 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Has somebody invented a way of placing points in 3D space even though you
> only have a 2D edit area yet?
Most 3D modellers I've seen allow you to split the edit area into 4, 3
viewing orthogonally along each axis, and 1 perspective. This allows you to
place points accurately in 3D, and of course check the "real" look of the
outcome interactively (yes all views update together in real-time).
Like this:
http://www.nycresistor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/blender-20080613-095701.jpg
Alternatively you just have 1 perspective view and slide the point along
each axis as you see fit (obviously rotating the model whilst you're doing
it to check the look).
Depends on personal preference I guess, and what exactly you're modelling.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> right mouse button click (RMB) - selects
>> left mouse button click (LMB) - changes location of 3D cursor
>
> And I think that there pretty much sums up why people think Blender's
> interface sucks. :-)
Not really, you can change that one around (as I always do). There's many
other things too though that you can't change :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Has somebody invented a way of placing points in 3D space even though
>> you only have a 2D edit area yet?
>
> Most 3D modellers I've seen allow you to split the edit area into 4, 3
> viewing orthogonally along each axis, and 1 perspective. This allows
> you to place points accurately in 3D, and of course check the "real"
> look of the outcome interactively (yes all views update together in
> real-time).
Most of the modellers I've seen *only* work in this way. (Blender
apparently allows you to rejigger the display any way you see fit.)
It's still surprisingly easy to get "lost" in 3D space, or to draw stuff
and then discover you didn't draw what you thought you drew.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Also... Blender seems to incorrectly assume that Z is "up" and Y is
>> "back". (It should obviously be the other way around.)
>
> It is not incorrect; it is right-handed.
OK, I rephrase: confusing.
>> Interesting how the amount of scaling is apparently completely
>> unrelated to the mouse movement... (Seems to scale the cube by about
>> 20% of the distance the mouse is moved.)
>
> It depends on how far the mouse pointer is from the selection.
Oh, I see. So, what, the mouse position at the instant you type "s"?
>> OK, this one took me a while to figure out. You'd think you extrude it
>> by dragging the face that you want to extrude... but no. You just
>> click and Blender places faces at random for you.
>
> Select faces/edges/vertices, press E to extrude. The newly formed
> faces/edges/vertices are automatically selected, and by default you are
> put in Grab mode; move the mouse to move them or right-click to keep
> them where they are. You can also switch from Grab mode to Scale or
> Rotate by pressing S or R.
This doesn't appear to match the behaviour I observed. Click somewhere
and new faces appear. Move the mouse and nothing happens. Click again
and more faces appear.
The faces aren't random though; it appears that if you click exactly
half way up the screen, the new geometry is parallel to the existing
cube. Click slightly below the midline and the geometry is connected at
an angle. Click lower still and it self-intersects in a way I don't
quite comprehend yet.
>> F9 doesn't appear to do anything.
>
> F9 opens the Editing panel in the Buttons window. If the Editing panel
> was already active, nothing will happen.
Ah, I see.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Most of the modellers I've seen *only* work in this way. (Blender
> apparently allows you to rejigger the display any way you see fit.)
>
> It's still surprisingly easy to get "lost" in 3D space, or to draw stuff
> and then discover you didn't draw what you thought you drew.
That's why you should keep an eye on the perspective view, and keep rotating
it around to ensure it looks ok. As you said, it is very easy to make
something look cool from one viewpoint, but then when you rotate it around
it's nothing like you wanted.
If you're designing smooth surfaces it can really help if you turn on some
specular lighting or even an environment map reflection (if your modeller
allows it), this allows you to see how "smooth" the surface is better than
just with diffuse lighting.
Personally I prefer just one perspective view and to keep looking from
different angles while I'm designing, but maybe I'm just used to that
because it's how my 3D CAD software works (which I use 100x more frequently
than Blender).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Given that Blender is only capable of rendering triangles, is there some
way to GPU-accelerate the rendering process? (As opposed to nailing my
CPU to the wall for 10 minutes at a time.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 11:31:13 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Given that Blender is only capable of rendering triangles, is there some
> way to GPU-accelerate the rendering process? (As opposed to nailing my
> CPU to the wall for 10 minutes at a time.)
For quick test renders, turn off OSA, and perhaps also ray-tracing.
For a quick preview of just a small part of the scene, use Render Preview
(Shift+P).
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:20:33 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> Also... Blender seems to incorrectly assume that Z is "up" and Y is
>>> "back". (It should obviously be the other way around.)
>> It is not incorrect; it is right-handed.
>
> OK, I rephrase: confusing.
Confusing to *you* perhaps, because you are used to left-handed systems.
>>> Interesting how the amount of scaling is apparently completely
>>> unrelated to the mouse movement... (Seems to scale the cube by about
>>> 20% of the distance the mouse is moved.)
>> It depends on how far the mouse pointer is from the selection.
>
> Oh, I see. So, what, the mouse position at the instant you type "s"?
Yes.
>> Select faces/edges/vertices, press E to extrude. The newly formed
>> faces/edges/vertices are automatically selected, and by default you are
>> put in Grab mode; move the mouse to move them or right-click to keep
>> them where they are. You can also switch from Grab mode to Scale or
>> Rotate by pressing S or R.
>
> This doesn't appear to match the behaviour I observed. Click somewhere
> and new faces appear. Move the mouse and nothing happens. Click again
> and more faces appear.
http://blenderunderground.com/2007/08/17/blender-basics-part-3-is-live/
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Given that Blender is only capable of rendering triangles, is there
>> some way to GPU-accelerate the rendering process? (As opposed to
>> nailing my CPU to the wall for 10 minutes at a time.)
>
> For quick test renders, turn off OSA, and perhaps also ray-tracing.
>
> For a quick preview of just a small part of the scene, use Render
> Preview (Shift+P).
Sure. I was just wondering, since Blender doesn't do anything a GPU
can't do, whether there's some way to use GPU acceleration, that's all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Sure. I was just wondering, since Blender doesn't do anything a GPU can't
> do, whether there's some way to use GPU acceleration, that's all.
You mean the Blender internal renderer? Umm, that's a fully-fledged
raytracer with multiple reflections/refractions, ray traced shadows, ambient
occlusion, all that stuff etc, as you will know from the POV/GPU discussion
these things are quite hard to do on a GPU, if possible at all.
Of course the editor view in Blender is using the GPU, but the materials
that are shown are a limited cut-down version of what will appear in the
render window.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
