MODELING techniques

[HeDaCoM]

What do u use for modeling? CAD or 3D software like MAX?

and if you model with CAD.. what do you prefer, SOLIDS or MESHES?

 

My opinion is CAD with SOLIDS is the best way. Architecture needs precision and all the plans of buildings are already in cad format. Solids because is more natural way of thinking. is like doing a physical model. we have solids materials in architecture. not one-sided 0mm width faces.

[nisus]

I definately prefer max for modelling

Instances, parametric, sub-object modelling are only a few advantages...

 

rgds

 

nisus

[STRAT]

CAD all the way. unless i need a more organic shape like a curvey stair hand rail, or a tent like canvas canopy shape, then i use max's tools.

[samp]

MAX, since I can't work with CAD

Have to practice that ...

I want to test Autodesk Architectural Desktop too

[DelfoZ]

Max/Viz, im agree with nisus .maybe cuz i dont know how use Cad in 3d ... to much thing good in max , more flexible/roganic , more easy to modify somethings. interface.

 

why use only Max to render and mats .. and what do with the another 10k

advantages

[STRAT]

Samp - if i were you i'd go with acad 2000 or 2002. desk top (whichever version) is bug ridden.

[Dave Buchhofer]

3ds max all the way. can work from the ground up cleaner, no extra faces, no strange errors.

 

Only using autocad for very strange booleans, and that not even for many months.

 

for more organic, and more fun-based personal project stuff, i use wings3d (Free modeler)

[Brian Cassil]

I use autocadd to create all my 2D splines and then import them into max for all my 3D stuff. Having the modifier stack is the main reason I like doing all of that in Max. Also I prefer Max to Viz because its just more flexible. It seems that AutoDesk is trying to turn Viz into nothing more than a renderer. They are really pushing the ADT stuff and I hate it.

[CHE]

I do all my modeling with solids in AutoCAD 2002. I found out that you can pretty much model anything with this program. Plus I have heard that VIZ is going to become part of AutoCAD as a renderer engine.

 

[ July 02, 2002, 08:48 PM: Message edited by: CHE ]

[Francois]

Rhinoceros 3D is the way to go...

 

Free form with cad precision.

 

Francois

[John Dollus]

I use AutoCad for modeling interiors because it translates into Lightscape much better than Max.

 

John D

[plastic]

i use archicad for 98% of my architectual models, its simply the fastest way. (i know the other tools)

for precision modeling i like rhino, although its pretty hard IMO.

whats cool about rhino is that it perfectly exports NURBS data to 3dsmax, and NURBS have the great advantage that they don't require UVW mapping.

 

i also often use 3dsmax NURBS (yes, really), they are great for curved walls and hulls.

[Guest ywmang]

why not rhino?

 

it's *perfect* for accuracy (more than autocad) can handle curve very well.

 

and its commands are basically same as Autocad

(means the learning curve is vertical if you know Autocad)

[Guest hajer]

hi all

well after 3 years of using rhino I discovered

that u can,t be a pro modler unleas u have some

experince in bothe subdivide modeling techniqe

witche is good for natural forms and the cad

techniqe wich is generating serfaces from bunch

of lines ... so know I,m trying to cache up doing

some boxmodling in max .....

[Spongebob]

I am almost afraid to give my opinion. I am not up to the level of most of you guys here, I mainly produce construction docs. But here it goes...

 

I use a little bit of AutoCAD, a little bit of Arch Desktop and I am finding alot of new uses for VIZ modeling. All have their advantages and disadvantages. I feel CAD is more precise, but VIZ is made more with 3D in mind.

 

The last project I worked on was a large expo center in which we needed to do a full presentation in two weeks. This involved prelim. floor plans, elevs, mat'l boards and renders. I did most of the work myself because I seem to always insist on new software that noone else cares to learn.

 

I did the floor plans and elevations in Arch Desktop 3.3 (the way it was intended to be used) then I simply imported the model into VIZ for rendering. It worked pretty well and the final render was impressive despite the time crunch.

 

I believe Arch Desktop has alot of potential, but it does need some work. It is a WIP itself, some tools are awesome and extremely powerful - some are missing altogether. I suppose this does not matter, I have just heard that AutoDesk will be scrapping it for Revit.

 

Spongebob

Detroit, MI

[Guest guardian256]

I agree with above.....autodesk will let Revit lead the way for them. I suggested it to colleagues as soon as revit came out.

 

I'm an old hack ( way back to acad 2.6 ) so I model in acad but I would like to become better at modelling ine viz / max

[cyborg]

I have been working with CAD as a proff. the last 7 years (I'm 30 years old)

 

MicroStation V8 and AutoCAD for buildings.

[kid]

I learned 3d modelling on Autocad r14 (yes, I'm a newbie). My introduction to rendering was Max 3.1, I tried to model in Max but found it very innacurate, the snaps were temperamental, and the boolean operations were dreadful. I find ACAD great for rectilinear stuff but shocking for anything with compound curves. I do 95% of my modelling in Rhino now, even the basic box stuff.

 

Don't sleep on Rhino people!

[kid]

ACAD is a better drafting package, and the 'industry standard' in most places so most offices go that way. I worked for an Architect and had to use ACAD2000. It's great for drafting but I hated 3d modelling in it, after getting to know Rhino. I think a much better setup for offices who need ACAD in order to conform to government contracts, consultants, etc, but do inhouse viz would be to have Rhino and AutoCAD LT, instead of a full version of ACAD - a lot cheaper too.

[Kerry Thompson]

Hi

 

I have used AutoCAD since version 2.1 and along the way, I developed techniques using linked blocks to allow me to break the models into various parts and work on the smaller parts. With this approach, I redefine internal block definitions by remapping them onto external drawing allowing me manage the size of the model and control how it is represented. The concept is used in AutoCAD 2002 with the “refedit” command.

 

The introduction of ACIS provided further facility, and with some simple menus to assist in moving UCSs and slicing of solids, I am able to model just about anything that does not require an “organic” feel. For that I generally use Viz.

 

For architectural models I now use ADT 3.3 and filelink to Viz. ADT takes a fair bit of learning but once it is understood, it provides a quick way of developing architectural models (as well as the construction documents). The model can be skeletoned and then “fleshed out” by creating and modifying the various style definitions. While it is not as parametric as maybe Revit or ArchiCAD, the fundamental ADT objects are parametric and allows overrides and modifiers to be added to model specific situations.

 

I have found that fully parametric modelling often limits models, produces the same type of results when the parametric is used (I refer to this as cookie cutter design), or you have to be come a programmer to make the parametric produce an “individual” result.

 

ADT gives me access to the block, surface and solid modelling tools from AutoCAD as well as architectural tools provided by ADT.

 

Kerry Thompson

[Chris_A]

Choice of modelers tends to be very personal. It often comes down to what works for a person in their particular circumstance. I've worked as a designer in a large corporate environment where the ability to distribute work was critical. Doing freelance, I face a very different set of choices.

 

I'm curious as to how modelers relate to where in the process they are used. I suspect that the choices are different for people who use the model to design a space in detail, while creating documentation, and those doing "pure" design visualization.

 

Can you guys elaborate on when you are using modeling (ie. while doing design, or when handed CAD files from someone else) and why you think that tool is better for you than another? Could be something as simple as familiarity with it.

 

FWIW - I'm Mac based using FormZ, Electric Image, Lightwave (occasionally) and Lightscape (running on VirtualPC). My 'professional' life was entirely PC based, mostly using MicroStation (with a large Arch/Engr firm).

 

--Chris A

[bluebox]

MAX, MAX, MAX….

or any other 3D package.

Working in 3D with CAD is a @#^#$^%....if you know what I mean.

I use both MAX and CAD for 4 years and I don’t have any doubts.

You can import 2D drawings from cad into MAX and get very accurate geometry, but the modeling tools available in MAX are like an F-16 compared to a Tram - Different function and purpose together with speed and functionality.

You can hammer nails with a screwdriver but I would definitely use a hammer.

 

 

[ August 17, 2002, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: bluebox ]

[Francois]

Hi Kid. I use rhino for 100% of my modeling need (I also use it for freeform industrial design for composites parts) So, I use it all the time. Reading the posts, it seems most people use acad. acad seems so rigid for 3D, Yes you can model most things, but just rotating the view is difficult. In rhino,view manipulation is soo easy, all with the mouse. you can group objects, hide objects, hide everything except selected... and so much more. It has excellent osnaps too.

 

Plus, you model everything in surfaces or polysurfaces (solids) you export it to dwg using the jagged edges option and you get this clean 4pts polygons meshes, respecting all dwg layers and colours. Why would acad work better. If it is better, I'll switch too. It seems I am sold to Rhino, but It does work wonders, truly.

[foxlee]

neverending debate this ,prefer max/viz for design modelling, if you use cad you wont understand, max modelling. Never need to use snaps

as you stretch edges etc. that are already attached to the original its a way of working that is totally alien to cad, you need to experience it before you can comment. in cad there is only one or two ways to do things max etc. is open-ended and intuitive and just suits designer/cum visualisers better. about scale everything in max is 100% to scale and dimension.

I find it unfair of people to make judgements on working in max if they have never experienced max modelling themselves.

[mbr]

Form-Z for modeling, Max for rendering, Autocad for drafting (although Form-Z is good for simple stuff). I'd like to learn more of Max's modeling and animation capabilities.