CompuServe Thread

#3D cad with 3D studio??

11 messages in this thread
#188851From: RabbitSep 3, 1995 5:46 AM
Could someone please share some thoughts with me on the suitability or otherwise of any 3D software in the following situation: At present I draft in 2d in Generic Cadd6, then export into 3D Studio[R2] to create, view and render & animate my 3D models. I also export out of 3d Studio into Autocad LT to print/plot hidden line removals. I wish to find a 3D Cad program to so as to be able to create 3D models in a more accurate fashion than 3D Studio will allow, thus skipping the 2D drafting stage, and also dimension and generate 2D views of sections through the model. Autocad itself is not an option because I loathe the clumsy way it operates, especially its 3D viewing options. Specifically: 1] What are brand X's 3D viewing, rotating, perspective controls like on a 1 to 10 scale? [Eg Autocad = 1, 3D studio = 10] 2] Will 3D models built in brand X export via dxf into and out of 3D Studio with no hassle, lining up perfectly, and keeping all surfaces intact? 3] Can 2D sections of the 3D model be easily generated? 4] Can symbols, blocks, components or whatever they may be called have attributes attached, and can these easily be edited and exported to external databases? 5] Can these components be updated, and can one component be replaced with another while still keeping the original components attributes attached? 6] Can entities be selected by colour, layer, type, weight etc as well as by window, crossing etc? Thanks in advance for any replies – I have looked at Microstation, Archicad and Autocad – there must be something better….(and perhaps cheaper). Of course, 3D cad features could be built into 3D Studio to create the perfect 3D program…….please!!!
#188866From: Anne BrownSep 3, 1995 8:57 AM
Rabbit – You have to first remember that this is Autodesk's forum, supported and paid for by them and you really shouldn't expect to get great support here for competitive programs. Most of our members use 3DS and seem to be doing just fine with it. Secondly – please change your name from Rabbit to your first and last name. We ask folks here not to use handles. Kind of hard to get serious answers if you are named after a small, fuzzy creature with a twitching nose <G> If you are using WINCIM, click on Special, Forum Options and change your name there. Hope you will be able to get some information useful for you here. Anne
#189862From: RabbitSep 8, 1995 7:15 PM
Dear Anne, You perhaps misunderstand my posting. I, too am using 3DS and am doing just fine with it. However, some things it will not do, and one must use another (CAD) package to address those aspects of one's work. I am not too impressed with the way Autocad deals with some of these other things. I expect other people may feel the same, and hoped to get some feedback on this. In the course of ones work it may be necessary or desirable to use a mix of packages to achieve the final product. It seemed not unreasonable to me some people using 3DS might well use other manufactures products in conjunction with 3DS, and it may be possible to discuss this interaction of differing products without feeling one was farting in church. Secondly, while you may feel that it may be << . Kind of hard to get serious answers if you are named after a small, fuzzy creature with a twitching nose <G>>>, this is not my handle, it is my name. It is my name on my drivers licence, my passport and my birth certificate, and I therefore fail to see why I should change it for this forum. Regards Rabbit.
#189922From: ALAN IGLESIASSep 9, 1995 1:31 AM
Rabbit Who? Rabbit, please don't pretend that folks here would be out of line suspecting that "Rabbit" was a handle — especially when there's no last name! A little reality check is in order here. Go ahead and post with your full name, and things'll be just fine! Sincerely, -Alan Iglesias
#190002From: Jerome R. KaliszSep 9, 1995 1:46 PM
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
#190058From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]Sep 9, 1995 8:10 PM
<<..Jonas & Gary, are you listening? <g>… wish..>> got 'em.
#190196From: Anne BrownSep 10, 1995 9:56 PM
Rabbit – Since you say that Rabbit is your real first name, just add the real second name and I'll hop away. Thanks – and sorry but I just couldn't resist that ! <G> Anne
#189117From: Brandon BartlettSep 5, 1995 1:32 AM
Greetings, Until someone comes up with an architectural modeling IPAS for 3DS, the most common solution is to use either AutoCAD or Microstation to do the CAD side of what you are wanting. The advantage of using AutoCAD becomes clear when you consider the number of third part add-on packages specifically designed to do all of the things on your list, automatically, and in 3D. With products such as Softdesk's "Softdesk 7", Ketiv Technologies "ARCH-T", "Facade", and many others, quickly creating modifiable and accurate 3d architectural models is a breeze. >>Autocad itself is not an option because I loathe the clumsy way it operates, especially its 3D viewing options.<< The Autodesk forums aren't usually the best place to flame their products, unless you want to start a cyber-fight<bg>. Without knowing exactly what you are referring to as far as what in particular you "loathe", you should note that, if one knows what they are doing, some of AutoCAD's 3D viewing options can be made to act much like 3DS's, and with the add-on's I mentioned above, your actual time in AutoCAD is minimized. Hope this helps. Best Regards, Brandon DesignTec
#189870From: Bruce OrdwaySep 8, 1995 8:11 PM
<I wish to find a 3D Cad program to so as to be able to create 3D models in a more accurate fashion than 3D Studio will allow> I use Cadkey. I am a big fan of 3D Studio, but I have nothing good to say about AutoCad. BTW, I work as a machine designer and spend most of my time using CAD packages.
#189942From: Tim Krego, [pro.image]Sep 9, 1995 3:11 AM
>I use Cadkey. I am a big fan of 3D Studio, but I have nothing good to say about AutoCad. BTW, I work as a machine designer and spend most of my time using CAD packages.< Do you have any problems converting Cadkey .prt files to 3DS? I use DXF out in Cadkey, but my part files give me no geometry only circles. Do you need to mesh Cadkey files before DXF?
#189957From: Bruce OrdwaySep 9, 1995 8:53 AM
< Do you need to mesh Cadkey files before DXF?> Use Picture it to create a polygon out. This will create a CADL file that you can then DXF.