Can any oldfags tell me what people used the 3d model back in the day? Was it simpler than it is now?
>>601638Can you be more specific? What era/year?What type of asset? For TV/broadcast? For movies? For games/realtime? For print?Generally speaking, it was never easy to get good results.
>>601652Not an oldfag but seriously thisI would surrender on first try by modelling with triangles, that's even fucking harder
From personal experience when I started out in early 2000s I'd say things are much simpler and easier than before. I use to swear by old versions of 3dsmax for their stability but I can't go back now due to the time saving features modern versions have. UVW mapping for example is 10x easier today. All you need to know now is where to cut the seams before hitting that unwrap button that does it all for you. Kids today would kill themselves if they had to use the old method of projection mapping and then manually cleaning it up.
>>601638>Was it simpler than it is now?That's cute, you really have no clue.Compared to now it was absurdly hard and you also didn't get tutorials stuffed up your ass literally everywhere for free.It was still manageable of course but took way more dedication and therefore it's funny when you see all the whining about getting started nowadays. It's piss easy now to get started and actually fun to build on the base and get advanced.
oldfag from 3rd post here>>601663>projection mappingThis. Only high end packages(Alias, SoftImage) had UV mapping in the early 90s, so I surfaced most stuff with planar mapping...even complete characters. It worked.>>601638also only expensive software had options for shaded views, for the rest of us it was all wireframe mode up until the mid '90 (pic related)I also have some experience with ancient/obscure stuff on Intergraphs and SGI.
Wow, I didn't know I have been having discussions with grandpas all this time.
>>601679I just turned 40, little asswipe. Get on my level, then you are allowed to talk to me.
>>601679I made a baby chacha meme back in the day, before we called things memes
>>601682The amount of ignorance these "3d modeling" faggots have these days. They are interested in computer graphics but only in very thin and superficial way. Real computer graphics afficionado knows the true history of animation and computer usage throughout history. I personally miss 90s. VFX industry as a whole started it's decline in about after 2003 or so but before that it was the golden age of innovation. https://excelsior.asc.ohio-state.edu/~carlson/history/timeline.htmlThese millennials don't even know where Maya comes from and what was before that. They don't know what the fuck was/is Silicon Graphics. And then at work people I have talked about recruiting juniors directly from school - the students don't know how to script any more, they are not interested in finding how the software actually works. They only seek a single button solution to everything and then complain the software is shit if they cannot accomplish the task at hand. I could complain so much about this but I just leave it here.
>>601672Did you work on B5?
>>601638I know they used 3ds max for half life
3D studio (before it was 3DS Max)
Why are all ancient software GUIs more comfy than what we have now?
>>601694The amount of ignorance these "3d modeling" faggots have these days. They are interested in computer graphics but only in very thin and superficial way. Real computer graphics afficionado knows the true history of animation and computer usage throughout history. I personally miss 30s. VFX industry as a whole started it's decline in about after 1943 or so but before that it was the golden age of innovation. <Excelsior edu, Ohio State, 300271>These boomers don't even know where paper comes from and what was before that. They don't know what the fuck was/is Handdrawn Graphics. And then at work people I have talked about recruiting juniors directly from school - the students don't know how to script any more, they are not interested in finding how the process actually works. They only seek a single computer solution to everything and then complain the real technique is shit if they cannot accomplish the task at hand. I could complain so much about this but I just leave it here
>>601700No, but I auditioned at Foundation Imaging(B5, VOY) and Amblin Imaging(SeqQuest) in 1995, but things didn't quite work out as planned.
>>601638>>Can any oldfags tell me what people used the 3d model back in the day?Most of the stuff that's still around today. Plus SoftImage.>>Was it simpler than it is now?No. It was a pain in the fucking arse.
>>601750and I think that this is the main thing, why Box modellers don't like sculpting, because they can not get descent that fast.
Sure, I started with Ray Dream Studio on a 33MHz 030 IIsi with 32MB that I paid $200 to buy an add in FPU card for back in 1996. It did extrusions and lathes, and that was it. You drew spline paths to define the objects and the axes to extrude along or revolve around. Oh, and view refreshes were done on the CPU, so it was far from real time. See pic; you used the boxes on the axis grid to position objects, then waited for the CPU to redraw the object. Shit was slow as hell and almost put me off from 3D until I got ahold of Lightwave.
>>601638Since I know what you're asking, before SFM they used Poser
>>601638>Was it simpler than it is now?FUCK no. Go back into early 3D games and you're animating your characters movements by manually pushing vertices because weighted skeletons didn't exist.
>>602095I remember the joy of "animating" custom models for Q1/Q2. Atrocious.
Why has no one mentioned PoV?Defining scenes and cameras at command line. Rendering a single image took 3 days. Eventually they added a crude visual modeller so you at least had an idea that the camera was pointing at your object before spending 3 days computerless to render a fucking white screen.But jesus some of the stuff people made with it.
Making assets for early 3D games was the easiest money you could ever earn, the meshes consisted of just a handful of polys, you didn't have to worry about small details or bad topology (not really much you could screw up, forget subdividing and bevels). Obviously you didn't even have to bake any normal/AO maps or anything either.
>>601694Thanks for the link bro, actually very interesteing
>>601732Well, we have Blender.
>>602326You're either a complete mong or a noob, can't decide.No, it was never 'easy money'.
>>601638I started modeling in 1998 with Lightwave. You could not edit models in the perspective viewport, only orthgraphic. Wireframe only in orthographic views.
Super Mario 64 was done with Nichimen Graphics N-world. It's successor was Nichimen Mirai which was awesome and they were way ahead of their time when you had alternatives like 3dsmax (back then it didn't have that good tools for polygonal modeling) or Maya (that was good but without scripting your own UI it was bit of a pita). And back then Maya cost so much people couldn't afford it. I'm talking 1995-1999. Maya 1.0 was released in '97-8.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-World
>>602525Didn't know anything about this company/platform before. Thnx for sharing
>>602525I worked with N-world on Irix/SGI. Superb for polygonal modeling(definitely its strongpoint), but it also had tools for NURBS and patch modeling. Like SoftImage it had good rigging and deformation tools and importers for mocap data.However, it was - like most other 3D applications of the time - not one unified environment and split into different modules, so you had to switch constantly between them.
Back in 1985 when I was in college I used this hardware/software modelling system called something like Paradigm or Paragon or Parallax, I can't remember what the name was exactly but it was something like that.It ran on an PC XT 286 that was connected to another custom built box just a bit bigger than the XT was. Each box had its own monitor. The XT was the interface for the system, it's where you built your model and the other box was the machine that would render it. The XT had a Hercules graphics card and green monochrome monitor the other box had a custom built monitor and graphics card that was proprietary to the system.Took forever to render and even longer to build a model. You basically built your model by stacking primitives together and you could manipulate individual vertexes by entering new coordinates for the vertexes. When the model was completed you could "animate" it, basically telling it how to rotate and you'd set a path for it to follow.At the time it was one of the most high tech things I'd ever worked with but it was actually pretty mid-tier tech at the time. It was basically a 3D system for companies that couldn't afford time on a supercomputer to render their 3D graphics.
Keep sharing stories oldfags this is interesting.
>>602539Sounds vaguely close to the Cubicomp Picturemaker system, another short-lived 3D atrocity I had the "pleasure" of working with in the late 80s.
>>602539>>602543Some related videoshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1FLlcAVy14https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zW56z2q698https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3UgnpkSmrc
>>602543>Cubicomp PicturemakerVery similar, the system I learned on supported those old digipad mice, but only the students in the CAD class had access to them, we had to use the damn cursor keys.