9 ms·

Blender 4.5 LTS

208 points by pykello 1y ago

geuis 1y ago
I've never been an artist but I love 3d printing. So 5 years ago I went through the struggle of learning to use Blender. Best choice I ever made. I still struggle to understand even the most basic CAD app. I probably spend more time for some projects in blender than I would in a proper cad environment, but it's a toolset I understand somewhat deeply now. So far, Blender is one of the most successful open source projects I've ever worked with in the last 30 years. Even with major changes, every change has mostly been for the better. The introduction of geometry nodes completely changed my workflow a few years ago. So much room for activities after that. Unlike any other modern software package, I have no regrets or doubt when I upgrade to the latest Blender release. If you're on the fence about picking up Blender I highly recommend taking the deep dive.
- disqard 1y ago
  Thank you for sharing your experience! Would you mind sharing a bit more about your workflow? Do you export to obj/stl? What slicer do you use? Five years is a decent amount of Time, and I'm sure you have much hard-won knowledge (and gotchas) to share. (Personally, I'm stuck on the mental block of "I know I should just get and learn Fusion360" but I cannot bring myself to knowingly tie myself to a subscription-based piece of rentware.) Thanks in advance! Edit to add: my motivation is 100% to use this for 3d printing.
  - geuis 1y ago
    Yah. My workflow is hard to describe. Over the years I updated my base project files when new Blender versions require rebuilding my geometry node graph when old stuff gets outdated. That being mentioned, the updates are worth it. It's a hobby so time is free and a learning opportunity. It's something I accept as cost of learning, which so far has resulted in better end results. I was totally in the same mental space with Fusion. Here's what I did. I don't like hard to understand UI. I don't like a product whose company constantly changes the rules. I don't like not being in specific control of mission important software I use. I also tried open source alternatives to CAD. There are non that are anything approachable from a user perspective. Until the FreeCAD project gets some help from Blender, I'll stand by that. I don't maybe have any specific modeling scenarios to recommend. Not a professional, just a hobbyist. I tune my printer. Use the 3d toolbox plugin for Blender. Make sure your model is manifold. Get to learn how to spend dozens of hours editing 3rd part "printable" models into something that's actually printable. Ain't manifold, ain't printable. If you "borrow" models from games to print, you'll spend a lot of time making them printable. They aren't yours even at that point. Don't try to sell them or give them away for free. Not yours. Respect the artists. Geometry nodes have SOOOOO many options. I'm not kidding, it's awesome the team keeps adding nodes that address old and new issues. But figure out a basic workflow wherever you're at. Only update if there is some required or otherwise very specific advantage
    - disqard 1y ago
      Thank you for replying!
  - beau_g 1y ago
    I was in the same boat as you and sounds like others in this thread, >1000 hours in Blender over the past few years, but learned Fusion360 to be able to get parts lasercut and machined so had to go to proper parametric CAD format. The simple answer is use both - some things like making a simple bracket or fixture are just much easier in CAD. For organic shapes with lots of complexity, sub D modeling is far faster and easier IMO in Blender than the ways to achieve that in CAD (like T splines in Fusion). The space between those 2 things is where you have to decide what you are really trying to accomplish. The program you use will have an impact on what your result looks like, you see this in the evolution of product design alongside the evolution of design software (boxy cars in the 80s, soap bars in the 90s, and the last few decades of cars with flowing designs with body line defining creases which modern A surface modelers seem to draw you towards). I find parts made in Blender with my workflow often look a lot more interesting and visually pleasing, using edge crease/bevel modifiers and sliding loops around vs. using fillets in CAD for instance, they both aim to soften an edge, but look far different in the end. If you are only ever going to 3D print parts and never CNC, you are already fast in Blender, and part strength vs mass doesn't matter much (especially to a degree where you don't care about FEA), Blender is plenty viable to make printed parts with. You can footgun yourself easily with both programs, but I find Fusion to be worse for this, half because of the UI, but using tools like sketch projection for me has caused really diabolical issues in the timeline. The whole trick to CAD is being very careful with the design intention as you progress forwards, which is hard to learn coming from 3D modelers where that doesn't matter much and you can just shuffle around non destructive modifiers. This might just be due to my own experience difference in the programs though, I definitely remember going down some roads in Blender I never returned from on meshes when I was learning, normally by either applying subdivision modifiers, doing too many loop cuts, or using a tri/n-gon somewhere thinking it wouldn't be an issue or I would fix it later.
  - justinclift 1y ago
    > I cannot bring myself to knowingly tie myself to a subscription-based piece of rentware. Fusion360 isn't your only option. Several of the larger commercial CAD programs have various maker/hobbyist licences which are either free or low cost, and are suitable for exporting 3D models for 3D printing. https://solidedge.siemens.com/en/solutions/users/hobbyists-and-makers/ https://solidedge.siemens.com/en/solutions/users/hobbyists-a... → Free https://www.solidworks.com/solution/solidworks-makers https://www.solidworks.com/solution/solidworks-makers → US$48/yr presently
- Klaus23 1y ago
  Blender is great, but it still can't replace a CAD program. I tried using it for simple CAD tasks (before geometry nodes were released), but the experience was so poor that I quickly switched to FreeCAD. It was worth it, even though it took some time to learn how to use the new program. FreeCAD is pretty buggy, confusing, and sometimes limited, but its workflow can't really be replicated with Blender. Once you have worked with a CAD program for a while, you realise that certain things that are almost impossible or annoyingly difficult in Blender can actually be pretty easy. It would be great if the two programs could be merged. Blender could benefit from better CAD functions, and FreeCAD could benefit from everything else Blender provides.
  - elcomet 1y ago
    Can you explain more? Which things are impossible in blender
    - timonoko 1y ago
      If you try OpenScad-style adding and subtracting volumes, the syntax is pretty horrific. It is impossible to script objects that way. Quote Gemini: However, implementing a full OpenSCAD-like syntax and robust CSG system from scratch in Blender Python is complex due to Blender's mesh-based nature versus OpenSCAD's mathematical description. Blender's boolean operations on complex meshes can sometimes lead to topological errors.
      - jacquesm 1y ago
        To be fair though, OpenSCAD works best too if you do this during the generative step and not after the fact. I've used it to remix existing STLs so it definitely does work but you really have to watch the areas where two shapes get close to each other, especially if there is a lot of fine detail.
      - timonoko 1y ago
        Did I solve all problems that OpenSCAD might have? Compared to FreeCAD. Me myself think I did: https://youtu.be/eG5lhLYvihQ?si=yA00IYVU4_Zemdxi https://youtu.be/eG5lhLYvihQ?si=yA00IYVU4_Zemdxi
- Jnr 1y ago
  As someone who has modeled in 3DSMax and Blender using the mesh modeling approach and in Fusion360 and FreeCAD using the CAD modeling approach, for 3D printing I really recommend learning CAD modeling in FreeCAD. The ability to make models precise, constrained and and parameterised more easily allows going back to previous steps to make adjustments. For 3D printing it is very helpful to be able to change a defined variable and have the whole model recalculated. I often use variables for clearance, screw hole diameters, etc. Recently FreeCAD has become very good and I have switched to it. And there are a lot of great FreeCAD tutorials on Youtube.
  - RugnirViking 1y ago
    to be fair, I did do exactly as you described, and im glad I had both under my belt. But the amount of bs you can get when doing exactly that, "going back and changing a previous step" can be very annoying. Changing dimensions or previous sketches is usually fine, but anything more complicated often results in everything in your stack breaking with strange errors, leading it to just be easier to re-create the model. For many of my more complex mechanisms, ive made the entire thing three or more times
    - jacquesm 1y ago
      I use OpenSCAD for parametric stuff and it has served me very well, even if it has a learning curve and some serious limitations. The trick is to stop thinking interactively and to treat the shapes you want to make in a more generative manner. For instance, you could try to fillet or chamfer an edge, or you could create that edge using a sphere or a shape tracing a path and then tying it all together with a hull. But it can take a while before you become adept at seeing how shapes decompose into simpler shapes.
      - ur-whale 1y ago
        If you like to code, OpenSCAD is really the best for simple shapes and my go-to tool for these situations, stuff like making a project box for an electronic contraption. OpenSCAD however fails spectacularly for any kind of complex filetting situation when compared to tools like Fusion or even FreeCAD (FreeCAD's UI is an abomination though). The morphological ops in OpenSCAD (minkowski type stuff) are a very poor substitute to real fillets, and are extremely slow (underlying algos are all polynomials in number of triangles) when your objects get complex, and they are global operations, it is extremely hard to limit their action to a localized part of your object. Even Blender, which was truly never designed for this type of operations can sometimes do better than OpenSCAD for fillets. Another thing that's a real pain in OpenSCAD: you cannot "probe" (measure) your existing object at a certain stage, grab the result of that measurement and re-use it in the rest of the code. MAJOR limitation.
- aetherspawn 1y ago
  I think you are mixing up general 3D modeling (the act of doing whatever to get a good visual result) and CAD (designing something to be made physically). Blender is not a CAD tool and wasn’t designed to be. Likewise, CAD tools will never be used to make a movie scene.
  - viraptor 1y ago
    There's a bit of overlap in practice though - and people are interested. Some are interested enough to make things like https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://blender-archipack.org/ https://blender-archipack.org/ and others. Those really blur the lines.
  - geuis 1y ago
    I'm not mixing up anything. I did not say or imply that Blender was a CAD tool. And yes, Blender is perfectly capable of creating precision models meant for physical printing. Is a good CAD app probably better at it? Sure. Has nothing to do with whether Blender can do it too in different ways.
- fracus 1y ago
  I spent a good couple of months learning Blender enough to make a 3D model of a real Zamboni of all things for no real practical reason. That was a couple of years ago and I've forgotten everything and I'm pissed about it. I wish I kept at it.
- sph 1y ago
  > If you're on the fence about picking up Blender I highly recommend taking the deep dive. Yes! I have spent my August learning Blender, and it's become one of my favourite pieces of software ever; in my journey of learning game dev, 3D modeling has become one of my favourite tasks. If one is looking for recommendation on learning material, the Udemy courses by Grant Abbitt are EXCELLENT. I'm totally unaffiliated, but I don't think I would've stuck around without as good a course. The whole course was a discounted $20 for 14 hours of learning material, from the very basics, to UV, texture painting, rigging and animation. I know enough Blender to be dangerous now, but I am open to recommendation for intermediate and advanced courses. You can do a lot with Blender basic tools, but as a modeling software it is a mile deep and I know I'm just scratching the surface.
  - jijijijij 1y ago
    > Yes! I have spent my August learning Blender, and it's become one of my favourite pieces of software ever Same. Started in July with the Donut tutorial and then got completely carried away in geometry nodes and automation. Once the UI clicks, Blender is super intuitive and downright addictive to use. I realized, while I don’t actually want to work in 3D modeling for other reasons, I could totally live in Blender all day! Can’t think of any piece of software that made me feel so in love. And don’t get me started on its capabilities. It’s even useful as a video editor and for drawing. I think the only thing it can’t do much is audio editing, but I wouldn’t be surprised if one day it’s becoming a DAW, too :D I recommend to everyone: Learn the basics of Blender! Just dive in for a week or two. For universal creative output, it’s probably the single most powerful and useful tool you will ever encounter. Blender unlocks a whole new skill tree. I promise, you will look at the world, differently, how to express yourself, conceptualize and tackle a variety of problems. Even if you are, like me, not much interested in "graphic art", it’s so versatile for anything 3D, illustration or video. You can use it to visualize ideas for yourself or others, a 3D scratchpad, for 3D printing, illustrating math stuff, even simple physics simulations. Yes, there is a learning curve, but it’s pretty straight forward after the initial complexity shock. The UI is so thoughtful and consistent you get efficient with it very quickly. Totally worth it! And Blender is free and open source, this skill enablement is permanent and unconditional! It’s an attestation to what’s possible.
- CrulesAll 1y ago
  Never piss off engineers. So many software cartels went so far in ripping off their customer base that it caused a blistering clap-back. Companies like Maya were just taking the piss with their prices effectively pricing out all but big companies. A group of talented and, let's face it, awesome people built Blender into something not only as good as Maya, but better in most ways. also see game engines e.g Unity(complete toss pots) and the evolution of Godot. As for why people use Microscum's products like Excel, when LibreOffice is superior is beyond me.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
globalhsbc 1y ago
[dead]
ChrisArchitect 1y ago
Blender 4.5 discussion from July: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44571917 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44571917
rcarmo 1y ago
I have been using Blender for video editing recently, and 5.0 is going to bring compositing nodes to the sequence editor. Now all I need is automatic video stabilization.
- pilaf 1y ago
  This more than doubles the usefulness of Blender for video editing, glad they finally got around implementing it.
- diggan 1y ago
  > Now all I need is automatic video stabilization Motion tracking been existing for a long time in Blender, couldn't you use that and move object used to display the footage opposite of the tracked motion and basically get video stabilization?
  - rcarmo 1y ago
    Yes, but to do that you need to do tracking per clip. It can be a lot of work.
tannhaeuser 1y ago
Headline is misleading, TFA says it's the last maintenance release in the 4.x series so if anything, big changes are expected in the 5.0 beta whose planned release date was two days ago as mentioned at the end. So are there any news for 5.0 yet? I loved Sketchup and sure looked forward to Blender releases over the years but it's anything but a tool for casual 3D scene modelling or level design, requiring a huge time investment for learning and keep memorizing its awkward UI.
- jijijijij 1y ago
  > requiring a huge time investment for learning and keep memorizing its awkward UI. Have you actually given Blender a serious try? You don’t actually need a huge time investment to get efficient with its basics, maybe 1-3 days with a tutorial. When it clicks and you memorized just a handful of shortcuts, the UI is mindblowingly intuitive and consistent, pure bliss. To the point where everything else feels wrong. And let’s be clear, the payoff here is using a fully capable professional tool of nearly infinite complexity. It’s not a toy, niche, or compromise, but widely used across the industry, up there with commercial giants.
  - mallowdram 1y ago
    Go one step further, Blender is the first stage to replacing language and binary on a widespread creative gameplan.
    - jijijijij 1y ago
      Sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to say.
      - mallowdram 1y ago
        Replace language, language is Pleistocene technology. Replace binary, binary is dated technology, trapping us in counting, not measurement. Pretty silly, using these dead and dying tools, Blender, as ieal seamless animation/rendering/editing software, point the way to visual software.
__0x01 1y ago
I have noticed that many of the most used and loved projects use C/C++. With all of the unpopular press that they get, why has history often proven C/C++ to be the right choice time and time again?
- unmole 1y ago
  There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses. -- Bjarne Stroustrup, The C++ Programming Language
- DarkNova6 1y ago
  Survivorship bias
- fsloth 1y ago
  Don’t trust hype. ”Unpopular press” generally means ”non-expert clickbait opinions”. C++ as a language is abominable but the ecosystem (compiler support, tooling, libraries, established knowledge) is very hard to beat.
- dotnet00 1y ago
  Long term stability is pretty important and C/C++ has a pretty good record of that. A lot of the bad press is also for ideological reasons, not entirely practical ones. Finally, I think it's because the C/C++ manages to stay hidden. You don't need to know that it's written in C/C++ to use it.
- makapuf 1y ago
  The most used Desktop projects were started before 2015, around which new languages were stable enough to consider app building. Those apps fill their niche well and people don't need to start new projects for these niches, and new developers add to those projects instead of replacing them, which is a good thing. The cloud, AI, mobile (or crypto ..) by example are another story.
- bobajeff 1y ago
  Part of the answer is in term C/C++ itself. C is a very popular language because the history around Unix and FFI. C++ builds on that popularity by being sort of backwards compatible with it and being what Microsoft Visual C++ supports if you want more languages features beyond ISO C90. Which brings to mind another factor, that people used to pay for compilers and IDEs. The hobbyist had to consider price as well as functionality, portability, performance and popularity in what programming languages they choose. Given there were several C++ compilers to choose from and the popularity of Windows it makes sense that C++ won. Why has nothing replaced it? That depends on what you mean by replaced. Python, and Typescript/JavaScript have replaced it in many places. It's just low level programming where C++ has yet to be superceded. For that kind of programming there had not been many that could even approach the space until LLVM-based languages started coming out recently. Some things come down to the OS system. We're still using the C FFI and other system elements designed around C. So until something better replaces those we're still using C on some level.
rfrey 1y ago
Question for those conversant in blender: I'm pretty good with parametric CAD (solidworks and fusion) but have never touched Blender. I've been curious about Blender but I have no artistic or sculptural skills. I use 3D cad for both 3d printed objects and machining. Is Blender worth learning for somebody who probably couldn't make a snake out of playdoh?
- aners_xyz 1y ago
  I learned blender purely to edit borked meshes customers brought in when I worked at a 3d print service bureau that refused to spend money on software. Now I can just about fix, edit, or make anything I want in blender pretty quickly and have even started making some 3d art. Definitely worth putting the time in
- rolandixor 1y ago
  Personally, I'd say yes. I started out with Merlin 3D and Autocad way back in the day, and of course, Blender is a whole other beast. Took me some time to get used to it, but once I did, I found 3D made a lot more sense than it ever had in those other applications. Of course, YMMV, but I'd say you should give it a shot. Even just poking around is a start.
- Daub 1y ago
  It depends on what your best hopes for yourself are. You don’t need a lot of creative skill to model something geometric such as furniture or mechanisms. Having modeled it you would need to texture, light and render it. That can required good visual judgement, but god knows there are lots of examples to learn from. Making organic forms is another matter and would require some sculpting skills, which are not easy to acquire. Finally, there is the procedural environment of geometry nodes. With a good mind for maths, you could make some super cool abstract animations.
- CooCooCaCha 1y ago
  A lot of people seem to think you need some inherent talent to get into art. But art is a skill that you can practice and get better at. So go for it!
- 1y ago

208 points by pykello 1y ago

I've never been an artist but I love 3d printing. So 5 years ago I went through the struggle of learning to use Blender. Best choice I ever made. I still struggle to understand even the most basic CAD app. I probably spend more time for some projects in blender than I would in a proper cad environment, but it's a toolset I understand somewhat deeply now. So far, Blender is one of the most successful open source projects I've ever worked with in the last 30 years. Even with major changes, every change has mostly been for the better. The introduction of geometry nodes completely changed my workflow a few years ago. So much room for activities after that. Unlike any other modern software package, I have no regrets or doubt when I upgrade to the latest Blender release. If you're on the fence about picking up Blender I highly recommend taking the deep dive.

disqard 1y ago
Thank you for sharing your experience! Would you mind sharing a bit more about your workflow? Do you export to obj/stl? What slicer do you use? Five years is a decent amount of Time, and I'm sure you have much hard-won knowledge (and gotchas) to share. (Personally, I'm stuck on the mental block of "I know I should just get and learn Fusion360" but I cannot bring myself to knowingly tie myself to a subscription-based piece of rentware.) Thanks in advance! Edit to add: my motivation is 100% to use this for 3d printing.
- geuis 1y ago
  Yah. My workflow is hard to describe. Over the years I updated my base project files when new Blender versions require rebuilding my geometry node graph when old stuff gets outdated. That being mentioned, the updates are worth it. It's a hobby so time is free and a learning opportunity. It's something I accept as cost of learning, which so far has resulted in better end results. I was totally in the same mental space with Fusion. Here's what I did. I don't like hard to understand UI. I don't like a product whose company constantly changes the rules. I don't like not being in specific control of mission important software I use. I also tried open source alternatives to CAD. There are non that are anything approachable from a user perspective. Until the FreeCAD project gets some help from Blender, I'll stand by that. I don't maybe have any specific modeling scenarios to recommend. Not a professional, just a hobbyist. I tune my printer. Use the 3d toolbox plugin for Blender. Make sure your model is manifold. Get to learn how to spend dozens of hours editing 3rd part "printable" models into something that's actually printable. Ain't manifold, ain't printable. If you "borrow" models from games to print, you'll spend a lot of time making them printable. They aren't yours even at that point. Don't try to sell them or give them away for free. Not yours. Respect the artists. Geometry nodes have SOOOOO many options. I'm not kidding, it's awesome the team keeps adding nodes that address old and new issues. But figure out a basic workflow wherever you're at. Only update if there is some required or otherwise very specific advantage
  - disqard 1y ago
    Thank you for replying!
- beau_g 1y ago
  I was in the same boat as you and sounds like others in this thread, >1000 hours in Blender over the past few years, but learned Fusion360 to be able to get parts lasercut and machined so had to go to proper parametric CAD format. The simple answer is use both - some things like making a simple bracket or fixture are just much easier in CAD. For organic shapes with lots of complexity, sub D modeling is far faster and easier IMO in Blender than the ways to achieve that in CAD (like T splines in Fusion). The space between those 2 things is where you have to decide what you are really trying to accomplish. The program you use will have an impact on what your result looks like, you see this in the evolution of product design alongside the evolution of design software (boxy cars in the 80s, soap bars in the 90s, and the last few decades of cars with flowing designs with body line defining creases which modern A surface modelers seem to draw you towards). I find parts made in Blender with my workflow often look a lot more interesting and visually pleasing, using edge crease/bevel modifiers and sliding loops around vs. using fillets in CAD for instance, they both aim to soften an edge, but look far different in the end. If you are only ever going to 3D print parts and never CNC, you are already fast in Blender, and part strength vs mass doesn't matter much (especially to a degree where you don't care about FEA), Blender is plenty viable to make printed parts with. You can footgun yourself easily with both programs, but I find Fusion to be worse for this, half because of the UI, but using tools like sketch projection for me has caused really diabolical issues in the timeline. The whole trick to CAD is being very careful with the design intention as you progress forwards, which is hard to learn coming from 3D modelers where that doesn't matter much and you can just shuffle around non destructive modifiers. This might just be due to my own experience difference in the programs though, I definitely remember going down some roads in Blender I never returned from on meshes when I was learning, normally by either applying subdivision modifiers, doing too many loop cuts, or using a tri/n-gon somewhere thinking it wouldn't be an issue or I would fix it later.
- justinclift 1y ago
  > I cannot bring myself to knowingly tie myself to a subscription-based piece of rentware. Fusion360 isn't your only option. Several of the larger commercial CAD programs have various maker/hobbyist licences which are either free or low cost, and are suitable for exporting 3D models for 3D printing. https://solidedge.siemens.com/en/solutions/users/hobbyists-and-makers/ https://solidedge.siemens.com/en/solutions/users/hobbyists-a... → Free https://www.solidworks.com/solution/solidworks-makers https://www.solidworks.com/solution/solidworks-makers → US$48/yr presently
Klaus23 1y ago
Blender is great, but it still can't replace a CAD program. I tried using it for simple CAD tasks (before geometry nodes were released), but the experience was so poor that I quickly switched to FreeCAD. It was worth it, even though it took some time to learn how to use the new program. FreeCAD is pretty buggy, confusing, and sometimes limited, but its workflow can't really be replicated with Blender. Once you have worked with a CAD program for a while, you realise that certain things that are almost impossible or annoyingly difficult in Blender can actually be pretty easy. It would be great if the two programs could be merged. Blender could benefit from better CAD functions, and FreeCAD could benefit from everything else Blender provides.
- elcomet 1y ago
  Can you explain more? Which things are impossible in blender
  - timonoko 1y ago
    If you try OpenScad-style adding and subtracting volumes, the syntax is pretty horrific. It is impossible to script objects that way. Quote Gemini: However, implementing a full OpenSCAD-like syntax and robust CSG system from scratch in Blender Python is complex due to Blender's mesh-based nature versus OpenSCAD's mathematical description. Blender's boolean operations on complex meshes can sometimes lead to topological errors.
    - jacquesm 1y ago
      To be fair though, OpenSCAD works best too if you do this during the generative step and not after the fact. I've used it to remix existing STLs so it definitely does work but you really have to watch the areas where two shapes get close to each other, especially if there is a lot of fine detail.
    - timonoko 1y ago
      Did I solve all problems that OpenSCAD might have? Compared to FreeCAD. Me myself think I did: https://youtu.be/eG5lhLYvihQ?si=yA00IYVU4_Zemdxi https://youtu.be/eG5lhLYvihQ?si=yA00IYVU4_Zemdxi
Jnr 1y ago
As someone who has modeled in 3DSMax and Blender using the mesh modeling approach and in Fusion360 and FreeCAD using the CAD modeling approach, for 3D printing I really recommend learning CAD modeling in FreeCAD. The ability to make models precise, constrained and and parameterised more easily allows going back to previous steps to make adjustments. For 3D printing it is very helpful to be able to change a defined variable and have the whole model recalculated. I often use variables for clearance, screw hole diameters, etc. Recently FreeCAD has become very good and I have switched to it. And there are a lot of great FreeCAD tutorials on Youtube.
- RugnirViking 1y ago
  to be fair, I did do exactly as you described, and im glad I had both under my belt. But the amount of bs you can get when doing exactly that, "going back and changing a previous step" can be very annoying. Changing dimensions or previous sketches is usually fine, but anything more complicated often results in everything in your stack breaking with strange errors, leading it to just be easier to re-create the model. For many of my more complex mechanisms, ive made the entire thing three or more times
  - jacquesm 1y ago
    I use OpenSCAD for parametric stuff and it has served me very well, even if it has a learning curve and some serious limitations. The trick is to stop thinking interactively and to treat the shapes you want to make in a more generative manner. For instance, you could try to fillet or chamfer an edge, or you could create that edge using a sphere or a shape tracing a path and then tying it all together with a hull. But it can take a while before you become adept at seeing how shapes decompose into simpler shapes.
    - ur-whale 1y ago
      If you like to code, OpenSCAD is really the best for simple shapes and my go-to tool for these situations, stuff like making a project box for an electronic contraption. OpenSCAD however fails spectacularly for any kind of complex filetting situation when compared to tools like Fusion or even FreeCAD (FreeCAD's UI is an abomination though). The morphological ops in OpenSCAD (minkowski type stuff) are a very poor substitute to real fillets, and are extremely slow (underlying algos are all polynomials in number of triangles) when your objects get complex, and they are global operations, it is extremely hard to limit their action to a localized part of your object. Even Blender, which was truly never designed for this type of operations can sometimes do better than OpenSCAD for fillets. Another thing that's a real pain in OpenSCAD: you cannot "probe" (measure) your existing object at a certain stage, grab the result of that measurement and re-use it in the rest of the code. MAJOR limitation.
aetherspawn 1y ago
I think you are mixing up general 3D modeling (the act of doing whatever to get a good visual result) and CAD (designing something to be made physically). Blender is not a CAD tool and wasn’t designed to be. Likewise, CAD tools will never be used to make a movie scene.
- viraptor 1y ago
  There's a bit of overlap in practice though - and people are interested. Some are interested enough to make things like https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://www.cadsketcher.com/ https://blender-archipack.org/ https://blender-archipack.org/ and others. Those really blur the lines.
- geuis 1y ago
  I'm not mixing up anything. I did not say or imply that Blender was a CAD tool. And yes, Blender is perfectly capable of creating precision models meant for physical printing. Is a good CAD app probably better at it? Sure. Has nothing to do with whether Blender can do it too in different ways.
fracus 1y ago
I spent a good couple of months learning Blender enough to make a 3D model of a real Zamboni of all things for no real practical reason. That was a couple of years ago and I've forgotten everything and I'm pissed about it. I wish I kept at it.
sph 1y ago
> If you're on the fence about picking up Blender I highly recommend taking the deep dive. Yes! I have spent my August learning Blender, and it's become one of my favourite pieces of software ever; in my journey of learning game dev, 3D modeling has become one of my favourite tasks. If one is looking for recommendation on learning material, the Udemy courses by Grant Abbitt are EXCELLENT. I'm totally unaffiliated, but I don't think I would've stuck around without as good a course. The whole course was a discounted $20 for 14 hours of learning material, from the very basics, to UV, texture painting, rigging and animation. I know enough Blender to be dangerous now, but I am open to recommendation for intermediate and advanced courses. You can do a lot with Blender basic tools, but as a modeling software it is a mile deep and I know I'm just scratching the surface.
- jijijijij 1y ago
  > Yes! I have spent my August learning Blender, and it's become one of my favourite pieces of software ever Same. Started in July with the Donut tutorial and then got completely carried away in geometry nodes and automation. Once the UI clicks, Blender is super intuitive and downright addictive to use. I realized, while I don’t actually want to work in 3D modeling for other reasons, I could totally live in Blender all day! Can’t think of any piece of software that made me feel so in love. And don’t get me started on its capabilities. It’s even useful as a video editor and for drawing. I think the only thing it can’t do much is audio editing, but I wouldn’t be surprised if one day it’s becoming a DAW, too :D I recommend to everyone: Learn the basics of Blender! Just dive in for a week or two. For universal creative output, it’s probably the single most powerful and useful tool you will ever encounter. Blender unlocks a whole new skill tree. I promise, you will look at the world, differently, how to express yourself, conceptualize and tackle a variety of problems. Even if you are, like me, not much interested in "graphic art", it’s so versatile for anything 3D, illustration or video. You can use it to visualize ideas for yourself or others, a 3D scratchpad, for 3D printing, illustrating math stuff, even simple physics simulations. Yes, there is a learning curve, but it’s pretty straight forward after the initial complexity shock. The UI is so thoughtful and consistent you get efficient with it very quickly. Totally worth it! And Blender is free and open source, this skill enablement is permanent and unconditional! It’s an attestation to what’s possible.
CrulesAll 1y ago
Never piss off engineers. So many software cartels went so far in ripping off their customer base that it caused a blistering clap-back. Companies like Maya were just taking the piss with their prices effectively pricing out all but big companies. A group of talented and, let's face it, awesome people built Blender into something not only as good as Maya, but better in most ways. also see game engines e.g Unity(complete toss pots) and the evolution of Godot. As for why people use Microscum's products like Excel, when LibreOffice is superior is beyond me.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

globalhsbc 1y ago

[dead]

ChrisArchitect 1y ago

Blender 4.5 discussion from July: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44571917 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44571917

rcarmo 1y ago

I have been using Blender for video editing recently, and 5.0 is going to bring compositing nodes to the sequence editor. Now all I need is automatic video stabilization.

pilaf 1y ago
This more than doubles the usefulness of Blender for video editing, glad they finally got around implementing it.
diggan 1y ago
> Now all I need is automatic video stabilization Motion tracking been existing for a long time in Blender, couldn't you use that and move object used to display the footage opposite of the tracked motion and basically get video stabilization?
- rcarmo 1y ago
  Yes, but to do that you need to do tracking per clip. It can be a lot of work.

tannhaeuser 1y ago

Headline is misleading, TFA says it's the last maintenance release in the 4.x series so if anything, big changes are expected in the 5.0 beta whose planned release date was two days ago as mentioned at the end. So are there any news for 5.0 yet? I loved Sketchup and sure looked forward to Blender releases over the years but it's anything but a tool for casual 3D scene modelling or level design, requiring a huge time investment for learning and keep memorizing its awkward UI.

jijijijij 1y ago
> requiring a huge time investment for learning and keep memorizing its awkward UI. Have you actually given Blender a serious try? You don’t actually need a huge time investment to get efficient with its basics, maybe 1-3 days with a tutorial. When it clicks and you memorized just a handful of shortcuts, the UI is mindblowingly intuitive and consistent, pure bliss. To the point where everything else feels wrong. And let’s be clear, the payoff here is using a fully capable professional tool of nearly infinite complexity. It’s not a toy, niche, or compromise, but widely used across the industry, up there with commercial giants.
- mallowdram 1y ago
  Go one step further, Blender is the first stage to replacing language and binary on a widespread creative gameplan.
  - jijijijij 1y ago
    Sorry, I have no idea what you are trying to say.
    - mallowdram 1y ago
      Replace language, language is Pleistocene technology. Replace binary, binary is dated technology, trapping us in counting, not measurement. Pretty silly, using these dead and dying tools, Blender, as ieal seamless animation/rendering/editing software, point the way to visual software.

__0x01 1y ago

I have noticed that many of the most used and loved projects use C/C++. With all of the unpopular press that they get, why has history often proven C/C++ to be the right choice time and time again?

unmole 1y ago
There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses. -- Bjarne Stroustrup, The C++ Programming Language
DarkNova6 1y ago
Survivorship bias
fsloth 1y ago
Don’t trust hype. ”Unpopular press” generally means ”non-expert clickbait opinions”. C++ as a language is abominable but the ecosystem (compiler support, tooling, libraries, established knowledge) is very hard to beat.
dotnet00 1y ago
Long term stability is pretty important and C/C++ has a pretty good record of that. A lot of the bad press is also for ideological reasons, not entirely practical ones. Finally, I think it's because the C/C++ manages to stay hidden. You don't need to know that it's written in C/C++ to use it.
makapuf 1y ago
The most used Desktop projects were started before 2015, around which new languages were stable enough to consider app building. Those apps fill their niche well and people don't need to start new projects for these niches, and new developers add to those projects instead of replacing them, which is a good thing. The cloud, AI, mobile (or crypto ..) by example are another story.
bobajeff 1y ago
Part of the answer is in term C/C++ itself. C is a very popular language because the history around Unix and FFI. C++ builds on that popularity by being sort of backwards compatible with it and being what Microsoft Visual C++ supports if you want more languages features beyond ISO C90. Which brings to mind another factor, that people used to pay for compilers and IDEs. The hobbyist had to consider price as well as functionality, portability, performance and popularity in what programming languages they choose. Given there were several C++ compilers to choose from and the popularity of Windows it makes sense that C++ won. Why has nothing replaced it? That depends on what you mean by replaced. Python, and Typescript/JavaScript have replaced it in many places. It's just low level programming where C++ has yet to be superceded. For that kind of programming there had not been many that could even approach the space until LLVM-based languages started coming out recently. Some things come down to the OS system. We're still using the C FFI and other system elements designed around C. So until something better replaces those we're still using C on some level.

rfrey 1y ago

Question for those conversant in blender: I'm pretty good with parametric CAD (solidworks and fusion) but have never touched Blender. I've been curious about Blender but I have no artistic or sculptural skills. I use 3D cad for both 3d printed objects and machining. Is Blender worth learning for somebody who probably couldn't make a snake out of playdoh?

aners_xyz 1y ago
I learned blender purely to edit borked meshes customers brought in when I worked at a 3d print service bureau that refused to spend money on software. Now I can just about fix, edit, or make anything I want in blender pretty quickly and have even started making some 3d art. Definitely worth putting the time in
rolandixor 1y ago
Personally, I'd say yes. I started out with Merlin 3D and Autocad way back in the day, and of course, Blender is a whole other beast. Took me some time to get used to it, but once I did, I found 3D made a lot more sense than it ever had in those other applications. Of course, YMMV, but I'd say you should give it a shot. Even just poking around is a start.
Daub 1y ago
It depends on what your best hopes for yourself are. You don’t need a lot of creative skill to model something geometric such as furniture or mechanisms. Having modeled it you would need to texture, light and render it. That can required good visual judgement, but god knows there are lots of examples to learn from. Making organic forms is another matter and would require some sculpting skills, which are not easy to acquire. Finally, there is the procedural environment of geometry nodes. With a good mind for maths, you could make some super cool abstract animations.
CooCooCaCha 1y ago
A lot of people seem to think you need some inherent talent to get into art. But art is a skill that you can practice and get better at. So go for it!
1y ago