Gloss3D – an open source 3D Modeler for Linux and Windows(gloss3d.net)
gloss3d.net
Gloss3D – an open source 3D Modeler for Linux and Windows
http://www.gloss3d.net/
4 comments
Question from someone completely unfamiliar with this domain - when would you choose to use this instead of Blender?
Speedy and intuitive workflow are important for 3D modelers. I had a coworker who swore by a $100 modeler called Silo because he hated modeling in Maya. Blender’s modeling workflow can often be...cumbersome as well.
I used to do hobby modeling with Wings3D http://www.wings3d.com/. The closest I can describe its UI was the Vim of 3D modeling software.
Wings3D's UI workflow is really nice for 3D mesh modeling (it was actually inspired by the Symbolics 3D animation system [1]).
Blender feels very cumbersome when you learned 3D modeling with Wings.
It's really unfortunate that they chose to implement it in a language (ERLANG) that severely limits the number of people that can contribute to the software, and as a result, the development of Wings sort of stagnates.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV5obrYaogU
Blender feels very cumbersome when you learned 3D modeling with Wings.
It's really unfortunate that they chose to implement it in a language (ERLANG) that severely limits the number of people that can contribute to the software, and as a result, the development of Wings sort of stagnates.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gV5obrYaogU
I learned to 3D model with MilkShape3D, which was popular for making quake and halflife characters back in the day. I have bounced off blender a few times, I just can't grok the UI/workflow.
Milkshape! I loved that software. It was so intuitive for me. I was hoping clicking this link it’d look more like MS3D and less like blender… and I think it does. I’ll have to download and give it a try
There is also MM3D (Maverick Model 3D).[0,1]
[0] https://clover.moe/mm3d/
[1] https://github.com/zturtleman/mm3d/
[0] https://clover.moe/mm3d/
[1] https://github.com/zturtleman/mm3d/
I played around in Art of Illusion, it has quite sophisticated features and the help system/documentation was useful for getting started: http://artofillusion.org/
Bryce 3D is another tool that comes to mind with a UI that is easy to grasp, but more for generating awesome raytraced landscapes and floating mirror cubes :)
Bryce 3D is another tool that comes to mind with a UI that is easy to grasp, but more for generating awesome raytraced landscapes and floating mirror cubes :)
I couldn't grok it either until I found this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jHUY3qoBu8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jHUY3qoBu8
Blender is an abomination. I uninstalled it year ago and swore to never use it again (for mental health reasons). I'm hobbyist 3d modeler, I can afford not to have blender installed. I use mm3d daily and occasionally wings3d. Both are in Ubuntu repo. Using blender made me angry, even starting blender made me angry. Using mm3d makes me happy, it would be nice if it had more features and supported more formats but it's good enough for what I do.
Um...okay. Meanwhile the entire 3D world moves forward and uses Blender on a daily basis in professional and non-professional areas.
Blender when it first came out was pretty bad, interface wise. Now it's one of the best out there...bar none. But hey, you're a hobbyist. Use what you want.
Blender when it first came out was pretty bad, interface wise. Now it's one of the best out there...bar none. But hey, you're a hobbyist. Use what you want.
It does answer your question why you would use one over the other: because of irrational non sequiturs.
Probably never, the purpose of this project is likely to learn how to build a 3D modeling software not to build an actual useful one.
Hi. I'm actually the creator of Gloss3D. It is true it started as a way to learn how to build a 3D modelling tool, but the ultimate goal was also to provide a full software package (modelling/animation/rendering) with its own community of users.In short, an easy alternative to Blender. I'm working alone on this project, so that's a loooong process. Feel free to join the team however :).
I'm surprised this is available for Linux and Windows, but not Mac. I've always mentally placed programming for OS X somewhere between Linux and Windows, and assumed that something cross-platform-enough for Linux and Windows could easily be tweaked to also compile to the Mac (e.g. Qt, Electron, wxWidgets).
Hi. Indeed, it should be easy. Gloss3D does not use any fancy libraries, only regular Unix ones and GTK3, I just haven't had enough time to try to compile it on MacOS. It'll come.
Some Blender tools with a lower barrier to entry to do small tasks would be amazing, but hard to integrate into a workflow when the only fully supported file format is the Gloss3D format.
What I miss the most is a good NURBS modelling that is runs on Linux, preferrably also Open Source. That is, allowing to create mathematically exact shapes that are good enough for 3D printing or other manufacturing, while still allowing an intuitive and somewhat "organic" modelling experience.
Something like Rhinoceros 3D [1], or at least Moi 3D [2].
Unfortunately, all the Linux tools and open source ones seem to be focussing on mesh modelling.
[1] https://www.rhino3d.com/
[2] http://moi3d.com/
Something like Rhinoceros 3D [1], or at least Moi 3D [2].
Unfortunately, all the Linux tools and open source ones seem to be focussing on mesh modelling.
[1] https://www.rhino3d.com/
[2] http://moi3d.com/
I use openSCAD for all of my 3D printing. It is some seriously whacky shit to write. There are a lot of quirks that are best learned by doing. Still, it's powerful enough to make some complicated objects.
NURBS usually requires relatively specialized libraries[0], which don't exist (at high enough quality) in the open source community.
[0] Mostly due to precision issue with floating point representations.
[0] Mostly due to precision issue with floating point representations.
> NURBS usually requires relatively specialized libraries[0], which don't exist (at high enough quality) in the open source community.
There is fully opensource cross-platform NURBS modeler — Ayam[0], but it looks not NOT user friendly (as for me).
Also there is FreeShip Plus[1] which is truly NURBS 3D CAD.
[0] http://ayam.sourceforge.net/
[1] https://github.com/markmal/freeship-plus-in-lazarus
There is fully opensource cross-platform NURBS modeler — Ayam[0], but it looks not NOT user friendly (as for me).
Also there is FreeShip Plus[1] which is truly NURBS 3D CAD.
[0] http://ayam.sourceforge.net/
[1] https://github.com/markmal/freeship-plus-in-lazarus
Maybe libfive?
> all the Linux tools and open source ones seem to be focussing on mesh modelling
There is some support for NURBS in Blender (3DView->Add->Surface->NURBS Surface) , but it is indeed minimal.
There is some support for NURBS in Blender (3DView->Add->Surface->NURBS Surface) , but it is indeed minimal.
> What I miss the most is a good NURBS modelling that is runs on Linux
Try FreeShip Plus (Lazarus port of FREE!Ship+).[0]
Also, check Paolo Furani's technique on SubD modeling in Blender and converting to NURBS via FreeShip.[1,2]
[0] https://github.com/markmal/freeship-plus-in-lazarus
[1] https://twitter.com/PaoloFurani/status/1407071700244701195
[2] https://blenderartists.org/t/from-blender-subdivision-to-n-u...
Try FreeShip Plus (Lazarus port of FREE!Ship+).[0]
Also, check Paolo Furani's technique on SubD modeling in Blender and converting to NURBS via FreeShip.[1,2]
[0] https://github.com/markmal/freeship-plus-in-lazarus
[1] https://twitter.com/PaoloFurani/status/1407071700244701195
[2] https://blenderartists.org/t/from-blender-subdivision-to-n-u...
Solvespace might be of interest you if you haven't heard of it!
Solvespace is a CAD tool that makes heavy use of constrains and uses the traditional CAD way of building 3D models, where most of the work happens in 2D planes then gets "lifted" to 3D.
It's useful when you build 3D objects that have to obey strict engineering constraints.
3D modeling for games / sfx / 3Ddesign rarely has such problem and typically follows a very different workflow.
It's useful when you build 3D objects that have to obey strict engineering constraints.
3D modeling for games / sfx / 3Ddesign rarely has such problem and typically follows a very different workflow.
I don't think SolveSpace is in that niche at all, it's for parametric design, like FreeCAD.
Have you tried it. Way different than freecad. You set constraint of equality or whatever. You leave it open ended and now you can add those same constraints in the 3D and transform your shape in this hybrid feel, that feels like your are modelling an equation with your hand.
That being said Freecad is way more versatile and you can do almost anything. Solve space is more like the equivalent of building a freecad model out of clay. You can always adjust it but you don’t end up with anything more usable than a stl file in reality, which you can then import into freecad lol.
Openscad and opencascade are for CAD program designers imho . Although version control is so appealing.
That being said Freecad is way more versatile and you can do almost anything. Solve space is more like the equivalent of building a freecad model out of clay. You can always adjust it but you don’t end up with anything more usable than a stl file in reality, which you can then import into freecad lol.
Openscad and opencascade are for CAD program designers imho . Although version control is so appealing.
I love OpenSCAD for specific tasks like modeling microcontrollers against vendor datasheets. While this is not often required with commercial tools and conventional component suppliers, KiCad + chipageddon + being based in China means I've done quite a bit of that recently and it's been largely efficient, cross-platform and up to task. I am competent with Blender, but prefer OpenSCAD for this domain. Haven't really looked in to SolveSpace.
I have tried it, yes. You can add constraints to any parametric CAD software, like FreeCAD, OnShape, Solidworks, Fusion, etc.
> You can add constraints to any parametric CAD software, like FreeCAD,...
SolveSpace has a little bit different constraints solver.
There is Assembly3 worbench for FreeCAD, which is based on SolveSpace solver.[0]
[0] https://github.com/realthunder/FreeCAD_assembly3/wiki/Constr...
SolveSpace has a little bit different constraints solver.
There is Assembly3 worbench for FreeCAD, which is based on SolveSpace solver.[0]
[0] https://github.com/realthunder/FreeCAD_assembly3/wiki/Constr...
Hmm, it's been a while since I last tried it, but I remember the constraints being pretty much the same as other software. Maybe I should try again.
[deleted]
[deleted]
It's just a different implementation of exactly the same idea. I've used every parametric CAD software that exists (more or less) and their sketch constraint solvers are generally indistinguishable. They only differ in small details - can you select the midpoint of a line? can you have mirror constraints? are they vaguely stable when underconstrained? etc.
> I don't think SolveSpace is in that niche at all
SolveSpace could export designed 3D model as NURBS geometry to STEP (.stp), but there are no advanced tools for NURBS surface modeling.
SolveSpace could export designed 3D model as NURBS geometry to STEP (.stp), but there are no advanced tools for NURBS surface modeling.
libfive is a new CAD kernel based on functional-representation. It seems like a good library to use to make something like that, if anyone is interested.
[deleted]