For Modo user switching to Blender 2.8

(kkar) #81

I recommend that you report that as a bug on, this is the kind of stuff they try to iron out for 2.8 when the devs have time.

(Shiv0r) #82

But isn’t it a bit confusing because this is more a feature request than a bug?

(kkar) #83

Well, there should not be hardcoded shortcuts. Some of this stuff is overlooked.

(Shiv0r) #84

Okay done, I hope they will fix it in the feature would make working with blender even better.

(kkar) #85

Awesome, thanks. I can tell you based on my experience that engaging with the devs is much more productive. They check the bug reports, they do not have to fix it, but they will if they see merit in it.

(MACHIN3) #86

I’ve used Modo from 301 to 801.
I’ve had enough of it around 901, when didn’t see them innovating in areas that interested me, like modeling.
At the same time I came across HardOps, Retopoflow and powerful pie menu’s far exceeding what Modo’s could do. The rest is history.

Welcome modonauts.

(Grimm) #87

Heh, I started using vi in around 87 I think, there definitely was a battle for supremacy at the time, although there was also a war between UNIX and VMS too. :smile: I still use vi (vim) a lot, I’m just so much faster with it than with a normal text editor. Now I mostly use vi embedded in SublimeText, when I’m not on the command line.

I looked at Modo many times over the years, but it was alway too expensive to justify for my hobby use. I also purchased Silo, but just feel burned by them. Blender has always been a constant rock in the sea of shifting DCCs.


Interesting thanks for sharing, so the war was thing in the 80s , still kinda funny

Sorry to hear that Modo has stagnated , I did not realize that things were so bad, I always felt Modo was going the right direction and I really regarded (after the demise of Sotimage) its UI as the best on market. Pity …

(kkar) #89

Bear in mind that actually modeling tools in most apps stagnated. There has not been any real innovation on the pure topology editing side of 3d. I am not talking about sculpting or remeshing, I mean actual bare bones modeling. 3d apps have been mostly relying on the gpu and cpu speed improvements with this stuff for a while. Similar to how pixel painting apps do not seem to come up w innovative tools frequently, they are mostly improved and features added.

I am using the same tools I had been using 22 years ago to model. Not that I am conservative with this stuff and sticking to my guns, just that there has not been much new tools in the modeling menus, sculpting tools aside.


This because most of the innovations end up failing to become popular

  1. Patch modeling (3DSMAX1)
  2. Loft modeling (3DSMAX1)
  3. Cross section modeling (3DSMAX1)
  4. Nurbs modeling (still popular for architects and industrial designers)
  5. Grease Pencil modeling (Bsurfaces)
  6. Metaball modeling
  7. Pixol modeling (Zbrush)
  8. Photomertric modeling (somewhat has come back to fashion bust still quite unpopular)
  9. Voxel modeling (3d coat)
  10. Texture modeling (Alpha maps/ Displacement maps) (kinda popular for sculpting and terrain generation)
  11. Procedural modeling (Houdini / Blender Geodesic Domes addon)
  12. Coding modeling (PovRay)

They all failed to gain traction. So its not that apps do not want to innovate its that users do not like innovative tools so much.

(SaintHaven) #91

Zbrush (pixols) is generally considered popular. Sculpting as a modeling workflow has become a mainstream approach. Pixols are also just pixologic’s take on Voxels.

Innovation for 3D modeling packages like Maya, Max, Blender, Modo can often imply getting that Zbrush quality sculpting inside those modeling applications. It could be continuously refining existing tools, or adding smarter retopology tools. One application that can do everything that the specialty apps can do and at the same level.

We often don’t see any big changes either in 3D software (like how Blender went from 2.7 to 2.8) and instead are asked to pay for what amounts to small tweaks, some bug fixes some feature no body is really interested in using (or is designed poorly). That’s kind of where Modo is for me atm. The legacy stuff is pretty good but it never grew up in a way that makes it worth the update cost. They couldn’t even outdo Blender’s EEVEE with their viewport updates.

I’m still kind of pissed the ZenUI plugin died and despite community feedback, they all but ignored what it did for Modo’s UI/Workflow.

Anyways, going back to the main topic of the thread. With the improvements 2.8 brought, the viewport update, the general visual design the GUI, and plugins like HardOPs, @MACHIN3’s MeshMachine/DecalMachine… ect show something far superior than what we are seeing from the actual dev teams via Foundry & Autodesk. The users and artist seem to know best what they expect in 3D software. =)

(MACHIN3) #92

This is my take on it as well. I think we’ve seen a lack of innovation in (poly) modeling, because of a gap between developers and artists. All of HardOps, BoxCutter, DECALmachine, MESHmachine etc should have been technically possible 10, maybe 15 years ago.
Why has it taken so long then?

I think for developers there have just been many more interesting avenues to explore than new poly modeling tools. Developers also haven’t faced the same problems as artists have and so they haven’t developed the intuition what kind of tools may be required and helpful.

So it took artists becoming developers, who care about those things, to step up.

I’m convinced there is a lot more cool stuff that can be done, way beyond the core poly modeling tools.

(Felix Kütt) #93

This is why we have technical artists, or as they usually are called in production: Technical Directors. Blenders core developers should appropriately be called Software Architects. They develop the foundations, the low-level functionality that technical artists then develop on top of. The examples you brought:

Are exactly the sort of things one should expect a Technical Director to develop, in feature film industry typically that would be per specific productions needs, but there is no reason a technical artists can’t develop these in a more general fashion for the wider community as has been the case with the above examples.

It’s certainly good to see these things starting to and indeed happening now. :slight_smile:


If we had 12 3d apps of about the same popularity you would see a vast degree of innovation mainly because apps would have to think new ways to bring users. With Autodesk dominating and Adobe on 2d it has resulted on stagnation.

If user voted with their wallets on innovation we would have a much different field.

The reason why you see so much more innovation on Blender is because devs have a large degree of freedom to try things out and experiment. Although Blender lacks the amount of devs to innovate so much. There is still huge amount of untap potential in Blender.

I do agree of course that we have seen a lack of innovation in general. This could also be attributed with the increasingly complex nature of modern 3d graphics. As coder we are face with many more technical challenges than we used to. But its mostly monopolistic tactics that cause this.

Which is why something like Blender is crucial to exist. Fortunately libre software is only growing more popular. So there is hope.

(Richard Nielsen) #95

Saw your post on Foundry’s community.

Im thinking of switching over to blender, downloaded 2.8 … a little confusing but i’m sure in time ill get the hang of things. Just saw the the new features for Modo 13 … seemed stale to me, I want to invest in software that is actually making a difference and pushing the envelope. Plus theres so much more content on youtube for blender than modo. This site will be my new best friend. Glad I saw your post and hopefully the community won’t get to irritated with my questions lol

(kkar) #96

Sure, but I personaly did not see any paradigm shift in the poly land topology tools in the last 25 years.

We saw that kind of shift especially in rendering with global illumination, path tracing, accessible volume rendering etc. 3D Sculpting had its own paradigm shift with Zbrush and maybe to certain degree wtih 3DCoat and Mudbox. We had a bit in UV mapping but not much in the polygon modeling toolbag.

Naturally polygon modeling tools improved and new tools added like the free form knife tool (in most 3d apps) or poly reduction tools got much much nicer over the years but nothing earth shattering in this particular area of modeling, again I am refering to raw poly modeling, not 3d modeling.

(kkar) #97

Also this happens when the data science departments and the marketing departments rule to game. They do not want innovation, they just want people to stay busy with the tools, same with the web platforms.

My personal view is that software as service is anti-innovation.

Blender does not need to worry about that kind of stuff.

(ByteC) #98

Exactly. And you never know, when companies swap over to sub only. Adobegorithmic, Sketchoff, maybe Foundo next time… Instead of accepting such treatments and feed such dragons, support Team Blender.

(brent3d) #99

I’m not on the Modo forum but I model extensively in Modo, and have a playlist of how to get Blender interacting like Modo/Lightwave if your interested.

(howardt) #100

Zimlorog: I just pushed a commit to Blender to make Bevel modal keymap editable by users.