Modo

Nov 8, 2007 at 9:00am

Modo

Anyone here use Modo (https://www.luxology.com/) ? Looks freakin’ amazing.
wes

#34517
Nov 8, 2007 at 1:58pm

I’ve done some work with it — it’s pretty great. Their
documentation is excellent, too: lots of screencast videos of
features and tutorials. The only other modeller I’ve used is Wings3D
and modo has many more features (and a pricetag) so there’s no
comparison.

#116686
Nov 8, 2007 at 2:37pm

I don’t have much to add of value here but I will admit I’ve been tempted to
take a closer look at it. From the little I’ve read about it, the painting
capabilities seems pretty strong.Not sure what else it does better then
other 3d apps. They do seem to be ramping up a nice tutorial resource. That
is a big plus though Max and Maya are flooded with plenty of teaching
material around the net.
Personally I chose Cinema 4D a few months ago so the hesitation to look
further while still learning it. The big catch with Cinema for me was the
Mograph module posed as a tool for motion graphics. I don’t doubt that Modo
and others have similar capabilities but things can be put together
relatively fast in Mograph.

On Nov 8, 2007 6:58 AM, Dan Winckler wrote:

> I’ve done some work with it — it’s pretty great. Their
> documentation is excellent, too: lots of screencast videos of
> features and tutorials. The only other modeller I’ve used is Wings3D
> and modo has many more features (and a pricetag) so there’s no
> comparison.
>
>
>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_ambient

#116687
Nov 8, 2007 at 3:28pm

Yeah, ive been teaching myself it. In fact, ive transcoded all of
their tutorials on to my iPod Touch so i can watch them during my
subway rides. Modo is gaining quite a bit of ground, and apparently
has the best UV modelling tools out there, so if you want to create
low res assets for realtime use from high res sculpted models, and not
have to re-texture map everything, modo is probably the tool of choice.

:)

On Nov 8, 2007, at 4:00 AM, Wesley Smith wrote:

> Anyone here use Modo (https://www.luxology.com/) ? Looks freakin’
> amazing.
> wes

#116688
Nov 8, 2007 at 6:07pm

What looked most powerful to me was the subdivision engine which
maintains form integrity over topological operations and the fast
renderer. It’s also scriptable via Lua :)
wes

On 11/8/07, vade wrote:
> Yeah, ive been teaching myself it. In fact, ive transcoded all of
> their tutorials on to my iPod Touch so i can watch them during my
> subway rides. Modo is gaining quite a bit of ground, and apparently
> has the best UV modelling tools out there, so if you want to create
> low res assets for realtime use from high res sculpted models, and not
> have to re-texture map everything, modo is probably the tool of choice.
>
> :)
>
> On Nov 8, 2007, at 4:00 AM, Wesley Smith wrote:
>
> > Anyone here use Modo (https://www.luxology.com/) ? Looks freakin’
> > amazing.
> > wes
>
>

#116689
Nov 9, 2007 at 1:21am

A friend of mine is a Modo user. He loves it, and Lightwave users should feel fairly at home inside it. I use Maya mostly, but also use Houdini sometimes for effects and particles, and have been using ZBrush more often lately. I’m hoping that there is a way to use normal maps inside jitter to fake detail, but from what I hear about Modo, I only hear good things, especially from Lightwave users.

If you want painting abilities for modelling, you should look at ZBrush (pixologic.com) or Mudbox (Autodesk). Mudbox has a more intuitive interface, but personally I think ZBrush is much more powerful for modelling and detailing. I’m pretty sure that only these two applications will give you the control that you really want in a “brush” based modelling/painting package.

eg.
WinXP, 1gig ram, nVidia FX3000 card (256megs vram), and i work on 2 million polygons on screen pretty close to real time in ZBrush.

I’m pretty sure that my Macbook (2.4Ghz dualcore, 2 gigs ram) would be able to do at least 5 or 6 million polygons (They don’t have a UB-OXS version of 3.1 yet).

#116690
Nov 9, 2007 at 4:49am

if you want normal maps working, I have a ported normal map and
parallax mapping shaders. You can find them at http://001.vade.info

:)

On Nov 8, 2007, at 8:21 PM, Don K wrote:

>
> A friend of mine is a Modo user. He loves it, and Lightwave users
> should feel fairly at home inside it. I use Maya mostly, but also
> use Houdini sometimes for effects and particles, and have been using
> ZBrush more often lately. I’m hoping that there is a way to use
> normal maps inside jitter to fake detail, but from what I hear about
> Modo, I only hear good things, especially from Lightwave users.
>
> If you want painting abilities for modelling, you should look at
> ZBrush (pixologic.com) or Mudbox (Autodesk). Mudbox has a more
> intuitive interface, but personally I think ZBrush is much more
> powerful for modelling and detailing. I’m pretty sure that only
> these two applications will give you the control that you really
> want in a “brush” based modelling/painting package.
>
> eg.
> WinXP, 1gig ram, nVidia FX3000 card (256megs vram), and i work on 2
> million polygons on screen pretty close to real time in ZBrush.
>
> I’m pretty sure that my Macbook (2.4Ghz dualcore, 2 gigs ram) would
> be able to do at least 5 or 6 million polygons (They don’t have a
> UB-OXS version of 3.1 yet).
>
> –
> -DonK

#116691

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.