Yet Another Pandora 3D build

[herask]

Nate, thank you for the illustration, this makes things a lot clearer and a lot more sense that what I had in mind. my version is simplified (or unnecessary complicated, depends on one's view). your way is actually a lot better and now I'll have to rework those frames. good thing I'm reworking cant frames anyway (that's a as far as I got), so no biggie. thank you again...

 

just one more question. was raising wood continuous like mine or did it have scores for frames?

 

 

 

 

[herask]

actually, based on the framing plan, I'd say that raising wood does have scores for frames. more comprehensive rework it is then... 

[herask]

ok, this took a while, mainly because I deleted windows from my computer and installed Linux. not without issues, but I'm up and running again and have finished aft cant frames...

 

[herask]

fore cant frames done, onto the square frames...

[Nirvana]

Very nice!

 

[Tossedman]

13 minutes ago, Nirvana said:

Very nice!

 

Indeed! 

[herask]

and here's another walkaround video....

 

https://youtu.be/u4vmJBTFf3w

[Tossedman]

That's really cool! Must have been some free beer up at the pub so the shipwrights have all left.

 

Cheers,

 

Todd 

[druxey]

Lovely atmospheric work. It it always sunny there?

[herask]

Druxey, it is if I forget to change the weather. 🤣 but, to my defense, today was sunny around here, so yeah...

 

counter frames and head pieces done. I know, counter frames are just hanging there, but for now they will stay so, until other timbers that connect them are done... and NOW square frames will follow...

 

Edited Wednesday at 10:32 PM by herask

[herask]

making progress with square frames, albeit really slowly. those irregular futtocks shapes really don't help. frames around forecastle are done...

 

[Nirvana]

Denis, your ability to create this model is just amazing. 
The rendering is outstanding, but I have seen small non-noticeable areas where the "wood fiber" is not in the correct direction. I don't care about it; it still looks amazing.

[Waldemar]

 

15 hours ago, Nirvana said:

small non-noticeable areas where the "wood fiber" is not in the correct direction.

 

Normally I pay attention to that too, but in this case it's all very carefully done indeed, especially compared to some wood models where the grain can run completely perpendicular (and quite absurdly it has to be said ) to the contours of the frames or other proportionally elongated elements.

I'm rather puzzled by something else — is a mesh based 3D modelling program (as opposed to NURBS geometry) really optimal for such magnificently detailed structural models and yet of such extremely complex geometry for most components?

 

Edited yesterday at 04:57 PM by Waldemar

[herask]

thank you for your comments, guys! 😊 glad you like the ship.

 

Waldemar, to answer your question is Blender really optimal for this? honestly, I don't know. it handled Pegasus pretty well, so I guess it will handle Pandora as equally well, and that's probably what matters the most. "if it works...", right?

the thing is, the ship is not really that detailed. I'm making the frames the same way I made those for Pegasus, despite now having newer computer and beefier GPU, because I don't really need that much polygons. if you look at the renders at the shipyard, you can't really see facets and edges although they're quite large. just look at this screengrab from Blender:

that's pretty much low poly mesh right there. for an object that's quite as tall as this frame is, you'd think you'd notice polygons when camera gets close, but in reality that's not (always) the case. so there was no need to go overboard with subdivision modifiers and whatnot. so, yeah, I think that Blender is OK for this.

I thought about making Pandora in Fusion360 or Plasticity, and as much as I'd like to do it in CAD program I seriously doubt I'd have as much fun as I have working in Blender. we just clicked from day one like 13 years ago and I still enjoy using it, and even if Blender wasn't optimal tool for this (and there's no reason for me to think it isn't) I'd still be using it because it's the tool I'm most comfortable with, and that's what matters the most.

 

oh, and since UE5 literally eats polygons for breakfast because of Nanite tech, I could've exported Pandora with subsurf modifier even if I wasn't going to use it in Blender, but I actually forgot to add it... 🤣 

[Waldemar]

 

Thanks a lot for the explanation, Denis, but to be honest, I wasn't referring to the mesh density of the 3D objects already made (for display, rendering, printing, etc.). Rather, I was referring to the prior stage of modelling the shapes of the ship's components sporting, after all, extremely complex geometry, and yet in such a way that all those thousands of components fit together perfectly (at least that's how I see it in your renders), taking into account all those carpenter's mortises and tenons etc., while still maintaining the rigour of the required shapes, individually and as a whole.

 

I know that even in specialised CAD software, modelling such complex structures is very difficult, and I was curious to see what it looks like in Blender, just for the sake of comparison. And, it's absolutely clear that you are fully comfortable with Blender, as can be seen by the results you get .

 

[herask]

oh, now I get it. we'll, I think that Blender is a mixed bag when it comes to complex shapes. on one hand, CAD software allows greater precision in modeling but only if you already know what you're doing and have detailed plans. on the other hand, if you're stuck with badly scanned plans with a lot of distortion, then Blender allows for easier adjustments and corrections along the way. 

 

at least that's the way I see it. to give you more precise answer I'd have to build one of these ships fully in CAD to really get to know both camps. 

[herask]

I'll try to post some examples on how I tackled ship's hull shell just with some edge loops and subdivision modifier. it resembles NURBS workflow yet still allows some freedom... 

[herask]

ok, here you can see a NURBS curve, and bellow is a simple vertex extruded edge with subdivision modifier lvl4.

 

the result is almost the same, yet allows for more freedom than CAD program. at least for me. I like pushing vertices around, although the result might not be the perfect smooth shape as with CAD, but that's OK, I'm not designing mechanical device, I'm merely making a visualization of one...

here you can see the ship's hull which I duplicated and then cut out frames, which I then shrinkwrap back on the first hull shell to keep the shape of all the frames consistent:

 

 

[Waldemar]

 

Many thanks, Denis, for the demonstration. I was particularly curious just about this stage of model creation. I think it is enough to appreciate the essence of your methods, indeed so closely linked to the specifics of the software. Once again — great results .

 

 

[herask]

I thought of making the hull shell in Fusion 360 or Plasticity, but that involves using one more software, learning user interface, learning CAD workflow, import export... 

 

The truth is, as I grow older I'm less and less inclined to bother myself with unnecessary cr... er, stuff. so I kept things simple and did everything within blender... great piece of software that one... 😁