#BUSTER.JPG
5 messages in this thread
GreG,
This looks decidedly impressive. I have to ask what the model is? Something
you made from clay or something?
And how many points are in the wireframe? There is an ample amount of detail,
certainly.
The question of digitization vs point-pulling is like the question of
OCR vs key-entry : it's really a matter of time required to
accomplish the same end with two different means. Does the Digi-Max
save you (total) a significant amount of time?
>>
This looks decidedly impressive. I have to ask what the model is? Something
you made from clay or something?
<<
Gary,
I used a vinyl model kit of the Alien object that I purchased at a hobby store.
I had it laying around, was gonna actually build it, airbrush it, mount and
encase it, when I decided to chop it up and digitize it.
>>
And how many points are in the wireframe? There is an ample amount of detail,
certainly.
<<
Ok, I digitized that object in 3 parts so far. The head, upper torso, lower
torso. I also only digitized the right side of the object, then mirrored it to
get the left side. Saves time to do it that way, rather then digitize it
whole. With somewhat symetric objects it just makes sense.
Right side of Head object: 787 points 1457 Faces
Right side of Upper torso: 1157 points 2174 Faces
Right side of Lower torso: 865 points 1533 Faces
To get the total point count just add the three and multiply by two. I could
have done it with less detail, but I wanted to be able to get in close without
losing any of the subtleties. I could have also used more detail, but thought
that would have been overkill.
>> The question of digitization vs point-pulling is like the question
of OCR vs key-entry : it's really a matter of time required to
accomplish the same end with two different means. Does the Digi-Max
save you (total) a significant amount of time? <<
It does when working with organic objects that you want an accurate
model of. Again, it really depends on the object you are talking
about. Some objects I wouldn't want/need to digitize, other's I
would. The DigiMax can also be used to rough out the shape of an
object for detailing manually. It all depends on the object, and
what you want your end product to be.
GreG —
Oh, THAT alien! The Sigourneyensis gloppyei. Sorry, it didn't register, it's
been too many years.
I can see that it would be helpful to digitize on some occasions. How many
points per minute do you think you average when you are entering an object like
this? And is it necessary to enter them in a deliberate sequence to keep the
polys from getting tangled? Or does it keep the snarls out automatically?
regards,
GB
>>
How many points per minute do you think you average when you are entering an
object like this?
<<
Gary,
I haven't timed it. <g> Digitizing goes by pretty quickly…I have the probe
in hand (no jokes Sam, or JohnS, or Stephen, or anyone else!), and my other
hand is draped over the axis rotation knob with my finger right on the button
that is pressed to enter that coordinate. Once you've developed your "groove"
it's a matter of move/click, move/click, etc.
>>
And is it necessary to enter them in a deliberate sequence to keep the polys
from getting tangled? Or does it keep the snarls out automatically?
<<
It's not necessary, but I've found it best to enter the vertices in some type
of order. Actually, thats the only way to do it without really getting messed
up. The nice thing about the software though, is that you can always go back
and add points to any part of the mesh in any random order. This is usefull
for adding detail to areas that were only roughed out in a cursory pass. You
can also alternate between this mode(forget the name at the moment), and the
lofting mode.
-GreG
>> The nice thing about the software though, is that you can always go back and
add points to any part of the mesh in any random order.<<
That's what I was wondering about. It's a good feature to have.
Also, I'm assuming the probe does not need to be in contact with the object
being digitized? As in, "I want this point this far off the actual surface" ?
Thanks for the briefing, GreG
regards
GB