I see a big philosophic difference :)

When you use Nurbs you know exactly the form that you want!
When you use SubD you don't know exactly the form that you will obtain! :)
it's always a surprise (good or bad :)

There is an interesting thread about that on SketchUcation! (34 pages growing of examples of what I say! :)
https://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=397&t=63826

"You need to be a member to view images." :( I can't see any of the posted screenshots / renderings in the subd thread.

Ahhhh yes!
Sorry you must free register for see images who are directly published on their forum ! (not external linked)!

:)

Here's a 154-page alternative forum thread about subdivision modeling:

http://polycount.com/discussion/56014/how-the-f-do-i-model-this-reply-for-help-with-specific-shapes-post-attempt-before-asking

Hi Pilou,

//
When you use Nurbs you know exactly the form that you want!
When you use SubD you don't know exactly the form that you will obtain! :)
it's always a surprise (good or bad :)
//

The problem is that most of us need to use SubD in a predictable way, where there is no room for surprise.
And the only way to archive this control is with a lot of practice (and planing) ... creating edge loop in every direction, fighting with surface distortion etc.
It's not a very funny process, at least not any more after a couple of years.

In the other hand SubDs is the only modeling technique that can tackle any subject, from organic to mechanic, and that's probably the reason its far to be 'dead' yet.

Fortunately we can now convert SudDs cage model into a Nurbs surface, and somehow take advantage of the best of those 2 modeling method.

Still much easier to UV map a sub'd mesh than a somewhat messy mesh generated from Nurbs Surfaces.
Also you have to be really careful to keep your normals data intact before rendering a nurbs generated mesh.

With Sub'ds you can model anything you think of. Modern retopology tools are overcoming many of sub'ds shortfalls. Its still time consuming though.

Nurbs are really at their best for hard surface objects.

I don't know if it will ever happen but a program that has the speed & power of nurbs and the tweakability of sub'ds would be really cool. Modo's meshfusion is an attempt at this but still generates a messy mesh.

Yes, you are correct about UVs. Still, have you tried out 3DC's UV tools for NURBS polys? The auto mapper is pretty darn good and can often suffice with a single button click. I use it all the time. Here's a quick video of some of the easy to use features.

Ah, some kind of flashback :)
Couple of years ago I started topic like this and there was huge battle:)
I just want to say what I learned from that time, guys do not waste your time posting on forums to debate with each other, just do your job, it will be much more effective to learn things:)
There are thousands of designers that use NURBS, there are thousands of designers that use Polygons, there are thousands of designers that use Sculpting, everybody uses the instruments they need, because there is no any universal tool!!!

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating one over the other for everyone. It's just my observation that there is a shift in focus among many of the top concept design modelers that I know and follow.

Of course everyone should use whatever tool they like.

That said, paying attention to shifts in trends makes sense as the technology in the space moves so quickly.

Fully agree with PaQ, about carefully planning and knowing in advance what you do.

Here is also (once again... :-)) a very good example of the ZModeler brush:

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread.php?209559-Tamotsu-Kishida-s-Sketchbook

I wonder how many times fillets etc. would fail on such a complex model and if NURBS
modeling would be really faster than subd modeling. One other advantage is also dynamic
subdivision (rendering), so that poly count can be kept low when saving, compared to a
frozen subd mesh.

Pixologic must had a good reason to implement the ZModeler brush in 4R7... :-)

But i agree, one should use the tools one is most comfortable with.

Regards
Stefan

Tools are not the more important ... just imagination! :) (sure they can help but...

My French friend Orgelf make some crazzy things with SketchUp! :) http://www.orgelf.com





or Xlrlxi (always SketchUp) Gallery : https://600v.deviantart.com/gallery/

Interesting Pilou, that SketchUp can handle models with a large poly count!

Regards
Stefan

Maybe not like ZBrush but sufficient for crazzy things! :)
By Orgelf

Hi Pilou.

Wanderful stuff is doing your friend Orgelf!!

@You : "...Tools are not the more important ... just imagination! :)..."

I agree with you

Just imagination, hundreds of hours of studying and practicing and....talent.

Yes. I think that ALL starts from talent you received.
Starting with that, you can work and strive to become a "true artist".

If you don't have the "natural" talent for a certain thing, with the strive and the hard work certainly you will be able to do even very good things,
but becoming a true amazing "artist" I think it's a thing reserved only to a very small part of the mankind.

Ciao!

P.S. When I say "true artist" I'm thinking to the various "humanity's genes" that are all "heritage of humanity."

Galileo, Raffaello, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Picasso, etc... etc...


:)

Can we imagine what these geants should made with the computers tools! ;)

Another cool show! :)
https://www.artstation.com/orgelf/albums/all

Hi Stefan,

That looks very impressive. Still, somehow ZModeler feels a bit off in a freeform sculpting tool like ZBrush. I just can't get used to it, and miss some basic functions like edge extruding, grid snapping, non-destructive modifiers, and more. As soon as I want to poly-model something, Blender remains my go-to tool.

Regards,

Seems Silo comes back also in the game! ;)
"3D Modeling Zen for Games and Animation."







etc...

Hi Metin,

i started learning subd modeling long ago with Silo and later MODO (which i have sold) and
i took also a Blender class a while ago, but come now to the conclusion that i can do all those
things with the ZModeler brush, when needed. I think doing a subd base mesh and later
sculpting on it, or adding subd mesh parts to a sculpt, is a welcome addition. But sure, no
doubt, Blender is also a very nice and very capable modeling environment.

You can call me also a bit crazy but i really like those nicely colored poly groups in ZBrush. :-)

Best regards
Stefan

Hi Pilou,

the Nevercenter guys announced a couple of hours ago on Facebook
that a new version is out (2.5.1) with smoothing groups/hard egdes
support.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYfX1HmzXqk

Best regards
Stefan