4 ms·

This is one area where I think VR will produce a solid win. IMO the steepest parts of the modelling learning curve are the result of the complexity required to

by badsock 10y ago

This is one area where I think VR will produce a solid win. IMO the steepest parts of the modelling learning curve are the result of the complexity required to manipulate a 3D world using 2D interfaces. With VR, both the input and output interfaces have the same dimensionality as what you're building - I think that'll have a big impact on how easy it is to get into, and consequently how much content is created.

ffwacom 10y ago
The interface to cad programs is trivial to learn, mechanical design isn't. It's like saying the hardest part about programming is using the IDE.
- grogenaut 10y ago
  To ellaborate, when you're using cad you have to give thought to how the part will be produced as well. There are a lot of shapes that 3d can't build, there are minimum angles, all sorts of restrictions. And there's the nitty gritty of actually fitting real shapes together in the real world, having the right flange sizes for holding screws, nuts, etc. And then you get into wear, balance, etc.
- badsock 10y ago
  You're right. When I wrote the above, what I had in mind was sculpture (what I've mostly see consumer 3D printers making these days - representational things like D&D set pieces, or cosplay props). The interface of programs like Maya, for making very complex 3D shapes, I wouldn't call trivial. But in hindsight the context of the discussion is more about industrial design of functional consumer goods, which I completely agree is a highly skilled trade, and while learning the CAD program is still a lot of work, that's one of the least of the requirements.
semi-extrinsic 10y ago
I don't think so. I do a bit of AutoCAD at work, mainly for pressurized vessels (i.e. pretty simple stuff, just has to follow the regulations). 95% of the time, you're working with a 2D sketch in either the x, y or z plane and extruding from that. The other 4.9% of the time, you make some other plane based on those extrusions and do 2D sketches in that plane. 0.1% is reserved for 3D splines.
rebootthesystem 10y ago
You are confusing UI with mechanical design. It's like confusing learning Python with producing solid software products. OK, let me illustrate the point with a question: You have two parts that attach to each other. The parts are joined using a set of six 5 mm bolts with washers and locking nuts. The hole pattern is circular and has a radius of 3 inches. What are the minimum diameter and dimensional tolerances you should specify in order to guarantee mating across multiple parts and across thermal variations? OK, same two pars. Now they mate using no screws. They use a one-time-only locking tab and catch system along the inner periphery. What's the geometry and what are the tolerances? Interestingly enough, none of the above talks about how to use the UI of some 3D program to solve the problems.

by badsock 10y ago

ffwacom 10y ago

The interface to cad programs is trivial to learn, mechanical design isn't. It's like saying the hardest part about programming is using the IDE.

grogenaut 10y ago
To ellaborate, when you're using cad you have to give thought to how the part will be produced as well. There are a lot of shapes that 3d can't build, there are minimum angles, all sorts of restrictions. And there's the nitty gritty of actually fitting real shapes together in the real world, having the right flange sizes for holding screws, nuts, etc. And then you get into wear, balance, etc.
badsock 10y ago
You're right. When I wrote the above, what I had in mind was sculpture (what I've mostly see consumer 3D printers making these days - representational things like D&D set pieces, or cosplay props). The interface of programs like Maya, for making very complex 3D shapes, I wouldn't call trivial. But in hindsight the context of the discussion is more about industrial design of functional consumer goods, which I completely agree is a highly skilled trade, and while learning the CAD program is still a lot of work, that's one of the least of the requirements.

semi-extrinsic 10y ago

I don't think so. I do a bit of AutoCAD at work, mainly for pressurized vessels (i.e. pretty simple stuff, just has to follow the regulations). 95% of the time, you're working with a 2D sketch in either the x, y or z plane and extruding from that. The other 4.9% of the time, you make some other plane based on those extrusions and do 2D sketches in that plane. 0.1% is reserved for 3D splines.

rebootthesystem 10y ago

You are confusing UI with mechanical design. It's like confusing learning Python with producing solid software products. OK, let me illustrate the point with a question: You have two parts that attach to each other. The parts are joined using a set of six 5 mm bolts with washers and locking nuts. The hole pattern is circular and has a radius of 3 inches. What are the minimum diameter and dimensional tolerances you should specify in order to guarantee mating across multiple parts and across thermal variations? OK, same two pars. Now they mate using no screws. They use a one-time-only locking tab and catch system along the inner periphery. What's the geometry and what are the tolerances? Interestingly enough, none of the above talks about how to use the UI of some 3D program to solve the problems.