3d modelling done right

[drventure]

Wow. Can't wait till something like this makes it into Sketchup, or some other tool. That 3d arcade front end might take on a whole new aspect!

[ChadTower]

Heh, that has to be some very costly software, and I can't imagine that tech making its way into freeware any time soon.

[shrunkenmaster]

Watched this before work this morning, looks good. I agree, won't be cheap enough for us mere mortals for a while. Maybe I'll get some new Tapper handles after all 

[ChadTower]

Now, if we could just get this fed into CAD for a 3D printer...

[drventure]

I wouldn't be surprised if something similar ends up in the free or opensource space relatively soon. There are lots of people that like those "I could do that' kind of challenges. Hell, I'd be one of them if I wasn't busy just keeping things going right now.  Not saying I have the skills to pull that particular project off, but there are much better programmers out there than me.

[ChadTower]

It's not always about the programmers.  A lot of times it's about the patents.

[drventure]

Ugh. Sadly enough, good point.

[wp34]

Wow this could put a whole new ugly spin on DRM.

Sent from my Atari 800 mobile device using Tapatalk

[Howard_Casto]

I would have to think that this is actually geared towards a consumer-level product.  If you look at the models it actually creates, they are pretty poor in terms of detail. 

For Hollywood they'd be about as useful as the old morphing software from the 90's.  It would also be completely worthless for CAD applications.... the precision and level of detail just isn't there. 

So I actually think there is a good change that this WILL end up in our hands.  Now what could you actually do with it?  Maybe make some cool photos?

[Xiaou2]

Its odd how often the past is forgotten.   This stuff has been out at least in two other product forms.

 One was ages ago, but Im not sure if it allowed such complex curves.  It could do the rest though.
Import a photo, draw the outlines.. and it snapped up the textures around a 3d model.

 Another was a Microsoft invention, which took data from several pictures of varying perspectives and focus,
and was able to compile them into a 3d object or entire map, automatically, as far as I remember seeing.

[Ed_McCarron]

Another was a Microsoft invention, which took data from several pictures of varying perspectives and focus,
and was able to compile them into a 3d object or entire map, automatically, as far as I remember seeing.

http://www.123dapp.com/catch

[RayB]

I would have to think that this is actually geared towards a consumer-level product.  If you look at the models it actually creates, they are pretty poor in terms of detail. 

For Hollywood they'd be about as useful as the old morphing software from the 90's.  It would also be completely worthless for CAD applications.... the precision and level of detail just isn't there. 

So I actually think there is a good change that this WILL end up in our hands.  Now what could you actually do with it?  Maybe make some cool photos?

My thoughts watching the vid are that this will greatly speed up "prop" modelling for video games. Even if the model and texture need tweaking after, the steps in this vid show a savings of at least a couple to a few hours from the process.

[Xiaou2]

Well, for the amateur, maybe.. 

 But I believe Pro game makers are still going to use hand made creations.  Partly for legal reasons.. and partly because this level of model probably isnt created properly for video game usage.

 Also, I believe a lot of game makers are using actual 3d image scanners now.   That as well as motion captures.

[danny_galaga]

I think Rayb has a point. Even if the big games developers have really advanced tools, small developers with lower budgets could make great advantage of this sort of software. They aren't amateurs, but they don't have the resources (time and/or money) of the big boys.

[drventure]

The tech will only get better.

I'm excited to see it. Here's hoping it comes to the amateur market soon!

[Howard_Casto]

Well the problem is, like X2 pointed out this isn't exactly a new idea, concept demos (which is all this is at this point) involving this sort of tech pop up every few years but they never make it out of the concept stage.  Why?  Because of the reasons I pointed out... who would you sell it to?  Because for all the work, you aren't going to be able to sell it for "photoshop prices", it's going to be a consumer-lever product.  That's a lot of coding and work for something that would likely have to retail between 30 and 50 dollars. 

[RayB]

Well, for the amateur, maybe.. 

 But I believe Pro game makers are still going to use hand made creations.  Partly for legal reasons.. and partly because this level of model probably isnt created properly for video game usage.

 Also, I believe a lot of game makers are using actual 3d image scanners now.   That as well as motion captures.

This tool would save a couple to a few hours on the initial modelling and texturing of a prop. A Pro would then edit further as needed. When you're contracting out at a rate anywhere between $25 to $50 per hour for hundreds or thousands of props, it's significant. NOT just for amateurs.

[Howard_Casto]

Well what a pro would do is immediately throw out that prop you generated and start from scratch.  I mean I still know modelers that for stuff like background objects still insist on doing things at the vertex level, aka one point at a time.  The reason is game developers want those unimportant models as tiny as possible to keep the framerate up.  The only way to do a realistic, low-poly prop is to do it by hand. 

And you guys are right amateurs would use it, which is essentially "guys like us".  So like I said, it might retail for 25-50 bucks, maybe 100 if they are really pushing it.


I mean I think if it ever gets released it'll be a great to play around with, but it decidedly is in the "fun toy" category. 

[Ond]

Interesting application, I've noticed a few apps that operate in a 2D space that can produce meshes using the textures from the source.  Modelling practice in other 'pro' 3D apps uses similar techniques  i.e. reference images placed in each plane of the x and y axis which geometry is created around (including extrusion like the demo).

Just a comment Howard, pro's don't need to discard hi poly or crude meshes, well not any more anyway.  It's now possible to  take a hi polygon model or a model with poor topology (mixed quads and triangle polys) and simply re-mesh them to a desired clean poly count and refine them quickly as required. This is a very recent function which has the 3D modelling community all excited, me included.   It's no longer necessary to do 'one point at time' modelling when there are more efficient methods to produce quality meshes for games or other.

[eds1275]

Not to mention that many game items have 2 meshes - a high-poly one for generating textures and normal maps, and another low-poly one that ends up in the game.

I believe that this and tools like it have a real place in the gaming world. Sure, it's not the same as firing out a completely hand-carved piece of 3d art but for the small game studio of 2-10 people it really can make all the difference. And of course there is always the mobile device market - low-poly stuff is pretty much a requirement.