OSTexo,
Ideal continuity I mean class A surfaces with G2 or G3 continuity. I'm sure you talked about this.
But looks like now you are going to talk about it in terms of Art Forms or even Mathematics functions.

Andrei,

I fail to see what makes it "ideal", now you're resorting to make believe terminology? Go back and reread what I wrote, I certainly did not use the term "ideal continuity", since you just made up that term out of thin air. I have no idea why you're talking about art forms and mathematics, I meant exactly what I said in my most recent previous post, that the concept of continuity has been used in design for hundreds of years. If you had the slightest idea what the term continuity means you'd realize those designers Mauro mentioned used and understood it, as well as countless other designers (automotive and otherwise) before and after.

You have the nasty habit of trying to make yourself look better by knocking others hard work, even when said work is perfectly relevant to the subject thread. Let's dispense with the nonsense of the context of your posts being misunderstood because of translation, you and I both know that isn't true since you exhibit the same behavior regardless of subject at hand.

You start out by knocking MoI saying it's no good for concept modeling, especially in automotive design. Then when you are shown that it can in fact be a beneficial tool in conceptual design you attack the designers proficiency with the tool. Then you try to resort to deflection and derailing the topic because your objective is not to have a constructive discussion on topic, in your mind it's how many people you can get to stroke your ego. And when someone else get's some attention for the hard work they've done, (whether a design, plugin, etc.) you try your hardest to put others accomplishments down, it's as if you can't stand not continually being in the spotlight, regardless of the consequences.

You might want to step back a moment and see how silly it's making you look. I have a thick skin when it comes to things like forums, then again I think you know the context in which I put your comments, not a big deal in my case, but they can be upsetting to others. Perhaps I've given you something to consider, if not that's OK too.

Hello
I don't think that you need moi or g2, g3 or g×√π for vehicle design. You need insperation and a pencil and a sheet of paper.
Ok, Maybe, You need also a black turtleneck sweater, glasses with a thick spectacle frame - especially if you don't have problems with your eyes(simple float glass), some cool apple gadgets, a Artemide Tizio on your desktop and a showcase with some old Braun products;-)

Kind regards
Karsten
p.s: Am I redirected? Or is this really the moi M O i - Forum???

..and a showcase with some old Braun products..

Does this mean my Bellini Olivetti calculator doesn't count? ;-)

Ok,
And a Bellini Olivetti calculator ..... also.

Right (not the Sottsass one).

the Sottsass one ;)


All the collection ;)
http://www.epocalc.net/pages/calc_olivetti
and of course here;
http://www.storiaolivetti.it/

"""""""""There are no even such a term Like 3D modelling when Marcello Gandini created Countach or Miura."""""""""""

No, he would have used things like "French Curves" And "Drafting Machines" and a heavy "understanding of math" for the ability to actually use a French curve...... Also understanding that he was creating a 3 dimensional object which needed to maintain the beautiful characteristics of Curvature...

He most definitely didn't just draw something and say "Look at that!"...............

I never known why this is called "French Curve" ! :)

In French that is a "Perroquet" (a parrot) look the last one on the right side!

Maybe!?

:)

Hi Pilou,

I don't know why they called french curves, but the name Ludwig Burmester may be interessting for you!

Have a nice day
Karsten

Yes, mister Pierre Bezier was his successor! :)

Dont't forget Bernstein and De Casteljau;-)

Nevertheless, my hero is Ivan Sutherland:-)

Those guys were monsters in math and masters of geometry.

Burmester was working on "lightlines" before je moved into creating his motion theory.

...after Catia,continuity and mathematics don't forget taste,stylish,elegance..what we Italians call "the concept of beautiful"

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