Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Thanks, I only have the intro module out right now. A combination of rl and the fact that I thought I could do a module at a time but am finding I have to work a bit on all of them a little at a time to sort out how to present the material in a manner that will hopefully be easier to follow in the end and still serve as a good reference resource. The combination of these has slowed down coming out with the next module...
Has anyone played with Freestyle yet?
Another bit while I'm working on the tutorials. Here's a list of tutorials for Blender's VSE (Video Sequence Editor) for anyone interested in editing video in Blender.
[Edit] If anyone has particularly good tutorials, or ones that cover areas not easily found, feel free to post links.
[2nd Edit] Checking this link I noticed that the list menubar doesn't come up on the right side of the video window on YouTube's site, I'm not sure why. There is a bar at the top of the list that shows 1/17... and one can click through the various videos that way, however, it might just be easier to go to the author's page and pull up his video playlist.
Anyone interested in 3D Text Effects?
Multiple UV maps for a single object.
For anyone wanting to show a quick how-to, Blender has a built in Screencast Recorder. Along with this, there is an add-on for Screencast Keys (under the user preferences/add-on ofc) that puts a button to turn on Screencast Keys on the Numeric Panel of the 3D View.
Not directly related, but something cool from Siggraph 2013, NewTek's Chronosculpt which "can work with any standard 3D software" supposedly. Will be interested to see how well it works for people. NevronMotion, mentioned on the same page also looks pretty interesting. Videos for both at the page.
You're going off topic Gedd (that's how I feel). I didn't read your tutorial (just quickly had an eye on it) but I think it is a good start for beginners. Eventually add more screenshots because there is already a lot written there.
I suppose your goal is to bring people to use blender to make things for DS and the biggest difficulty is to get over the unusual UI
I must say It took me one year before I felt comfortable with blender. I had used 3D studio (not even max) 10 years before and struggled to get new habits but in the end I find blender's system very good
About free style I tested it a bit. From what I've seen, the edge detection system is quite good. I didn't test the shading system but I've seen good things. But I don"t see big interest for DS user since the is already a toon shading system which is not bad
Thanks for the reply. Yes I am wandering, mostly because pulling together the modules is taking longer then I expected (other life demands mostly atm.) I figured I'd keep my Blender posts in one area though.
From what I've seen of Freestyle, it appears to be much more developed and feature rich then anything available in DS, but I haven't put them through any side-by-side testing yet. Also, cycles and the node editor for shaders/post offers a lot, so the idea is really a two way thing with Blender for me, using DAZ content in Blender and producing content/morphs, etc for the DS environment. I like the idea of playing with the Renderman based 3DLight, Lux some (time....) and Cycles.
[Edit] forgot to mention, yes... the initial module re: the interface is definitely aimed at that. The other modules, the intent is that and to fill in some for people who have been using Blender for a while but might be missing some efficiencies in their workflow and to get them started in areas they might not have tackled yet. (That's the 'goal' anyways)
:)
The other thing is, it's Siggraph 2013.. it's hard not to get distracted ;)
Andrew Price's take on the Blender Interface. Hint, he proposes totally redoing the interface to make it easier to use. If you have wanted to use Blender but see the interface as an impediment, you might want to check this out and voice your opinion and/or support. He also has a podcast here that goes into some of his other thoughts on the topic.
This has actually been part of what has caused the long delay in my own project here as I've had to rethink some of how to present the material I thought was helpful. My take was a bit different in that I've decided for the moment to try to coalesce common 3D concepts and techniques across packages, independent of the interface with lead-in to Blender's take on how to accomplish the task (good and bad.) I am interested in seeing if this gets traction as it does make sense to hold off on specific how-to's if the interface might actually get an overhaul.
For my take, I think Andrew (Price) has some excellent points and his design is well thought out. I also think it would make a good default start interface for many people. I don't think it should come at the cost of flexibility that the current interface has. Many people don't necessarily realize just how flexible the interface is right now as it is so hard to wrap one's brain around to get to that point in it's current state.
Anyways, I don't want to say too much before people have had a chance to see the video, read other comments and think about it as I think there are many valid points out there to consider.
Glad to see you didn't give up on this thread. Althought there are valid points when talking about accessibility for beginners, I don't really know how it would impact when you are more advanced. Just have to wait and see. I'm not a big fan of big icons and like having text. But there are some ideas that could bring something.
However you'll have to wait for some time before a new UI redesign. And the biggest problem I see is that you'll have plenty of broken plugins with that
Well my take is explained in some of my comments on Andrew's website. To paraphrase, the two things I hope for are no loss of flexibility in being able to customize the interface for one's particular workflow/level and an easier mechanism for creating custom interface 'skins.' The inconsistency issues do seem to be an issue when trying to learn/teach.
From a teaching background one thing I've learned is that what on the surface seems unintuitive can often be put in a context where it becomes intuitive (it made sense to someone at some point) so that actually is not as much of an issue for me. A good explanation of why something is the way it is can go a long way. However, that doesn't make it efficient for a given person's workflow. The fact that workflows vary quite a bit from person to person, environment to environment, etc... is more central to my way of thinking, thus the need for a flexible interface. This of course can cause issues also in teaching, but most tutorials early on would center on a good starting default interface, and by the time custom configurations made sense, the people using them would hopefully be adept enough with the tools that it wouldn't be an issue but rather an aid towards increasing workflow efficiency in many cases.
A side note, my comments on the other site are under 'Joseph Jude' which is how I sign my artwork.
Andrew Price's presentation at Blender Conference 2013 Improving Blender's Interface, Reflections where he covers what has evolved out of the original proposal he presented based on developer input and user feedback.
Blender 2.69 is out with FBX import and improved export, Cycles improvements including a new hair shader, SSS improvements: new algorithm, bump, and texture blur; and some interesting modeling features... Overall, it looks like a very nice set of improvements :)
Andrew Price recaps Blender Conference 2013 and explains his current take on the proposal he made for the UI. For anyone who hasn't been keeping up, he backed off on his original proposal and explains why.
One of the things about Blender is that it isn't just a software tool but a community, much like Daz Studio. A good example of that is the movie projects. Here with Caminandes for instance, as with Sintel and the other Foundation movie projects, the foundation uses the movie projects to develop and test features that go into Blender in a real world manner, they share what they learn with the community, provide mechanisms for the community to support directly the development both of the software and the specific project through sales, and finally, they share much of the materials used in creating the movie. For instance with Sintel, they share a version of the main character in the movie (for learning) Sintel Lite along with some tutorials and other material. If one takes the time to poke around, there are many interesting things that pop up, kind of like Christmas in a way ;)
* and of course, there's Blendswap.
A quick list of some basic Blender links:
Blender 2.66a Shortcuts Reference, with drop-down to set context.
Blender Artists
Blendswap
Blender Nation, news & tutorials
Blender Cookie
Blender User Manual
Blender Developer Blog
Raypump, cloud based rendering with free rendering for 1280x1020 500sp images. Point based costing for larger projects and animations
p3d.in, 3D object visualization in a web browser, free & upgrade paid.
Probably the biggest issue I have with the interface, and an area that Andrew mentioned and I believe will follow up on, is inconsistencies in the interface. A good example of this is here under Number Buttons in the user manual wiki where the concept of dragging a value to change it is discussed. In the example, it says "2. To change the value in a wider range, hold down LMB and drag the mouse to the left or right." which works with 'that specific control.' However in some related controls, one has to click on the label for the control, not in the numeric input, to have drag/change work. The point is, this is the biggest issue in my opinion in the current UI as one cannot take skills learned and apply them universally if the controls/interface work differently in different areas as they do now at times.
Having said that, there are efficiencies in Blender's interface that Maya and 3DS do not have, and many reasons Blender is worth the occasional frustrations like this. I mention it as it bites pretty much everyone at some point, but while frustrating, I would encourage anyone reading this to try to weather the frustrations as these are being fixed (slowly at the moment) and the rewards are worth it imo.
Related to that, on the same User Manual Wiki page as the previous example, they show radio buttons that do not follow the normal convention for displaying radio buttons. Some people will like this type of presentation and some won't. The point is, there are areas where Blender takes some liberties (from the norm) in how they display some things, which once one gets used to becomes a non-issue. If one comes to understand some of the real advantages of Blender, even if one would prefer standard presentations, most will learn to adapt and forget about it in short order.
* Some Mesh features/tools in Blender that are very handy and in some cases unique or at least easier to access then in many other software packages.
Lynda.com has an excellent tutorial on Character Modeling in Blender where the instructor shows among other things, using the grease pencil to lay down an 'edge net.' This tutorial is good enough I would recommend anyone interested in this topic to get a month's subscription for this alone, then poke around after to see what else one might want to look at while the month is active. The feature itself (grease pencil/edge net) is very powerful looking (Full disclosure: I haven't played with it, just went through the explanation, so there could be quirks.)
One of the other areas this tutorial (and some others on the same topic I've gone through recently) made finally click for me is the difference between dynotopo sculpting and multires sculpting. Dynotopo sculpting is where the software lays down detail in the form of extra polygons, as needed. The net result is a very fluid sculpting environment once one learns the workflow and quirks, but one that ends up with a heavy, triangulated mesh that won't work for animating or areas like game engines. This tool is meant for initial free-form sculpting. If one plans on doing anything more then a quick render of the model, one needs to retopo the mesh, then go back in with multires* sculpting to add back the detail to the retopo'd mesh.
*multires is Blender's SubD modifier/tool.
I realize this is a somewhat limited explanation. if anyone is confused by this post, just ask and I'll try to clarify.
Hi Gedd. I think you should go on with your tutorial as I don't think any UI change will come soon. I will recommend watching the folowing video for people having hard time with the camera placement in Blender http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbMe3z7YWEs&hd=1
Sidenote, Blender 2.69 is out!
About DynTopo, it's a shortcut for Dynamic Topology and is really different from Multires.
Dyntopo is what you have in Zbrush or Sculptris : when sculpting, it adds some polys if it is needed so that you don't have to subdivide your model overall
Multires keeps a low poly Mesh and a High Res Mesh at the same time. Allowing High Res Sculpting for baking Normal Map that you can then use in 3D Games or renders. That gives the ability to keep a low poly cound and have better details on the geometry
I'll correct something in what you said : Multires can be used to Subdivide the mesh but Blender also has a Subdivision Surface modifier.
Thanks for expanding on the dyno/multi... and yes, I was trying to get across that they were fundamentally different and used differently, but to really understand them, one has to go through some tutorials on sculpting where they show them used imo.
As to the SubD modifier, I forgot about it as everyone I see lately is using Multires. The reason I believe is that for most things, multires is more flexible and efficient. However, there are some small areas that SubD does better for some people. The big one I see mentioned is that one can't use the mirror modifier with Multires, however Multires has 'symmetry' which for the most part negates that. I don't have the link where someone went through specific examples of when they used SubD unfortunately. If anyone has examples they can post them.
As to the tutorials... well the main thing that is holding them back atm (after sorting out the potential UI changes) is that I've embarked on a quest of going through the main 3D packages so I can identify better what are generic concepts (and how best to present them in a way that applies across tools) vs what are Blender specific. This is a bit ambitious but if I can finish my survey should vastly help the quality of the tutorials. Hopefully in the meantime we (anyone here) can post tips, links, etc.. that are particularly useful.
Thanks for participating Takeo... I believe that is as helpful as the tutorials will hopefully eventually be. :)
* A quick note on my survey of various 3D packages, it has really made me appreciate how Blender really stands out in some ways, more efficient then the commercial packages at some things.
Anyone who has a real interest in the interface of Blender should take the time to look at this: The Evolution of the Blender UI.
A couple caveat's to this. One, it is discussing the evolution from pre 2.5 interface to the 2.5 interface and what is being discussed now is either a refinement of that, or evolving that... so this is somewhat of a history lesson. The point is, there was a lot of thought that went into the 2.5 interface, and while there might be areas that the concepts here could use refining, it helps to understand why the decisions where made that created the current interface so we don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Also, some areas here are discussed that are core issues that still haven't been resolved, so in some cases the real solution is to finish implementing things that were already identified but have not been resolved.
The other caveat is... I forgot ... will update when I remember. ;p
Oh yes.. I remember. The document could use translation to more common terms rather than the technical terms it is currently written in so that it is more accessible, but that would require extending it since many of the technical terms being replaced would have to have whole concepts elaborated on in place of a few technical words. It would however make the document more accessible to a wider audience.
The What changed with Blender 2.5 page summarizes the results of the previous document and does so in simpler language with videos. So, if one wants a simple overview they can skip to this page. However, taking the time to read the previous document will give some insights into the thinking behind the design.
* One word that keeps popping up in the UI articles that non programmers won't necessarily be familiar with is modal and non modal. Modal refers to windows or dialog boxes which pop up and take control where one has to click on an 'ok' button or equivalent before going back to the original window. Conversely, non modal refers to panels where one can have something selected in a main screen and adjust parameters of the item selected in a panel, then go back to the main window area, then panel... all fluidly without having to click any 'ok' buttons. A modal dialog box needs to be ok'd then go away in other words before working on anything again in the main screen, whereas a non modal dialog box/panel can stay open constantly. Blender's perspective is to avoid any modal situations where one has dialog boxes popping up expecting changes and an 'ok' as it is the philosophy that this breaks fluid interaction in the interface. I hope this makes sense.
One of the other aspects of modal vs non modal is that modal dialog boxes 'go away.' That is to say, the settings and parameters contained in a modal dialog box 'disappear' once the 'ok/cancel' button is clicked. Conversely, a non modal panel shows settings and parameters at all times if it is open on the side (it can be dismissed, but can also remain open but inactive at any given time.) This means that the modal environment seems less cluttered, but parameters and settings 'disappear' whereas the non modal environment those settings and parameters are more visible, but the interface can seem more cluttered. Thus, the tradeoff an environment like Blender makes, having much of the information always readily available but more confusing and cluttered for new users. This of course can be overcome by closing or collapsing panels, but non modal environments will always seem somewhat more busy then modal ones usually.
One area that can be confusing about non modal environments is demonstrated by the User Preferences dialog box in Blender. If one puts Blender in windowed mode vs full screen mode then opens the User Preferences dialog box, we find that clicking on the main Blender window brings it to the foreground and drops the User Preferences dialog box to the background, and this can be confusing. Unscrupulous web designers will exploit this making non modal pop unders that are running in the background but underneath the web browser so that the user doesn't even realize there is a separate add window in the background.
The Blender History page of the user manual is a quick one page read that gives a good understanding of the evolution of Blender and it's capabilities. Again, there are a lot of technical terms, but for anyone who isn't familiar with any of the technical terms, there are links right in the document in many cases that go to a page that explains them, and for those that don't have a link, doing a quick google search on the terms one isn't familiar with will be a valuable education in fundamentals of 3D graphics, and well worth the time.
One of the areas of Blender that is confusing for many is that it is node based vs layer based. What does that mean? well Filter Forge is a good example of a node based system. Whereas Gimp and Photoshop are examples of layer based systems. That is, when making changes to something, one uses 'nodes' which are connected and and act on some starting (image, etc...) to achieve a desired output vs using layers of effects to achieve the same result. Layered systems have been around longer and are therefore more understood but node based systems are more flexible and powerful. DAZ Studio's Shader GUI is also node based, but a rather poor example since among other reasons the nodes are not intuitive. If one were to look at DS's shader node system and Blender's, they will find Blender's both vastly easier to understand and equally more powerful then DAZ Studio's. Learning to understand and manipulate Blender's various node based systems is important in opening up much of the more advanced capabilities of Blender. Blender is not alone here either, most 3D software tools are moving to node based systems if they don't already use them extensively.
Feeling talkative? lol
Don't know if it will help in your quest but here is a comparison of differrent 3D packages http://animation-software.findthebest.com/compare/1-3-18-19-26-34/Maya-vs-3ds-Max-vs-Autodesk-Softimage-vs-Blender-vs-Cinema-4D-Studio-vs-Houdini-FX
[Edit] There is also a point that doesn't appear in the comparison, is that you don't see how much Blender is an all in one tool. The sculpting capabilities are very good. If you want to see what you can do with the sculpt mode then have a look here http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?264568-Dyntopo-tests/page51
Another area of Blender that is confusing is that there are areas that are only exposed through the 'search' feature. If we watch this UI video (approx. 1.56 timeline of video,) it demonstrates tearing off a panel for multi monitor setups. However, the only way I know of to tear off the panel is to use the 'search' feature for Duplicate Area into New Window. This is a bit crazy and typically is an example of a not fully implemented feature, however in this case I'm not sure why it is not accessible in a simple right click on the header bar or as an option under the 'window' menu. Btw, to make this feature work properly, one has to select the header of the window one wishes to 'tear off' prior to using the search bar to find and click on the Duplicate Area....
That's a good link, thanks. It does show how extensive of a feature set Blender supports compared to other software packages.
One thing about feature comparisons though is it doesn't say anything about how fully or well any given feature is. Any given feature may be extensively supported, barely supported, poorly supported, or the industry standard for that feature. All of the packages shown will have some of the features there with bare support, but one thing that Blender is different about compared to commercial packages is that it will have features that are in the software that are buggy whereas the commercial packages tend to hold off in releasing features until after the bugs are all worked out for the most part. That isn't a complaint, it's just something to be aware of when working with Blender. It's good to know that if something doesn't seem to be working right it's good to do some searches on the internet to see if there are bugs still in that feature. Most people who work with Blender would rather have some features that are a bit buggy available so they can play with them at least, even if they can't be sure they will work properly 100% of the time rather then not (have them available.)
Another thing I like about feature charts like in the link is that it is a good learning tool. Any feature that one isn't familiar with is a good candidate for a Google search. :)
The second (Sculpt) link is also very nice in that it has a couple of good examples of just how nice the results can be if someone is familiar with the tools. And, those are not unusual results. The trick is, it takes understanding the toolset and how to use them. In the first example for instance, it was done as was discussed earlier in this thread with Dynotopo, Retopo, Multires. There are tricks to using Dynotopo in Blender also as one has to control the number of polygons. It will not support working with anywhere near what zBrush does (no other sculpting tool compares to zBrush for number of polys.) This means one has to understand the tool and work smart. The link I posted to the Lynda.com tutorial* on sculpting covers the working methods (in Blender) well, and includes things like understanding how zoom level effects polygon generation, short edge collapse to keep poly count under control, etc...
Any raw dynotopo sculpt, including one from zBrush needs to be retopoed to be useful in anything other then a static render.
* Just a reminder, Lynda.com has a free week trial so one can go through the Blender tutorials for free.
I agree on the level of implementation of features. Just came across some interesting posts here : http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?137892-Andrew-Price-on-Blender-s-UI/page8. See surrealist's post about Blender and Maya
I've already seen that many features are not fully implemented or polished but that takes time and money. But I think that beginners won't really see the difference