"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

Michael, I said the same thing:
"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." MoI has no patches and surface match tools. Or I'm wrong?
Yes you always told me to go to polygons and I made what you suggest and I want to thank you for this really valuable suggestions. Now when after about a year of digging into polygons I hardly can think that i'll back ever to the Nurbs.

" Some people know what they want and just want to draw that particular thing as quickly as possible. "
In all that model that I showed here Helicopters etc.. I defently know what I wanted, I made them from blueprints, and I have to say it was not as quick as possible it was absolutely not quick. With that models MoI turned for me from Moment of Inspiration to Weeks of Inspiration.

You talking about styles of modeling but the main thing is forms that you model and MoI have some objective limitation in producing some kind of forms that we can call "Organic". And you told me this so many times.

"Once you get to a higher level of detail it becomes too difficult to manage a large sea of vertices."
I'm not agree with you. If you have enough skills it is not so hard. I know it from personal experience. When I started polygons I made some global mistakes in some models and I have to rebuild and modify very dens cage, from that time I do not afraid anything because I got a lot of skills.
The key thing here is skills.

Also polygons has ABSOLUTLEY different philosophy from Nurbs.
MoI is very simple much simpler for beginners then Polygons. You draw lines sweep them then Boolean and fillet and something is ready. In polys you have feel them like Operators in Matrix read that green code on their screens. To hard for beginners. I need about year to get good skills. But now looking back to remember how much time and efforts I spent to produce that models in MoI I become a bit angry cause I spent too much time with MoI solving puzzles and riddles of Nurbs Modeling that can be done with Polygons in minutes.

Anyway when I started MoI I had zero experience in modeling so I had to start from something, now I have something to compare.
And I want to say you Michael big thanks, you always help me when I need it.

Also I think I made not small contribution in MoI community by making the biggest collection of tutorials for MoI about one hundred where half of them is about organic stuff. So I think some users can excuse my sharpness in discussion. I still continue to answer and help people that ask questions on youtube.

Hi Andrei, well I'm glad that you have been able to get a toolset that is more suited for what you want to do!

And thank you very much in your last message for not insulting anyone, maybe we can let this thread die down now, it is getting tiresome.

- Michael

Hi Andrei I see that the lack of insulting was short lived.

Please do not post any more messages insulting users of this forum. If I see you post any messages that are directly insulting other people I will delete them.

If you are not going to be using MoI, I don't understand why you are so focused on posting messages here in the forum - you are aware that this is a support forum for MoI, right?

It is not a place to be attacking and insulting other people's work.

I guess I will lock this thread since you are not able to behave yourself in it.

- Michael