same as 2D bezier curves but in 3D, ie you just wiggle about the
control points until it looks right :-)
> Presumably you also have to be a member first.
Yes, and you'll need to get there first, and have enough courage to speak to
someone there, and know how to use their search system, and blah blah blah -
yeh you may as well just stay at home. BTW most libraries will try to order
a book from another library if they don't have it, or have they stopped
doing that recently?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Seriously, to build anything of any complexity using just polygons,
>> you would need hundreds of billions of them, and there's no way you
>> can manually place that many polygons within a single human lifetime.
>> There has to be a better way...
>
> Yeh, like using all the mesh operators in 3D packages!
Heh, I knew there had to be one...
> Like I said,
> build a rough mesh by hand with maybe 100 or so polygons
Uh... wouldn't that still be absurdly time-consuming?
> then use the
> 3D package's smoothing tools to semi-automatically add more polygons to
> make the mesh smoother. Most 3D packages will do this interactively, so
> you can wiggle about the vertices of the original low-resolution mesh
> and see instantly how the final smoothed mesh changes.
Well, that's faster then moving billions of polygons by hand. Now you're
"only" moving hundreds. Still sounds really slow though...
>> This sounds infinitely more plausible. (Although I can't actually make
>> much sense out of the tutorial... I guess I'd need to actually install
>> and run Blender.)
>
> It's the same as 2D bezier curves but in 3D, ie you just wiggle about
> the control points until it looks right :-)
Yes, that sounds much more likely to produce useful results in less time
than the current age of the universe. Curiosly, I've never come across a
package which actually allows you to do this. (But since apparently
Blender does, I think I'll have to go give it a try...)
>> Presumably you also have to be a member first.
>
> Yes, and you'll need to get there first, and have enough courage to
> speak to someone there, and know how to use their search system, and
> blah blah blah - yeh you may as well just stay at home.
OK, I will. :-P I wasn't especially bothered about learning 3D Studio
Max anyway... (It's not like I own a copy of it or anything.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Like I said,
>> build a rough mesh by hand with maybe 100 or so polygons
>
> Uh... wouldn't that still be absurdly time-consuming?
No, not with all the tools in 3D packages specifically aimed at drawing
meshes from scratch. Like face/edge extrude, multiple selection and
operation on vertices/edges/faces, mirroring ummm countless others I'm sure.
Here's a screenshot of a car I'm working on by drawing the mesh from
scratch. You can see I have the front wing shown in wireframe so you can
see the vertices, it really doesn't take very long to get them lined up
nicely with a reference drawing. After that the modeller will smooth it out
for me by replacing each face with perhaps 4 or 16 faces in the correct
places for a nice smooth finish.
> Yes, that sounds much more likely to produce useful results in less time
> than the current age of the universe. Curiosly, I've never come across a
> package which actually allows you to do this. (But since apparently
> Blender does, I think I'll have to go give it a try...)
Actually, using this method with NURBS surfaces is very similar to adjusting
the vertices by hand of a rough mesh and watching how the smoothed mesh
changes. The number of control points required in NURBS is quite similar to
the number of vertices needed in a rough mesh to get similar control of the
final surface.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'image1.png' (94 KB)
Preview of image 'image1.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote in message
news:4979de29$1@news.povray.org...
BTW most libraries will try to order
> a book from another library if they don't have it, or have they stopped
> doing that recently?
No, they still do that.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] scottcom> wrote in message news:4979e60a@news.povray.org...
> Here's a screenshot of a car I'm working on by drawing the mesh from
> scratch.
I wish I had your talent with car modeling, you've posted some great stuff
in the past.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
