Been tinkering with Shade 8 std

[Sketchy]

Been tinkering with Shade 8 Standard for the past couple of hours. I imported a model I did in Blender to see how it renders in Shade. Man, the UI is about as complex as Blender's. Judging from my initial experiments, it's just as solid as any 3d app out there. The learning curve when it comes to the modeling aspect seems steep. You're probably better off sticking with your favorite modeling apps than learn Shade's. This is just a portion of Shade's basic rendering features common to most 3d packages.

This is just out of curiousity. Shade 8 Standard was given free when Amapi Pro 7.5 was offered for a fifth of the full price.

[juanmanuel]

As a matter of fact, I find Shade modelling quite easy to grasp. However, you must be open to the idea that it's curved surfaces are a thing apart from either nurbs or polygon/subdivision modelling. It is something else entirely.
If you want to see more tutorials on how versatile curved surfaces can be used in modelling, (apart from e-frontier's) try the ones in Shaderscafe and in Renderosity (in free stuff). Oscillator, Noel and myself have done some tutorials on curved surfaces, each one with our own personal approach.

Oscillator in particular made a tutorial focusing on several important key aspects of using curved surfaces, it is quite good for the novice user.

BTW I like the material on the pawn, very nicely done.

[Sketchy]

Originally Posted by juanmanuel

As a matter of fact, I find Shade modelling quite easy to grasp. However, you must be open to the idea that it's curved surfaces are a thing apart from either nurbs or polygon/subdivision modelling. It is something else entirely.

Oh it's not about that. In fact, coming from a AutoCAD background, my whole concept of 3d when I was starting out was about creating lines or curves to form all kinds of 3d shapes/objects. For instance, a circle extruded forms a cylindrical object; the same circle revolved around an axis forms a torus, a square extruded forms a cube, and so on. I didn't even have any clue what this poly/subd modeling was all about at first. The first time I played with Blender I still didn't know what it was until midway in my exploration of Wings3d that things began to clear up.

Shade seems one of those 3d apps that requires a radical shift in the way you do 3d. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I find the navigation workflow a bit awkward. You basically work with ortho views only, which I find limiting. You don't model in the perpective/camera view. It's there to form your render image aside from the usual visualisation purpose as you model in the ortho views. Accurate camera views are accomplised only by controlling a separate dialog box, instead of in the view itself.

I tried rotating one of the ortho views like top, then the other two views (front and side) rotate as well, which is not exactly desirable. The same thing with zooming in and out. They don't behave independently of each other like in basically all 3d apps. I tried bringing the rotated ortho view back to ortho and I can't figure how.

Other than that I think Shade is just as capable as any 3d package. Needless to say, it's admirable to see people who could produce professionally-done images out of what I think is too complex to make sense of. Thanks Juanmanuel. BTW, it's not a pawn, it's a knight.

[juanmanuel]

It could be that most of my modelling is concerning architecture, and the way the orbiting suits how I work very well. I use the "rotate to selection" a lot, much easier to use than trying to rotate manually the view. But then again, when I modelled in Autocad several years ago, that is exactly what I did too!

One thing is certain, it is almost mandatory to assign keyboard shortcuts to several functions, so time is not lost clicking away in dialogue boxes. This makes what you say of controlling the camera right on the viewport possible.

As to the zoom, pan, etc that is always linked in the viewports, there should be an option to unlink it. I don't really mind them being linked, but once again, that is mostly related to the kind of work I do.

I agree Shade has a radical shift as to how it works in 3d. The adaptation can be a bit frustrating, but on the other hand, it is very reliable and predictable, no mysterious surprises if you follow the general rules.

And you are right, it is a knight. Been a bit distracted lately.

[transient]

Shade could definitely use a 3d widget for modelling and moving in the 3dview, but this is no big deal for me.

You can map shortcuts very easily in Shade. I have all the main menus mapped to the number pad, which makes life much easier. You can't really live anywhere in 3d land without shortcuts in my experience, the tools are too complex.

Also you can use the memory button in the camera pane to easily make different cameras in your scene. I find toggling between preset cameras is easier than rotating the view all the time. I do this in other apps as well. You can also place spotlights this way.

Shade is very powerful and deep, but I agree you do have to think a bit differently.

That's a nice render btw.

[Sketchy]

That knight was one of my first 3d models I did in Blender, which was about four years ago. As you can see it's got millions of polys!

I should mention that the blend file exported out of Blender as an obj didn't open in Shade. It says object failed or something. I re-exported the same model in Blender with various settings. Nothing worked when I opened it in Shade as before. I tried the dxf exporter (in Blender). Shade was able to open it, but the model appeared too tiny and split in pieces.

As a last ditch effort, I opened the same obj file in Amapi Pro 7.5, then resaved it with the same filename. Not only Shade was able to open the file, but it's exactly the same model with the same size that opened in Amapi Pro. So there you go. Amapi models exported as obj work perfectly well with Shade.

And still tinkering...and tinkering...



A blend file exported to an obj file. Opened in Amapi Pro 7.5, then resaved. Then imported in Shade 8.

And tinkering...