Using MAX as a Precision Design Tool?

[MegaPixel]

I come from a Technical Design Field where precision modeling is required. I use parametric solid modelers such as Solidworks and ProE for 3D Design where evry aspect of the model is controlled by a dimension. I also use AutoCad for 2D design. Now my mind is formatted so that when I draw or Model anything, I'm thinking about exactly how long or wide a shape is or exactly what angle or offset distance a parallel line is from another and so on. Since I've started modeling in MAX, I've found it very difficult to draw complex shapes maintaining complete control over the geometry's dimensions. I find myself having to pre-draw shapes in AutoCad and then import them into MAX to help me get started. I really don't want to have to rely on this method. It's slow and inefficient. I need suggestions and or help from you guys to figure out how to gain complete control over shape and mesh generation. I'd really like to hear from those folks who understand where I'm coming from who are involved in a similar line of work. Thanks alot, MegaPixel

[MegaPixel]

I've often recieved the same responses you two have just given me about MAX being purely a Visualization tool and I guess I've always refused to believe it. I can live with importing a few shapes from Autocad now and then I guess. However, there ar still some projects where I feel like I have to import every sngle element from CAD. I guess I just need improvement on my Spline modeling techniques, individual segment control & creation in particular.

Some times, I just import an entire model from my 3D application just because I don't have time to reproduce it in MAX but I have to tell you that imported meshes from other progrmas look down right ugly in wireframe. Triangles going all over the place, no nice and neat vertical and horizontal lines. Thats typically why I avoid doing this. Anyhow, thanks guys

[Ernest Burden III]

Maybe you need to let go and work a bit looser?

Darn, that rules me out, as well. I sometimes find myself zooming in to correct a condition in a model that is so small that no-one would ever be able to build it that precisely in real life. I live by the snap. I type in angles and distances so they are exact. I almost NEVER eyeball anything. It is a sickness. I should seek professional help immediately. No, can't, too much work to do.

 

Seems like every few days I read another post here to discourage me from going to MAX. So far the only reason TO take up Max is because it allows you to use VRay.

[kid]

...imported meshes from other progrmas look down right ugly in wireframe. Triangles going all over the place, no nice and neat vertical and horizontal lines.

That's an easy fix. Select the object you imported, go into 'Edge' sub-object mode, select all edges (Select All is in the Edit menu I think) then scroll down in the Modify panel till you see Auto-Edge and click it.

 

 

So far the only reason TO take up Max is because it allows you to use VRay.

VRay's the only thing keeping me with Max

[DelfoZ]

i use Max for modeling and is 100% Precision Tool ... maybe u need more experience to use it with more Precision..

of curse if u want to create from Zero the model without any reference from ACAD is very Slowly and UN-Precision mothod...

 

(2D)AutoCAD + (3D)Max = Exelent Combo

 

Saludos...

[kid]

Max was designed to allow you to model off the cuff so to speak, to form stuff working mostly from eye and aesthetics rather than infinite physical control of every dimension and angle.

 

 

Maybe you need to let go and work a bit looser?

 

this might help you though http://www.scriptspot.com/bobo/darkmoon/cm/

[STRAT]

what Kid said.

 

you can try use max as a precision modeller but you'll struggle. it does do similar things to cad, but it's a pain in the butt and not anywhere near the infinate precision cad will do. thats why the majority of proffesionals use cad and viz/max hand in hand.

[MegaPixel]

My thoughts as well Delfoz. I admire your work by the way and hope that other forum members as skillful as yourself could offer knowledge and technique to those of us struggling to gain an ounce of useful tidbits from them.

[DelfoZ]

u can check this old Topic Modeling techniques

[proces2]

the biggest problem that i find is the tolerances are crap in MAX. but, i will admit that i do all my modeling - conceptual to detail - in MAX, just because i was sick and tired of translating the piles of variations that i would go through with any given design project. spline modeling and the measure distance tool (from VIZ 4) can get you really far.

 

even for architectural models, though, the tolerance is quite poor. if you have a big bldg, but then want to define some curtain wall details where you may want to see them close up. forget it! things start to fall apart and the program starts acting up (more than usual).

 

sean

[Jefferson Grigsby]

I have always found max to be a good blend between a precision modeler, and what is actually necessary in the 3D realm. I would not recommend it for Industrial Engineers, but the work flow is great for Architecture. To get accurate dimensions, just create the component shapes and enter their dimensions, use the align tool to get them in place, attach, and delete the pieces you do not need. Always remember to weld verts when you are done. You can be very accurate, but need to approach the software a bit differently then CAD. It is more intuitive, and the workflow can be very fast if you get your key stokes customized to you habits. It can be done, every MAX GURU has had to make this transition at some point, but it is welll worth the time put in. Avoid Booleans as much as possible. It is a shame they never cleaned up the Boolean operations in the recent releases.

[STRAT]

it's a case of what ur used to.

 

ie, delfoz and nisus use max and not 3dcad atall. others use just cad, and others use them both.

 

there is no right and wrong or a set definate method. it's a matter of opinion and more particulary what methods ur used to using.

 

it is daughnting for a begginner to know what methods to use, but thats where practicing and trial and error come in i suppose. max will do it all AND autocad will do it all (it even has a decent renderer infact), personally i'd advise a combination of both.

[garethace]

I'd really like to hear from those folks who understand where I'm coming from who are involved in a similar line of work. Thanks alot, MegaPixel

 

I definetly know where you are coming from there. My simple advice is to stop using VIZ/MAX products real soon and switch over to using FormZ or Lightwave, or even Bentley Triforma isn't bad. Both those appliations are serious modelling tools, whereas VIZ/MAX do not have 4-sided polygon modelling.

 

While Lightwave does.

 

Triangular polygons are needed for any rendering algorithm to work, but what Lightwave does correctly IMO, is allow you to work with 4-sided polys until you are ready to render.

 

Therefore, LW has LW modeller for modelling (a standalone window which links into LW animation window for just rendering and animation)

 

I believe that VIZ/MAX doesn't have this separate environment just for modelling - a world were the needs of a good modeller person like yourself is catered for.

 

OTOH, if i was a natural-born animator, rather than a natural born modeller, i would possibly love MAX to bits and hate LW - its unecessary cluttered, complicated ways of separting modeller/animator.

 

FORMZ has almost no animation at all, and it's solids can shell properly, merge, cut, sweep, distort... - basic tools you would expect to find in any good solidedge type of package. I would buy the vanilla FormZ too, without the renderzone or radiosity, if you can - just use it a great modelling environment and bring the models into VIZ or Lightscape or whatever then.

 

Allplan is good too: try posting a comment here:

 

www.allplanforum.com

 

Tell Ovidiu (moderator) that Gareth sent you.

 

Max was designed to allow you to model off the cuff so to speak, to form stuff working mostly from eye and aesthetics rather than infinite physical control of every dimension and angle.

My best MAX images, if i were to look at the wireframe model they came from, i would be horrified by the techniques of modelling used. MAX is a shite modeller, and doesn't allow the artist to develop any sort of useful workflow, technique or desireable practice as a good modeller.

 

'Aesthetic' is a polite way of saying 'shite' in my very humble opinion.

 

max will do it all AND autocad will do it all (it even has a decent renderer infact), personally i'd advise a combination of both.

I think the point he was making in fairness, was the problem he finds most of all, with Autodesk bloatware, is this constantly niggling aspect - you need autocad and max to do it properly.

 

Autodesk have been 'dicking' around with both products for too long now, and cannot seem to manufacture a decent product somewhere between. Ridiculous. Mind you, the constant inefficiency of the whole situation properly pays two whole armies of software engineers to deal with such a mess. :ngelaugh:

 

To get accurate dimensions, just create the component shapes and enter their dimensions, use the align tool to get them in place, attach, and delete the pieces you do not need. Always remember to weld verts when you are done.

 

Been there, got the T-Shirt. You will still produce 10x times more work, and much higher quality work using anything other than MAX for architectural visualisation. It depends on how much you have to model, and the amount of time you have at your disposal - at a certain point, or poly count - continuing to use max just becomes a liability, a hand grenade without a pin just waiting to blow you to kingdom come.

 

From a modellers point of view it is like this: If you wanted cool radiosity visualisation for a client, would you just go into the local pcworld and purchase a $50 toy rendering package to do the job????

 

Well showing a POS like MAX as a modeller to someone who knows how to model - is exactly like what i described above. You cannot even begin to imagine you much of an insult it is, being presented with MAX as a modeller, having grown up using solidedge - or any Unigraphics/parasolids based application.

 

It is a shame they never cleaned up the Boolean operations in the recent releases.

They fix it with one release, only to break it again with the next one. I remember back when the collapse/boolean function used to work in the utilities panel in max - but that is a long, long time ago now and autodesk haven't got their shit together properly since version 1 IMO.

 

spline modeling and the measure distance tool (from VIZ 4) can get you really far.

Why not go back to T-squares and set squares.

 

even for architectural models, though, the tolerance is quite poor. if you have a big bldg, but then want to define some curtain wall details where you may want to see them close up. forget it! things start to fall apart and the program starts acting up (more than usual).

 

Pure truth.

 

Seems like every few days I read another post here to discourage me from going to MAX. So far the only reason TO take up Max is because it allows you to use VRay.

Keep away from it - if you have began in the visualisation industry long time ago, and have learned to use tools that work, that have proven themselves over time - i see no reason whatsoever to upgrade, change or otherwise alter practices for the sake of some insane upgrade cycle to 'get more and more features', more and more bugs, hardware incompatiblities, sleepless nights, lost productivity and general torture.

 

Keep it real. :winkgrin: If MAX didn't have a succesful product like AutoCAD to anchor itself to it would never have made it through a second years production IMO. AutoCAD IS a fine product, but could do with an upgrade option, to allow users better opengl support, better tools like in Z etc, and perhaps less trad CAD features to pull the price down a bit to the level of Z.

 

But at the moment, i see no reason to give up Z, in favour of AutoCAD which is 3x times the price.

 

[ May 26, 2003, 04:20 AM: Message edited by: garethace ]

[proces2]

i have actually been having good luck with booleans in MAX. Even with multi-level booleans where there might even be lofts imbedded. I have been able to weed my way through the stack, get down to the sub-object levels for the base objects, edit them and have the whole boolean update - successfully.

 

spline modeling = T-squares?? not sure if you are understanding the usefulness of spline modeling (meaning spline modeling with surface modifier). its not for rectalinear stuff. but for compound curving shapes or complex folding planes - its a great tool. from a design process, its perfect in being able to rough out a shape, then go back into it, refine and add more detail to it (without having to rebuild the whole object each time).

 

sean

 

[ May 26, 2003, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: proces2 ]

[xgarcia]

Originally posted by kid:

That's an easy fix. Select the object you imported, go into 'Edge' sub-object mode, select all edges (Select All is in the Edit menu I think) then scroll down in the Modify panel till you see Auto-Edge and click it.

Wow..thanks for that tip. Never knew it was there. Works wonderfully.

[garethace]

I have been able to weed my way through the stack, get down to the sub-object levels for the base objects, edit them and have the whole boolean update - successfully.

We all have done it, believe me. Call it, going through 100 steps to get down through dialogues/modifier stacks.... all bs... just to edit an object? ? ? I don't particularly like spending all day dancing around in the 'modifier panel'. I would much rather spend my time in a viewport hands on with a model. When i see MAX geometry being animated at sub-object level by cg animators, all of this elaboration starts to make perfect sense. So for a potential cg animator, who wants as large and varied a digital tool box as he can get with minimum cost, i would probably choose MAX myself. But if you really want to learn a software to model/design buildings, spaces and master plans with, forget it. MAX/VIZ is a big waste and a pain in the you know what. I have huge respect for AutoCAD as a software, and would buy or use it no problem. But i certainly wouldn't buy MAX or VIZ aswell.

 

Try something like the industrial designers use - thinkdesign or vellum solids, or Alias Wavefront stuff for real surface shapes manipulation. Rhino, Maya... The organic stuff that MAX does reasonably well, much better than its rectilinear stuff anyhow, is simply of no use to an architectural design software user. Yeah, i can use the spline stuff you are refering to - it was a substitute for nurbs modelling, because the nurbs modelling in Discreet stuff is so second-rate to AW programs.

 

The original poster here, megapixel should have a quick read through the posts over here:

 

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=000001

 

[ May 27, 2003, 04:58 AM: Message edited by: garethace ]

[Jefferson Grigsby]

I personally find max to be an exceptional modeller. I have used Form Z, and toyed with Lightwave, but found myslef friustarted by the notion of learning a new program when I have worked out a good system in Max. I am in Love with instancing and referencing functions. If you learn to use them on a sub object level, you can do some amazing things, very quickly. Is is easy to get frustrated with it, but once you learn a set way of doing things, it can be a joy. I have absolutley no problem creating all my splines in Max, you just need to loosen up a bit and focus more on the finished product and not little details and tolerances that do not show up in a finished rendering. My major gripe is its inablity to bevel edges on complex geometry, which form z does rather well.

[garethace]

To get accurate dimensions, just create the component shapes and enter their dimensions, use the align tool to get them in place, attach, and delete the pieces you do not need. Always remember to weld verts when you are done. You can be very accurate, but need to approach the software a bit differently then CAD.

Have you any idea how crazy this sounds to somebody like myself - used to modelling exclusively in AutoCAD or alternative CAD 3D modelling platform?

 

I would have all that done and more, in seconds as opposed to minutes.

 

I have used VIZ as a standalone modeller for almost 2 years solid, and reckon that i know it pretty well indeed.

 

I think that a poster in the LW forum sums it up for me - Lightwave is a true polygon modeller - if a wall has 10 windows, then the wall still remains as one polygon, instead of 200 polygons like in your average VIZ attempt at putting a few holes in a darn wall.

 

I mean, go File> Save after making a wall with a few simply holes for windows and just look at the jump in file size in VIZ/MAX!!!!!! It totally abuses the hell out of any designer how likes to try out alot of poly working. Once you start splitting a face with just two triangular polys, quite soon you are into dealing with 4, then 8, then 16, 32... and so on. Multiply this process over and over again, for the whole piece of architecture, and very soon you will be looking for ways to make your model smaller in file size - you won't put in all the bits you wanted. You will begin having to use mapping instead of geometry half the time.

 

I am pretty handy now, with the mapping effects, and find this a real saver for using VIZ to model with. I mean, since improving my photoshopping techniques more, i enjoy the speed and work-flow of trying various mapping alternatives in VIZ. My new digital camera helps alot too, and i make good use of the scanner now. That export illustrator tutorial is great:

 

http://www.cgarchitect.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000163;p=1#000009

 

I find myself doing alot more cleaning up than i would wish for though in Photoshop at the end of the day. Photoshop and VIZ are a wicked combo - but again, i still feel like i am using a program designed to do animated logo ads etc, etc.

 

Some people like Z, because the feeling of working with 'a solid' is great. I use Bentley Triforma J for modelling whenever i can, and though the handling of the software isn't as savy as FormZ, the principles of editing/subtracting/moving and scaling actual solid objects around a scene are exactly the same.

 

I am in Love with instancing and referencing functions. If you learn to use them on a sub object level, you can do some amazing things, very quickly. Is is easy to get frustrated with it, but once you learn a set way of doing things, it can be a joy.

 

I am interested in what you meant by instancing and referencing (no need for explanation, i get that bit) at sub-object level. Could you perhaps elaborate a small, small bit on what a sub-object instance is useful for?

 

I love the tools in VIZ such as contour> site model base tool. The bevel profile modifier is wicked with a bit of practice. But unfortunately, i justs think that VIZ/MAX takes so much time to learn the tricks and techniques that you have already waisted valuble time and years.

 

I have used Form Z, and toyed with Lightwave, but found myslef friustarted by the notion of learning a new program when I have worked out a good system in Max.

 

Yeah, i hear you. My buddy here, has worked out a bullet proof system for working in AutoCAD solids (ridiculously large files all over 20MB) and exporting into MAX. Then the size of the file ends up as a 5MB .max scene as a mesh. Pretty neat, hasn't went toward ADT yet even. But i cannot see him changing any time in the near future either from what works for him/ he knows best.

 

I began modelling in AutoCAD, went on the FormZ, then went onto VIZ, then played around with Lightwave and have ended up modelling mostly in Triforma J. Count five different employers, five different darn softwares. All these softwares have very idiosyncratic behaviours - sort of like vintage racing automobiles. Having known VIZ like the back of my hand, for 2 years i couldn't begin to even understand LW for at least 6 months. Then one fine evening, it sort of clicked with me - that LW uses true 4-sided polygons, edges and points, without any sub-object level carry-on. Once i twigged it, i could see myself just getting better, and better with the program and infinetly more comfortable with 'its ethos'.

 

www.3drender.com

 

has got rhino modelling tutorials. I don't know off-hand of a site like that for LW modelling users, but i wouldn't mind trying it out again some time in the future. Having said that, i have too much choice of softwares, and not too little - i could spend the next ten years just 'learning'.

 

[ May 27, 2003, 06:37 AM: Message edited by: garethace ]

[MegaPixel]

Hi it's me MegaPixel (The original Poster of this topic)

 

I'm very overwhelmed by the amount of responses this topic as generated and I fear I started a firey debate over which Modeling package is better which was not my intention. I have allready gone through the evaluation process of existing packages and made my choice to purchase MAX 5 because of its grass roots connection to AutoCad. The ability to X-ref and import Cad files into MAX seemed logically valuable at the time. I'm not here to say MAX is the best, I'm here to say I have made my decision and now I need to hear from those who do use MAX to better understand how they acheive the best precision results as possible.

 

BTW, I use Parametric Solid Modeling tools all of the time here at work and in my opinion, Solid Modeling seems so much more intuitive and acheives nicer looking, detailed models quickly and efficiently. So Why don't I just stick with it as a modeler? Because Engineering applications don't give you squat for Texturing and Lighting tools and very little animation options. I sometimes import Stereolithography into MAX when I need something quick and dirty done to the models but as I mentioned before, I find imported meshes to look very ugly and I have difficulty manipulating them to correct the mesh lines and so forth. But, based on what I'm hearing from you guys, It can all be done and it's just a matter of my learning it and getting over my "Anal retentive" precision modeling tendencies.

 

Next week, I am planning to spend a chunk of change on customized MAX training in Indianapolis. I would like the instructor to work with me on this subject alone until I feel comfortable with my Modeling techniques. Now I need to generate a list of subjects to cover for my Instructor. Do you guys have any suggestions on which tools and or methods I should request to learn to help me address my weakness?

 

Thank you all for your participation in this post. I think this site is going to get alot more attention from me from now on because of it.

[garethace]

Do you guys have any suggestions on which tools and or methods I should request to learn to help me address my weakness?

I learned a bit more myself from this thread - perhaps i too have become a bit too tied up in mechanical/cad type of applications. I would want to begin using my copy of VIZ again, and just start playing around with it. I noticed that is version 3, the context menus for sub-object mesh editing are more friendly anyhow. Which helps ALOT. Make sure, the instructor covers this one important aspect - maximising your efficiency at using the MAX/VIZ interface for faster modelling speed.

[MegaPixel]

MegaPixel again. Please redirect your attention to the Next post I've made about Roof Modeling to site a specific example of what I need help with.

 

http://www.cgarchitect.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=000187;p=1#000000

 

[ May 28, 2003, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: STRAT ]

[Jefferson Grigsby]

As far as sub object instancing, what I meant is that you can instance commands from one object stack or material assignment onto another. It is a very useful technique. If you have UVW mapping coordinates that must remain consistant, you can change them on one object and have them update on all. Also, the fact that I can draw a spline for a loft, then change it later and have the loft update is a nice little perk with max. Working with Max, for me, is more like building a physical model. Once you master using the different transforms; local, world, parent axis, positioning objects relative to their various coordinate systems is a breeze. It is a matter of building each piece one at a time, them positioning it in the model. Do not get wrapped up in trying to assign groups and layers. You are much better off just attaching abjects together in subobject mode. If you attach objects to objects that were instances, all the original objects will update. Example. I have a light post that I instanced thoughout the scene. The client tells me they want banners on all the light posts. I attach a banner to one of the light posts, they all update, hence subobject instances.

 

as far as using booleans to create openings, don't waist your time. It is all about how you model. I rather draw the verical and horizontal pieces around the opening, array(and instance them) then let the negative space in between define the opening. When you are cutting opening, that means that the facade of your building is basicly flat. I would rather have the opetion to go in and set the horizontals back an inch and give them a seperate material. This is more in line with how a building is constructed and gives you more oppurtunities to provide subtle variations that create a more distinctive design. I can later go in and bevel edges and add detail and have all duplicate peices update. It also lends you the ability to provide reveals where the vericles and horizontals meet, if that level of detail is appropriate for the model. remeber, you would only have to tweek one of the pieces to get a consistent look throughout. Good modeeling is all about proper planning. I am sure all the packages have their strengths, but Max is the clear cut winner for its ability to reference and instance like objects. Look for the patterns in a buildings, then model to the strength of your software in such a way that you can prevent redundant tasks.

 

[ May 30, 2003, 07:14 AM: Message edited by: Jefferson Grigsby ]

[VintageTone]

Hey Jefferson Grigsby, thanks for the detailed post, I learned a lot that I will have to put into practice!

[MegaPixel]

This reply is for Kid,

 

I can't find this "Auto-Edge" modifier you're talking about for imported mesh cleanup. Could you elaborate on what you mean by this? I've selected all of the edges in my mesh, but when I scroll down in the panel or Modifier panel, I don't see the Auto-Edge which you refer to.

 

Thanks

[Jefferson Grigsby]

Thanks, This thread was begging for a response because I personally find Max to be a very powerfull and complete modelling program. I can not really compare Maya because I have yet to play with it, but I am sure both have their advantages. One thing I would recommend any maxer to experiment with is the transform pulldown. It is the main toolbar across the top and probably says "world" under it. Experiment with the local transform. Anytime you rotate an object, you can use this to manipulate an object upon whatever plane you rotated it too. Very usefull when dealing with files that have multiple axis. You can also use pick to work off the axis of any object you desire, or create a dummy object to define as your transform plane. Hope it helps, let me know if you have specific questions I can help you out with.