...when the whole 3D universe is moving towards NURBS. All three of the programs I mentioned have excellent NURBs and Polygonal toolsets.
No one is moving to NURBs :P
NURBs were semi-useful in the mid 90's until people realized polygons with a smoothing function and/or subdivisions offered all the benefits with none of the many, many, infuriating drawbacks.
Unless you have extreme patience, NURBs look totally cheesy and stupid.
I only use NURBs for small, linear portions (like a leg or something...) which I convert to poly's before merging in with the rest of the model. Even then it usually has to be tweaked a bit to deform correctly.
I only use NURBs for small, linear portions (like a leg or something...) which I convert to poly's before merging in with the rest of the model. Even then it usually has to be tweaked a bit to deform correctly.
You are wrong. In the entertainment space, people may have avoided the use of NURBS and other parametric modeling techniques, but in the actual design space -- which probably accounts for most of the 3D CAD that's ever done -- parametric curves are a big deal. They offer greater precision and tend to be much better for producing cross sections or any type of 2D drawing.
If you consider that a lot of things never need to be deformed in an animator, even for the entertainment space, there is plenty of room for NURBS and other forms of parametric modeling. Given also the fact that CPU speed keeps advancing at a faster rate than memory size/speed, there's plenty of potential for NURBS to replace subdivisions down the line, especially as we continue to increase display resolution at exponential rates.
Quote:
Unless you have extreme patience, NURBs look totally cheesy and stupid.
For biological stuff, I might agree with you. But as is the theme of this whole response, the opposite is true for mechanical items. It takes a long time to do mechanical stuff with subdivisions, it often looks odd, and you can't go to production with it since it's a bloated file that doesn't scale or work well with CNC.
If you consider that a lot of things never need to be deformed in an animator, even for the entertainment space, there is plenty of room for NURBS and other forms of parametric modeling. Given also the fact that CPU speed keeps advancing at a faster rate than memory size/speed, there's plenty of potential for NURBS to replace subdivisions down the line, especially as we continue to increase display resolution at exponential rates.
[/B]
Why would an increase in CPU speed lead away from sub-d's to NURBs? NURBs are much easier to process. That's why they were so popular in the 90's, they were generally the easiest/quickest way to get curved surfaces. It's going the other way.
Quote:
If you consider
For biological stuff, I might agree with you. But as is the theme of this whole response, the opposite is true for mechanical items. It takes a long time to do mechanical stuff with subdivisions, it often looks odd, and you can't go to production with it since it's a bloated file that doesn't scale or work well with CNC.
For mechanical stuff, both NURBs and sub-d's are inappropriate. Straight-up polygon modeling will suffice in 3DS Max/Maya, but you're much better off with a dedicated 3D CAD program like Solidworks/AutoCAD.
Why would an increase in CPU speed lead away from sub-d's to NURBs? NURBs are much easier to process. That's why they were so popular in the 90's, they were generally the easiest/quickest way to get curved surfaces. It's going the other way.
For mechanical stuff, both NURBs and sub-d's are inappropriate. Straight-up polygon modeling will suffice in 3DS Max/Maya, but you're much better off with a dedicated 3D CAD program like Solidworks/AutoCAD.
As may be obvious from my screenname, I know a lot about the math behind these things. A NURBS solid take more operations to compute than an "equivalent" polygon, but are much more precise, so they require much, much less memory than an equivalent subdivision solid.
Moving on, one of the things I do is design plastic parts. Since the output formats needed to do rapid prototypes or to go to production with tend to be parametrics-based, having a non-parametric model is not acceptable.
SolidWorks is fine since it has a good parametric toolset, but a thorough app like FormZ is also good enough for most injection molded designs (and a lot cheaper). AutoCAD is primarily a 2D program, has abysmal support for parametrics, and it just won't cut it. It has its uses, but it's not really in the same market as SolidWorks or ProE, which are more than just 3D modelers.
As may be obvious from my screenname, I know a lot about the math behind these things. A NURBS solid take more operations to compute than an "equivalent" polygon, but are much more precise, so they require much, much less memory than an equivalent subdivision solid.
Moving on, one of the things I do is design plastic parts. Since the output formats needed to do rapid prototypes or to go to production with tend to be parametrics-based, having a non-parametric model is not acceptable.
SolidWorks is fine since it has a good parametric toolset, but a thorough app like FormZ is also good enough for most injection molded designs (and a lot cheaper). AutoCAD is primarily a 2D program, has abysmal support for parametrics, and it just won't cut it. It has its uses, but it's not really in the same market as SolidWorks or ProE, which are more than just 3D modelers.
I'm sure you do know a lot of the math behind these things. But you still seem to be mixing things up.
First off, you're using polygons and sub-d's interchangeably.
Secondly, assuming that you're only working at Level-0, the algorithm for smoothing both sub-d's and NURBs are the same. In fact, when converting a NURB to a sub-d, you're just taking the same points and changing how you edit them, because the calculation is the same.
The only difference is that sub-d's, of course, can have n-gons.
Anyway, since you're working with CNC machines and probably 3D printers and the like, I'm assuming that they have specific file formats which (reasonably) can't handle sub-d's, and as such, on export have to tesselate these. In this case NURBs are more lightweight and more accurate, which is where I think you're coming from.
That said, smoothed polys and sub-d's are just as accurate on the computer and are based on the same algorithms.
In response to your original comment, that "everyone was moving to NURBs," my point still holds: no one is moving to NURBs. People that already use it because it's the right tool for the job (Ie, you), still will, because it only makes sense until something better comes along. But NURBs are pretty much only the right tool for your specific job.
I think I am confusing you by using "NURBS" and "parametrics" interchangably. Parametrics are often (usually) converted to NURBS within the modeler, and my original intent was to de-complicate matters by using one term. On second thought I sould have used "parametric curves" as that term. My beef with subdivisions is that a lot of polygon-only programs will use a subdivision feature to try to make up for their lack of a real, parametric toolset. In this sense, I think you'll understand where I coming from.
And yes, the whole world is moving towards parametrics. Good sub-d tools all have parametric controls for each control vertex, but at that level you may as well take the time to do it all with your own spline patches.
If all you want windows for is games then buy an xBox 360, wireless controllers, and some games and grab a 50 inch RP HDTV and have a better gaming experiance for years...no $300+ GPU upgrades every 6 months just to play games.
Yeah, you'll be left with an outdated GPU from day one...
now you're talkin'! a whoppin' huge HDTV will go obsolete far more slowly than a computer (Mac OR Windows PC) of the same cost.
Actually many specs around HDTV are not firmly established yet. So most televisions sold today will not work with future technologies.
As for switching.
I myself don't get to play many video games as I have too much work to do. I'll go over to a buddy's house and play for a few hours, but man I couldn't have one of those things myself. Too much time wasted.
I know too many people who spend too much time fixing their computers or complaining that something on their computer does not work.
Mac's are not 100% perfect at all. But I spend far more time being productive than complaining or fixing.
I suppose over priced can mean different things to different people. I don't mind paying more to be more productive. Rather than pay less to spend more time fixing and complaining.
If you brought that thing to a lan party, you would get your ass kicked, half the guys would think it was a mac, the other half would misstake it for a suitcase nuke
And yes, the whole world is moving towards parametrics. Good sub-d tools all have parametric controls for each control vertex, but at that level you may as well take the time to do it all with your own spline patches.
I agree with gregmightdothat. Maybe NURBs are more useful in CAD but most of the world is using Sub-D. Sub-D came after NURBs because NURBs couldn't do what people needed.
When you add detail to a NURBs surface, you have to add loops all the way round the model in order for the surface to maintain it's uniform parametric space. With Sub-D, you can project UV parameters so it's far more flexible.
Modelling stuff artistically is easier with sub-d, modelling stuff technically is easier with NURBs. NURBs are for CAD and sub-d is for everything else.
That's not to say you can't use both for doing anything and I've seen amazing organic NURBs models on CGTalk and amazing sub-d architecture but still sub-d is more popular.
As for software, I haven't used 3ds max but its VRay renderer is supposed to one of the best raytracers on the market. However, Mental Ray that is bundled with Maya gets a really good reputation too. Plus, you can export to Renderman from a lot of software and you now get prman on the Mac.
I don't like Maya's modelling so I use the free Blender software for modelling/animating (it models like Modo - also available for Mac) or animate in Maya or export to Renderman direct. All this can be done on the Mac.
Then you have Final Cut Pro, Shake, AE, Combustion, Photoshop, Macromedia Studio all on the Mac.
On top of that, I have a solid, stable, easy to use OS that lets me do programming without any hassle. I have the best of the commercial world and open source world.
I nearly switched to Linux once before OS X came out because pre-emptive multitasking and protected memory blew me away but I found that I couldn't do anything productive with it as there weren't any decent software packages. GIMP is not as good as Photoshop. Try going to a website to get good commercial Linux software and it's very difficult. Device drivers are hard to find too.
In that respect, Linux is worse than Windows. Windows is still bad though because the system is badly layed out. The memory handling is awful. One of my relatives bought a £900 PC with XP and you can't log in as two users at once or the system goes unbearably slow and they keep getting errors popping up all the time.
OK so Mac hardware is a bit more pricey, well so is a Sony Vaio but who is complaining about them? As for the gaming angle, I have a PS2 and I love it. For my home desktop, I use a Mac Mini and it does me fine. I use a quad G5 at work though.
I agree that a keyboard and mouse are better for some games. I've just lost touch with gaming really now that I'm all grown up . Burnout on the PS2 and some other titles are all I need. I've often found PC games to be buggy as they have to run on a huge number of machine configs. You have to be careful modding your own machine too. I've seen PC users fry their whole machine simply by installing a PCI card. It can be an expensive venture.
Having said that, if I was a hardcore gamer, I'd probably try out the custom PC thing too. But with the new consoles, I don't think you'd be able to get nearly the same power/price ratio with a custom PC. Heck the graphics card alone would cost more than the console. Also, I think you get keyboard and mice for consoles - it could do with being more supported though.
Cheap Mac + cheap console = good desktop + good gaming
This thread is so funny for sooo many reasons. But not Placebo.... noo......... going over to the dark side, you are........! PS. AMD DualCore for you?? Why singlecore?
This thread is so funny for sooo many reasons. But not Placebo.... noo......... going over to the dark side, you are........! PS. AMD DualCore for you?? Why singlecore?
I think I might try to survive without a computer until June for the AM2 chipset. Then I'll get a dualcore. But I don't want a spankin' new processor with a socket that will be outdated in a month or two.
I've decided that I'm too much of a hardware/games freak to keep on living with an overpriced system and an undersupported (game-wise) operating system. So I'll be switching to Linux for my desktop putzing-around operating system and Windows my gaming/productivity OS.
I might try to run Mac OS X on another partition, but I'm not going to put a lot of effort into it if it's going to get broken with every software update.
Over the weekend I convinced my girlfriend to switch to Mac!! . I took my machine and worked at her place (me: webdesigner) and while she was SUFFERING with her windows machine with pop ups that constantly popped with no browser even running, her machine freezing up twice in two days and all the frustrating virus attacks, I got a great deal of work done and all my hair remaind attached to my head.
She was amazed that I was just doing my work and didn't deal with any frustrations like she had to. I also showed her that I run Windows 2000 Pro (Virtual PC version) to test my websites for Windows compatibility, as well as working in UNIX if I needed to (she also works with UNIX). I further showed her all the extra little things that are built into the Mac OS - such as video editing program, webcam software, iTunes, bluetooth and all those little things you get for free; with Windows you get pretty much nothing but Windows.
She was so impressed that she is switching with her next machine in a month or so .
I should be an Apple sales man, this is the second hardcore PC user I have conviced to switch )))).
Comments
Originally posted by Splinemodel
...when the whole 3D universe is moving towards NURBS. All three of the programs I mentioned have excellent NURBs and Polygonal toolsets.
No one is moving to NURBs :P
NURBs were semi-useful in the mid 90's until people realized polygons with a smoothing function and/or subdivisions offered all the benefits with none of the many, many, infuriating drawbacks.
Unless you have extreme patience, NURBs look totally cheesy and stupid.
I only use NURBs for small, linear portions (like a leg or something...) which I convert to poly's before merging in with the rest of the model. Even then it usually has to be tweaked a bit to deform correctly.
Originally posted by Placebo
Well, 3DS Max is the de facto 3D modeling and animation app in the game development industry.
And windows is the defacto OS, and EA is the biggest company, that tell you ANYTHING about the moddern game industry?
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
No one is moving to NURBs :P
I only use NURBs for small, linear portions (like a leg or something...) which I convert to poly's before merging in with the rest of the model. Even then it usually has to be tweaked a bit to deform correctly.
You are wrong. In the entertainment space, people may have avoided the use of NURBS and other parametric modeling techniques, but in the actual design space -- which probably accounts for most of the 3D CAD that's ever done -- parametric curves are a big deal. They offer greater precision and tend to be much better for producing cross sections or any type of 2D drawing.
If you consider that a lot of things never need to be deformed in an animator, even for the entertainment space, there is plenty of room for NURBS and other forms of parametric modeling. Given also the fact that CPU speed keeps advancing at a faster rate than memory size/speed, there's plenty of potential for NURBS to replace subdivisions down the line, especially as we continue to increase display resolution at exponential rates.
Unless you have extreme patience, NURBs look totally cheesy and stupid.
For biological stuff, I might agree with you. But as is the theme of this whole response, the opposite is true for mechanical items. It takes a long time to do mechanical stuff with subdivisions, it often looks odd, and you can't go to production with it since it's a bloated file that doesn't scale or work well with CNC.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
If you consider that a lot of things never need to be deformed in an animator, even for the entertainment space, there is plenty of room for NURBS and other forms of parametric modeling. Given also the fact that CPU speed keeps advancing at a faster rate than memory size/speed, there's plenty of potential for NURBS to replace subdivisions down the line, especially as we continue to increase display resolution at exponential rates.
[/B]
Why would an increase in CPU speed lead away from sub-d's to NURBs? NURBs are much easier to process. That's why they were so popular in the 90's, they were generally the easiest/quickest way to get curved surfaces. It's going the other way.
If you consider
For biological stuff, I might agree with you. But as is the theme of this whole response, the opposite is true for mechanical items. It takes a long time to do mechanical stuff with subdivisions, it often looks odd, and you can't go to production with it since it's a bloated file that doesn't scale or work well with CNC.
For mechanical stuff, both NURBs and sub-d's are inappropriate. Straight-up polygon modeling will suffice in 3DS Max/Maya, but you're much better off with a dedicated 3D CAD program like Solidworks/AutoCAD.
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
Why would an increase in CPU speed lead away from sub-d's to NURBs? NURBs are much easier to process. That's why they were so popular in the 90's, they were generally the easiest/quickest way to get curved surfaces. It's going the other way.
For mechanical stuff, both NURBs and sub-d's are inappropriate. Straight-up polygon modeling will suffice in 3DS Max/Maya, but you're much better off with a dedicated 3D CAD program like Solidworks/AutoCAD.
As may be obvious from my screenname, I know a lot about the math behind these things. A NURBS solid take more operations to compute than an "equivalent" polygon, but are much more precise, so they require much, much less memory than an equivalent subdivision solid.
Moving on, one of the things I do is design plastic parts. Since the output formats needed to do rapid prototypes or to go to production with tend to be parametrics-based, having a non-parametric model is not acceptable.
SolidWorks is fine since it has a good parametric toolset, but a thorough app like FormZ is also good enough for most injection molded designs (and a lot cheaper). AutoCAD is primarily a 2D program, has abysmal support for parametrics, and it just won't cut it. It has its uses, but it's not really in the same market as SolidWorks or ProE, which are more than just 3D modelers.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
As may be obvious from my screenname, I know a lot about the math behind these things. A NURBS solid take more operations to compute than an "equivalent" polygon, but are much more precise, so they require much, much less memory than an equivalent subdivision solid.
Moving on, one of the things I do is design plastic parts. Since the output formats needed to do rapid prototypes or to go to production with tend to be parametrics-based, having a non-parametric model is not acceptable.
SolidWorks is fine since it has a good parametric toolset, but a thorough app like FormZ is also good enough for most injection molded designs (and a lot cheaper). AutoCAD is primarily a 2D program, has abysmal support for parametrics, and it just won't cut it. It has its uses, but it's not really in the same market as SolidWorks or ProE, which are more than just 3D modelers.
I'm sure you do know a lot of the math behind these things. But you still seem to be mixing things up.
First off, you're using polygons and sub-d's interchangeably.
Secondly, assuming that you're only working at Level-0, the algorithm for smoothing both sub-d's and NURBs are the same. In fact, when converting a NURB to a sub-d, you're just taking the same points and changing how you edit them, because the calculation is the same.
The only difference is that sub-d's, of course, can have n-gons.
Anyway, since you're working with CNC machines and probably 3D printers and the like, I'm assuming that they have specific file formats which (reasonably) can't handle sub-d's, and as such, on export have to tesselate these. In this case NURBs are more lightweight and more accurate, which is where I think you're coming from.
That said, smoothed polys and sub-d's are just as accurate on the computer and are based on the same algorithms.
In response to your original comment, that "everyone was moving to NURBs," my point still holds: no one is moving to NURBs. People that already use it because it's the right tool for the job (Ie, you), still will, because it only makes sense until something better comes along. But NURBs are pretty much only the right tool for your specific job.
And yes, the whole world is moving towards parametrics. Good sub-d tools all have parametric controls for each control vertex, but at that level you may as well take the time to do it all with your own spline patches.
Originally posted by a_greer
If all you want windows for is games then buy an xBox 360, wireless controllers, and some games and grab a 50 inch RP HDTV and have a better gaming experiance for years...no $300+ GPU upgrades every 6 months just to play games.
Yeah, you'll be left with an outdated GPU from day one...
now you're talkin'! a whoppin' huge HDTV will go obsolete far more slowly than a computer (Mac OR Windows PC) of the same cost.
Actually many specs around HDTV are not firmly established yet. So most televisions sold today will not work with future technologies.
As for switching.
I myself don't get to play many video games as I have too much work to do. I'll go over to a buddy's house and play for a few hours, but man I couldn't have one of those things myself. Too much time wasted.
I know too many people who spend too much time fixing their computers or complaining that something on their computer does not work.
Mac's are not 100% perfect at all. But I spend far more time being productive than complaining or fixing.
I suppose over priced can mean different things to different people. I don't mind paying more to be more productive. Rather than pay less to spend more time fixing and complaining.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811164060
Look familiar at all? Maybe? Just a little?
Originally posted by mynamehere
This may be a bit late, but since you're switching from a PowerMac, I think you'll enjoy this case.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811164060
Look familiar at all? Maybe? Just a little?
That is, without a doubt, the ugliest thing I have ever seen.
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
That is, without a doubt, the ugliest thing I have ever seen.
Yes, yes it is. Every time I go look at cases, I wonder how people can spend money on half of them.
Originally posted by mynamehere
This may be a bit late, but since you're switching from a PowerMac, I think you'll enjoy this case.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811164060
Look familiar at all? Maybe? Just a little?
If you brought that thing to a lan party, you would get your ass kicked, half the guys would think it was a mac, the other half would misstake it for a suitcase nuke
Originally posted by Splinemodel
And yes, the whole world is moving towards parametrics. Good sub-d tools all have parametric controls for each control vertex, but at that level you may as well take the time to do it all with your own spline patches.
I agree with gregmightdothat. Maybe NURBs are more useful in CAD but most of the world is using Sub-D. Sub-D came after NURBs because NURBs couldn't do what people needed.
When you add detail to a NURBs surface, you have to add loops all the way round the model in order for the surface to maintain it's uniform parametric space. With Sub-D, you can project UV parameters so it's far more flexible.
Modelling stuff artistically is easier with sub-d, modelling stuff technically is easier with NURBs. NURBs are for CAD and sub-d is for everything else.
That's not to say you can't use both for doing anything and I've seen amazing organic NURBs models on CGTalk and amazing sub-d architecture but still sub-d is more popular.
As for software, I haven't used 3ds max but its VRay renderer is supposed to one of the best raytracers on the market. However, Mental Ray that is bundled with Maya gets a really good reputation too. Plus, you can export to Renderman from a lot of software and you now get prman on the Mac.
I don't like Maya's modelling so I use the free Blender software for modelling/animating (it models like Modo - also available for Mac) or animate in Maya or export to Renderman direct. All this can be done on the Mac.
Then you have Final Cut Pro, Shake, AE, Combustion, Photoshop, Macromedia Studio all on the Mac.
On top of that, I have a solid, stable, easy to use OS that lets me do programming without any hassle. I have the best of the commercial world and open source world.
I nearly switched to Linux once before OS X came out because pre-emptive multitasking and protected memory blew me away but I found that I couldn't do anything productive with it as there weren't any decent software packages. GIMP is not as good as Photoshop. Try going to a website to get good commercial Linux software and it's very difficult. Device drivers are hard to find too.
In that respect, Linux is worse than Windows. Windows is still bad though because the system is badly layed out. The memory handling is awful. One of my relatives bought a £900 PC with XP and you can't log in as two users at once or the system goes unbearably slow and they keep getting errors popping up all the time.
OK so Mac hardware is a bit more pricey, well so is a Sony Vaio but who is complaining about them? As for the gaming angle, I have a PS2 and I love it. For my home desktop, I use a Mac Mini and it does me fine. I use a quad G5 at work though.
I agree that a keyboard and mouse are better for some games. I've just lost touch with gaming really now that I'm all grown up
Having said that, if I was a hardcore gamer, I'd probably try out the custom PC thing too. But with the new consoles, I don't think you'd be able to get nearly the same power/price ratio with a custom PC. Heck the graphics card alone would cost more than the console. Also, I think you get keyboard and mice for consoles - it could do with being more supported though.
Cheap Mac + cheap console = good desktop + good gaming
Custom PC = bad desktop + good gaming
Originally posted by sunilraman
This thread is so funny for sooo many reasons. But not Placebo.... noo......... going over to the dark side, you are........! PS. AMD DualCore for you?? Why singlecore?
I think I might try to survive without a computer until June for the AM2 chipset. Then I'll get a dualcore. But I don't want a spankin' new processor with a socket that will be outdated in a month or two.
Originally posted by Placebo
I've decided that I'm too much of a hardware/games freak to keep on living with an overpriced system and an undersupported (game-wise) operating system. So I'll be switching to Linux for my desktop putzing-around operating system and Windows my gaming/productivity OS.
I might try to run Mac OS X on another partition, but I'm not going to put a lot of effort into it if it's going to get broken with every software update.
So long.
HASTA LA "VISTA" BABY!!!!
She was amazed that I was just doing my work and didn't deal with any frustrations like she had to. I also showed her that I run Windows 2000 Pro (Virtual PC version) to test my websites for Windows compatibility, as well as working in UNIX if I needed to (she also works with UNIX). I further showed her all the extra little things that are built into the Mac OS - such as video editing program, webcam software, iTunes, bluetooth and all those little things you get for free; with Windows you get pretty much nothing but Windows.
She was so impressed that she is switching with her next machine in a month or so
I should be an Apple sales man, this is the second hardcore PC user I have conviced to switch
Looks like your girlfriend, frustrated with Windows insecurity, switched right at the dawn of Mac viruses...
Originally posted by gregmightdothat
That is, without a doubt, the ugliest thing I have ever seen.
The intakes on the side look pretty stupid. They're just a few points from nailing it though.