I thought about this issue, and I had an idea last night that would make non-organic modeling easier.
If the Flatten tool had an option to "Flatten To Plane" then some hard surface modeling would be more straightforward. Instead of flattening to the view, the tool would have 2 steps in this mode:
1: orient a plane object (not a mesh but just a cursor basically) in 3D space, position and rotation
2: Use flatten as normal
The way I imagined it, all flattening would happen such that the vertices you are flattening converge toward the plane defined in step 1. However, I am not sure how it could behave if the faces you are flattening have something like a 90 degree angle to the defined plane. I can only imagine that either nothing or something crazy must happen.
I guess another compromise feature could be a "morph" tool that takes a selection and blends the shape towards another shape. In blender there is a "Sphereize" tool as well as a "Cast" modifier that morphs your arbitrary mesh towards a cuboid, cylinder, sphere, etc.
I am not against non-organic modeling, but I do think it's mistaken to want sculptris to be a one-stop shop. So, I guess these are my ideas as a compromise between the two poles.
Instead of flattening to the view, the tool would have 2 steps in this mode:
Just want to clarify for those reading The flatten tool flattens to the normal (or average of normals) under the brush, and not directly at the viewer
I think a plane that you can adjust that will make the brush only effect verts that are on one side would be an awesome tool you could use it for cuts or blending And thinking about it as i wrote it, spheres and cylinders could be cool too, but i'd be happy even with a stop plane
hm, since it flattens to the normal then it wouldn't be too far of a leap to flatten to the normal of something else, but I have a very limited knowledge of how sculptris handles geometry.
Anyway, just a thought. It would still probably result in crazy, screwed-up meshes if you tried to flatten to a normal that was at or near 90 degrees from the starting normal.
That's where the relax algorithm comes into play I'm gonna do a vid on that focuses on using the grab brush for building up the form before using any other brushes, it will show how well it works when you put very little thought into what your doing You can easily push stuff around without getting crazy pinches or over lapping verts if you know what to do
and ya flattening to another objects normal shouldn't be tough or to have it be a stop point, especially if it's flat
Most of the time people forget that organic and hard surface go hand in hand For example, a flower, in a pot I cyborg nicks and scratches engraved items and always my favorite example, a car, even more so? a wrecked car! I think the big misconception is that hard surfaces require a ton of tools to achieve and that those tools won't be usable by organic sculptors and will be in the way and slow down the program and such
A car, a pot, and engraved items aren't organic, they're non-organic. What I really don't understand here is the idea that Dr. Petter will be upset, or there won't be any more intuitiveness or fun in Sculptris if it's expanded to model non-organic items. How? Who says that it has to become unintuitive to include non-organic modelling? How did Dr. Petter achieve intuitiveness in organic modelling? In the same way he did that, non-organics can be added. I may be incorrect in assuming Dr. Petter thinks this too, but what developer wants to limit their project?
Also, I found an odd normal glitch with what I assume to be the smooth-shading property at 6 triangles (which was all I could get down to, even though you can have 4 triangles in a solid model.)
I could be wrong, but my sense of it was that he considered sculptris to be essentially, or ideally, limited in scope. I don't think that means there is no room for additional features, including hard surface-type features, but that he did not envision an indefinite extension of functionality. there is some discussion of this subject in the "open source" thread.
While I certainly would be interested in seeing some dedicated plug-ins to Sculptris, I think that this sort of thing (hard-edged objects) could be implemented into Sculptris while still keeping its focus on simplicity and intuitiveness.
But yeah, I would like to see what Dr. Petter has to say, as it is his creation.
Also, I apologize if it sounded like I was suggesting an end to the conversation. I just felt that thing might be getting a little heated.
Last Edit: Jun 2, 2010 23:58:14 GMT 1 by schwerpunk
@ schwerpunk - Exactly: there is definitely a way to implement it without destroying the intuitiveness of Sculptris.
kemmler - Well, that could just mean that he wasn't going to embed Python and let you make games, or just never allow sculptris to animate things natively. However, I see hard-surface modelling and general non-organic modelling to be essentials in any modelling software.
Sculptris isn't just another modeling tool, it's a sculpting tool.
In my humble opinion, there's plenty of intuitive and well-designed modeling programs that can deal perfectly well with anything "non-organic". It's the sculpting part where other modeling tools lack functionality and usability, except some high-end software with a generally steep learning curve.
If my vote matters, I'd say: keep Sculptris a no-nonsense sculpting tool, don't make it a complex multi-tool that has (and lacks!) a bit of everything and gets sluggish in the process.
For sculpting, use Sculptris, for the rest: Blender, 3ds max, Maya, etc.
In real life, I can sculpt non-organic shapes. The fact that is a sculpting program (that creates models, hence also a modelling program) shouldn't affect what it can create: it affects how it creates it.