/3/ - 3DCG

>>760890
Good luck with that, Autodesk is just as cucked as Blender if you go by all the shill threads on this board.

>>760894
I never read other peoples threads, only my own.

>>760890

7. No UV relax tool
8. Packing algorithm is complete shit
9. Cannot change object base parameters if you click in the viewport or move the object
10. No good retopology tools
11. Shit performance
12. No industry usage
13. Rigging tools are a joke

>>760901
>Rigging tools are a joke
>Shit performance
>No good retopology tools

To blenders defence max has neither of those aswell.

Atleast we have retopo in max beta

>>760909
I believe Max has the best modeling performance in the market. Houdini is second, though good luck using it for direct modeling. Blender is the undisputed worst at modeling performance; only fanboys and trolls deny this.

Another thing that is annoying: you can't have objects of the same name even if they are in different collections.

This is very annoying when designing a building with multiple rooms. I can't just have a 'floor' object in each collection, they have to be floor.001, floor.002, floor.003 and so on.

>>760890
Most are wrong, those that arent are insignificant software specific gimmick. Max has those too, like the shit you have to go through to edge slide a vert, whereas in blender you just double tap G. Git gud, stop waging software wars and looking for excuses

>>760923
https://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph5f2d48f363632

>>760932
>most are wrong
stop being a faggot and name one then

>Git gud, stop waging software wars and looking for excuses
I haven't quit using it, I'm still learning it, just looking for something that is more polished. 3DS max and blender aren't the only two modeling programs out there but if they are both equally shitty i might start weighing the options of coming up with my own solution

>>760936
>weighing the options of coming up with my own solution
Don't mean to offend, but you have trouble navigating (not that) simple piece of software, and you think designing and writing your own equivalent on your own will yield better and faster results?

>>760909
Except 3DSMax has decent rigging tools (Maya is still the best though) and has nice retopology now. The fact that it runs like shit on your comp just means you're a favela who can't run a 12gb program, lol. If you had mentioned crashing when doing certain tasks I would argue you would have one point, but you didn't even do that. Pathetic.

>>760939
>complains about blenders performance
>"you just need a better PC for Max, you poor idiot"

>>760890
>1. You can't make selections through culled backface geometry
Not sure what exactly you mean by this, but if geometry is culled, of course you can't select it.
>2. You can't use absolute units when scaling/extruding/insetting
Press the "=" sign (not on the numpad) and you can. You can even mix and match units. So you could be in metric, but move something by inches by using "in" or "
>3. You can't do proper edge offsetting without an add-on
Probably me being a brainlet, but I'm not sure what you mean by this either. Edge slide is just GG. You can change the offset with the dialog box, or just putting the numbers in manually.
>4. You can't easily add a vertex to an existing edge (come on, I have to be wrong about this one)
Just subdivide the edge, and then slide the vert.
>5. You can't make a global material (non object-specific)
Material override is in the Output properties panel. If you mean you want a material without having an object tied to it (free user), just click the little shield to make it stay no matter what. You still have to start with an object, but you can delete it after you hit the shield.
>6. You can't enable backface culling in render preview
If you're using Eevee, backface culling is in the material settings. Cycles is a bit ass backwards (or not), in that it renders all faces equally. It should be easy enough to set up a material to not render based on its facing value though.

cont.

>>760901
>>760941
>7. No UV relax tool
Magic UV has a UV Smooth/relax. Pretty sure it comes with Blender, though I could be wrong.
>8. Packing algorithm is complete shit
I'd agree, but why anyone would let a computer pack for you is beyond me.
>9. Cannot change object base parameters if you click in the viewport or move the object
I agree there. It's nitpicky, but you're right. I used to be able to with F6 or F9 if I remember, but I can't remember if it was an addon or not.
>10. No good retopology tools
Remesh was re-worked to be much better iirc. Though I'm a person that prefers to do it by hand anyway.
>11. Shit performance
True to a degree. Though it's slowly getting back to normal. Still, sounds mostly like a "you" problem. Performance on my end works pretty fine. Even on complex scenes. If your computer can't handle it though, then I can see it. Especially when overall the program was lighter in terms of performance costs.
>12. No industry usage
Why does it matter to you what the industry uses if you'll never get a job in it anyway?
>13. Rigging tools are a joke
Also true. Blender lags behind a ton in terms of its rigging and character animation department.

>>760941
>Not sure what exactly you mean by this, but if geometry is culled, of course you can't select it.

I mean that if you have a culled backface, and you try to select geometry that exists beyond it, ie something that the normal is facing you, you can still accidentally select what is culled and there is no option to disable this. it is supremely annoying when trying to target vertices or other elements in tight spaces where you don't want whats in the foreground interfering with what you're trying to manipulate. Not only that, but the backfaces that are culled are translucent, not transparent and there is also no option to change this either, so if you're viewing geometry that is obstructed by a backface that is supposed to be invisible, you have this retarded haze over everything that also effects the visibility of your selection cursor

>Press the "=" sign (not on the numpad) and you can. You can even mix and match units. So you could be in metric, but move something by inches by using "in" or "

You can manually type units in each time. But you can't scale, extrude, inset, bevel by say, an absolute value of 1 meter, because no matter what, the value you are manipulating is a percentage of the size of what you're manipulating from. Say you have a 10x10 meter plane. If you scale it down by .9, now you have a 9x9 meter plane. You've went down by 1 meter, congratulations, but if you scale it down again, you are scaling it down by .9 of 9 meters, which is not adhering to an absolute stepping measurement of 1 meter, because you're now doing 90% of 9 meters. This is a huge pain if you are making say, a square column with a bottom fascia design that has tapers in equal increments getting smaller as it goes upwards, like decrementing in size by 2 cm each step rather than 90% of the previous step size, which is RELATIVE value not absolute... and checking absolute increments in snap menu does not fix this, though it does make the grid behave wonky

>>760941
>>760944
contd.

... and by wonky I mean, check out how your 3d cursor snaps when you have absolute units checked in your snap menu. Its completely different from how your geometry snaps. Unpredictable.

>Probably me being a brainlet, but I'm not sure what you mean by this either.

Edge offsetting is when you are basically extruding a loop of edges outwards (the opposite of insetting) so its like scaling up while extruding outwards. Blenders offsetting does not properly retain proportions as expected.

>Just subdivide the edge, and then slide the vert.
You can also do a loop cut, however, if you have geometry that is an odd number, that cut will be snapped to an increment that is offset from the grid. Speaking of which the grid system in blender is virtually useless. You don't really have a grid, you have increments, of which not all functions adhere to and there is no way of telling which ones do and do not, and there is no way of changing that setting either.

>If you mean you want a material without having an object tied to it (free user), just click the little shield to make it stay no matter what. You still have to start with an object, but you can delete it after you hit the shield.

Will try this, but my point stands. This is a hack for a function that should already exist. ALSO if materials are object specific, why can't two materials in two different objects have the same name? Don't tell me its for exporting purposes, because if I have two of the exact same materials on two different objects and they have two different names because blender wont allow it, why would I want to export two of the same image for use in say, a game engine? thats wasteful and dumb.

>It should be easy enough to set up a material to not render based on its facing value though.

Haven't fully dived into eevee but I'm not talking about at render... I'm talking about the render preview shader view while modeling. Not sure if you are aware of that

>>760946
>>760944
I think your main problem here is trying to turn a polymodeler into autocad

>>760944
I can select through backface culling just fine.
If you mean the x-ray mode, yeah that's fucky. I never use that shit. It's impossible to tell depth with that shit.

I'm able to extrude, inset and bevel by values and not percentages though. All the time in fact. It'd make modelling with real-world measurements impossible if you couldn't. Scaling works on percentages though. Which makes sense when you think about it. You're scaling something, scales work in ratios. Half of something that's been halved already isn't going to be a consistient measurement down the line.
What you're looking for is the shrink operation, not scale.

As for snapping, I only ever use snapping for verts/faces/edges. The grid is pretty much useless to me. Not because it's not functional, just because I don't use it.

>Edge offsetting is when you are basically extruding a loop of edges outwards
Never had to do that, but I'll take your word for it. But again, I think you're looking to use the shrink operation.

>You can also do a loop cut...
Yeah I'm aware, but I didn't want to say to use a loop cut since it'd add a loop around the whole object. You said you wanted to add a vert to one edge.

>This is a hack for...
It's not really a hack, it's just how the program works. It's a bit weird, but most programs have some weird thing where you question what the devs were thinking when they made it that way. As for 2 materials with 2 objects with the same name, it's because the materials are global and can be put on any object. They're not tied to the object (even though they technically are), it's just that the program checks if something is being used, and if it's not, it doesn't keep it.

>I'm talking about the...
So just the basic viewport (solid mode)? Press the little drop down arrow next to the viewport shader selct and backface culling will be on the options there. If you're in "lookdev" you'll have to change the eevee settings like I mentioned earlier.

>>760947
none of the functions i mention are exclusive to cad software. hard surface modeling is still modeling whether you're creating a mech for a video game or a doorway arch. If all i needed to do was create boring rigid building structures id just spend and afternoon reading sketchup for dummies and go on about my business

>>760946
>>760949
Here's the little options menu I was talking about.
And I guess it's not called "lookdev" it's material preview. Still, it's based on Eevee, so you'll just have to enable backface culling for the material in the material settings. Just like how you'd set up alpha blending to set up transparency for Eevee.
If you're in Cycles, it might not show up though, so just swap to Eevee, check the box, and then swap back to Cycles.
I don't know why the option isn't there if you're in Cycles, but it's just one of those things. It doesn't matter all that much though since the material preview isn't 1:1 to the Cycles output, but I can see it being confusing if you don't know about it.

>>760938
I never said it would be better, and I never said I would do it for that reason. I'd do it for the money because if people spend money on 3ds max and its equally as shitty as blender then they might buy my garbage too, just trying to think outside the box/camera/lightsource

>>760952
You can't seriously believe you can make a 3D software people would use or even buy, all by yourself. Grow up, this is too retarded.

>>760949
>I can select through backface culling just fine.

Make two planes, put them 1cm apart, flip the normal on the closest one, enable backface culling, zoom out, now switch to face select mode and use the marquee selector to select the face behind the culled backface without zooming in a million percent. you will select the backface. I want a mode that allows your selections to ignore culled backfaces.


>Scaling works on percentages though. Which makes sense when you think about it. You're scaling something, scales work in ratios.
To be limited to percentages and relative values when scaling makes no sense. If it were impossible to do it with absolute unit values, I would agree, but its not. I can force blender to scale down by 1 meter each iteration, but it would only be because I do the calculation manually. My point is that blender should do this calculation. Blender should offer this simple feature. Blender does not, and it slows my workflow. How such a thing could be overlooked does not make sense at all.

>>760951
I've seen that option for materials. This might work at the render stage, but I'm talking about geometry as I am modeling because generally I need backface culling for better visibility during the modeling phase. I don't assign materials to every single face I create as I'm creating them, that would be very slow, not to mention if I'm doing it solely to fix backfaces I'd have to manually revert them all. Not a practical solution.

>>760952
>Another anti-blender turns out to be a delusional weirdo

Bet OP has never finished a single fucking model

>>760954
obviously you don't know how software dev works, so i'm not gonna humiliate you by saying that nobody nowhere not now or in the last 50 years has created any amount of software by themselves ever since a current of electricity could be converted to a 1 or 0. There are libraries, plugins, frameworks, platforms, scripts, functions, classes etc that vary through more layers of abstraction than either i or you are aware of, and there is not a person alive that doesn't use any number of all of them when creating an application at any level so basically you are an idiot and will get nowhere with that kind of negative tudeness, no offense

>>760958
are you 15?

>>760957
>delusional

I am going to create a 24 fps frame-by-frame animated series with cinematography inspired by michael mann (think heat) and a soundtrack composed, recorded, and produced entirely by me. delusion is an ugly word, I much prefer grandiose. I'm a visionary... a catholic, and an elite mastermind creator of what will become my magnum opus and ultimately the beginning of a media empire. You will know my name soon enough. I will be the guy that hires you to polish my shoes and clean the cum stains out of my ferarri testarossas

heh... nothing personnel kid

>>760958
Ok, you're a confirmed retard then.

To be fair, XISMO is being developed by one dude and while it's pretty bare-bones and nowhere near commercial software level, it's usable for traditional poly modeling (basically what it was made for, a free streamlined alternative to Metasequoia).
http://mqdl.jpn.org/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzB9XTzDnNuD8yOYFYPHl6g/videos
But OP is not a passionate and experienced Japanese 3D artist slash coder, so yeah.

>>760958
Jesus.

>>760942
>Magic UV has a UV Smooth/relax. Pretty sure it comes with Blender, though I could be wrong.

Nope it's not the same thing. UV relax removes distortion from an UV island. In Blender you have a UV relax brush that makes everything even more distorted.

>I'd agree, but why anyone would let a computer pack for you is beyond me.

Because most people use a painting program instead of photoshop now, so you don't need to recognize the assets in the UV layout. Manual packing takes a long time and in production you can't lose so much time manually packing assets, especially when there are many of them within a single UV map.

>Remesh was re-worked to be much better iirc. Though I'm a person that prefers to do it by hand anyway.

It's only useful for sculpting. I'm talking about manual retopo here.

>>760890
Z is still fucking UP
when will they learn?

>>760966
you didn't post a model.

>>761017
There is no model. Do you think a guy who doesn't know his way around basic modeling features is able to model something? He has an idea of how things should be/are and thinks this is enough to warrant the right to complain about "lacking" features. In reality, the only lacking thing is his skill and experience.

>>761017
>>761020

imagine this, in akira-like anime styling:

*queue some jazzy, misty, bluesy sounding solo strat guitar, mostly clean, thick with hall reverb as screen fades from black into:

a slow moving establishment shot over a vast cityscape at night, slowly creeping forward.

scene cuts rapidly and you hear the roar and see a tight shot of the nose of a futuristic jet-like ship barreling through the dark clouds...

scene cuts again, this time to a little girl sniffling with a teddy bear on some steps in a dark rainy alleyway

cuts back to the city scape, panning over the many buildings slowly increasing speed
*80s miami vice-ish guitar solo ensues*

cuts back to the jet

back to girl

back to the city scape, getting faster and faster now

back to jet,

back to cityscape as camera shifts to 50mm focal length as it approaches the side of a building finally panning to a large window and zooming inside

character A is in hospital bed parallel to window, peering out with a thousand yard stare as door opens

character B walks in, introduces himself

"Here for your debriefing... start from the beginning Character A" dialogue

*narration begins, and story takes off*

>>761020
you forgot to post your model

>>760912
Wasn't talking about modelling performance, in visualization max is kinda horrible especially when working with the slate material editor and enabling global rendering

>>760939
Cat is outdated and while bones is powerful it's super unintuitive to setup, especially when you don't want to resort to automation via maxscript.

I run a 8Core 16 Thread CPU GTX 1070 and 32GB of Ram and when it comes to visualization and material building max is kinda shit.

I hope they improve slate soon and add some new modernized auto rigging tools.

>>760890
Hear! hear!

For UVing this combo is good:
>UV packmaster 2
>Textools
>UV Toolkit

>>760955
>This might work at the render stage
It's literally in the viewport.
>>760949 It's in action right here. It's not a render trick. It's normal ass backface culling. If you mean in edit mode, then yes, that's intended. Just hide the fucking face.


>Blender should offer this simple feature. Blender does not
I literally told you how to do it. SHRINK (Alt+S). It works based on normals direction, but you can specify specific measurements and it'll use those. Scales are percentages, in any fucking program, even in real life. You don't buy a model at "25cm smaller than normal", you buy a model at "1/4th scale".

Learn how shit works before you criticize it. You're just looking for a boogeyman for your own incompetence. 1 month learning something like this isn't nearly enough to encompass the wide amount of shit you need to know. This would go with any of the major 3d programs.

14. It can't be pirated like Maya

>>761055
>2020
>still using a GTX 1070
Favela confirmed

>>761072
>If you mean in edit mode, then yes, that's intended.

Of course I meant in edit mode, who the hell is in object mode for more than a fraction of a fucking second during the modeling phase?

>Just hide the fucking face.

Not. A. Solution. Hiding individual faces is ridiculous, because you have to go back and unhide them, hide this, hide that, every fucking time you rotate the viewport. I didn't say I had a problem with how hiding faces works, I said I had a problem with how backface culling works. They are different things that work in different ways and serve different purposes.

>I literally told you how to do it. SHRINK (Alt+S). It works based on normals direction, but you can specify specific measurements and it'll use those. Scales are percentages, in any fucking program, even in real life. You don't buy a model at "25cm smaller than normal", you buy a model at "1/4th scale".

This is a retarded comparison, and again, you're failing to differentiate between absolute and relative value. Scaling a 1 meter cube down by 1 centimeter is a percentage calculation, but if you are always scaling by 1 centimeter no matter the size of the object, then your percentage being scaled changes. This is what using an absolute unit means... rather than the percentage staying the same and the unit changing, it is reversed. You said it only makes sense to do it one way and not the other, and I said you are wrong because there is no reason to limit it to one or the other, which blender does.

Alt+S, pressing =, and typing your measurement in manually every single step is not the same as scaling and having it snap by an absolute measurement (or the grid even). The latter is vastly more efficient and gives you a much faster workflow and the former is a clunky process that needs to be repeated. Repetition like this unnecessary and not reflective of a well thought out UI, which is my entire point: blender is shit.

>>761080
What? I have pirated Blender and it works just fine.

>>761097
Bro where can I pirate blender I really want to try it out but can't buy it right now please bro tell me

>>761081
yeah im waiting for Zen3 and Volta to upgrade.

Still doesn't change the fact that large parts of max are still not as smooth as they could be.

Most of the modifiers aren't even multithreaded

>>761102
It's on one of the most popular CG trackers. I suppose it must be on others too, haven't really looked to be honest.

>>761117
>*reupload*
My sides

Yet, despite these shortcomings, people use Blender everyday to create their art. Whether or not you think that art is good or valid is irrelevant.

Enumerating Blender's shortcomings is a worthwhile exercise, no doubt, but everything else is just noise.

>it will never be used by AAA studios
who cares
>it will always be a toy
who cares
>blendlets suck
who cares

The world has a free 3D application to use for whatever purpose you want. It's yours, mine, everybody's. Nothing else matters.

>>761162
They are trying to justify their software choice because they feel attacked by a free community driven software that has probably ignited the next cg generation

If you want blazing viewport speed in Eevee, for animation enjoyment purposes, just disable all your normal maps and use bumps instead. Sure it's a drop off, but having an animation scene run 30FPS while fully rendered is worth it.

t. potato PC

>>760890
>>760901
Most of this is bullshit but the UV tools in Blender are actually garbage. Moving from max/maya this is the biggest step down. Retopology is just fine. A bit clunky but having previously done it in Zbrush I didn't see a lot of difference in terms of how fast you retopo shit.

>>763290
Wtf? How can bump mapping be faster than normal mapping?

>>763313
bump as in vector/bump, not a displacement map... but I have no idea why normal map slows animations down so much. An entire scene will run smoothly at 30 fps, and just one normal slows it to 20ish.