Modo doesn’t have a remesh solution either. Like I said before, to retopo an object it’s a poly by poly process.
Actually we have autoretopo now. Its a new feature in version 10. I assume thats what he was referring to.
You don’t know, you just say things. That’s the problem. I didn’t mention Fweeb, I asked whether the things you said were true.
For the record, I looked into it and I didn’t find any published free software that does something like Mesh Fusion (arbitrary Subdivision Surfaces with blended Booleans). That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, of course.
As for “Instant Meshes”, that publication comes with a free, usable demo application. There exists a support scripting for using it with Blender on github.
Because you two are the worst example of people in this forum and the reason why the people know that blender is used in some studios only because somebody see a image of blender in a making off and nobody told nothing in this forum.
You keep saying things. You’re not very good at that, I must say. Maybe you should focus more on your art.
1 Like
I appreciate your opinion. Fortunately nobody care about what happens in this forums for the same cause that your friends and I tell. I should not worry about an admin that enter in a thread to irritate me, like the message of baron confirm that search “rubbish” me (I enter to the forum with my mobile where I’m not loged and read the msg). I perfectly know the way that this works, enter in a thread to irritate somebody, after that fweeb make a veiled threat with “this is not the place for that” and a few messages after he deletes the message or thread. This happens a lot of times and all people know that meanwhile beerbaron can irritate every time that he wants and fweed does nothing.
I don’t care about my future because only depend of two things, my experience and my portfolio. Unlike other people that only have a lot of free time.
You were asked to elaborate on what you said. You have nothing to complain about.
You also have a demonstrably poor grip on the English language, so you shouldn’t assume ill intent on the part of someone like Fweeb, who has shown copious amounts of patience towards even the most obnoxious users (which I believe is the wrong thing to do).
That’s not true, Fweeb has deleted my posts on several occasions. You may not have noticed that, because I then don’t go on to whine about it or cry “censorship”.
If I made clear what I think of you in “plain terms”, I’m sure he’d be quick to delete that, as well.
I’ve been using and teaching modo classes in the past.
Trying to be objective here are the strong points of each
Modo
- Selection tools
- ubershader
- streamlined UI logical hotkeys
- Better Viewport
- Ability to cut paste geometry to different objects
Blender
- Modifiers, making modelling much more flexible, especially skin and boolean
- Curve tools
- Much better procedural/modifiers workflow
- Bigger community
- Open Source
- Faster Development
- GPU Rendering
- More Addons
- Outliner behavior could be more straightforward
- Working with multiple objects
I’ve switched to Blender exclusively in the past year and have been loving it. But the things I miss most from Modo are definitely a couple super useful selection tools and some UI streamlining, but I’ve fixed most of that by just customizing hotkeys. Overall I feel that Blender has huge potential, with a few UI tweaks it’s already feeling very strong. On the other hand Modo’s development was going in a direction that I wasn’t finding very useful.
Meshfusion and NPR kit (and maybe the auto-retopo tool): the main features that keep Modo ahead… meshfusion being the first among them of course…
I was talking about some software like instant meshes itmself and meshlab. You can find other solutions in mesh mixer, openflipper, cgal… that have other solutions without good topology but good to a “dynamesh” tool. I’m sure that it’s enough examples of a remeshing solutions.
BUt I don’t want to critic BF for this, I only see weird that he don’t use some of this solutions and use “remesh” that give strange artifacts.
Do you think that blender have a faster development that modo? I believe that was the opposite.
And same question about procedural modeling, I believed that was better in modo.
1 Like
I work with both, everyday. There are cons and pros on both sides. There is no definite answer to this. Highly depends on what you do, highly subjective. Things that I see as advantages on MODO side are:
- Passes system
- Bunch of MODO procedural textures + many utility nodes.
- Round corners
- One of most pain in a butt things are masks in Blender, it dead easy to have them in MODO
- Mesh fusion for prototyping
- Render booleans
- Substance support - Blender GPL licensing is making hard for commercial plugins to connect with Blender. Usually so much work is not justified with profit…
- Much more render outputs.
- UDIM support
- Dislike Outliner in Blender, MODOs item list is so easier to organize on larger projects.
- Fallofs
- Macros
- Profiles in beveling, extruding etc
A portfolio will open quite a few doors, and an attitude can close them just as quickly.
And yes you are right, most professionals don’t “care” what happens in these forums, although it can be a concern when it comes time to hire an artist, and quite frankly this is a large community and word gets around.
But all of that aside, why do you care what he says? Why are you granting him the ability to control your emotions? All of us have one thing in common (hopefully) and that is we all have better things to do then let some idiot over the internet ruin our day.
Is this thread still going to be about the merits of Blender and Modo or is it now about the character of the person who started this thread?
Noting the list of Modo advantages above…
–For a few select things like boolean modeling, Modo is the industry leader (though I have heard that their algorithm leaves something to be desired if you want to keep polycount to a minimum).
–As for the remesh modifier, I do recall that Nicholas Bishop never intended the modifier to be an actual retopo solution (but more in the vein of creating a more workable mesh from scanned data or a dyntopo sculpt).
–Passes and outliner, they are both receiving attention in 2.8 (so we’ll see just how much improvement they get).
–Substance support, the BF can’t do anything here due to the license, so Modo will always have an advantage there (especially since there’s little chance of it becoming an open standard).
–UDIM; A recent experimental build by Lukas Stockner actually has a patch for such a workflow with Cycles (find it in the denoisier thread).
–Masks and Falloffs, I know that Blender has mask creation tools for the compositor and sculpting and several falloff options for proportional editing, what does Modo do with them that Blender doesn’t?
–Procedural textures, I also agree that Cycles could see more functionality here, but the devs. unfortunately are constrained as to what they can do here because then they need to support rendering them on the GPU (which by the way would also become a major challenge for The Foundry if they ever decide to allow Modo’s engine to run on that hardware).
–Profiles, I agree that they would be nice to have (but I don’t think there’s a high chance of them coming anytime soon due to how Campbell seems to be one of the ones devs. really interested in improving the modeling tools at the C level).
It didn’t affect me in any way, maybe it is cultural difference and that confuses you. Of course that it don’t ruin a day.
It’s interesting some points, like UDIM.
Other parts are hard for me to understand, like the problem with substance (can they link a license free module for blender or something?) or the bevel profile ¿It’s really hard add a usefull option like this? it will change the way to model a lot of objects, and if they add this in a modifier will be impressive
I would argue that Blender boolean modifier has been a much more practical tool for my work. Mesh fusion is great for small objects and negative fillets but in many cases you can’t control them to get something like you would in a solid /nurbs modeller. For more complicated geometries it slows down to the point where it’s unpractical.
Blender booleans are much more straightforward/simple but they are more practical in my opinion and they allow for more complicated/higher number of operations before slowing down.
I find that agreeable, but it’s still a probable fact that we really could use an auto-merging ability in the bevel modifier (so we can be free to make them as big as we need without overlapping geometry).
As of now, you have to apply the boolean operation and prepare the geometry for a bevel (and ideally, one key direction that Blender should be going in points to an increasing ability to model non-destructively).
Where do you heard something about automerging? because everytime that I see examples of this type of booleans like mesh fusion I don’t see any automerging solution. I see a other type of tools.
There is no “vs”, we used Modo dailey within our studio for years and it’s a great 3D software, but Blender doesn’t suffer from the limitations of being a commercial product, so we quickly migrated over to it once the Cycles engine matured. Check out my latest Lightwave/Modo Crossover for training and my vids on youtube the go over this topic.
-Brent