PDA

View Full Version : modeling / problem



qbaqbaLW
11-05-2013, 09:38 AM
Hi,
I worked on the packaging for the last few hours and I can not deal with
modeling phase of this block.

117995

Pls help me or post a link to a tutorial about this case.

pozdrawiam / Best Regards
Jacob

JoePoe
11-05-2013, 10:18 AM
What exactly is the problem? Looking good to me.
Some pretty heavy non planar CC stuff going on, yes?

Is this an existing product you're trying to match/recreate in 3d, or an original design?
Either way, what is the reference to see where it's off?

Edit: On second look, I'm not even sure how you got that far with those wires. Those are some pretty crazy curves. :stumped: :D

qbaqbaLW
11-07-2013, 04:14 PM
Hi
Thanks a lot for answer and sorry that I didn't answer so long, but I had to finish some imortant subject at my work.

Image attached above is only a reference which I want to achieve.
Model was made ​​in another application.

Because I wasn't modeling for long time, especially organic sub-D, so I wasted many hours before anything was made.
I was sure I won't managed to do it, so I wrote here.

After a few hours, I remembered myself a few tools which I used in the past for similar job.

I know the topology and the network are far away from ideal, but something luckly was made.

118046

118045

118044

Thanks and Regards
Jacob

JamesCurtis
11-07-2013, 08:44 PM
Can the client supply you with .stl files? LW11.6 can import .stl's. In fact, even .obj files would import.

JoePoe
11-07-2013, 10:29 PM
...
Model was made ​​in another application.



Ahhhhhhh. Okay. Phew.
Your wires look muck more familiar.
Wish I knew that was the case.... that you were looking to achieve something to that effect...and not necessarily trying to recreate that topology as is (thought I lost my touch :D).
I think you did a good job.
I'm interested to know what software the original was done in though?? Nurbs????

meshpig
11-08-2013, 03:17 AM
WTF? That's a piece of cake in modeler :)

JoePoe
11-08-2013, 07:59 AM
WTF? That's a piece of cake in modeler :)

:lol:

meshpig
11-08-2013, 10:42 PM
It looks like a NURBS object. So it could be Rhino, Maya, Modo...

djwaterman
11-09-2013, 12:57 AM
Good job, you got it sorted without anyone's help. Sometimes you just buckle down and get it done. The renders look pretty nice too.

JoePoe
11-09-2013, 01:01 AM
It looks like a NURBS object. So it could be Rhino, Maya, Modo...


Yeah.... the wires of the OP,.... impossible in LW.
Not sure Modo is a possibility..... my initial thought (with no evidence to back me up) was.... C4D.

But Rhino.... Hmmmmm. Good one.

meshpig
11-09-2013, 10:15 PM
Yeah.... the wires of the OP,.... impossible in LW.
Not sure Modo is a possibility..... my initial thought (with no evidence to back me up) was.... C4D.

But Rhino.... Hmmmmm. Good one.

... meant mmMax not mmModo. Either way by how much would a few polynomial equations bump up the price of a modelling app?

qbaqbaLW
11-10-2013, 02:39 PM
Hi

Thanks for comments :). Master file was created in Rhinoceros, but the producer didn't want to share it.
We needed a model/prototype for presentation on last Friday, so we had to made it quickly iin 3D print


I know that that bottle is no problem for modeler :), but last 2-3 years I was concerned only on rendering and lighting.
I was using modeler only for simple geometric shapes, without complicated blocks of organic sub-D.

So the first two or three hours during the modeling were wasted for coming up with ways to do it ...
Only after this time, it came to me that in Modeler there is the key like TAB... :) and magaged to do it.

Regards
Jacob

jeric_synergy
11-10-2013, 04:24 PM
Yeah.... the wires of the OP,.... impossible in LW.
thank gahd.... I was thinking "I am SO behind the curve...."

+++
OK, I can see how one might do that, as long as the ridgey bits didn't have to have smooth camfers (fillets? -i can never remember) with the body of the bottle-- IOW if the ridges were essentially independent meshes.

But actually making them part of the same contiguous surface, in LWM? That would seem to me to be quite a challenge. Exporting from a NURBs modeler would be the way, no?

JoePoe
11-10-2013, 06:53 PM
thank gahd.... I was thinking "I am SO behind the curve...."

:ohmy: I Get it!! Behind the curve!! CURVE!!!

I'm starting to feel that way myself after watching some vids from the nurb capable programs (just became aware of moi3d too.... talk about some complex boolean sweetness made simple :hey:).


.... OK, I can see how one might do that, as long as the ridgey bits didn't have to have smooth camfers (fillets? -i can never remember) with the body of the bottle-- IOW if the ridges were essentially independent meshes.

Even with NO ridgey elements..... Seriously doubt it.
qbaqbaLW (Jacob) did a very nice job. Don't think one can do a subD version with much less (the simple cylindrical indents at top and bottom seem a little loop happy.... but other than that :thumbsup:).
Jeric, give it a try. But please..... don't hurt yourself. :D
It's nurb all the way.

Edit: The new Pixar subDs haven't been mentioned. Don't really know too much about them though. I've only seen a presentation on their ability to animate on extremely dense levels. I don't know what their modeling capabilities are... but, I believe they are based on CCs, yes(?). So, Ngons. But the CCs I know still can't do the op.

jeric_synergy
11-10-2013, 07:17 PM
:ohmy: I Get it!! Behind the curve!! CURVE!!!
And STILL I can't get a standup gig.

(just became aware of moi3d too.... talk about some complex boolean sweetness made simple :hey:).
And now I know about it too. :thumbsup:


Even with NO ridgey elements..... Seriously doubt it.
qbaqbaLW (Jacob) did a very nice job. Don't think one can do a subD version with much less (the simple cylindrical indents at top and bottom seem a little loop happy.... but other than that :thumbsup:).
Jeric, give it a try. But please..... don't hurt yourself. :D
It's nurb all the way.
There's the one fellow here who has a EXCELLENT sub-d tutorial series. I think he could do it.

Still, a polygonal modeler is, at base, simply the Wrong Tool for such an object. It would definitely be an uphill paddle.

jeric_synergy
11-10-2013, 07:35 PM
EEEeeesshh.... Google hits #1 and #2 for moi3D tutorials are 67 and 123 minutes respectively.

We really didn't thank William Vaughn enough.....

JoePoe
11-10-2013, 08:16 PM
There's the one fellow here who has a EXCELLENT sub-d tutorial series. I think he could do it.


Please, who is this "fellow" you speak of" A (not so) young padawan would love to know.
Maybe I'm being seduced by the dark side, but even this apparent :yoda: will be hard pressed to reproduce.

djwaterman
11-10-2013, 08:42 PM
If it were important you could with a little work get those ridges to be part of the bottle, it wouldn't be simple but it could be done, it would involve upping the subdivisions on the bottle to be closer to the amount on the ridges and then knitting the points together. However, in this case the renders look fine and you could always cheat them in Photoshop for still images. If you have ZBrush you could take the shapes in and merge them together into a dense mesh object.

jeric_synergy
11-11-2013, 02:27 AM
Please, who is this "fellow" you speak of" A (not so) young padawan would love to know.
Maybe I'm being seduced by the dark side, but even this apparent :yoda: will be hard pressed to reproduce.

He posts here often, his website has "Pixel' or "P" in the name, with a dominant yellow color....... looks like i didn't bookmark it.....


WAIT! Here it is:
http://www.pixelandpoly.com/video.html

AND at first glance the THREADS tutorial near the bottom of the Free page looks exactly the ticket....

hrgiger
11-11-2013, 09:14 AM
its doable with LW but it wouldnt be my first choice of software to tackle it with.

JoePoe
11-11-2013, 10:48 AM
As Meshpig said.... It's a piece of cake in LW. Of course it's doable.

(I feel like we're having a crossed conversation here :))
I was not commenting on the possibilities of producing the object in LW.
My point..... my only point..... was, and is, that the wires of the original post are not reproducible in LW.

subD's simply require more edges to define the curves.
A cylindrical shape can't be defined by only the wires highlighted on the right in the pic below. If anybody can (convincingly :D) join up two discs with only one edge loop.... :bowdown:. I would loooove to know how. Seriously, please.

Jeric, thanks for the link. I have seen those tutes.... they are excellent. Even he, if he wants something round/cylindrical, does not go under a 8 point disc. You can subD with less of course, but (depending on what you want to do with it...) it's not going to like being pushed around too much.

Edit: 8~ Maybe it's just how the edges are drawn in Rhino. Maybe only certain edges are being drawn..... kinda like showing just the splines that define a complex curved surface and not the poly mesh created by them. hmmmm....... Or maybe Nurbs are magic :hey::D

allabulle
11-11-2013, 08:04 PM
You might want to take a look at Surrealist's (his user name in this forums) subdivision surfaces modeling tutorial: http://lightwiki.com/wiki/Fundamentals_of_Subpatch_Modeling

jeric_synergy
11-12-2013, 01:07 AM
JoePoe, I don't know -- and at a VERY deep level. ;) NURBS are a totally different animal-- the samples from the moi3D site show some pretty fancy curves with very few, errrr, source profiles.


Yeah, you can produce the object in LWM, of course, but I think it would be orders of magnitude more difficult, as measured in mouse clicks. Different modeling methodologies have specific advantages, and this shape is particularly well-suited to a certain KIND of modeling.

Waves of light
11-12-2013, 04:09 AM
Richard Culver (aka Surrealist) is the master you refer to. http://www.akinema.com/

gerry_g
11-12-2013, 04:25 AM
ah come on the Rhino object is NURBS Lightwave is SUB D, don't work the same don't tessellate the same, nurbs are made of patches the lines often define the extent of the patch or its centre axis, tessellation is on a per patch basis and uses smoothed normals not merely tessellation alone where as in sub d every thing is is connected and smoothed uniformly, you can fillet chamfer and Boolean thing in nurbs that will give you nightmares in sub d, two different disciplines , need to master each differently

jeric_synergy
11-12-2013, 09:31 AM
In C4D you have the option of doing (some, at least) NURB modeling, but (it seems) you eventually can switch the object to "EDITABLE" -- says a lot right there-- at which point the mesh will become polyganized. It's a one-way street, of course.

You CAN just render the NURBS object, but it's best suited for stuff like this bottle.

That would be a nice facility to have.

JoePoe
11-12-2013, 10:04 AM
ah come on the Rhino object is NURBS Lightwave is SUB D, don't work the same don't tessellate the same, nurbs are made of patches the lines often define the extent of the patch or its centre axis, tessellation is on a per patch basis and uses smoothed normals not merely tessellation alone where as in sub d every thing is is connected and smoothed uniformly, you can fillet chamfer and Boolean thing in nurbs that will give you nightmares in sub d, two different disciplines , need to master each differently

Thank you, ...that's all I'm sayin'.

As far as doing this in LW.....
I'm up for a challenge...... see ya in about an hour. :hey:

JoePoe
11-12-2013, 12:54 PM
Okey dokey, here we go (Hannibal Lecter :D).... All one piece.

images:
1) First stab. Multishift and a couple simple rotations of a couple points. I started with just one horizontal edge, but two gave me much more control of the "yin yang-ish" curves.
(the green edges are just highlighting what my initial comment was in this thread about what was "missing" to my eye in the op wires)
2) A mistake. I knew I needed four horizontals so I thought I'd just add them in, but curving them down was going to be doable, but.... more trouble than it was worth.
3) So I created the potato chip with curved lines from the start. Mirrored and rotated the chip to give me the indents. Connecting the chips was easy enough.
4) Repeated the rotation steps from the first stab (just a couple more of them this time). Edge bevels and multishift to get ridges.
5) The rest. 544 polys (no real inside to it at the moment) all quad.

Not sayin' it's perfect. And certainly not saying there is the same "type" of control and precision on the chamfers as a CAD program.
But all the transitions can be fairly easily tightened or loosened as needed. :)

Edit: to add quick render.
..... and, I just realized that the ridges are going in the wrong directions :ohmy:.

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=118152&d=1384293269

JoePoe
11-12-2013, 01:45 PM
In C4D you have the option of doing (some, at least) NURB modeling, but (it seems) you eventually can switch the object to "EDITABLE" -- says a lot right there-- at which point the mesh will become polyganized. It's a one-way street, of course.

You CAN just render the NURBS object, but it's best suited for stuff like this bottle.

That would be a nice facility to have.

Yeah, that's why my initial guess was C4D. Moi3d is also being touted as having a pretty friendly conversion to polys.
And, yes, it would be VERY nice to have. :beerchug:

jeric_synergy
11-12-2013, 06:46 PM
Heckuva job there, JoePoe. Going to dissect it when I get back , but meanwhile :bowdown: .

pinkmouse
11-13-2013, 01:20 AM
Very nice Joe. Any chance you could do a video for us subD idiots? Doesn't need narration, just a screen recording would be fine. It's not so much what particular tools you use, but the logic used to get to an object like that from a primitive that I need to grasp.

meshpig
11-13-2013, 01:51 AM
Maybe it's just how the edges are drawn in Rhino. Maybe only certain edges are being drawn.....

Yes there are many more control points than you can see and that don't so obvioulsy affect the surfacing.

Blender does NURBS;


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1xDvnVovd4

Jim M
11-13-2013, 02:55 AM
You could do this in Zbrush in about 15 minutes.

gerry_g
11-13-2013, 03:29 AM
not a fan of having too much geometry by any means but u definitely do not have enough vertical geometry or divisions to the basic cylinder shape in the Y axis, I still think you biggest shortcoming is trying to mach the devision level of the nurbs original in terms of topo, the nurbs model is only displaying the major isoparms and always tends look amazingly clean in a way sub d object cannot, this lack of division is leading to awkward transitions between the concave circular section and the point it joins to the cylinder shape

meshpig
11-13-2013, 04:42 AM
You could do this in Zbrush in about 15 minutes.

Yes Jim, I think though this thread is leaning slightly towards a bit of a maybe why not a nurbs plugin for modeler. Rhino is around $1700 USD.

Kuzey
11-13-2013, 05:32 AM
Yes Jim, I think though this thread is leaning slightly towards a bit of a maybe why not a nurbs plugin for modeler. Rhino is around $1700 USD.

Speaking of Nurbs :)

Wasn't LWCad getting Nurbs at one stage??

I guess that was only possible because of the new architecture in "Core" and not possible with the current/old architecture of LW11.6...I guess

hrgiger
11-13-2013, 05:47 AM
Speaking of Nurbs :)

Wasn't LWCad getting Nurbs at one stage??

I guess that was only possible because of the new architecture in "Core" and not possible with the current/old architecture of LW11.6...I guess

yes. And a few years ago he showed a video of it working in Modeler and not CORE. But at the time, they were just too slow in modeler to be workable. Which is probably why LWCAD was one of the first plugins that was planned on being available for CORE. I believe its still his plan to bring NURBS to LWCAD, I think its just a question of when.

jeric_synergy
11-13-2013, 09:55 AM
Very nice Joe. Any chance you could do a video for us subD idiots? Doesn't need narration, just a screen recording would be fine. It's not so much what particular tools you use, but the logic used to get to an object like that from a primitive that I need to grasp.
what pinkmouse said: even with the knowledge it is possible (but not the pix in front of me) recreating your effort is difficult. (But inspiring!!!)

sometimes in a tutorial it is CRITICAL to have certain values, like "8 sides", and not anything else, and the presenter knows this but neglects to mention that it must be so. Constructing an all-quad object is quite a puzzle.

bobakabob
11-13-2013, 12:22 PM
You could do this in Zbrush in about 15 minutes.

Agree, booleans in Zbrush could achieve this (they are a bit fiddly though) or alternatively, ZB precision sculpting.

Another non Nurbs solution is Groboto which has a non destructive Boolean system which creates superbly efficient meshes.

Both are very complementary to Modeler which IMHO is unmatched when dealing with the fundamentals of points and polys.

JoePoe
11-16-2013, 03:07 PM
Glad you liked it.

Re tutorial: I've tried to record tutorials before....my machine just can't handle it (it's not coincidence that my models are low poly :)).
And besides, if it's the logic behind the process your looking for, the voice would be the most important part! I could say WHY I'm doing something as I actually do it.
Hopefully this situation will change soon. In the meantime I have done a couple tutorials in animated GIF format... like the one I did for this thread on modeling an eight strand weave (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?136531-Need-modeling-help-Please&highlight=weave). Half of that tutorial was slides on WHY, not how. Something like that could be possible.

Re Blender: Man that thing can do so much. I need to try harder to make Blender my friend. I've never been able to get past the frustrated phase.

@ GerryG: Well, the point for me was, in fact, to see how low poly I could go. I WAS trying to get it as close to the Rhino wires as possible, as that was my initial comment. Then the conversation morphed more towards modeling the ridges into the main body, so I just kept going. I might agree that a little more geometry would be prudent here. Although more geometry just means more to potentially have to push around :grumpy:. I'd be interested to know which transitions bothered you (your cue to send image with 50 red arrows all over it :D).... as they can be pretty easily adjusted with the geometry as is. The issues I see (yes I see issues), have more to do with flow rather than density. Edit: I've changed the flow and it's much better (if we're talking about the same thing :hey:).

@ Jeric: I only mentioned 8 sides as a comment on the "how low I can go" side of things. In general, if I do a subD cylinder I try not to go below 8 if I'm going to need to do much with it. If I put a hole through something.... again 8 sides. You can certainly use more, but quickly it gets to the point where you're making things harder on yourself with too much geometry and suddenly simple adjustments require moving a LOT of points. So it's about finding the appropriate balance for the job at hand.

Re other programs: Rhino=$$$, but moi3D (which I believe I read was created by the Rhino creator) is $300. And this Groboto thing!!! Wow that looks cool :eek:.... and $100..... awesome. Thanks for that. And Zbrush...... well, of course, but I haven't ventured down that rabbit hole yet. I'm afraid I would never see the light of day :D.

jeric_synergy
11-16-2013, 03:47 PM
Arrghghghghg.... MOOT, not "mute"!!!!! --Other than that, thanks! ;)

JoePoe
11-16-2013, 04:05 PM
Arrghghghghg.... MOOT, not "mute"!!!!! --Other than that, thanks! ;)

I don't know what your (< done on purpose to drive you nuts) talking about :D.