#Patch Modeler Answers
16 messages in this thread
About two weeks ago, Autodesk made a public announcement concerning the
demise of the Bezier Patch Modeler Plug-In for 3D Studio Release 4. Since
then, there has been a great deal of speculation regarding this decision as
well many as questions about the fate of the modeler. I think a little
clarification is in order…
I'm the president, head developer, lead animator, chief bottle washer,
and cook for Details Inc. and I created the Bezier Patch Modeler, under
contract to Autodesk. Contrary to some messages which appeared here in the
forum, the modeler was NOT pulled due to excessive instability, lack of
features or limited functionality. Nor was it full of "roaches".
From the beginning of the patch modeler project with Autodesk, one of
the primary criteria was that the user interface of the modeler reflect the
look, feel, and functionality of 3D Studio's 3D Editor module in every way
possible. For the most part, we were able to achieve this goal. (As those
of you who saw the Phil Miller's demonstrations at SIGGRAPH know.)
Unfortunately, it was technically impossible to duplicate EVERY nuance
of the 3D Editor within the confines of the IPAS environment. This is not
to say that the IPAS SDK is limited in any way. Of course, those features
whose functionality or interface could not be made to match the 3D Editor's
could have been built differently. However, Autodesk felt that this could
cause user confusion or frustration.
Rather than taking the risk of compromising the overall quality
standards of 3D Studio with a product that behaved differently from the
internal modules, Autodesk made the difficult decision to cut the product
from Release 4.
Throughout the development and testing process with Autodesk and beta
sites, there has been a great deal of enthusiasm for the capabilities and
potential of the Bezier Patch Modeler. Due to this, I felt that the
modeler deserved a "second chance". To that end, I have spent the last
little while negotiating with Autodesk to get the rights to the Bezier
Patch Modeler.
I'm now pleased to announce that we have come to an agreement and I have
acquired the rights to the Bezier Patch Modeler. My immediate goal is to
put in additional features and functionality which I feel will add even
more power and flexibility to the modeler.
Once completed, the Bezier Patch Modeler will be released. I'm aware
that many people believe that the modeler should be offered free of charge
by Autodesk, or that it should be posted as a public domain IPAS here on
Compuserve. Unfortunately, that will not happen. The reality is that
Autodesk pulled it and I had no control over that. I have to recover the
cost of acquiring the rights from Autodesk and I've spent too much money,
effort and time away from my wife and kids to simply offer it for free.
I believe Bezier Patch Modeler is a powerful addition to the 3D Studio
user's list of tools. It gives users a new way to create models in a more
intuitive and productive way inside 3D Studio, adding the smoothness of
spline-based surfaces and wrapped materials to 3D Studio's polygon-based
modeling system. It may be a bit longer arriving than any of us expected,
but I think it will be well worth the wait.
Sincerely,
Danny Mercurio
Details, Inc.
That's good news, Danny. This sounds like a good middle ground solution to the
disappointment the exclusion of your module has cause 3DS'ers. While I've been
saying a lot about the limited usefulness of patch modeling on the forum, I
don't wish to underestimate its power – it will be an excellent addition to
3DS's modeling tools, to be sure. I just think many people had the idea that
this was a complete spline modeler, when it is in fact a specific tool. I'm
sure with the features you've added and are still adding, it will be a superior
patch modeler, though.
John Tissavary | LUNA cie, inc
Danny,
If it works, I am going to be a customer. What you are doing is picking
up the ball and running with it. That is good for all of us. I don't see reason
for sour grapes, so send me the specs., proposed delivery date, and the price.
Then we can talk business. My fax is (310) 306-0579.
Regards, Sanford
Sanford Kennedy Design
Thanks for the confirmation. I was betting on that reason, too: that there was
some limit about what you could accomplish in terms of an IPAS, and that
Autodesk couldn't bear to turn the product through another SQA cycle if they'd
made the IPAS changes to accomodate your plug-in… That's one tough aspect of
plug-in technology.
>I just think many people had the idea that this was a complete spline modeler,
>when it is in fact a specific tool.
Mr. Tissavary made this comment (and he knows FAR more than I do about these
sorts of things) so I guess I'd like some feedback from you (when you get the
time) on just what the differences are. Specifically, I'm looking for an
easier way to model than the lofter/shaper, and preliminary comments concerning
your product indicated that that was the case.
And, yes, I'll be a customer as well, assuming your pricing is in line with
other IPAS stuff. Keep us posted on your progress.
About how much will it cost, around when do you think it will be out, and will
Release 4 be required to run it?
> About how much will it cost, around when do you think it will be out, and
will Release 4 be required to run it?
Sorry Jason, but it's too early to determine the cost of the modeler yet. As
far as the version of 3DS required to run it; in it's current state, the
modeler would require 3DS R4. However, we are looking at the possibility of
updating it to run in both an R4 and R3 environment. No promises… <g>
Danny…
I don't know exactly what featues Danny will be implementing in his patch
modeler, but fundamentally it works like this:
You can choose building blocks of either planes or a cylinders. These spline
meshes have something like 16 control points, or CV's that have influence over
the shape and deformation of the patch.
Among the many potential uses for patches:
1) seemlessly link objects. In other packages it is possible to select curves
on objects, and make patches between these. This is not a built in function of
3DS, so I cannot say if this will be possible with Danny's modeler, but he's a
bright guy…
This is one of the more ideal uses for patch modeling, because you don't
have to get into the complex buisness of moving individual or clusters of CV's
around to make the shape – the modeler will blend the difference between
surface (curve) A and surface (curve) B. One could, concieveably, loft basic
shapes that defined cross sections of the final model, then patch these cross
sections. This would be a work around to curve patching, using lofted objects
instead of spline curves. This is like what SKIN.AXP does, but you'd have the
advantage of interactively adjusting the spline patches. The disadvantage is
inherent in the difference between patching and skinning: patching does not
create an overall blended surface between curves, rather it links them without
reference to the previous surface. Skinning will put a smoother surface across
the curves, because you skin by selecting a group of curves, not just two like
in patching. Again, Danny's implementations may differ from my experience with
patch modeling.
2) Building from scratch. This is accomplished by creating as many patches
(plane or cylindrical) as needed to get the detail resolution desired, either
at first, or one at a time during the modeling process. CV's would be moved
around to deform the original shaps and "sculpt" the desired model. In many
cases this could be a powerful modeling tool, but it is excrutiatingly similar
to moving vertices in the 3D Editor – it gets just as cluttered and confusing.
The biggest difference (advantage, IMHO) to moving spline CV's over polygonal
CV's is that the object being deformed is smoother, and the surface looks like
what you'll render (unless you model with low rez meshes or render with lower
than ideal subdivision settings).
Hope this gives you a better idea of what might be useful…
John Tissavary | LUNA cie, inc
Hi Danny,
Thanks for re-animating the bezier patch modeler project, I'm really glad to
hear that it's alive and well. I don't think I'll ever really understand how
Autodesk operates but it's nice to finally hear the real scoop. The demos I saw
of your modeler were great and I'll be eager to buy it when it's ready. The
fact that you've extended yourself to keep the project alive demonstrates an
impressive level of commitment.
Best regards,
-Heinz.
Fantastic Danny! I look forward to seeing it…
Mark
Bravo Danny! I like the spirit of all involved in this solution.
I'll look forward to its appearance and will make my decision about a purchase
then. I hope everybody ends up being pleased.
Carlton
Thanks, Danny, for this valuable and insightfull information.
Could you please upload this as an announcement to the libs? My node seems to
have lost the message part way through the fourth paragraph and I would like to
read the rest of your message.
Besides, your post is somewhat of a historical event and is worthy of keeping
in the libs for future reference.
— James — MAP —
Good job, Danny. Glad to hear the modeler will be available for us.
That is great news. I was a bit confused because the feedback I heard was very
favorable from the few who had a chance to use it briefly. I am urgently
interested in knowing when it will possibly be available as well. When you
have time I would appreciate your faxing me some info also. I appreciate the
explanation as to what has occurred. While the other new features of R4 are
impressive I think Autodesk made a mistake by pulling the modeler. Look
forward to hearing more! My fax number is 404-739-7355 @ Data Imaging
Associates.
Tom
See my email to you Thomas.
Thanks,
Danny…
Great to here Danny. Can't wait to see it finished. I'm glad you left such a
clear explanation of what went on with Adesk. I'm sure you'll do a great job
with it now. Any expected date or price yet?
Dave Mennenoh