For some "Designers" here, check this video this will be a 7 minute master class for you about design.
Filippo Perini talked about design of Huracán, also he creates concepts for such an iconic cars like Sesto Elemento and Aventador.
You will not hear not about Catia, not about Concept of Continuity not about any 3D modeling stuff. This is pure design, thoughts behind design and creative process.


Here some of "Designers" can not understand that there is design in 3D for concepts, that do not need precision, closed surfaces(watertight), ideal continuity etc... All that stuff will be made by you - 3D Modellers when concept will be approved. So lets everybody will do their things, designers will create design and modelers will create perfect 3D models.
And when 3D modellers start to talking about design(some persons in this forum) it looks awful.

Also this is new Russian Tram:


Design was made by guys that never have deal with 3D their work was creating web sites, brands, images etc (marketing stuff)...
They even have no educational background in any kind of Design.
But they made nice job.
And fore sure they work in team with engineers and 3D modellers, but everybody made his job.
So pleas stop talking about design in terms of 3D technical stuff. You will never create any beautiful stuff if you will think like 3D modeller, not with Catia nor with MoI.

And about MoI and Car Design...
For sure MoI is not good for Car Design in terms of Concepting and forms research. Polygons is perfect tool for this. MoI may be suitable in modeling cars from already made concepts and blue prints. But it defenetly lucks of some essential tools for this work so it is not the best choise for car design.

Why I'm so against MoI in this situation is that I want people do not waste their time doing car design in MoI or any other "Organic" stuff. Their enthusiasm will finish one day and they will have to spend time to learn another app...And this is will be very hard. Because you will have to change your habits, minds, understanding of modeling etc... Personally for me it was very hard task. So this is how it was with me. So why people have to repeat somebody's mistakes?
MoI gives you a lot of inthusiasm with its simplicity but you will have to pay price for this - limited possibilities.

Hi Andrei, you seem to have a tendency to make overly broad statements a lot in here. The things you say may be applicable to your particular modeling style or needs but they may not apply so directly to other people because they are doing something different than you with a different focus and different priorities.

For example you write:

    "For sure MoI is not good for Car Design in terms of Concepting and forms research. Polygons is perfect tool for this."

There is not just one single definition of "concepting" - one method of concept modeling is taking an idea you have visualized in your head and trying to get it constructed as a concrete model as quickly as you can. MoI can certainly be good for this type of concept modeling, it's one of the things it's primarily designed to do.

If you are talking about going into a design where you do not really have a strong definite idea about what you want and instead want to make dramatic changes like make big bulges and kind of sculpt away at it, then what you are saying makes sense. Polygons are good for mushing shapes around and making large bulgy modifications to things.

But that does not apply to everyone's idea or workflow about realizing concepts and doing concept modeling.

One of the core ideas behind MoI is that it tries to make it possible for you to really quickly construct the idea you had in your head, it's why it is named "Moment of Inspiration", because you can quickly draw things.

If that type of quick object realization does not fit with what you in particular need, then that's certainly fine. But there is no need to insult other people who do find it useful and try to claim that their style of work is somehow wrong which you seem to be doing a lot recently here.

Vehicles do tend to be a difficult type of model to create - they involve a lot of variety and changes in the surface shaping. They are difficult to do in polygons as well.

- Michael

Andre,

I'm having trouble understanding your intention.

I think one is naive to believe modeling vehicles with polys is the only way. Certainly a person must allow for there to be more than one approach to model vehicles. Most car and boat designers I know, who actually do it for a living, don't use polys or SDS (Sub-Division Surfaces). Of course SDS can create fine models, as long as one has a good understanding of polyflow, knows how to spin quads and create edge weight maps along with another half-dozen other specific techniques, which when applied end up being VERY restrictive-- and certainly don't allow for infinite iteration. In fact, take for instance some basic TurboSquid SDS models of something simple, say an iPhone. These are among the finest SDS models on the planet.

Take a look at these and tell me exactly how easy they are now to modify by pushing a few polys around? Not very-- and these are representative of the very BEST SDS modelers in the world. So, it appears SDS doesn't provide such great workflow in even the easiest of hard surface models.





Granted, SDS modelers, like the one you use, are great for creating cartoon characters, and I would certainly agree with you your SDS program can create a better Donald Duck than MoI. But hard surface models and/or vehicles. I don't think you can really say one is substantially better than another.

Certainly fine work has been done in both.

Hello,

I think the Problem of These discussion is the different Point of view about the meaning of design. I'm not a designer, but I think we have to clearify and find a consence about the meaning of some Terms. Here some non-binding proposals:

* product design - concepts and geometrical shaping of a product with respect to function, usability, production, matierials, estetic, communication/ iteraction with the user, haptics, Emotion,....
* estetic Styling - estecic of the form, colour, surface structure,...
* functional Styling - form follows function - depending on concepts (integral - differential design)

I had worked 14 Years for an automotive supplier and I've never heard something about Sub-D there(O.k. in Catia are a lot of Buttons;-). It may caused by the history of the companies. But I had a lot discussions about curvature stuff. I often get Models made or smoothed with ICEM. Some drafts came from ALIAS. The Styling with this Tools is a hard peace of cake (told the colleages that worked with ICEM, - No Designers!)- and very Special. I know something about the specifications for the Styling and the dataquality (Q-Checker:()
Sometimes I had to work at some blends for hours. So I don't understand the discussion about effective Styling/shaping not. For automotive styling you have to fullfill exactly some specifications and the wishes of the designer. Everybody can make a choice who he is and what he will do with Moi.

I like the contributions about other Tools and Software thank's for that to all- but a discussion about the matial arts of Chuck Norris v.s. Jean Claude van Damme in the forum of harmony is in my opinion obsolete.

Kind regards
Karsten

"Language shapes the way we think and determines what we can think about."
Benjamin Lee Whorf

Michael,
When I said concepting I mean form research, when you move this or that, change forms trying to find perfect form.
With polygons you can make it in seconds, for example moving vertexes, edges etc, you can move big parts change proportion etc. There is no way to make something like this in MOI. You can do it in MoI for sure but it will take days instead of seconds.

>>>There is not just one single definition of "concepting" - one method of concept modeling is taking an idea you have visualized in your head and trying to get it constructed as a concrete model as quickly as you can.

Can you make anything like this in MoI for 10 minutes?



Defently no... And this is just primitve car body. So MoI is not Moment of Inspiration with this kind of deisgn. In any way.
It is fast I'm sure but no in car design or in any other design with this forms.

Also ask Mauro how many time hi spent to produce this simplest detail in MOI:



Ask him was it a Moment of Inspiration? I think it was hours of Inspiraion. It can be done in minutes in SubD...

So how can I insult people if I tell facts?
MoI is great but not for "Organic shpaes" it is a fact.

PS
I understand that tell something against MoI on MoI forum is not good idea, but there is no way for me to tell that MoI is good for Car design.
I made the biggest collection of tutorials about how to make Organic stuff in MoI. So I can say for sure like man with experience in this, if it comes to "organic" shapes like practically all cars have now days, MoI is not Moment of Inspiration.

chippwalters,
I read your post and it makes me smile. When you will have at least basic, primitive understanding of how SubD works we can back to our discusion.
Anyway in all that models that you showed I can modify absolutley everything even despite the fact that model on second image was already subdivided.

Hi Andrei - I have long been a fan of your 'Artwork' and as a conceptual artist you are certainly in my view one of the best, it's sad for me to see you going like this, you have become presumptuous, rude, arrogant and egotistical and I find this to be such a shame.

If you find these discussions annoying to the point that you feel the need to be rude and offensive then maybe you should avoid them, and just stay smug with yourself and your beliefs. Please don't blame google translate as a language barrier, there are plenty of others who use it for their basic needs of simple translations, you are rude and abusive in your original language and google just translates what you have typed.

Please just go back to the smart and talented modeller that you are with a desire to help others, no matter how simple you may find things, others don't and they struggle for years and may never master the design and imaginative skills of the 3D concept artist, rather than rubbing their face in their weaknesses, show some compassion and help them progress. It's easy to be rude, to help is much more rewarding and takes far greater skill.

I dare say that when you first started out with 3D modelling and 2D sketching that your work was 'Simple and Basic and Childlike', and I bet your mum and dad or your teachers at school stayed positive and encouraged you to continue and to develop instead of saying such things as, 'this is rubbish and childlike and if that's all you can do then i am highly disappointed - When you have mastered the skills to even a rudimental level then we can discuss things!'.

Please remember your roots for that is where you grew from. Show people, explain to them, encourage them, just as they did with you when you were first starting to draw and model.

Peace bro

Martin Spencer-Ford

"MoI is great but not for "Organic shpaes" it is a fact." (ANDREI SAMARDAC)

NO, it's not a fact.

MoI is very good at organic shapes. I did the attached in MoI precisely because was easier and quicker than trying to do it in MODO or Rhino or LightWave - all of which I use. When it comes to getting a concept down for others to look at, for me MoI has these other apps beat every time. I use it to develop shapes and ideas from scratch where I used to rely on a pencil and paper.

Please keep in mind this is a work in progress and an illustrative concept so it is good enough for what I need at the moment.

Mark

Very nice work Mark.
Did u primarily loft curves, or blend surfaces?

MarkRG, and what?
I also made these models in MoI and I nether wanted to repeat this experience because I spent for a one model a couple of weeks, but now with polygons I made it for abut 4 days. If you have a lot of time you can waist it, but I can not afford it.

Let me get this right...

You point to this simplistic and childlike model as an example of SDS expert car design technique -->



Yet you show this as a FAIL in MoI.



My turn to smile :-)

Andrei , I confirm what i told few pages back in this thread:i was silly to insist on front part (595 Abarth)
About rest of car,front logo,rims,wipes,rubber hooks,lights,i think it's easier do in MOI...but it's just for me.
I think everybody follow the way feel better to model,you find your way and that's ok :)
I avoid to model using lot of patches to make a car,so in some cases i'll switch to sub-d (Modo)
Moi is intuitive to get the shape because it's Nurbs-based,so draw contour lines to make a surface
Contour lines give you an immediate feedback
If someone want to try a different approach like Ed's car using Max Sub-D plug-in he can do
I agree it's not intuitive to model lot of blocks and subdivide them but result is cool and Ed is proud to show his car (bravo !)


Last but not least ..if the customer pay..be happy designers ! :)

Discovers "Loft" and a simplistic understanding of Tangents, and NAMES IT AFTER HIMSELF! :o

I made an attempt to help him understand and he called me a no nothing newbie.

Enters a forum with people who have been doing it since before he was born, and spouts about what he doesn't understand.

A critique is useful, but should also have merit.

A brilliant modeler? No. A beginner who has much to learn.

People have given him praise because we all like to share our approaches and styles. It's gone to his head and he actually THINKS he is qualified.

Hi Andrei,

> When I said concepting I mean form research, when you move this or
> that, change forms trying to find perfect form.

Ok, yes that's one style of modeling - your error is that you seem to be insisting that this kind of "blob shaping" is the only kind of modeling that everyone should be trying to do.

If you want to do that type of modeling then yes a sub-d modeling program is probably better. In fact I kept on telling you that many times before.

But not everyone wants to model in that way where they don't know what they want and just want to squish blobby things around haphazardly. Some people know what they want and just want to draw that particular thing as quickly as possible. That's when NURBS modeling tends to be good, it allows you to form large sheets of your model from a small number of profile curves.

If you do want to sculpt blobs then yes sub-d modeling is good for that, and that's why there is plenty of interest in a hybrid solution like with Max's plugin which you were also complaining about for some reason that is mysterious to me.

Also blob sculpting "form research" type modeling only works in the beginning stages when you have a simple and rough control cage. Once you get to a higher level of detail it becomes too difficult to manage a large sea of vertices.

- Michael

Michael,

Exactly. In the iPhone example shown above, the first image shows a row of "circular" holes in a SDS. To try and put this type of repetitive detail into a 'blob' SDS is extremely difficult if one wants to contain the overall ability to push/pull the cage. In fact, it's impossible even if one uses something like MeshFusion, which still ends up modifying the cage beyond it's 'concept' ability (though with Modo, you do have a modifier stack which you can rollback to). (Andrei, try putting in a dozen perfect small holes along the base of your car THEN continue to pull and push the main shape!).

Not to mention SDS's do not create *perfect* circles which can be spec'd at a given diameter. In fact, that's another flaw of SDS: creating accurately dimensioned parts. In 3Dprinting, I've tried creating snap and snug fits, like 3d printed nuts and bolts, and it's a huge trial and error as the dimensions from the cage to final SDS can be quite significant-- and even changes depending on the degree of SDS. I finally gave up on SDS for 3D printing and now use MoI exclusively.

Still, blobs are why SDS is so good for cartoons. There is no real need for precision or accurate detailing. It fits the bill perfectly. In fact, Andrei's car would make an excellent cartoon car for Mickey. The next step, making it actually something 'finished', is where the work-- and hours, are spent.

Showing a quick 'blob' as an example of auto design capabilities is a bit like typing text in Photoshop and claiming it can now replace page layout programs. Not equal.

>> Hi Sebastian,

>> Long time no hear, hope all is well

>> > Catia is what is used and the only software that can do the job.

>> I wouldn't say the only software, there are other high end CAD software used in the aeronautical sector, I know Boeing use Siemens NX as well as Catia and I think most aeronautical companies use a combination of a few CAD software.

>> -
>> ~Danny~

Hi Danny... yeah I've been really busy.

I got offered a position with an aeronautics engineering company that supplies Boeing, Airbus, etc (and McLaren). The industry standard is Catia for ALL product/part design. Standard as in required, no exception. Yes, we use Creo for all in-house manufacturing related design i.e. moulds, jigs, 3-axis and 5-axis programming but anything to with design parts for an aircraft has to be done with Catia. This is because only Catia allows for the strict processes that required (skeleton parts, publishing of co-ordinate systems, external reference geometry, internal reference geometry, drafting references, the list goes on.)

My point in my previous was simply that there is a difference between designing a car and designing a car, if you know what I mean...

Hi,


well, what is the difference between SDS modeling and nurbs modeling ?

let's try to make a wall with a hole

1) with nurbs :



easy...




2) now the same work with SDS modeling :




more complicate...

yes, it's joke :)


good evening

Hi Michael,

I have 1 year of experience as a pro in packaging design for PET bottles.I was created my designs with blender3d polygonal and sub-d tools in the past.Once my design was a winner,but to be able to produce it,I had to create it in rhinoceros3d.Then I saw I've created a big mess,so I started to learn rhinoceros 3d cad software,which is compatible with more advanced tools like Inventor,where engineers could do their job.If I did it with Rhinoceros3d from the start,there won't be problems and delays with the project.After that, I learned Rhinoceros3d and designed with it only.I promissed then to myself I will buy something similar to rhinoceros3d,and several years ago I invested in moi3d.
I'm pretty good with modeling in blender3d software with sub-d tools too.Most of my clients wanted in the past,and now to create a real car designs for them in CAD software(IGES,3dm,itc.),because NURBS are the industry standard in most cases and more precise.I have a huge respect for creative designers from Russia and from other countries too.They are inspiring me and push me to be better.Now I'm working on 2 projects for 2 clients and I'm creating it with moi3d. One of the clients has solidworks engineer,and without the moi3d and cad modeling knowledge it would be much tougher to do it for him.Most designers today are becoming an engineers more and more,but also it depends from company to company.Sketching on paper for searching new ideas will always be the first approach for many designers.It feels more natural and more creative for most of the artists,for me too.I'm trying to create my designs and redesigns with everything I learned so far,from sketching to 3d modeling.I'm still learning.Before I bought computer I sketched cars a lot with ball pen on paper.Now I'm learning to sketch my cars with graphic tablet with sketchbook pro software.I'm giving my best to design original designs,but most designers told me it's pretty heavy task because until today there are so many designs already created.I'm designing my vehicles and most of the people like it,that is enough for one selftaught(sketching,computer graphics) car design enthusiast like me.To sell my 3d models,designs on 3dstock markets for digital virtual projects I will use blender3d sub-d tools(much faster modeling,less precise),for creating real things I will use what most of the clients need cad software like moi3d(much precise,longer modeling).

All in all Moi3d gives me a new modeling approach for affordable price.If I need more advanced tools, I will go for rhinoceros3d which costs 800$ or solidworks more expensive.I create my designs with sub-d tools in blender3d,but then I'm trying to refine it with moi3d and most people like my aproach and final result with cad software.Design and visual tastes are different for every person,somebody like it some don't.The important thing is not to try to convert each other by attacking on others people opinion or their work,we have to respect each other.In my case the more somebody attack my modeling approach and my efforts,the more I will be persistent to progress myself in it.I won't argue(it is neverending post with some people) and waste my time,when I finish some real projects to the end I will then agree or disagree.Until then I will learn from the people who has more experience in industrial design industry and in producing real products.Yes CAD modeling needs more time to model or to design something,but it pushes me to think beyond my knowledge limits and it's highly challenging.Michael You create awesome tools(match surface,blending complex surfaces) in distant future,and we modelers and designers will give our best to create awesome designs even real car prototypes.Until then We have to give our best with what We've got now by keep learning, creating and respect each other effort and tryouts.Keep up good work Michael.

- Nikola aka Zenox