Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

3D modeling with paper

arvinpoddar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 52 posts

Re: 3D modeling with paper

#31

Post by Revisional_Sin »

aj7 wrote: post #26

This is ridiculous. I’ll tell you why. Here I quote: “All parts in the assembled model must be made of paper. Each part must be a single, solid color. The parts must not use any printed textures or designs. The model must be represented as a simple polyhedron.” Must. Must. Must. This is a game. Or an art school exercise. Modeling is concerned only with attaining the necessary accuracy. Not conforming to a methodology…

"These are self-imposed limitations that fit my preferred-style for model design... I find that these constraints encourage a better designed model that can be assembled easily and predictably, including by others."

Seems reasonable.

Re: 3D modeling with paper

#32

Post by the_af »

aj7 wrote: post #26

This is ridiculous. I’ll tell you why. Here I quote: “All parts in the assembled model must be made of paper. Each part must be a single, solid color. The parts must not use any printed textures or designs. The model must be represented as a simple polyhedron.” Must. Must. Must. This is a game. Or an art school exercise. Modeling is concerned only with attaining the necessary accuracy. Not conforming to a methodology…

What a bizarre objection.

> Modeling is concerned only with attaining the necessary accuracy. Not conforming to a methodology.

Maybe to you. More in general, your claim is simply wrong.

This is actually answered in TFA:

> Constraints: Let's set some constraints for how we're allowed to model our creation. These are self-imposed limitations that fit my preferred-style for model design:

> Why constraints? It may feel weird to impose constraints on an art. However, I find that these constraints encourage a better designed model that can be assembled easily and predictably, including by others.

It's ok if you disagree with this because you enjoy your model-making in a different way. The author explained why they chose this path, and it makes sense: a lot of art is about constrains ("don't do digital", "use only 2 colors", "origami without any cuts", etc).

Re: 3D modeling with paper

#33

Post by NortySpock »

rimunroe wrote: post #24

If anyone's a fan of papercraft models and the game Homeworld, you might enjoy this collection of models from the games. I remember my sister put together several of these back in the early/mid 2000s. https://www.homeworldaccess.net/infusions/downloads/download...

Hey, thanks for posting this!

The Kushan Carrier looks exactly like the one I put together as a kid after playing Homeworld, right down to the readme file saying "if you've never done anything like this before, I'd suggest starting with something else"... a warning I ignored as a kid!

Re: 3D modeling with paper

#35

Post by mkl »

zaphar wrote: post #19
meindnoch wrote: post #18

You could have replaced a bunch of faces with larger cylindrical/conical faces (aka 3D developable surfaces) to get a more realistic look. Paper can bend! I wonder if there are algorithms for approximating arbitrary geometries with a combination of planar, cylindrical and conical faces? Sheet metal fabrication should be facing the same constraints.

He specifically set a constraint for now curved surfaces. Using cylindrical and conical surfaces would have violated that constraint.

But that's an arbitrary constraint choice that didn't need to be there. It's not inherent to the medium. He has a justification for it (curves are "flimsy and introduce variances") but that is easy to get around with perpendicular reinforcing pieces inside that constrain the curve.

Re: 3D modeling with paper

#36

Post by Terr_ »

srean wrote: post #7

I always wonder what the Elements would have looked like had Euclid had included paper folding as a primitive. Folds are powerful. One can trisect or n-sect any angle for finite n. One still needs the compass though for circle. Straight edge Compass Nuesis Paper folding Makes for a very powerful tool set.

> Folds are powerful. One can trisect or n-sect any angle for finite n.

Does that mean folding allows you to construct (without trial-and-error) an accurate heptagon, even though you can't with a straight-edge and compass?

Intuitively, that seems wrong, I would expect many of the same limitations to apply.

Re: 3D modeling with paper

#38

Post by avhon1 »

Terr_ wrote: post #36
srean wrote: post #7

I always wonder what the Elements would have looked like had Euclid had included paper folding as a primitive. Folds are powerful. One can trisect or n-sect any angle for finite n. One still needs the compass though for circle. Straight edge Compass Nuesis Paper folding Makes for a very powerful tool set.

> Folds are powerful. One can trisect or n-sect any angle for finite n. Does that mean folding allows you to construct (without trial-and-error) an accurate heptagon, even though you can't with a straight-edge and compass? Intuitively, that seems wrong, I would expect many of the same limitations to apply.

Seems like you can

https://origamiusa.org/thefold/article/diagrams-one-cut-hept...

The one cut is to remove the perimeter of the square that lies outside the heptagon. Without the cut, you could make a crease, and fold the excess behind the heptagon.

Post reply on HN