nickp1 Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Hi there, recently I found a common featurein some architectural renderings. For example the photos I attached (please enlarge them), the skinof the building has a lot of organic openings, various in size (from big to small). Please give me some clues how to achieve thisin 3ds max / rhino/grasshopper??? I don’tknow how to describe this feature. I’m a newbie to 3d program. J:confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushir.qazi Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 hi. I dont have much experience in such modeling but i think could be done in Rhino or there is a max plug in para 3d . Thanx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 just make the overall shape you want. this can be done a number of ways a torus with a few FFD on top of it edit poly box model with turbosmoothing a loft / sweep of a profile along a path then inset the polys or chamfer the edges or triangulate and then inset or create line from edge and sweep experiment with a small object its a pretty simple effect to make Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickp1 Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 My Friends, I think what I asked was how to punch the dynamic openings on the skin of the building... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 best of luck mate, you will need it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cjmcphail Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I may be wrong, but im pretty sure para array has a tutorial on how to do something similar. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Parametric-Array-3ds-MAX-plug-in/124207957620049 keep us/me posted on your results Best of luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickp1 Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 thanks Chris Mcphail, it sounds like Magnet controller/Attractor in grasshopper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitris Tolios Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 It is probably attractor point / line in Rhino 3D...doesn't have to be through grasshopper scripting, it might as well be done with the Paneling Tools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Schroeder Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Just create the mesh, either by FFD or lofting different shapes. It really depends on your overall form you need. Then, convert to editable poly, inset the faces to give it some bulk, then start deleting inside faces as need. Finally, if you need some depth, shell the whole thing. If you need triangle pieces, with your editable poly selected (before you inset) and connect all verts to triangulate the mesh and then go about deleting things as needed. Shoot, you could even use a lattice modifier on your mesh to create the look. Even easier, if it is for far away, is to create a texture for it. Total number of plug-ins needed? 0 Extra software needed? 0 Stop over thinking things. You've paid for a very expensive piece of software. Learn the tools it has for you. The graphite modeling tools allow you to quickly and easily select faces, verts, edges, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic H Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 IMO its the classic... "im a *architect* and hello what tool do i need to understand to make it complicated also im a designer on a computer and its like making a building isnt it lets model up some taps we don't see" ...syndrome Like Scott says - model what you see and for what you need - I come across countless feckless architects struggling under the load of heavy software and self imposed limitations due to ignorance of the very powerful and simple tools under your nose. no offense meant of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems the easiest thing would simply be creative use of the opacity map and blended/composite materials? Here's a quick test using nothing more than a metallic material with a checker map applied to the opacity channel with a fresnel falloff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitris Tolios Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 It is a parametric driven tiling. You can achieve it through scripting directly the geometry generation (with programs already mentioned by the author and others), or use 2D tools to script the bitmap that will drive the opacity / displacement etc that will indirectly give you the result you are after in an information driven way... Or you can brute-force it, which is not that bad unless we are talking a really complex skin with thousands of variables. PS: some people are too harsh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Schroeder Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 It is a parametric driven tiling. You can achieve it through scripting directly the geometry generation (with programs already mentioned by the author and others), or use 2D tools to script the bitmap that will drive the opacity / displacement etc that will indirectly give you the result you are after in an information driven way... Or you can brute-force it, which is not that bad unless we are talking a really complex skin with thousands of variables. PS: some people are too harsh Yes, this is one way to do it. But you are trying to light a candle with a high powered laser here. It doesn't have to be parametric, script driven, or superbly complicated at all. I'm guessing the OP has the shape they need to make, so just model it. The model will already have quads, if you need smaller quads then just smooth them down or increase the resolution of the initial shape. The mesh will already have proper mapping coordinates, unless you don't add them before hand, which I don't know why you wouldn't do it before hand. Since it has proper mapping, all that is needed is a simple tiling adjustment. On top of that, you can create a properly scaled and tiling map in Photoshop. The only reason it has to be parametric is, well, there is none. Max is a visualizing tool, not a building or scientific tool. As far as scripts go, I'm sure ScriptSpot.com already has a working script for you to download. But, given the tools inside Max that are already there for you, there really isn't a need for scripts. Here's what I'm talking about and it took all of 2 minutes to model both options. Max is extremely powerful. Just take some extra time to learn and stop over thinking and over complicating simple modeling tasks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy L Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Yes, this is one way to do it. But you are trying to light a candle with a high powered laser here. It doesn't have to be parametric, script driven, or superbly complicated at all. I'm guessing the OP has the shape they need to make, so just model it. The model will already have quads, if you need smaller quads then just smooth them down or increase the resolution of the initial shape. The mesh will already have proper mapping coordinates, unless you don't add them before hand, which I don't know why you wouldn't do it before hand. Since it has proper mapping, all that is needed is a simple tiling adjustment. On top of that, you can create a properly scaled and tiling map in Photoshop. The only reason it has to be parametric is, well, there is none. Max is a visualizing tool, not a building or scientific tool. As far as scripts go, I'm sure ScriptSpot.com already has a working script for you to download. But, given the tools inside Max that are already there for you, there really isn't a need for scripts. Here's what I'm talking about and it took all of 2 minutes to model both options. Max is extremely powerful. Just take some extra time to learn and stop over thinking and over complicating simple modeling tasks. [ATTACH=CONFIG]47743[/ATTACH] Hello Scott, I think what he's trying to do is a little more complex. In the original images the holes in the skin are decreasing over distance. I tend to agree with the 'it'll be a bitch to make without algorithmic control' camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Hunt Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 add into that, if its for design development, you might need a greater level of control as to the placement and size of the holes, that might need to be easily changed. If its already designed and locked in then the simple poly modelling approach would be best. I did come across a tut to dynamically control the hole size by using splines, I think its on the AREA tutorials. jhv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Schroeder Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 I guess the biggest question is are you really going to see the detail? How often have we wasted hours, even days creating detail only to realize that once the scene is populated and cameras are set you barely see all of that precious detail. All in all there are great suggestions here and many different ways to approach this. The key question is not how accurate the end result is, it is how well will you see the detail? An aerial view can get by with texture maps or poly modeling or a combination. Super close ups may require another technique, but I still feel could be achieved with poly modeling. If it is still in the design phase and could change often, then Max may not be the best. You'd want to use a true parametric program like Revit or similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickp1 Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 (edited) The point is, parametric design can be dynamic and organic, we are not try to create arbitrary regular mesh form base on nothing. For example the density and the size of the openings is driven by the solar orientation, function or programe. The evenly distributed openings feature is easy to achieve yet not convincing at all. Edited July 4, 2012 by nickp1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now