Architecture - Re: Blender, AC3D, Rhino or...?

Author

Re: Blender, AC3D, Rhino or...?

Kris Krieger

2005-06-16, 2:34 pm

"gruhn" <gruhn@deletehwb.com> wrote in
news:3V0oe.25$RQ3.1399@news.uswest.net:

quote:

>
> That is rarely, very very rarely, a good thing.

That's my thought. I know a few programmers personally - they're
interested in feedback, but usually via forms or, in a company, via
Customer Support - they're too busy programming to help end-users with "how
do I use the program" questions. Even free/open source programs usually
have a support contact.

quote:

>
> In the "open" world you can.

But it seems odd to me that an end-user would need to speak specifically
with the programmers, unless that user is a prpogrammer of sufficient skill
and knowledge to have a useful discussion about some specific aspect of
programming, such as, questions about how to make a plug-in interface
smoothly with the application.

****
OH, I thought of another consideration! Whether the app requires the use
of a dongle. Some still do. I've heard they're a eral pain. I can ask if
more info is needed.
****

quote:

>
> Some people are very paranoid about "spyware" to the point of
> silliness in what they'll deem spyware. Remember "Microsoft is
> downloading all of your private documents for thier own use"?

Er, nope, I don't remember that...

OTOH, I do know that, if one is not using a firewall, JavaScript can be
used to probe a website visitor's computer for information. There are even
sample scripts on-line. Usually, it'd be used for something relatively
innocuous, such as building a datbase of visitor emails and other data, but
it's not a big leap to get to less-innocuous data. ((Which is one reason
web borwsers allow you to manually designate which sites you want to allow
to run scripts and cookies.))

I'm not paranoid, I just tend to delete auto-update EXE files and regularly
comb through my registry, plus let ZoneAlarm clean all caches and MRU's
that I haven't nixed; plus run on "full stealth" n\mode; plus have thing
set up so that no scripts or cookies run without my manually selecting the
option(s) that allow them to run... =8-O

Main point, I've never heard of any decent 3D-ware that resorted to this
sort of thing. Where one runs into problems is with WAREZ versions. I
which case, it's like the old cliche', "if you lay down with dogs, you get
up with fleas".

quote:

>
> For XP users of such as max means just about zip on the software side.
> max has been "thread per scanline" for ages now and that is all that
> is required to take advantage of anything on the multi/hyper side of
> life.

I don't claim to know the programming ins'n'outs - folks I personally know
just say, basically, "programs will run faster and more efficiently and do
more stuff".

quote:

>
>
> Not even "so to speak." Just plain no.

OK...I misunderstood what I was reading, then (or someone mis-explained it
to me). Oops!

quote:

> Unless you're talking "trend" in terms of "I read in Popular Mechanics
> that in twenty years..."

I do know quite a few "pie-in-the-sky" types, so I probably didn't catch
where they were transitioning from 'now' to 'future'. Can I get away with
calling it "a long-tern trend" ;) ?

quote:

>
> Except you'll notice that the organic type objects such as demon spawn
> from HELLLLLLL are poly models due to the sweet poly tools they have
> these days. I suspect you'll see NURBS tools falling more towards
> their historic core of industrial design.

I personally do not use like or use nurbs because I (personally) find them
irritating to work with. I'm a polygonner, pure and simple. OTOH I know
of some people who still swear by nurbs for organic modeling. I suppose
it's simply a matter of people using the tools with which they're most
comfortable (and can work the fastest with), with conversions for export
being a fish of another color.

I have no idea what is given more weight in a Top prog. such as Maya (as
far as I understand the current biggie in the film industry, among houses
that don't create their own porprietary tools).

Personally, between surface subdivision and texture-smoothing for polygons,
I don't see why nurbs would even be a big deal for organic modeling. I
think it's a case of, Different people prefer different tools.

From what I understand, nurbs objects have to be converted to polygons
anyway for conversion to other formats. So I personally don't get the
point, but some people do like them and find it to be a more "natural
feeling" tool, more like sculpting. But I don't thing there is any 'trend'
so stop including nurbs tool altogether. Imjsut thing that it's a tactical
question rather than a strategic one, so to speak.

OTOH, the original question was about being able to do structures/buildings
in a 3D modeler so as to do realistic renders, and for that, polygon
modeling is generally considered superior. If one needs to soften corners,
such as in the case of an adobe-type building, one can simply use a polygon
tool to do so.

Also, most 3D app.s now seem to support Python scripting, which seems (from
what I've heard/seen) to work well with polygon modeling, so for example,
one could probably use it to create one's own procedural stock-item
creator. Another example, I model a lot of windows, whihc is easy but
boring and still takes time, so I'm trying to figure out a way that I can
use Python (first have to learn some Python of course) to tell my app. to
create a frame of dimensions XYZ, then sashes for double-hung or casement
windows as desired of dimensions X1Y1Z1 and then glass panes of dimensions
X2Y2Z2.

So I supposed one could say that Python support is a trend...?

quote:

>
> Enh... Mostly it just sounds like your info is a few generations old.

The way it was explained to me, nurbs objects have better math for rounding
edges and extraploating curves. I don't think that is 'old' info but OTOH
I have no way of judging that - it's only what I was recently told, when I
was asking a 3D programmer-user about nurbs.

quote:

> Sure, yeah, technically a NURBS model can be completely smooth due to
> the non-discrete nature of the functions involved. But that's really
> only "technically".

I just don't know when that technical difference would be important.

quote:

>
> Nope.

I'm just guessing based upon the magnification of a theater screen. But
I'll try to remember to ask among my 3D pro. contacts.

quote:

>
> It's easy. Whatever was in the SIGGRAPH procedings five years earlier
> will show up in everything. Except it'll show up in max one or two
> years after it shows up in eveything else and people will rant on
> about how kinetix/discreet/autodesk has abandoned development and
> they've wasted their thousands of dollars and...

<g!>

Max was one of the first, so it became an "industry standard" and many
people still regard (and defend) it as such, but there are other programs
that are "lighter on their feet" so to speak, more responsiveto consumer
feedback - and others that are much less expensive but produce, as far as
my eyeballs have been able to tell, equally good results.

That's why I emphasize that people always try demonstrtion versions, and
also do a lot of research. There are some folks who are very dogmatic
about the app.s they use, which goes far, far beyond haveing a lot fo
enjoyment in using the app. I really enjoy my own app., and I've seen some
results that IMO are quite impressive, but thre are others who deride the
app. as a "mere toy". So it can be very confusing if all one hears is any
of the all-too-common diatribes to the effect of "mine is great, the others
are garbage". That's just nonsense. The fact is that different programs
have different strengths and different weaknesses, and the wise potential-
purchaser/user will do a careful cost-benefit analysis. So, if one has a
$1000 maximum to spend, and decides that an open-spource program doesn't
offer what's needed, it is utterly irrelevant what something like Maya can
do, unless our potential buyer winds the lottery jackpot...

It end up being like deriding someone who is looking to buy a good PC,
because a PC can't match the capability of a Cray supercomputer. It's
silly, but I've heards (and will no doubt continue to hear) a similar sort
of argument when people talk 3D. In the end, it doesn't matter to that
buyer how good SuperDuper3D is, if SuperDuper3D costs $30,000 but the buyer
only has that $1000 available.

Of course, the *demos* of those things can be fun ;) !

quote:

>
> Tremendous advice.

Seems obvious but I think a lot of people don't realize just how many Demos
are really available nowadays. It used to be rare, but now, if a prog.
does not offer a demo, it's likely to lose market share, because 3D app.s
are too dang expensive to plunk that much cash down on a proverbial pig-in-
a-poke.

Hopefully all of this will be of some help to those looking at new software
purchases

--
- Kris M. Krieger

LinkBot