Live data from Hacker News

3D Modelling in a Browser

vectary.com

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#51

I am a Mechanical Engineer and we use SolidWorks for CAD. I was surprised to find there exists no 3D modeling software (Nurbs / Polygonal based) that I can model using accurate dimensions. 3DSMax, Maya, Modo, C4D, Blender, Houdini, you name it. I understand that they’re not doing parametric modeling such as SolidWorks, Inventor, etc. but there has to be a way to merge both modeling paradigms. I was honestly shocked a…

In blender at least you can specify the size of any primitive, measure the length of any edge, measure between any two points, move a vertice, object, or face by a specified amount etc. so this is just not true for blender at least. You can also annotate any dimension easily with a dynamically updating annotation. What you can't do easily (unless you're prepared to do some serious python scripting) is parametric / constraints based modelling because it's not a parametric modelling program. I'm not sure what else you'd want.

As to why visualisation folk don't care about dimensional accuracy, we do when necessary, but unless we're designing for 3d printing there's no point in worrying about things like clearances and tolerances since we're not making a physical object. Also, especially if we're doing arcvis, the demand is to knock out large quantities of models very quickly, not produce a perfect replica. I'm not going to worry about the exact dimensions of a piece of complex equipment or furniture I'm modelling if I need to produce a fully textured model in under an hour.

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#52

I am a Mechanical Engineer and we use SolidWorks for CAD. I was surprised to find there exists no 3D modeling software (Nurbs / Polygonal based) that I can model using accurate dimensions. 3DSMax, Maya, Modo, C4D, Blender, Houdini, you name it. I understand that they’re not doing parametric modeling such as SolidWorks, Inventor, etc. but there has to be a way to merge both modeling paradigms. I was honestly shocked a…

Maybe I missed something in your question, but in every modeling package, even online ones, you have always been able to numerically specify the size, position and orientation of every object in your scene, with a precision of several decimal points. No need to rely on your ‘eye’ at all.

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebGL, which is now supported by all modern browsers, with WebGL2 (more flexible, fewer restrictions) around the corner. Most of the professional level tools as exhibited by the OP will be using a custom engine built on top of it. For smaller projects, the excellent Three.js [0] is an easy way into creating 3D in the browser. [0] https://threejs.org/

WebGL2 is not around the corner. Apple has indirectly made it clear they will never be shipping WebGL2. WebGPU is "around the corner". Apple/Mozilla/Google/Microsoft are all working on it. Google and Mozilla will ship it. Apple and Microsoft remain to be seen.

Apple “made it clear” originally that WebGL would never be supported in iOS, but eventually buckled.

So I wouldn’t write off WebGL2 quite yet. Though I agree that it’s been stuck ‘around the corner’ for several years now.

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#55
To get extended functionality, you need to sign-up for a Premium account. This tool need's to be more open in first place as 'fully functional' before it can attract people to sign up for premium account.

The 'collaboration' aspect isn't what will sell this product. It could have potential when they allow creator's and designers to fully explore it first.

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#56
post #26

Does per monthly pricing turn off a lot of people? My usage patterns are pretty uneven and - although I know I can unsubscribe/resubscribe - I end up feeling like I'm probably wasting my money when I'm not using it (despite the low price) It's irrational but there you go. Does anybody consider a per-usage pricing model? Is there some reason why that is a terrible idea?

Yes, i do not mind paying for quality software, but i want to have control over it. This means payment once (...i am ok with buying new major versions as long as the developers aren't releasing a major version every year or whatever to force people repay) and i get an installer .exe (or whatever) that i can keep on my external HDD for as long as i want and there isn't any need for online authentication/DRM (i am ok w…

I don't like that model for anything I want continued support for (excluding things that are more or less complete like WinRAR or games).

The problem with the traditional pay once (with paid upgrades) model is that in order to continue developing the software, developers need to be paid every month. So a hugely variable revenue stream needs to be converted into a monthly one. Maybe by being very conservative about spending on developer resources to leave a big buffer.

There's also mismatched incentives, since if all your revenue is from paid upgrades it might make more sense to focus on flashy new features even if the majority of users care more about stability and bug fixes.

There's the issue of how much effort to spend back-porting bug fixes to older versions. Users will rightly be annoyed with having to choose between bugs and an upgrade that (they consider to be) not worth it, so the devs probably have to put in some effort. But then with the old model the developers are putting in more work and fewer users have access to new features, and the total amount users are paying still has to be high enough to fund everything.

These days I'm happy to pay for things I use on subscription (as long as the total cost is reasonable).

Maybe a good middle ground is something like the JetBrains model, where a 1-year subscription also comes with a permanent license for the version at the time of purchase, so you can at least open your old projects.

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebGL, which is now supported by all modern browsers, with WebGL2 (more flexible, fewer restrictions) around the corner. Most of the professional level tools as exhibited by the OP will be using a custom engine built on top of it. For smaller projects, the excellent Three.js [0] is an easy way into creating 3D in the browser. [0] https://threejs.org/

WebGL2 is not around the corner. Apple has indirectly made it clear they will never be shipping WebGL2. WebGPU is "around the corner". Apple/Mozilla/Google/Microsoft are all working on it. Google and Mozilla will ship it. Apple and Microsoft remain to be seen.

Didn't Apple kick off the whole WebGPU standardization process? I can't see why they would do that if they weren't interested in shipping it. Since Microsoft is moving to Chromium, I imagine they'll just leverage that implementation rather than doing anything with EdgeHTML.

Agree on WebGL2, it seems unlikely that they'll want to commit to supporting it forever with WebGPU on the horizon. Plus Edge will probably not add support until switching to Chromium, so WebGL2 will probably never have a chance to be supported by all browsers until WebGPU is taking off anyway.

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#58
post #25

We've come a long way since VRML [0] running in java applets! Re-live the experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eghlSdGvuC0 [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML

> We've come a long way since VRML [0] running in java applets!

I'd argue "yes" and "no" on this at the same time...

With VRML, it was designed so that - like HTML - anyone could easily create 3D objects and "worlds" using a simple markup syntax that was very similar to HTML (IIRC, both are subsets of SGML?).

It was easy to create something really quickly that could be interacted with.

These tools, while they simplify the creation part (somewhat), are more akin to today's "web site builder" systems vs raw HTML in an editor.

What you get out of them, though, isn't anything like HTML - if you are lucky, you'll get a standard file format or maybe JSON - but then what do you do with that? Furthermore, it isn't likely very human readable or editable.

WebGL - and libraries like three.js built on top - are all well and good, and allow for much easier access for 3D graphics work - but neither are anything like VRML.

There are some VRML-like tools out there - one that comes to mind is Google's A-Frame:

https://aframe.io/docs/0.9.0/introduction/

So some stuff like the old-school VRML is out there, and VRML had it's issues, which is part of why it didn't survive (the other part being that it was too early for the available PC hardware - unless you happened to own an SGI workstation at the time).

It's one of those pieces of "pioneering" technology that came too early for the tech - but gave us a glimpse of what might be possible in the future (much like the first "wave" of virtual reality hardware technology).

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#59

I am a Mechanical Engineer and we use SolidWorks for CAD. I was surprised to find there exists no 3D modeling software (Nurbs / Polygonal based) that I can model using accurate dimensions. 3DSMax, Maya, Modo, C4D, Blender, Houdini, you name it. I understand that they’re not doing parametric modeling such as SolidWorks, Inventor, etc. but there has to be a way to merge both modeling paradigms. I was honestly shocked a…

I hope you saw onshape mentioned in the other comments

Re: 3D Modelling in a Browser

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, i do not mind paying for quality software, but i want to have control over it. This means payment once (...i am ok with buying new major versions as long as the developers aren't releasing a major version every year or whatever to force people repay) and i get an installer .exe (or whatever) that i can keep on my external HDD for as long as i want and there isn't any need for online authentication/DRM (i am ok w…

I don't like that model for anything I want continued support for (excluding things that are more or less complete like WinRAR or games). The problem with the traditional pay once (with paid upgrades) model is that in order to continue developing the software, developers need to be paid every month. So a hugely variable revenue stream needs to be converted into a monthly one. Maybe by being very conservative about sp…

As a user i do not really care about the developer's business plans and especially i do not care on trying to make my purchasing decisions based on guessing what the developer might end up doing in the future. I prefer to act on what is available for me right now and have control on the software. Hence the preference for pay-once, DRM-free software with an installer i can download and keep myself.

And BTW, a developer focusing on flashy new features instead of stability and bug fixes is something that is independent of the monetization scheme. If the users want stability and bug fixes while the developer provides only new broken stuff, then the developer is simply not listening to their users which can happen (and often happens) regardless of if the software is paid once or subscribed to.

TBH I think you are looking things a bit too much from the developer's side.

FWIW i do not mind 1-year subscriptions with a permanent license, although i'd prefer the permanent license to be for the end of the year, not the start (especially if there is a chance that the files you worked on with the last version wont work with the earlier version). It is essentially "buy once, get free upgrades for a year". Assuming of course the other things i mention (offline installer, no authentication needed, etc) still apply.

Post reply on HN