[Thomas An.]

Max,

You are doing very well with Modo ... and you seem to be getting the hang of it.

1. How does it compare (ease of use) to sillo ?

2. I see you are doing some non-freeform objects, like the toolbox, cabinets, anvil etc ... this type of thing (product design) can also be Rhino territory ... how does the modeling of these items compare (ease of use and modeling speed) with Rhino ?

[tom]

Max, your modeling skills definitely rock mate!

[Maximus3D]

Thomas: Many thanks but seriously Modo is ridiciously easy to get your head around how it works. I still consider myself a newbie at it because this is like the 2nd time i really model anything with it. Before the toolbox i just messed with spheres, boxes and tested the tools a bit. So all this i learnt as i worked more and more on it.

Modo is easy to use, depending ofcourse on your previous skills and knowledge about this type of modeling. If you ever done standard subdiv/polymodeling then you won't have a problem working with Modo. The time you need is only to adjust to the userinterface, tools and workflow as with any other 3d app. Compared to Silo i'd say it differes slightly, but it's not by much.

Silo is leaning more now with 2.0 towards the Zbrush direction which is great for organic modeling and if that's your bowl of soup then i wouldn't hesitate to go for Silo 2. Personally i can say that Modo works charmingly well for technical and mechanical modeling if you can live with the poor lack of snapping at the moment until Luxology fixed that.

Modeling technical models (hardbody modeling) with Modo is pretty easy, but compared to nurbsmodeling in Rhino it's not really the same world at all. You have to do about 4 times as many operations to get the same result when you subdiv model, if you do the same in Rhino it's much less work to get great result. In the end i'd say it depends on your needs, or your own or your clients needs. If they want nurbsmodels or polymodels

However once you do get up to speed with this type of modeling then you can be as fast if not faster than a nurbsmodeler. It's all really up to you and how fast and effective you can work.

Tom: Thank you so much i appreciate the kind words from you.

Today's update (again..) yes i got another model now. I thought it was time for a small to place by the main workbench. Perhaps i went a bit overkill on this one but oh well.. can't help it.

Chair - Version #1


Chair - Version #2


Closeup of button with sewing


Lower half of the chair


/ Max

[Thomas An.]

Thanks Max !
I apreciate the insight...

You seem to be trying your hands in a variety of apps adding versatility to your skill-set / resume (very nice).

[Miles]

Max, I love the base of that stool - it's very: http://www.dan-dare.org/DareAnim3.htm

[Maximus3D]

Thomas: Anytime yep that's right, the more knowledge you have in various types and sorts of modeling and programs the better it is when you're gonna work. You're not limited to a certain type of jobs or apps, and as i enjoy learning new stuff this approach fits me like a glove

Miles: Hehehe great comparison i didn't think of that during the modeling, but hmm you just gave me a great idea..

Tonight there'll be a small update, i haven't been in the mood to model seriously tonight so this is a bit dull model. A trashbin..

Fullview


Closeup of a strangely designed handle..


Backside hinge thingy..


/ Max

[Tim Ellis]

Tonight there'll be a small update, i haven't been in the mood to model seriously tonight so this is a bit dull model. A trashbin..

For an 'non serious modeling' night, that's some heavy sub-d work mate.


Nice update Max. Is Modo free? You've inspired me to at least check out a demo, as it seems to be my kind of modeler.


Tim.

[jdp]

max, I love the stunning attention to detail you put into any of your models, but I wonder how you'll manage all the geometry of the scene once everything is ready for texturing and rendering.
I'm thinking about all of that miniscule metalic strings, screws, bolts, nails... I sometimes have the same over-detailed attitude (far from your skill, though!) resulting in scenes quite difficult to manage: what's your workflow? did you instance geometry subdividing scenes per object basis and then instanciating them?
I sometimes come out with a big mess and an even bigger headache...

[Maximus3D]

Tim: Thanks, it was/is one of those days.. slow and there's no inspiration for anything other than watching some crap on TV. So i made this between watching various shows and series. You can give Modo a try for 30 days for free and see how you like it, i bet you could create some killer models with it. And that's no joke, trust me i've seen what you can do.

jdp: Thank you, and hm yes i'm aware of the issues highly detailed models generate such as high polycounts and alot of surfaces to create materials for which i'm dreading already the clayrender seen on the previous page was about 560,000 polys when i rendered it with Maxwell. If it'd do it again i'd probably hit close to a million polys which i'm doubtful i'll be able to render :/

There's no instanced geometry anywhere, some parts are duplicated and tweaked a bit but 95% is handmodeled based either on a cube or a cylinder. Those are the two main primitives i work with for this type of modeling.

Thanks again guys for your kind comments, they're much appreciated.

/ Max

[Mihai]

Some criticism

There are many parts in your models which don't need to be subd. When you add things up it will be a lot of polys, which aren't necessary. What is the polycount on the chair, fully subd? Mechanical parts can usually be modelled by just increasing the polys on some parts of it, subd just quadruples the whole model where most times in mechanical stuff you only need 20% to be subd.

It also makes for cleaner models when not having everything as subd. Having a clean base is important for the uv mapping, because when you make the uv's you make them on the base mesh. But if the base vertices are all over the place you might get good uv's on the base mesh, but when you subdivide it, the texture smears.

For example most of the lower part of the chair, it doesn't need to be subd. There are also many edges which don't look too "orderly". I think it's because you do most of the modeling while in subd mode? This is usually not a good idea because you risk having a really messy base mesh.

This is pretty common:



You have a cylinder and you want only the sides to be red. You arranged the uvs so it looks alright on the base mesh. But when you subdivide, the red part has smeared onto the white part. So now you have to tweak the uv's to try and match them to what you see in the viewport. In XSI it's pretty easy to do this because I can move uvs and see them updated in the viewport as I change them, but if your program doesn't allow this it gets annoying. Or think if you have a more complex model and you have to always tweak the uvs like this so the textures fit properly on the subd version.

[Tim Ellis]

Cheers for the info Max, I'll source a download & have a play.

jdp: Thank you, and hm yes i'm aware of the issues highly detailed models generate such as high polycounts and alot of surfaces to create materials for which i'm dreading already the clayrender seen on the previous page was about 560,000 polys when i rendered it with Maxwell. If it'd do it again i'd probably hit close to a million polys which i'm doubtful i'll be able to render :/

No way man, you'll be able to render that many. My MWC scene is at nearly 2.5milion tris already, with only 1 sub-d level on the objects. Those lamp, battery & tripod models you made were useable for you but not for me, so I think your machine should cope.

Mihai, you can UV map a sub-d mesh (Blender rant again), can Modo not let you UV map a sub-d result, as well as the pre-sub-d mesh?

To stop the result of your texture stretch at sub-d level, add an extra edge loop to seperate the two colours. At least that's how I stop this happening, in combination with Blender's Sub-surf UV mapping. (Blender rant over.)

Tim.

[Mihai]

Yes, you can do that. But even more polys, and it changes the shape. About uvmapping the subd, yes you can, but the uv's will be based on the base mesh.

[Maximus3D]

Mihai: Yes you're definately correct, alot of these models don't need to be subdivided at all, and why i done that i have no clue.. You're also right about that the modeling is sloppy and with too many polygons in them. I shall try to improve until next time however if it's an excuse i'm still a newbie at this and trying to learn. I'm thanksful for the tips and the insight from your guys so i can hopefully get better at it.

Tim: Wow 2.5 million polys that's a insane amount. I hope you can render it.

/ Max

[Tim Ellis]

Tim: Wow 2.5 million polys that's a insane amount. I hope you can render it.

/ Max

I seem to remember a white paper for Maxwell that stated high poly counts would not slow Maxwell down during render. (I hope this is still true.)

The current record in the breaking barriers board, is 6.6million, so I think it should be fine.

Tim.

[Voidmonster]

In the various tests and full renders I've done, polygon count makes no difference at all in render speed. Where it makes a difference is ram usage, and the more ram your polys eat, the lower the res you can successfully render at.

The scene I'm working on is only about 1.4 million polys, but I still need to add strand-based hair.

I'm really looking forward to seeing both your image, Max, and the one Tim's working on!