[tom]

I agree about filleting/chamfering/beveling all edges and I agree most of the time it's easier to do it with a solid/nurbs model. However it's not impossible or very hard to model bevels with poly objects, since they have an extreme featrue called "sub division" and nowadays all poly modeling applications have very sophisticated features about selecting and modifying. It's just about the way you model solids and polys are quite different and I'm not an expert but I can model both. Solids require engineering steps to model properly and in other hand polys require scuplturing abilities. The only advantage of solids/nurbs are they can be analysed for production and used under cnc benchs but the geometry is just crap when turned into mesh if you need to animate. But with polymodeling you have unlimited modeling abilities and you can even model organics easily beside machine parts. And a sub division mesh is perfect for any animation based manipulation. Also UV mapping is far more easier. No face normal errors, no bad geometry since it's a water-tight mesh in the core. Well, you cannot manufacture them directly as solid geomerty but this ain't a handicap for a CG artist.

[mtripoli]

I agree about filleting/chamfering/beveling all edges and I agree most of the time it's easier to do it with a solid/nurbs model. However it's not impossible or very hard to model bevels with poly objects, since they have an extreme featrue called "sub division" and nowadays all poly modeling applications have very sophisticated features about selecting and modifying. It's just about the way you model solids and polys are quite different and I'm not an expert but I can model both. Solids require engineering steps to model properly and in other hand polys require scuplturing abilities. The only advantage of solids/nurbs are they can be analysed for production and used under cnc benchs but the geometry is just crap when turned into mesh if you need to animate. But with polymodeling you have unlimited modeling abilities and you can even model organics easily beside machine parts. And a sub division mesh is perfect for any animation based manipulation. Also UV mapping is far more easier. No face normal errors, no bad geometry since it's a water-tight mesh in the core. Well, you cannot manufacture them directly as solid geomerty but this ain't a handicap for a CG artist.

You are absolutely correct. This has been the bane of my existance with rendering. As you know ( ) I do my models in Solidworks. The mesh output is garbage (as you know!). There is NO SOLUTION I have found for dealing with this problem. I have Polytrans from Okino, 3D File Export from Baryn-Boym, and a bunch of other "convertors". I've even tried "solutions" costing $25,000.00 USD! NONE of them are any good for converting a solid model to a poly model.

Now, I'm looking at a different solution: there are tools (I have Silo poly modeler as well). THere is a tool that allows you to "draw" a new poly mesh "over" the existing one. I can use my "solid model meshes" as a base and re-draw over the top, creating a new model that ocnforms to the old one. Tedious, but I think it will acheive the end result. If I could just find an "automatic" way to do this!

Mike Tripoli

[DELETED]

DELETED

[mtripoli]

It's not the conversion process I have a problem with; it's the resulting mesh! Polytrans tries to "optimize" the mesh, and by doing so, nothing is particularly orderly. This results in models that (in my estimation) require a lot of "manipulation" in a poly editor. I don't have a model to convert right now, but I'll show you what I mean when I have one!

Thank you very much for the input!

Mike Tripoli

[DELETED]

DELETED

[tom]

8etty sounds good here... "do not optimize" will do the trick but in the end there will be 28592758272 poly to deal
in rendering, nothing is efficient as polymodeling and i started to learn polymodeling also...

[DELETED]

DELETED

[daros]

Definitly is a good idea to learn polymodeling.
You have 100% of control of mesh complexity.
Many of our clients are working with max and rhino. In many workflows we need more time to optimize their geometry as to make the renderings.
Yust yesterday i optimized a rhino jacht model from 3.000.000 polygons to 400.000 without any visible difference.
And you find wery good polymodelers aven for free.
Try out wings3D. It's very fast and powerful.

David Rossmann

[tom]

8etty, i understand your habits about solid modeling and i did enough stuff with nurbs. it's all right for me and i'm still happy about having knowledge on nurbs concepts. but polymodeling is like magic! i cannot compare any other style with it depending on my 12 years modeling experience. i used the tools you've never had chance to try and this is not a pissing contest. so give up suggesting gazillion polygon decimationfor your beautiful nurbs. know that each triengle is making your rendering a hell. it's not that easy just decimating them at high density to render 3 million triangle for a simple watch object.

[Mihai]

I've modeled in polys for a while, they are a real pain when trying to model anything with reasonable precision. Worst are cases where you have an organic shape that still requires precision angles/creases/fillets.....so most modern designs from vacuum cleaners to toothbrushes. For characters that need to deform they are great and very efficient, for product design nurbs will always be best.

[tom]

yeah i also modeled a mandibula from MR segments to poly to nurbs for my dentist friend for using it under ansys. i know poly is useless if you need engineering on models. IMO they can't be compartable to each other but if you're trying to render engineering models in this arena, it would be as funny as trying to engineer a polymodel as a precious solid model.