Non-Organic Models

[magweb]

Think there are are lot of possibilities.... only that rounded edges shading might be somehow confusing

Attachments:

[link3000]

kemmler - It's because I don't think Sculptris should be limited to organic modelling. And because it's apparently very fun.

These are all cool, but I still feel like something is missing...

[wasa]

May 31, 2010 20:00:06 GMT 1 kemmler said:

I still don't get the point of using an organic modeling program for non-organic modeling. Oh well.

taron that's effing cool, reminds me of Appleseed the manga.

Because most hard surfaces in design have a mix of fluid organic, and hard cuts, just look at a car, even one from the 50's
Car designers have been using clay to sculpt the designs for decades

[kemmler]

it's true, I think that sculptris can be extended in that way, but I do agree with drpetter's vision in that the tool should be limited in scope to have the most effective workflow for a given task. It's instructive to look at Blender, which tries to integrate every interesting functionality, and ends up being somewhat difficult to use for beginners. It's quite a contrast with sculptris, which is easy to use even for novices.

[wasa]

Jun 1, 2010 6:43:45 GMT 1 kemmler said:

it's true, I think that sculptris can be extended in that way, but I do agree with drpetter's vision in that the tool should be limited in scope to have the most effective workflow for a given task. It's instructive to look at Blender, which tries to integrate every interesting functionality, and ends up being somewhat difficult to use for beginners. It's quite a contrast with sculptris, which is easy to use even for novices.

I think that can be said for any all in one package.
Maya, Max, LightWave, ect they all have a steep learning curve.
But if you look at , Sculptris, Wings3D, Messiah, ect, they are very focused, and very easy to learn.
At the same time, with using multiple packages, you have to keep up with the differences between each.

When I first started using Blender (not attempting to learn it) I used it for animating. I was pleasantly surprised how easy it was to start learning blender when I focused on a single part of it.

[derffie]

Again I feel I need to say that sculptris has its limits, and for good reasons, but I fail to grasp why people need to have a app that does it all.
Sculptris has no render engine either, but would you all rather have a "faux"render engine like zbrush?
Using a handfull of good apps, blender, wings 3d and sculptris you can achive amazing results, hard surfaces ARE possible with a mesh import from wings tesalating to tris, creating something low poly that is still sculptable with sculptris's adaptive tesalations.
Its a simple work round. think of 3ds max or maya, would you rather use free, lightweight non system mauling apps or a power hungry industry super monster, with a dozen or more 3rd party plugins to do the things you want?
I can understand human nature to want more out of something than it can give, its how we improve but at the same time know, and respect its limits.
As you can see from my image, several wings meshes are used, imported to my figure infact there is 8 imported meshes in this one figure....
imagination is the mother of creation.

Attachments:

[wasa]

derffie No one is asking for nurbs, or animation, or rendering or anything of that sort
Just some tweaks and such so that hard surface sculpting is easier to do in Sculptris
Plus no one is making demands here, it's all just suggestions. Ultimately it's up to DrPetter since he's the mastermind.

@everyone, there really is no reason to be negative to feature suggestions. Because they are just that, suggestions. If a suggestion gets used it's just an extra, no one would be forced to use it. I also see no reason that changes have to be cluttered or intrusive, and DrPetters seems to prefer the KISS method (Keep It Simple Stupid)
Instead of shooting down ideas or suggestions, offer suggestions, either alternative ways of getting the results, or applications that already have such requested feature.

[nateowens]

Not shooting down or at anything - I've played with many of the 3d packages, and incorporated some of them into my illustration toolbox as they fit. Some are more affordable and practical than others... my "workflow" (said laughingly) is with a set of tools that many sneer at, but it gets the job done

Organics = probably sculptris (still new at it, but xtra cool tool)
Hardware/Architectural = Rhino
Mixed/other = Hexagon

Assembly of all into one image + render = Carrara

I do the same with my 2D toolbox, Photoshop, Painter, etc.

My dad was a mechanic, and like him, I don't expect one tool to be best for every job - usually takes several to pull it off.

My 2 cents ::)

[edwardart]

There's a tool for every job in this case it's Organic modelling, with the option of importing straight edges, just need to think outside the box!

So let's not go around in circles and consider the suggestions made!

[wasa]

Jun 1, 2010 12:26:56 GMT 1 edwardart said:

So let's not go around in circles and consider the suggestions made!

Lol, agreed!

[magweb]

If this is a suggestion, this thread was put into the wrong forum.

This application was written just for fun. The motor was the fun. The fun on creating things brought Sculptris to this current status, its features and its limitations too.
IMO it simply is a fun-killer to give a signal showing:" Hey, you didn´t do enough! We need this and that to get that application on a professional level!" - Remember: Fun was the motor , not the aim to replace current "advanced apps".
Instead of asking for abstract, global things like "hard surface modelling" and point onto a "it is not possible", I think it would be a nicer way to try to get as far as possible with the current possibilities. Now, doing this, one can give concrete simply suggestions, as
" hey, I found, that we only need this small thing to do such great things too" . Maybe (concerning hard surfaces) one could suggest:
"couldn´t you make the laziness of the mouse configureable, if the working area's distance to the cursor would be bigger, we would get straighter strokes". Or " could you restrict SubdivideAll to a SubdivideSelected (similar to ReduceSelected)? This would give us the option to drag selected areas out of a surface and subdived the dragged out areas only)...." Reading such things, Dr Petter may think "hey, that´s a nice aspect! I did´t think about, so let´s try...."

Think this way fun may stay

[derffie]

wasa, I do belive I was trying to offer a simple workround not, encite a forum feud! sorry if ANYBODY feels differently, I only hope people can find a solution they need in the simplest way.

[wikkidwidgets]

There is no feud. Just opinions. A genuine feud (flame war) would illicite a >cough< response from one of your freindly neighborhood admins... *wink wnk*

GROUP HUG! ;D

[schwerpunk]

Not to get us too far off topic, but this is probably the most peaceful forum I've ever visited.

I have a hard time imagining a genuine flame war erupting.
---

Has Dr. Petter said anything about allowing us to work with quads? I know you could just import an all quad .OBJ, and set detail to zero. But would it be possible to have that wonderful dynamic tessellation without having to add triangles?

I think that might make straight edges easier. (Sorry if this has been brought up in a previous comment.)

[wikkidwidgets]

Jun 1, 2010 14:17:23 GMT 1 schwerpunk said:

Not to get us too far off topic, but this is probably the most peaceful forum I've ever visited.

I have a hard time imagining a genuine flame war erupting.
---

Has Dr. Petter said anything about allowing us to work with quads? I know you could just import an all quad .OBJ, and set detail to zero. But would it be possible to have that wonderful dynamic tessellation without having to add triangles?

I think that might make straight edges easier. (Sorry if this has been brought up in a previous comment.)

There was a whole thread on the topic:

Quads

I'll save you the trouble and just post what Mac daddy Petter had to say...

Quad surfaces would disable my current method of automatic subdivision and force you to subdivide equally all over the mesh and/or build a careful base model before you begin, that has varying quad density in different areas depending on how much detail you want there. Subdivision surfaces are useful for adding detail to an existing base which you are already committed to, but not for sketching or building new forms as you go.

You can always resurface a mesh to give it new topology, if you want to do work with quads after building the initial shape. Not currently in Sculptris, of course, but many of the "big apps" can do this, I hear.