Modo


    Nov 08 2007 | 9:00 am
    Anyone here use Modo (https://www.luxology.com/) ? Looks freakin' amazing. wes

    • Nov 08 2007 | 1:58 pm
      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.
    • Nov 08 2007 | 2:37 pm
      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. > > >
    • Nov 08 2007 | 3:28 pm
      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
    • Nov 08 2007 | 6:07 pm
      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 > >
    • Nov 09 2007 | 1:21 am
      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).
    • Nov 09 2007 | 4:49 am
      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