Subdivision Primitives

Recommended Posts

I am so happy with this addition to the 3d solids modeling toolset. I can see spending many hours learning all the nuances of the "edit subdivision" tool, but it will be worth it. I love the flowing freeform organic shapes that are created.

Overall I believe 2016 is going to be a great surprise to a lot of people. I for one am excited.

Is there a way to see the X,Y, Z coordinates of various edited points in space, as in a nurbs curve?

Is there a way to see the X,Y, Z coordinates of various edited points in space, as in a nurbs curve?

If you really want it to work like NURBS, you can convert it directly as explained here:

Or you can snap right to the surface rather than the cage, or place a 3d loci or even a Stake object on the point if you want to get the location and have it remain. What is is you're trying to do?

I was hoping to be able to randomly, intuitively move points around and then be able to go back and refine by moving further points to exact coordinates that could be determined by looking in the Obj info panel, all without having to convert to NURBS.

I guess thats not possible at this point? I'll check out the videos.

Subdivisions are more about controlling the subdivision cage and having the mesh underneath fill in the details and gaps between cage geometry. You CAN add so much cage geometry via splits and faces and creases that you have exact control over everything from the cage itself if you really want.

But no, if you wanted direct manual control over every single point and to manage them all manually then you would most likely want to use NURBS or Mesh objects instead.

ok thanks Jim.

I see SubD's as a Free Hand Tool.

I don't think that any of the people at Pixar ever cared about a XYZ coordinate

of a control point. The opposite, those still think Y axis is up and Z points points

to the bottom of a page.

And was a little surprised to find it on the VW Feature List* as I don't think

it is suited for a precision CAD package.

Normally Mesh Objects don't work well in CAD packages.

(But they could in VW, after slight changes/improvements)

SubD's are only one of the Tools to create complex formed Mesh Objects.

Some prefer working with Sculpting Tools on highly tessellated Meshes.

(And retopo with a clean quad Mesh afterwards)

When working with SubD's in a 3D Package, you will all the time switch

between the Base Geometry (the cage) and the Final Surface.

If needed Cage Modifications produce Mesh Problems it may be needed

to delete parts of the Faces and create new Faces in a different way.

Plus you will need to set different Subdivison Levels for the desired result

and have the option to set different SubD Levels for screen and rendering.

Also you will set Edge Weights

VW SubD's don't go that far at this point.

There should not be any Form with SubD that you could not do with NURBS

in VW. If you want the precision at the end or just for you workflow as you may

think more CAD like like I do, as Jim said - better use NURBS surfaces.

It is just that SubD in VW may be easier to use and faster than the unintuitive

NURBS Modeling Tools.

I f you get used to VW SubD's as a Sketch Tool and get comfortable with it,

you can use it to prepare a raw geometry sketch of your design until you like

the Form, and redraw it by NURBS Tools by snapping to the SubD and

refine NURBS Control Points numerical later.

* No problem with that

I see SubD's as a Free Hand Tool.

I don't think that any of the people at Pixar ever cared about a XYZ coordinate of a control point. The opposite, those still think Y axis is up and Z points points to the bottom of a page.

And was a little surprised to find it on the VW Feature List* as I don't think it is suited for a precision CAD package.

Normally Mesh Objects don't work well in CAD packages.

(But they could in VW, after slight changes/improvements)

My first experiences with 3D were in AutoCAD. Somehow the 3D modeling in dedicated 3D packages as 3DS, Cinema4D etc. feel counterintuitive to me.

That being said, SubD's are relatively easy to use and if you subdivide often enough it can get close enough on the finer details.

I don't know if it is possible but if there could be a tool/command to change the surface of a SubD surface to a Nurbs surface for better precision at the end that might make SubD's more useful. That is, assuming that Nurbs surfaces require less internal information to be stored than SubD's and will result in smaller/less complex files. If my assumption is wrong then please correct me.

Yes, they can be converted to NURBS after the fact. We were careful to include MANY ways to convert Subdivs to other geometry types to make integrating it into existing models easier as we transition in the new tool:

In the future, I fully expect to see the ability to convert other objects TO a subdivision object as you can in other software packages, there are many instances where its faster to make a bunch of arranged extrudes first, then go into subdivision afterwards to get your end shape.

My first experiences with 3D were in AutoCAD. Somehow the 3D modeling in dedicated 3D packages as 3DS, Cinema4D etc. feel counterintuitive to me.

Yes and No.

Normally the tools in 3D packages are highly ergonomic for their purpose.

But I too prefer to grab some points and set them to Z = 0.00 numerically

than to graphically scale them in Z and move them free hand to "something"

like Z = 0 ...

It is just the way how you think and the workflow you prefer.

That being said, SubD's are relatively easy to use and if you subdivide often enough it can get close enough on the finer details.

I would say just use it (in a playful way),

forget about numerical input for a while and use it free hand.

(There should be an option to block snapping as long as you are in SubD Mode)

That is, assuming that Nurbs surfaces require less internal information to be stored than SubD's and will result in smaller/less complex files. If my assumption is wrong then please correct me.

That is true.

At a certain point it is easier to store some control points than storing each vertex

point of a complex mesh.

My preferred way is the CAD way, as I need to work with correct dimensions and positions.

SubD modeling, at least in the programs I have tried, give a somewhat better idea of how local geometry changes if you subdivide often enough whereas Nurbs surfaces seem to be a bit of trial and error for getting the result you're after.

So yes, for freeform modeling as a somewhat simpler method to get an approximate starting point it seems to be a nice addition and that is what I intend to use it for, for the time being.

SubD modeling is definitely more intuitive, at least i think so, but at some point if what is being modeled has to be drawn for construction purposes, then it has to go to NURBs.

How nice it would be to be able to go back and forth....

Edited by minotto

And NURBS are just Surfaces (like Rhino)

And SubD's are Solids, kind of, ...

At least they look like and don't fall apart

NURBS Surface control points are often disappointing because they do not reside on the surface. They are more like the SubD cage. Interpolated surface vertices are surface points and are great when available. But conversion to Interpolated surface fails from all but the simplest NURBS surface (in my experience, anyway).

I wish the Interpolated Surface functionality could be applied to all NURBS surfaces in VWX.

-B

I think me and NURBS don't get friends.

I'm a Solid guy ...

Rhino is attractive and does a good job with glueing NURBS Surfaces together,

but I'm disappointed each time a surface falls off and I can see that nothing is

in there

It is like modeling with paper while I prefer to cut, glue and paint styrodur foam.

Hello Guys,

I was also really happy to see the subdivision tool in the new edition. It seems to me that this tool is quite the opposite of the Surfer and Tecplot scientific visualization software, I regulary use. However in those you need to have your X, Y, Z, T(=time) points first to get beatiful interpolated 3D or 3d+time images.

If it would be possible to export the actual mesh point coordinates as well as the corner outer point coordinates to X,Y,Z points worksheet, or ASCI while using this tool it would be great.

I agree the previous colleagues, and realy do miss the real numerical part form this tool. This is a design software, so you need to have acces to all coordinate points directly and easily while using subdivison. I understand, that you can set up a prime distance, than divide it according to its precetages, but it is far not enough.

I'd like to represent real natural or artifical stuff with the subdivision surfaces, be able to define all final points of the surface in space without any difficulties.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×