making things with Moi

Next
 From:  val2
5596.1 
Thought I would post my latest project. It's not quite done as I still need to make the doors. It's pretty close to what i drew up though.


Attachments:

  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
5596.2 In reply to 5596.1 
Nice setup, Val - it looks like you've got a place for everything there!

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  val2
5596.3 In reply to 5596.2 
Thanks Michael,

Using Moi as a set of plans worked out nicely. I did a cut list from the parts. worked out the most efficient use of the plywood. Much easier than fooling around with paper.

Val
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Mike K4ICY (MAJIKMIKE)
5596.4 
Looks great Val! You could be a famous cabinet maker! :-)

MoI is a superb tool for layout and concept. Since MoI's interface doesn't require all kinds of parameters to be entered, you are more able to free-associate design implementations. ..The same kind of freedom that hand sketching gives you.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  val2
5596.5 In reply to 5596.4 
Mike,

I do like Moi for the things that you state. It really is free form enough to function as a sketching tool.
In the past I used turbocad pro to draw up problem plans. I'm attaching a bench I made that I couldn't have done easily without using CAD. Nothing really wrong with turbocad but it's a bit of a chore to use comparatively to Moi. The fact that Micheal holds the line on keeping his program simple to use by not having too many buttons is to be applauded. I have seen a number of pieces of software start out as simple to use and then they knuckle under to user pressure and add endless features.




Attachments:

  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Mike K4ICY (MAJIKMIKE)
5596.6 In reply to 5596.5 
I agree Val!
MoI's simplicity makes designing more enjoyable!

Although I don't own big programs like Rhino, Maya and SolidWords, their demos were certainly so complex, a month or whatever it was, was never enough time to breach the steep learning curve required just to use them on any basic level. (Rhino was easier of course).
But MoI - I picked up the basics in just minutes after watching Michael's tutorials. Then it only took a couple of days to master many of the more complex tools and then in a few weeks I was making my own tutorials!
I was already using SketchUp because it was easy-peezy, so MoI fit well.

Another case in point: I use PhotoShop for much of my core design at my employment, but I find myself doing my most creative (2D) work in a program called ArtRage - made to be simple to use and easy on the eyes.


Nice chair! ...there's something neat about the bee stripes... ;-)
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  val2
5596.7 In reply to 5596.6 
It's slightly unfair to compare programs like Maya and Max and Blender with Moi as Moi is a drawing program and the other three do many things, but yes I picked up how to use Moi in one day where as I still am figuring out all of the intricacies of Max. If one only looked at the modelling part of any of these programs are they really that complex? Probably... but I can't say for certain as I haven't looked into it that deeply but they don't have the cleanliness of Moi. I have yet to find a program that has as good of snaps as Moi.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
5596.8 In reply to 5596.7 
It's not unusual for the "do many things" animation oriented programs to have pieces interconnected with one another, so like in Max a lot of the modeling is set up not just to build a plain model but more like to set up a system of actions any of which can be animated, which is certainly powerful but it's part of what adds to the complexity.

So sometimes because of this interconnected nature you don't necessarily escape the complexity by focusing on just one area of an overall complex program like that.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  val2
5596.9 In reply to 5596.8 
These things are true. It's why I don't compare the two. I have found watching the development of Blender to be fascinating. It's happening in plain site with many cooks in the kitchen. Where as You are one and have the final say even though you ask your users for input. So is the individual superior to the committee? I personally believe a better product is much more a possibility made by one person making the final decision. The committee will more likely make a compromise when there shouldn't be one.
Design is interesting as it's about trying to make an object seem intuitive. There is a book I think is pretty interesting. "The Psychology of Everyday Things" by Donald A Norman. It's really worth a read.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
 From:  Michael Gibson
5596.10 In reply to 5596.9 
Hi Val,

> So is the individual superior to the committee?

I guess it depends on the particular goals that are being targeted. If the goal is more about amassing a whole bunch of features then the committee approach can work very well for that.

But yeah if the goal is more about making things "intuitive" or "streamlined" or "easy to learn", then it's a much different matter and having one individual in control helps out a lot. A lot less arguments for one thing... :) With a committee it invariably happens that not every single person involved shares the same precise vision for what the product should do and so the result becomes a sort of amalgamation.

Sometimes just adding features is what actually ruins simplicity by itself - and when there are a lot of people trying to contribute it gets difficult to say to someone - "sorry, your work is not quite in line with the overall product vision and so we're just throwing out all your work"... And then once something has been added in it usually stays in for a long time to come, just in general people don't react well when stuff is taken out.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged
 

Reply to All Reply to All