PDA

View Full Version : any (former) Rhino 3D users in here?


seguefy
12-15-2008, 03:13 AM
ive only EVER used rhino3d for everything modelling, because its soooo straightforward and feels so methodical and systematic to me. everything feels clear cut and "precise", whereas modelling in a program like cinema4d to me feels more like... toying around and influencing objects to an inaccurate degree but getting some cool results along the way. i feel like if i have a vision, its easier to get it realized in Rhino.

HOWEVER..

all i ever model is inorganic things like buildings, boxy things, architecture, and machinelike things.

never raelly organic matter or really fluid beautiful shapes.

have any users here ever migrated or worked with Rhino, and if so, do you feel like Modo is an all-around improvement on Rhino or hits any gaps, or meets any needs that Rhino doesnt meet?

im very interested in modelling photorealistic shoes, but i have problems with lots of curved surfaces and things like that. i feel like rhino is awesome for machinelike type stuff but not so easy for other things.

do you think Modo is a good tool to learn in light of this?

theeyeinthesky
12-15-2008, 09:30 AM
... on architectural modeling it's easy and fun, but once you have taken the organic way it quickly becomes a real pain. If you still want to use rhino on “organics” I recommend you to use it in conjunction with T-Splines plugin. It is the only close to sub-d solution in nurbs environment. But, on the other hand, Modo it’s another flavor for a 3d artist, once you taste it… :drool:

Martin Kay
12-15-2008, 10:55 AM
ive only EVER used rhino3d for everything modelling, because its soooo straightforward and feels so methodical and systematic to me. everything feels clear cut and "precise", whereas modelling in a program like cinema4d to me feels more like... toying around and influencing objects to an inaccurate degree but getting some cool results along the way. i feel like if i have a vision, its easier to get it realized in Rhino.

HOWEVER..

all i ever model is inorganic things like buildings, boxy things, architecture, and machinelike things.

never raelly organic matter or really fluid beautiful shapes.

have any users here ever migrated or worked with Rhino, and if so, do you feel like Modo is an all-around improvement on Rhino or hits any gaps, or meets any needs that Rhino doesnt meet?

im very interested in modelling photorealistic shoes, but i have problems with lots of curved surfaces and things like that. i feel like rhino is awesome for machinelike type stuff but not so easy for other things.

do you think Modo is a good tool to learn in light of this?

I occasionally use Rhino 4, but as an ex c4d user its now mainly Modo I use. You can model organic things in Rhino, but its not intuitive or anywhere near as easy as a sds modeller like Modo or the hypernurbs in c4d. There isn't much you couldn't do in Modo, but a lot of hard surfaced subjects might be a lot quicker in Rhino- I say might because some objects have a mix of machined features and organic type features which may weigh the balance in favour of one type of modeller. If you know Rhino inside out you can probably model anything and much quicker at that than in any sds modeller. The problem with Rhino is that whilst it's fairly easy to get a good basic grasp of many of its features, there are going to be many problem areas where a much deeper knowledge of the app is necessary and most definately you do need proper professional training in the more esoteric side of it.

I think Modo is a great modelling tool, but there are many facets to its capability, some 'obvious' if you take a lot of time to look for and learn them and some not so obvious where you need learn tricks from a skilled operator- ie the many training videos available from Luxology.

Martin K

Magnus3D
12-15-2008, 02:08 PM
I work with both Rhino3D, Moi3D and Luxology Modo for all types of modeling jobs, and to be honest if you never done any subdiv modeling before and you're gonna get started with it then you will run into problems as it's so new and different from nurbsmodeling in Rhino.

BUT, if you can get past the inital problems that comes with moving from nurbs to subdivmodeling then Modo is the tool you wanna work with, it's so userfriendly, easy to get started with even if you're a newbie, it's customersupport is awesome, it has a large userdatabase with many talented artists using Modo which you can ask for help when you get stuck, it has a nice manual and you also get access to Luxology-TV and Brad Peebler's funny modcasts. :)

Considering Modo 401 is getting closer and closer to it's final release in a not to distant future i'd say Modo is the tool you will not be able to live without!

/ Magnus

davidgoerndt
12-16-2008, 05:21 PM
I use Rhino everyday at work, as we do entertainment construction and I need to model hard surface objects that can be manufactured. Our work ranges from sets for TV and film to large fantasy objects for asian casinos. We do large 3D billboards for the theme parks and interactive kiosks for many different clients. I need to use a 3D program that I can model accurately, then translate those models into manfacturable items. I got modo because I want to be able to render Rhino objects without the hassle of using Rhino's rendering options. Also, I used to use Lightwave as my main modeling/rendering app but slowly migrated to Rhino because of work. I find myself trying to use Rhino commands in modo. For instance, I wanted to model a spring, in modo it's a lot of work arounds to get a decent looking spring. In Rhino, choose helix, enter start and finish axis, number of turns and radius then hit enter. You have a nice helical curve, then chose pipe, enter radius and enter. Takes less than two minutes. NURBS take a bit of getting used to, but you can do some interesting organic shapes as well as hard surface objects. Since I got modo, I'm getting back into Sub-D modeling, but mainly use it for rendering Rhino objects.

seguefy
12-16-2008, 05:31 PM
ah very interesting, thanks for the insight!

PaulS2
12-16-2008, 06:10 PM
I love using Rhino and am very design/illustration based for what I use it for. I bought Modo for an alternative rendering/modeling program but just haven't warmed up to some of the extra steps needed to create things which a nurbs modeler can simply do.

I just like a nurbs approach to modeling...for organic work though I think Modo is great. I think I might check out T-Splines in the near future as I like everything within one place.

I use Brazil 4 Rhino for just about all of my rendering and am completely spoiled. It is such a good render ...fast and produces great results. All within one interface. If you get Modo the .3dm translator is quite good though you have to mesh before you export out of Rhino.

davidgoerndt
12-16-2008, 11:42 PM
I've found that Rhino works better for some 2D work as well. things that can't be done in Illustrator easily are simple in Rhino. I probably won't ever give up Rhino to use modo, however, modo offers many things that fit in with my work.

Martin Kay
12-17-2008, 12:43 AM
For Modo users that have Rhino it is often much quicker to produce some of the more tricky objects in Rhino and export to Modo , but I would keep them to a minimum as the mesh is going to be denser and slower to display than those created in Modo which fully tesselate only upon rendering.

Martin K

benmillion
12-19-2008, 07:10 PM
i can not recommend Modo more for modeling! It's the best modeler I've used - wins by a landslide.

I only know sds modeling, and have modeled cars, organic shapes, you name it. But I really want to learn Rhino for the reasons on this post.

For example, how hard is it to model something as complex as a car using Rhino? Or a spaceship?

the problem with sds is once shapes start getting more complex, with mixtures of hard edges and smooth curves, edge loops get tricky - and they seem/ feel inaccurate...

pd
12-19-2008, 09:41 PM
I've been using Rhino for some time now, based on my ID background. I've quite some experience with SDS modelling as well, so I can compare SDS and NURBS quite well. When it comes to hard surfaces NURBS win hands down. It's a faster, more precise(complete curvature control without having to worry about dents), much more efficient and more flexible approach. On the other hand, if you have a clear picture of what you are going to model, so you can carefully plan your topology and if you are an experienced SDS modeller, you can go the SDS way just as well. In the end, I think it depends on what you want to do. Do you just need to render - use NURBS. Do you need to export to a game engine for example - you'll need SDS.
I'm just now looking into modeling with NURBS and re-topologizing in Modo to see how this goes - might save some time or might be a detour, not sure yet.

edit: regarding the topic starters question about shoes: I think you are better of to model them in Rhino or any other NURBS environment. It's just more flexible. For example, it's fairly easy to change the graphical features by projecting new shapes on the basic form and then do what you want(extrude,..).With a SDS modeler you'd have to rearrange your topology for anything that's not a minor tweak and this can be quite painful and frustrating. As said before, SDS works ok when you know what you want, but is a lot less flexible when you need to make changes afterwards.

davidgoerndt
12-20-2008, 01:34 AM
I only know sds modeling, and have modeled cars, organic shapes, you name it. But I really want to learn Rhino for the reasons on this post.

For example, how hard is it to model something as complex as a car using Rhino? Or a spaceship?

the problem with sds is once shapes start getting more complex, with mixtures of hard edges and smooth curves, edge loops get tricky - and they seem/ feel inaccurate...


I suggest you visit the Rhino web site and look at the gallery section. The Saleen S7 was modeled in Rhino and that is a very complex looking car. Both modelers have their strengths and weaknesses. If you want to manufacture an object, Rhino excels. Character modeling would be a lot easier in modo. Rhino is tops for hard surface modeling. You can do complex organic shapes in Rhino, but it takes planning to make sure you get the curves right. Rhino has several tools to make sure the topology is correct, eg the Zebra surface analysis give you parallel black and white lines so you can check the continuity of surfaces. I've been using Rhino for over 10 yrs and still find things I didn't know about, probably never will learn it all. For what it does Rhino is a bargain. I recently did some objects for a project that required them to be blow molded in clear plastic. Two of the objects had spiral flutes running from the bottom to the top. With the help of the molding company I managed to get the objects produced in large quantities (several hundred).

Martin Kay
12-20-2008, 11:24 AM
ive only EVER used rhino3d for everything modelling, because its soooo straightforward and feels so methodical and systematic to me. everything feels clear cut and "precise", whereas modelling in a program like cinema4d to me feels more like... toying around and influencing objects to an inaccurate degree but getting some cool results along the way. i feel like if i have a vision, its easier to get it realized in Rhino.

HOWEVER..

all i ever model is inorganic things like buildings, boxy things, architecture, and machinelike things.

never raelly organic matter or really fluid beautiful shapes.

have any users here ever migrated or worked with Rhino, and if so, do you feel like Modo is an all-around improvement on Rhino or hits any gaps, or meets any needs that Rhino doesnt meet?

im very interested in modelling photorealistic shoes, but i have problems with lots of curved surfaces and things like that. i feel like rhino is awesome for machinelike type stuff but not so easy for other things.

do you think Modo is a good tool to learn in light of this?


Go to this link to check out 'Hydraulic Design' they do a number of advanced tutorials which will teach Rhino at CAD level. They cover aircraft and cars. Pretty involved though and a lot to get your head around.

Martin K
http://www.rhino3d.com/resources/display.asp?language=en&listing=83

benmillion
12-22-2008, 04:03 PM
Thanks Martin and davidgoerndt for posting Rhino resources, that's exactly what I was looking for - even the Helmet sample, shows why surface modeling is typically a better method to create surfaces which have geometric and smooth shapes that are connected in one "mesh". I couldn't imagine doing that with subd's, it's possible - albeit painful.

Martin - congrats on your work being in the Modo gallery. I'm particularly fond of "Xmas lights over Kineton" - brilliant work!

Martin Kay
12-22-2008, 10:05 PM
Thanks Martin and davidgoerndt for posting Rhino resources, that's exactly what I was looking for - even the Helmet sample, shows why surface modeling is typically a better method to create surfaces which have geometric and smooth shapes that are connected in one "mesh". I couldn't imagine doing that with subd's, it's possible - albeit painful.

Martin - congrats on your work being in the Modo gallery. I'm particularly fond of "Xmas lights over Kineton" - brilliant work!

Thanks! The craft is based on the George Adamski 'photograph' of 1952 from his 'Flying Saucers Have Landed' book, purported to be a 'genuine' contact... Well who knows...
UFO activity is especially high at this time, apparently.

Martin K

CGTalk Moderation
12-22-2008, 10:05 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.