Live data from Hacker News

Blender 5.0

blender.org

151–160 of 377 posts

Re: Blender 5.0

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During COVID I learnt Blender for 3D modelling. It is still my go to. Many people complain about it being a mesh editor but it works for me. The sheer variety of tooling and flexibility in Blender is insane, and that's before you get to the world of add-ons. I want to learn Geometry nodes and object generation as I think they will address a lot of the "parametric" crowd concerns. This v5 is meant to be a big step in…

Alibre has a free option, which does not include sheetmetal bending but otherwise solid software

Alibre does not have a free option. They have a 30 day free trial and the low cost Atom3d package. I bought Atom3d and never use it because it's too painful. If I'm going to endure that much pain I might as well use FreeCAD which at least runs on Linux.

Re: Blender 5.0

#152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Video editing? Adobe has set themselves up for failure there, everyone wants an alternative Davinci Resolve is probably competitive with Premiere, but while free it's not actually open source. But either a viable competitor catching up or Davinci publishing the code could change that fast

Resolve Studio vastly outshines Premiere IMO. For $300 flat it’s a no-brainer.

I'm not a pro or anything, and I don't edit video super often, but I would like to point out that Lightworks is quite good, and offers a perpetual license [1] for $420 that is very often on sale.

I don't have the ability to compare these things in intimate detail, but Lightworks has at least been used for "real" productions [2] so I think it's production-ready.

[1]https://lwks.com/pricing

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightworks#Users

Re: Blender 5.0

#153

Blender is really an amazing case study of open source software. Apart from the Linux kernel and web browsers/tools, it is perhaps the only open source software that managed to beat all the commercial software in its niche. It has rendered Maya nearly obsolete. Meanwhile, in other niches, Microsoft Office still beats open source office suites like LibreOffice; Photoshop isn't about to give up its crown to GIMP; Light…

Microsoft Office is dying. Most grads we get only know Google docs and avoid Office. Most of our docs are on wikis or email now.

Re: Blender 5.0

#154

Blender is really an amazing case study of open source software. Apart from the Linux kernel and web browsers/tools, it is perhaps the only open source software that managed to beat all the commercial software in its niche. It has rendered Maya nearly obsolete. Meanwhile, in other niches, Microsoft Office still beats open source office suites like LibreOffice; Photoshop isn't about to give up its crown to GIMP; Light…

> Meanwhile, in other niches, Microsoft Office still beats open source office suites like LibreOffice; Photoshop isn't about to give up its crown to GIMP; Lightroom isn't losing to Darktable; and FreeCAD isn't even in the rear view mirror of Solidworks. Tbf, everything starts somewhere and all the proprietary apps you listed were not instant market leaders. I can and do use all those FOSS tools just fine both as a ho…

I don’t know if you can really say that Photoshop wasn’t a market leader from day one. It basically created the market on the Mac when it was introduced in 1990 and has been the market leader since.

If you want to limit standard Office productivity to ones that were written with the GUI in mind, MS Office was the leader on the Mac before it came to PCs and crushed WordPerfect and Lotus early on.

Re: Blender 5.0

#155

Blender is really an amazing case study of open source software. Apart from the Linux kernel and web browsers/tools, it is perhaps the only open source software that managed to beat all the commercial software in its niche. It has rendered Maya nearly obsolete. Meanwhile, in other niches, Microsoft Office still beats open source office suites like LibreOffice; Photoshop isn't about to give up its crown to GIMP; Light…

>FreeCAD isn't even in the rear view mirror of Solidworks. I think FreeCAD might be on a distant hilltop in their rearview these days, check it out again.

I tried it for the first time the other day after having heard how much better it's gotten recently, and it made me really wonder how bad was the UX _before_ all these recent improvements. I don't want to bash on it too hard, because it's clear that a ton of hard work has gone into it, but it was really a struggle for me to get some pretty basic things done. The only feedback for a lot of things I tried to do was some not-very helpful error messages in the console, or just the whole program crashing. After trying hard for quite a few hours, reading lots of docs and watching tutorials, I ended up giving up and going back to Fusion 360.

Re: Blender 5.0

#156
post #26

I’d really like to see something like blender come for the 3D CAD industry, at the moment it feels like the only people who would lose out are AutoDesk. The amount of money that flows in and out of 3D cad (as subscription and then value created) having a first class open source kernel and tooling, would be giving big industrial players freedom to modify and tailor to their needs as well as smaller / hobbyists get sta…

If you are looking for a tool that handles constraint based CAD for mostly like 3d printing your stuff, give Dune3D a try (on github), it's currently my go-to to keep a workflow similar to what I used to have on Fusion360, it's lightweight, open source and pretty damn good. The author also develops a EDA/circuit board designer called Horizon EDA.

There's also the https://www.cadsketcher.com/ addon for Blender, which is constraint-based. I tried it a few years ago and it was decent, but still lacking a few things. I haven't tried it recently, but I'd be surprised if it wasn't much improved from the already-pretty-good state it was in when I tried it.

Re: Blender 5.0

#157

Blender is really an amazing case study of open source software. Apart from the Linux kernel and web browsers/tools, it is perhaps the only open source software that managed to beat all the commercial software in its niche. It has rendered Maya nearly obsolete. Meanwhile, in other niches, Microsoft Office still beats open source office suites like LibreOffice; Photoshop isn't about to give up its crown to GIMP; Light…

> Apart from the Linux kernel and web browsers/tools, it is perhaps the only open source software that managed to beat all the commercial software in its niche. I can think of a few more: Git obsoleted an entire category of commercial software seemingly almost overnight, VSCode has become by far the most widely used IDE (not entirely open source, though), TeX still dominates mathematical typesetting AFAIK (as it has…

OBS smashing XSplit comes to mind

Re: Blender 5.0

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The studio that makes Evangelion moved from 3DS Max to Blender as their primary 3D software according to this article: https://www.blender.org/user-stories/japanese-anime-studio-k...

The fact you can point out specific examples of when Blender is used says a lot. It tells me it is the exception.

Agreed. You haven’t really won until it stops becoming noteworthy and “oh look X is using Blender!!”

Nobody talks about how Linux dominates the server space anymore. Nobody talks about how “git is winning” or getting “battle tested”. These are mundane and banal facts.

I don’t believe the same has happened to Blender yet.

Re: Blender 5.0

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same, but I don't think it's possible without a large and sustained investment into a free geometric modelling kernel, which can probably be only done by a government. Parasolid is powering practically every major CAD system. Its development started in 1986 and it's still actively developed. The amount of effort that goes into those things is immense (39 years of commercial development!) and I don't believe it can be…

> Same, but I don't think it's possible without a large and sustained investment into a free geometric modelling kernel, which can probably be only done by a government. Can you help me understand why this problem is so hard?

Geometric modelling tends to need a lot of detailed work for two main reasons.

Firstly, you probably have a variety of analytic shapes to represent — things like lines and circles in 2D or cubes and spheres in 3D. Even seemingly simple questions, like whether two such shapes intersect or not, can require a significant amount of logic to calculate the answer. That logic will often be specific to the exact combination of shapes you have, because the number of freedoms and nature of any symmetries in the shapes you’re working with can mean you would use completely different algorithms for superficially similar situations.

Secondly, while you’re probably going to implement a lot of analytic calculations, in realistic models you’re probably going to end up using numerical methods as well. That can be because you need to work with geometry like Bézier curves or NURBS surfaces that has many freedoms. It can be because even if you start with convenient analytic shapes, new geometry that you derive from those shapes, for example by offsetting a single shape or by combining details from multiple shapes as in constructive solid geometry, won’t in general have an analytic shape itself.

By the time you allow for the numerous different types of constraint that you might want to enforce between different types of geometry and the numerous different ways you can construct new geometry from geometry you already have, the scale of the problem explodes. And on top of that, almost everything you do is going to have numerical sensitivity issues, and all but the simplest algorithms are going to need detailed, careful analysis to make sure you really have covered all the possibilities. In this field, “edge case” and “corner case” are literal terms and not just figures of speech!

To give a practical example, without looking up how to do it, could you confidently calculate whether two arbitrary cuboids are completely separate or they touch or intersect somewhere? As another example, given an arbitrary parametric surface, a sphere in a position just resting on that surface, and the constraint that the surface of the sphere must remain tangent to the parametric surface without intersecting it anywhere, how would you calculate the path the centre of the sphere will follow if you introduce gravity to start the sphere rolling in a certain direction along the surface?

These are relatively simple problems in the field, but each already has some subtlety that leaves the “obvious” solutions incomplete. Solve a few thousand problems like that, each unique and with its own calculation strategy, and now you’re starting to get a practically useful geometric modelling system. (You’ve also probably had a team of dozens of mathematicians and developers working on it for decades.)

Re: Blender 5.0

#160
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LibreOffice, GIMP, FreeCAD and Inkscape all have their quirks (and bugs), but they're probably seen as features by their core users so they won't change.

Not sure about FreeCAD but got a lot done with Gimp, Inkscape and LibreOffice in my personal projects. Totally worth my time!

Me too. I guess a majority of people don't have the patience to work around counterintuitive things nor do they want to take measures to avoid bugs. On the other hand, Blender and Krita seem to give UX a higher priority, so they're more likely to catch on.
Post reply on HN