CARRAGON or HEXARRA!
richard.chaos_91798ec102
Posts: 0
Seriously if your not gunna do anything more with HEX would you PLEASE DUMP carraras disaster of a vertex modeler and put HEX int it's place!
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
I guess I really should fire up Hexagon and see what the fuss is about. I suspect that my bias lies in not wanting to swap between many programs -- it would be nice to have everything under a single program.
BTW, I've been seriously impressed with your work in Hex Richard.
I guess I really should fire up Hexagon and see what the fuss is about. I suspect that my bias lies in not wanting to swap between many programs -- it would be nice to have everything under a single program.
BTW, I've been seriously impressed with your work in Hex Richard.
Well once you've been HEXEDD you'll avoid carraras vertex modeler like the place. I for one have moved up top a new macpro and HEX no longer works on my new machine so I have to sue it on my older g5.
PLUS for you HEX IS A FREE App! I think it is still anyways
So, ..what sort of object is it that you can''t model in carrara , but you can model in hexagon ?
If it's just that you like using Hexagon and importing your models, then that's a personal choice thing, and I'm all for that.
But if it's an issue about a specific type of object that's not possible to make in Carrara, but is possible in Hexagon, then I think (since Daz3D are currently adding Genesis and elements of DS to Carrara) then there's no real reason we (all carrara users collectively) shouldn't put some sort of wish-list of features we want / need in Carrara. which are currently available in Hexagon.
For someone to spend money on a program like Carrara, and for that program not to be seen generally as being as capable of modelling (if not more capable) than a "(Currently Free) program" ...Isn't good.
It seems to me that it may be a matter of personal taste, or maybe some people either can't grasp the vertex modeller (and other modelling methods) in Carrara, (in which case, we need to do some tutorials on those modellers) or that some people prefer to use Hexagon, and we're back to that question of "personal choice".
If it's a personal choice issue, then that's fine, ....Use whatever modelling tool you prefer.
For me, Carrara's modellers are more than adequate, and allow me to make any object I want to.
Adding some additional features to Carrara's vertex modeller would seem more logical route to improving Carrara and removing that comparison, and should be easier to do, than trying to incorporate the Hexagon code into Carrara.
As it stands, the "choice" is yours to make,
If you prefer using Hexagon,. there's nothing stopping you, as Hexagon can export as Carrara files, or as.OBJ
'll stick to using Carrara's own modellers, and work within one program.
:)
There are actually some nice edge and vert tools that aren't available even in Blender for all of it's complexity. I haven't played with Carrara so I can't say anything about Carrara's tools. It's not uncommon that a 'free' tool, or more basic tool has areas where it happens to stand out.
Hexagons 'feel' is better than carraras. It just the way its laid out. I will probably always prefer hex to carrara, it just works better.
Andy, you can make any object you want in any 3d modelling software on the planet. That's not the point. It's all vertices and polygons. If you want, you can build a complete human, one vertex at a time. It's not a matter of what you can and can't do.
Everything is personal preference. Your personal preference is to use Carrara, and only Carrara.
What really matters is purpose and goals, and what tools best meet those purposes and goals. Personally, I value, among other things, speed and efficiency. If there is a simple task to be performed, I want the tool that allows me to do that task quickly, with minimum effort, and minimum head scratching. If I don't need to study the manual or go to a tutorial because it's obvious and intuitive, I prefer that over the application where I need to spend an hour studying, or remembering, how to do it. Especially for those menial tasks that have no affect on the quality of my work.
I could give a list a mile long of things about Carrara that I find difficult, or counter-intuitive, or annoying, and there are even some tasks it just won't do. But in my experience here, I know I'll spend a lot of time making a list, but that will just lead to a whole bunch of back and forth arguing to prove who's right, and I really don't have the energy for that right now.
Let me give just one example:
I want to add a cube to my scene. In Hex, I select a cube, draw it out, and run the Tesselation spinner up until I see the right amount of polys in each face. If I change my mind, I just crank the spinner up or down until I'm happy.
In Carrara, I insert a Vertex Object, not a cube. Sometimes I forget, and insert a primitive cube, and later regret it. And I have to convert it. And it converts to triangles. And I hate triangles. Anyway, it jumps to the Modeller, and inserts a cube of fixed dimension with an "Object Definition" of 8. I scratch my head if I haven't used it in a while. "Now, what does Object Definition mean?". No spinner so I can vary that up or down and get visual feedback, you just enter a value and that's it. Change your mind? Tough. Vary the size? Go back into the Assy room and do it.
Now, I know you'll come back with a lot of "yeah, but that's easy, just do...."
But I'm not interested in that. It's a pain, and annoying, and some stuff is just no do-able. And if I learn something that's counter-intuitive, I'll probably forget it next time. And if you add in all the other things that bother me, it quickly becomes just not worth it.
Like you say, you're free to choose to do everything in Carrara. I have no allegiance to or personal love for any of my software, including Carrara. I am more than happy to use whatever tool suits the job at hand.
I personally feel that Carrara's VM is more comfy. Less diddling around with the view. Perhaps I'm just not used to Hex's camera controls. But I got Carrara's down. Do I consider myself a worthy modeler? no. But I've certainly made some cool stuff in Carrara - and enjoyed myself along the way.
For some people I would say it comes down to how you learn to model and what tools you are comfortable with. I am no advanced modeler but I can crank things out very quickly in Hexagon that would leave me scratching my head in Carrara. Hex was what I learned first and things just make sense to me in Hexagon. Every time I try to give Carrara a try for even the most simple models, it just takes too much time trying to figure out how to accomplish something that I can do simply and quickly in Hex. If for some reason Hexagon is not developed anymore then I would love for the tools to be in Carrara. At the very least Hexagon and Carrara should be bridged together.
I use a plethora of modelers. When I need something fast and quick, it's Hexagon instantly, even though it's firing up WINE to do it. Hex is just so simple. I also like Carrara's vertex modeler, though it does take more effort to do things. Maya is just too $%^& to get anything done quickly, even though it is Linux Native. Maya is just so powerful that it always seems to get involved somewhere. SketchUP is OK, but something about it just rubs me wrong. 123D is still... well, Autodesk. Those who use Autodesk products will know what I mean, there's a certain UGH that goes with an Autodesk designed interface. Wings just never gives me enough reason to use it. Blender is Blender, and I'll leave it at that. Lightwave involves too much to get anything started. I'll stop there for now.
Hex does have some irritating issues. Many times I have to take the model into Carrara or Blender to clean up some weird "additions" to otherwise simple objects that Hex just seems determined to add. But the extra import, delete the anomalies, and re-export is still less time and effort than doing the model in other apps. I also hop from app to app where specific abilities allow for quicker work. It is not uncommon for me to have Hex, Carrara, Maya, Blender, and DS4 all up at the same time and popping OBJs in and out of each as necessary. Yes, DS4 actually has uses for working with modeling with OBJs.
Does Carrara need Hex's Modeler? It wouldn't hurt, but it isn't necessary. Truthfully, Carrara isn't what pops into mind first, or second, or sometimes even third, when I need to create a model from scratch. If I'm tweaking, cleaning, or otherwise messing with operations that revolve around vertices, then I'll use Carrara. But, I really don't model organics much either. The vast majority of what I'm doing starts in a CAD or structured drawing environment where I can control measurements very accurately.
A lot of the things I model are assemblies of many different, more basic, models. For instance, one model of an arena actually contained a fully realized cinder-block model (and associated mortar) for *each* brick necessary on the arena exterior, as well as fully modeled steel, aluminum, and fiberboard siding/roofing, composite and cast stone pieces, etc (there are reasons that I need full models and not just shell meshes). Hex helps create these smaller base pieces VERY quickly. Carrara... not so much a help on the base modeling, but excellent on helping assemble the composite pieces. But I have to admit that DS4 is very quickly displacing Carrara for the assembly process, especially with the help of some plugins.
Kendall
HI Joe , :)
Thanks for that feedback .
I actually find the inability to change the mesh density, or (definition) in objects (after creating them) a real drawback to modelling in Carrara, but I equally find the need to "Validate" everything I do in Hexagon, just as irksome.
Having the option to change the definition of an object, after it's been created, should be a feature request.
Contrary to what you may have assumed, Carrara isn't the only 3D software I use, EG (Max 3D Coat, Hexagon, Sculptris, Wings3d, etc ..) and I'm actually not biased here towards using Carrara,. (although this is the Carrara discussion forum) and the advice should be "how to use carrara first".
Here's my point briefly.
If you've just bought a new piece of software which seemed to have everything you need, but when you had a question about it, and went on-line to ask the users,. how would you feel if the advice was. ...Use a different program for that, because this one isn't capable.
Personally I'd be P'd off at that, and feel that I've spent a load of cash on a bag of nonsense.
This is where I'm heading with this question,. (how can Carrara's built in modeller be made better / easier).
so that new users don't have that experience.
Not ...You must use only Carrara's tools,.. or face the consequences. ... Mwaaah haaa haaa :)
I personally like the ability in Hex to (Nth) select every second, third or fourth edge, loop. that's an elegant feature which needs to be done manually and tediously in carrara.
So, I'm trying to figure out what features or functions will make Carrara's modeller better or equal to hex. once that's equalled, then it is just personal preference for the UI
Thanks to ALL of you for the feedback.. :)
For me it is quite simple.Hexagon models the way I learned to model, carrara doesn't.
I've just always found carrara's modeling clumsy and limited.
Why do you care if some users have to face the fact that there's no perfect software, especially when you're dealing with something so incredibly complicated as 3D graphics? That's how life is. If you want to work in 3D, you're probably gonna have to use a bunch of different software at some point in your journey.
Carrara, and any 3D graphics program, includes an incredible amount of functionality. Modelling, texturing, animating, UV'ing, rigging, dynamics, rendering, and on and on and on. It's physically impossible to make it perfect in every one of those areas, and if it was nobody could afford it.
And on top of that, to be practical, DAZ ain't gonna make Carrara's modeller really, really good. Guaranteed. It just doesn't make enough money to be worth it.
So relax, don't worry about it. Carrara's modeller sucks (IMO), and it probably always will. So get used to it, and accept that you're gonna have to use more than one program if you want to do 3D. That's life. Hex is free, it exports in Carrara format, so it's no big deal to have to jump into Hex to do stuff.
By the way, Blender blows the shorts off Carrara in many aspects, and Blender is free. Are you going to worry about some user finding out he could have saved $500 by downloading Blender?
Personally, I couldn't care less. If he doesn't research before he lays down $500, that's his problem.
HI Joe :)
I'm not ignoring the fact that most people use multiple programs, and I'm not suggesting that people can't use whatever they want.
If you don't improve software,.. does that make it more or less valuable ?, and does that make it generate more or less revenue for the developers ?
Saying that it sucks, may be your opinion right now,.. but does it have to remain that way for future versions.?
Anyone can download Blender or any other Free-ware 3D modeller and try to learn that UI or work-flow, but that's beside the point, if you're new to this, and have just bought software which should be usable to you.
First impressions count,. and if the first impression is being told by a "Professional" user, that the modeller "Sucks", ...is that good ?
People on Max, Lightwave or Maya forums aren't being advised to go get Hexagon, or Wings3D, or Blender because they're free, and you should get used to using multiple programs. !
If you're spending money on software, rather than downloading everything for free,. then it needs to be worth the price.
Saying that Daz don't earn enough from it NOW, because it Sucks, and they won't fix it, because it doesn't earn enough now because it sucks ,... etc...
In any industry, products are examined at stages in their life, and if possible improved upon, version by version.
If Daz improve Carrara, will it generate more revenue for them ?
and will the users / buyers of Carrara, be happier with a more useful program.
:)
Joe, you have made variations on this assertion quite a few times now in several threads. Usually there is an "I'm just stating the facts" not too far away.
Yet, if we take this to its logical - yet ridiculous - conclusion, virtually all software development would cease instantly. Not just 3D programs either. There would be only one of each app/utility ever created and that is it because "it is just too expensive to make things better."
This doesn't explain why there is Carrara, Hexagon, Sketchup, Modo, Maya, Lightwave, Wings, Blender...etc. etc. etc. There are many 3D modeler programs just as there are many word processors, spreadsheets, OSes, web-page author tools, image editors.
Clearly, expense is not the primary factor here.
Exactly. As I said, expense isn't the only factor here. There are many factors that are taken into account when building software. I'm going to hold out to see what C8.5 provides us with before making any software change plans for my world.
Yes, that is a ridiculous conclusion. But it has nothing whatsoever to do with reality, nor the point I'm making.
People here can't seem to comprehend this, and I can't understand why. It's simple. And I know if I state it a different way, or try to explain it further, people still won't get it.
But I'll try once more...
Let's say you own a candy store. You do a good business selling candy, people like your candy, sometimes you have a line of people waiting to buy candy. It costs you $1,000 every week to make the candy to sell, and keep the store going. But your sales every week are $1,500. So you make a profit of $500 every week. Not bad.
However, you also like to bake. In fact, you like to bake cupcakes a lot more than you like to sell candy. So in your store you also have a display case over to the side where you sell cupcakes you've made. But for some reason those aren't very popular. People buy the candy, but very few people buy the cupcakes. And it costs you $300 every week for the ingredients and stuff you need to make the cupcakes. But you only sell, at most, $100 worth of cupcakes every week. So every week you lose $200 on the cupcakes.
And on top of that, there are 3 very popular bakeries in town, and they sell much better cupcakes, with different flavors, at a fraction of the price, and everyone goes there.
Now, someone tells you that you should invest $5,000 to improve your display case, and the ingredients, and make them into super cupcakes. And have a bunch of different flavors. And then everyone will buy your cupcakes.
As a store owner, what do you do? Nobody buys your cupcakes now, they all buy cheaper and better cupcakes at the other stores. So do you take a risk and invest a lot of money in the hopes that suddenly everyone will want your cupcakes? And if you fail, you've not only lost the $5,000, but now you'll be losing $400 every week on the cupcakes because you're using more expensive ingredients.
It's the exact same situation with DAZ and Carrara. The candy is the content they sell in their store. The cupcakes is Carrara.
You guys are telling DAZ, "spend $5,000 to make your cupcakes better, even though nobody buys them now".
Now, on the other hand, IF you can figure out a way to make better cupcakes than the other bakeries, and sell them cheaper than the other bakeries, or provide something the other bakeries aren't providing, then you might have an opportunity to find a niche market where people will buy yours over the bakeries. And in that case it might make sense to invest a lot of money in building that market. But can DAZ do that? Personally, I really, really doubt it. Though I'm sure you guys disagree.
JOE! I tried to make a cupcake in the Carrara vertex room and they taste just awful! But the ones I made in HEX and wonderful!
TALLY HO JOE!
Andy, once again I don't understand your logic. Should we tell new users that Carrara's modeller is awesome, if we don't believe that to be true? Should we lie to people to make the feel good about their purchase? Should we come up with a wish list for Carrara's modeller to make it awesome, and then tell new users "hey, we've asked DAZ to make all these improvements, so don't worry, that $500 you just spent is going to be worth it in a couple of years if DAZ decides to make some of those changes".
Again, why do you feel responsible for making new users happy with their purchase? I don't understand. It's fine to help people use the program, but why is it important to you to make them feel good about buying Carrara? Because, sooner or later, if the modeller sucks, they're going to realize it. And then they'll come back to you and say "Umm, Andy, why did you tell me that the modeller is awesome when it actually sucks?", and they'll think you were misleading them.
Can you somehow force DAZ to implement all of these improvements you're talking about? I sure can't. If you can, then fine. But if there is a free DAZ program that users have access to, and can use it at will, why are you even the slightest bit concerned about all this in the first place?
HI Joe :)
In the candy store ,.. imagine that the owner didn't incur the manufacturing costs of the candies, and simply sold candies made by different manufacturers, ...
Suddenly, the shop owner / manufacturer, is now a retailer, and makes more profit, since the manufacturing costs are now incurred by others,.
Even although the profits of the candies is now split between the retailer and manufacturer., the retailer still makes a profit, and has more time to refine the process of making Cupcakes, in the hope of improving their taste, and therefore increase sales of cupcakes.
The retailer could also increase business by making a small tray of "free" candies available... and this may generate a larger customer base who are willing to try cupcakes, which now have "improved recipes", perhaps including some flavours of the most popular candies.
:)
Hi Joe, :)
I'm not suggesting that anyone lie about anything, I'm asking if it's worth improving Carrara's modellers to the same functionality of other programs, and the reasons for that should be self evident,. I use carrara, so I want to see it improved. (completely selfish reason)
To take another analogy,..
If you bought a vehicle, you would expect it to provide some specific requirements of a vehicle,. It should be "fit for purpose" .
So,... you buy a new car, which is within your budget, and you drive out of the dealership, (happy) .
But,... you get to a set of lights, and the brakes fail,. you crash, .....,thankfully,.. a minor incident.
You return to the dealership to complain, and a mechanic directs you to a store room filled with boxes of brake pads,. and says , You can use those one's, they're free...
Wouldn't it be better to fit those brakes into the vehicle before you sell it ?
I'm not responsible for anything here, and I don't have any involvement in the development or sale of carrara, or any other Daz products,.
But,.. as User's of those products we can all provide feedback to the developers, and by that feedback, improve the product with feature requests, and suggestions for improvement.
If it's a waste of time / finances / effort etc,.. to improve software by adding features, since there are alternative software's available, to fill any deficiencies ... why bother !
We've seen the amount of development which Daz has put into Carrara to integrate Genesis, Auto-fit, and make C8 work on Mountain Lion for mac users, plus the development of the new DUF format, in BOTH Carrara and Daz Studio,. and All of that effort does not come solely through the sale of Carrara software, it's subsidised through the sale of DAZ-3D content, which Carrara users continue to buy.
:)
actually Joe, I gotta ask, if you think Carrara sucks so much
why do you hang around here?
Richard KNOWS he prefers Hexagon for modelling
if 3ds MAX ran on a Mac he would prob get that!
Carrara 8.5beta DOES work on Mac with mountain lion apparently, a lot if software does not!
(we will not question his choice of operating system %-P )