Maya 2020 fundamentals - modelling the real world
Get halfway through a model and find it's an unworkable mess? Can't add edge loops where you need them? Can't subdivide a mesh properly? If any of this sounds familiar check this course out.
# 1 07-06-2013 , 02:53 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2

New to 3D

Users,

I have had troubles as of recent with modeling in 3D. I have watched lots of videos and tutorials. But can't seem to get ahold of things. With that said I have modeled using a 3D mechanical program for close to 8000+hours in Solidworks. That program focuses on the accuracy of those models down to the .000001 of one inch. But I have a hard time with 3D programs such as Maya, Blender, Max and UDK. Because of the reason is Solidworks is ment to be accurate to real proportionate and these programs are based on how they look in the end with nothing to give it a true for of how something really is in real life.

My questions how do I get used to working this way? I am an artist and I draw all the time but its hard to switch my mind set to be less accurate. EXAMPLE: a door is 8ft high. When you model you put it how we'll it looks in your scene. I am a fairly creative person but this thing holds me back. I don't know why or how to fix that. Perhaps it's just spending hours and hours in Maya or some other program but its just hard to start.

Thank you for reading user added image have a good day.

# 2 07-06-2013 , 03:13 AM
EduSciVis-er
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,374
Maya is not designed to be as accurate as a CAD program, but there are things you can do to model with reasonable accuracy. Getting good hi-res reference is a good start, but I realize this still comes down to eyeballing things. You can enter specific values for move, scale and rotation, which helps, but I don't know of a way to enter specific values for component translation, which I find very annoying.

# 3 07-06-2013 , 04:47 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2

Maya is not designed to be as accurate as a CAD program, but there are things you can do to model with reasonable accuracy. Getting good hi-res reference is a good start, but I realize this still comes down to eyeballing things. You can enter specific values for move, scale and rotation, which helps, but I don't know of a way to enter specific values for component translation, which I find very annoying.

I know its not ment to be. But how do I retrain my mind to think its ok not to be so accurate? I'm not looking to model something with perfect precission but my mind thinks it has to be perfect. I wish Maya had such a thing as units. Well you can sub devide and make those your units. I do not know. I just gotta spend time in Maya but its very intimating. But you have push beyond that just like learning a new CaD software.

# 4 07-06-2013 , 04:56 PM
EduSciVis-er
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,374
Maya does have units. You can change the units and grid divisions in the preferences and use x to snap to grid. Hope that helps. As for training yourself to be less accurate... I don't know. Build a house in half an hour and tell yourself you're done?

# 5 07-06-2013 , 08:36 PM
Gen's Avatar
Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: South FL
Posts: 3,522
By default Maya uses centimeters but there are several other options in the "Settings" category in Windows>Settings/ Preferences>Preferences, this sets it for the current scene. If you want to change the units for future scenes you'll create, check out the File>New Scene>options. As Stwert mentioned, there are snapping options as well, whether you want to snap to grid, points, curves etc. There is also a discrete feature that allows you to edit in increments when using any of the transformation manipulators, just hold down the "J" key(I'd say this is far more convenient than a checkbox in the tool's settings window), you can adjust the the increments by changing the "Step size" in said settings.

As for becoming O.K with being less accurate, that's tough spot to be in. I supposed you could remind yourself that as long as the model communicates the intended idea then you can move on.


- Genny
__________________
::|| My CG Blog ||::
::|| My Maya FAQ ||::
# 6 18-06-2013 , 06:58 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Wirral, United Kingdom
Posts: 4
Having used Blender for the most part, and learning Maya (heaven help me! user added image), and UDK in college, I can tell you straight away that UDK is a game engine, and it's toolset is nowhere near what you would want to use for modeling (Assuming of course that by UDK, you mean the Unreal Development Kit?).

What I would do, is on the object/character reference sheet, either place a single square near the corner with unit and size per square, OR put a semi-transparent grid over the image, and include the square units somewhere; then calibrate the 3D software's grid units and size to accommodate. You want the main grid lines to match up to your grid/square, and then add subdivisions.
You'll do this by matching the 3D software grid to either the single square or the semi-transparent grid.

(hope all that makes sense user added image)
and good luck user added image

# 7 28-06-2013 , 12:32 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 12
Im sorry but we can't get you out of the habbit of wanting to make everything perfect to the inch, depending on how you work will depend on what you can do to try and get out of that habbit, for example, I can surgest that you try to use less referances and rely more on your artistic knowlage of the final result not the imidiate problem of size.

I say this because I belive that the more you use referances the worse it will be for you to get out of the habbit of not worring about scale (its easy to guess a size without an image in the background that has a specific length.)

I'm not saying dont use referance images im just saying keep them as visual insight not as size calcuations. and that might help you get out of the habbit.

(Another thing to note is that images always lie, if you have a front and side view of a human head for example they wont line up so its pysicaly impossible to follow both images as a referance.)

Posting Rules Forum Rules
You may not post new threads | You may not post replies | You may not post attachments | You may not edit your posts | BB code is On | Smilies are On | [IMG] code is On | HTML code is Off

Similar Threads