3d digitizing

I need some help figuring how to start a 3d project
I do not have a 3d digitizer
but i know that it still can be done
can anybody out there direct me to a book or
tutorials that can lead me in the right direction

Thanks
Ross

 

AutoCAD is a great choice for serious 3D work! Depend on the type project.



The following 3D models and terrain were created in AutoCAD. The textures
and colorization of original 1940's German WWII aerial photos was done with
Adobe Photoshop and rendered in 3D Studio Max.



http://www.fireonthevolga.com/PPP-Stalingrad-demo01_files/slide0001.htm



http://members.boardhost.com/stalingrad/msg/661.html



http://www.fireonthevolga.com/360.html





Russ

www.fireonthevolga.com

 

ACs small 3D functionality is surely not a good choice for doing
complex 3D models e.g. with freeform faces but uses an old, very
limited ACIS kernel which is maybe good for nice boxes or extrusions
but not capable for doing much more...

....even AD is claiming AC as a 2D product and thus selling 3D CAx
systems *huh*

N.

 

You don't need a 3D digitizer when you have the splendid 3D program
AutoCAD.

Use the "viewport" command make 4 viewports go to the top left. Type
"Vpoint" type 1,0,0.
Go to the top right type "Vpoint", type 0,1,0. Go to the low left type
"Vpoint", type 0,0,0.

Now save the bottom right untill you find out how to make a
perspective, or type Vpoint 1,1,1.

Now you don't have a 3D digitixer but something that allow you to go
from plane to plane and acturly draw 3D ----- Try it it is easier
learned by trying than reading.

P.C.

 

Hi

"ACs small 3D functionality is surely not a good choice for doing
complex 3D models e.g. with freeform faces but uses an old, very
limited ACIS kernel which is maybe good for nice boxes or extrusions
but not capable for doing much more...

....even AD is claiming AC as a 2D product and thus selling 3D CAx
systems *huh* "

Then what, being small is just a Plus , if this is all you need -- and
btw -- AutoCAD save the 3D points in the drawing database ; it can
perform calculations based on these 3D points and you still claim
AutoCAD is just 2D wrong. The question about if AutoCAD are just 2D is
off-topic, when you can't even master these 2D, how would you handle
real 3D ???

3D allway's was something that could acturly produce, the thing you
design, that is 3D as I see 3D , instead of rejecting any new
perception even 3D must carry a direct link from projecting to
producing ; That is the 3' Dimension to do 2D things make a 3D
structure.
Do it cheap involve new jobs and creativity. Listen with 3D-H you can ,
you can make 2D frames make a 3D structure, 3D-H do it all just
anything )

 

I have used AutoCAD for over 20 years (since release 2.6, running on an IBM
8086!). And I have used Pro-E, SolidWorks, SDRC's I-DEAS, and several other
3D modelers for 5 to 12 years. AutoCAD's 3D sucks, no other way to say it.
AutoCAD's 3D module (ACIS) is merely an after thought to a pretty good 2D
drafting program, but not a serious 3D package. In fact it is terribly user
UN-friendly. Even the newest AutoCAD 2006 3D sucks. HOWEVER, Autodesk's
Inventor Series is a quitedecent parametric 3D modeler, and a good value
compared to the others out there. It is as robust, user friendly and
capable as Pro-E for a fraction of the cost. A great parametric 3D modeler
should transparantly give the designer a powerful visualization tool to
spend his time exploring his ideas, rather than limiting him to figuring out
how to draw something in 3D! Inventor does that, better and cheaper than
Pro-E or Solidworks. I woud take a serious look at Inventor if you are
looking for a good 3D package..

bzbygrand

 

Bullcrap!

 

It all depends on what you're using AutoCAD for. If you're constructing 3D
models of buildings, it works just fine thank you very much. AutoCAD
minimizes the functionality of 3D modeling in AutoCAD because they want you
to blow another three or four grand on 3D Studio. However, if you're
familiar with 2D AutoCAD, it's not such a leap to use it for 3D work; as
opposed to learning 3DS, which is a totally different program with an even
steeper learning curve.

I use Accurender to render my 3D AutoCAD models. It's very simple to use and
works as an add-on within an AutoCAD session. Accurender does about 80% of
what 3DS does, about three times more slowly. On the other hand, it's one
seventh the price and is about 50,000,000 times easier to use. I've made a
reasonable living using these two programs and none of my clients have
complained so far. See LOTS of examples at www.emasary.com.

Marc

 

Hi

CW ;
"> The question about if AutoCAD are just 2D is

You can't support your position so you launch into baseless atacks.
Nice. "

No not at all, but I seen it so often that someone complain about
AutoCAD is "just 2D" where fact is that 3D is not just about 3D
rendering. --------- ontop I will say that if "3D" is supposed _just_
and only to be about rendering , then realy someone misunderstand 3D.
Fact is that much of what is considered as 3D is infact 2D --- I will
say that even when you input 3D points you do that in a 2D restricted
way ;so no "CW" if you think this guy is oldfasion bound in the 2D
thinking you rather look at what I make ; you see my expertations to 3D
is not just about doing 2D images of pseudo 3D things no, I see 3D as
The CAD programs ability to produce the things in real ,see _that's_ 3D
, the real things projected with CAD --- try compare a paper rendering
with a 3D thing also made with CAD and tell me what is "most" 3D
please.

So for my sake just forget about the cramped discussion 2D versus 3D,
fact is that a lot of what is thought to be "3D" is just 2D handled
from plane to plane to add the third dimension but displayed 2D --- now
is that 3D -- is that 3D compared the thing that start as a 3D drawing
,that is then broken into a number of "2D" building compoments , and
finaly out in realality put together ,to form a real 3D thing ; now if
anything is 3D it is that.

 

??? 3DS and Cinema 4D and TrueSpace and Blender and Accurender and...
are no CAD systems but mesh based render- and raytracing programs and
do of course not replace a mainly for 2D useable CAD system as AC nor
the 3D modeling CAD solutions as the AD Desktop series or Inventor.

Nobody denies that AC has some limited 3D modeling functionality,
actually neither AD is promoting AC as a 3D CAD nor anybody
professional besides some students and one-man-show bureaus which
cannot afford something more capable are using AC for doing advanced
and productuve 3D modeling.

In fact, if 3D modeling is needed, other programs as Inventor or
SolidWorks or SolidEdge or Pro/E or Catia etc. for engineering and
design or ArchiCad or Allplan or VectorWorks etc. for civil
engineering are used.

This is just the truth, any verbose defense of AC as a 3D modeler is
just stupid.

Nobbi