CompuServe Messages

Heh – I agree with Alan. I, for one, don't mind the use of pseudos, as long as they're not used to hide behind while flaming or non-constructively criticizing. Yet; a solitary name of "rabbit" with no last name doesn't lend itself to the belivability that it's your legal name <g> Anyways, I agree with you about the lack of any CAD features in 3D Studio. They take the philosophy that "if you want CAD accuracy, supplement 3DS with CAD". Which works for many projects. The very success of 3DS shows that there are ways around it in most cases. Nonetheless, coming from a primarily architectural usage, I find that the fact that 3DS has the severe lack of CAD accuracy that it does ssometimes lends itself to major problems. Perhaps not major in their unsolvability, but major in the sense that they take much more time than would otherwise be necessary. The problem isn't in the weakness of many CAD packages or in 3DS itself. It's in the interface between the two. There are features of each that you simply can't cross over, at least easily. As it stands, to create an architectural animation, you pretty much must create the model in its entirety in a supplemental CAD package, then export it via DXF (or .3DS conversion if using ACAD 13) to 3DS. Then you can animate, and add entourage and various formss, etc. that the CAD package wasn't good at. One problem with this is now that you have it in 3DS, there's not much you can do with the overall structure. Even adding a window would be difficult: first, you couldn't be accurate with size or placement of the opening. Secondly, even if you get a reasonable approximation, the odds are the thing won't boolean correctly. What about things like auditorium seats? They're best modeled in CAD, but tweeked in the 3DS lofter. Placing them you *MUST* do in CAD. But what about mapping? Must you then go back and map each one? These are only a couple examples. I believe that although Acad was smart in creating a .3DS export, when MAX hits, a CAD extension of a type is going to be more critical than ever. Else, when you export your complex models in from CAD, they will lack that which is the best feature in the MAX modeler: parametrics. If MAX is going to have this ability, it should go one step further and allow you to have a little CAD accuracy in the shapes and placements of your primatives. Even if complex ploygons like floor plans NEED to be created in CAD, at least these shapes could then be brought into MAX, placed with accuracy and relative coordinates, and then extruded and lofted with a little ACCURACY. Imagine the openings that constitute your windows being parametric booleans? You could actually move the windows around without having to completely re-model the whole thing! And – the booleans would actually WORK for a change! Even if Adesk doesn't come out with a Corecomp like this, or include such *SIMPLE* Cad features in Max, we desperately need it for any kind of advanced visualization that requiress more than an educated guess about how the thing should look. But if Adesk doesn't come out with it; they're missing a very important piece of the puzzle. Hmm… I sense another wish coming on. First, these ideas, but then wrapped up inn some more specifics. Jonas & Gary, are you listening? <g> -jk