Contentious statement....

Discussion in 'Software' started by wunwinglow, Feb 19, 2004.

  1. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    Here is a VERY contentious statement....

    Vector packages are BRILLIANT for card model designing. Bitmap packages, no names, no Pack Drill but you know who I mean, are RUBBISH for card model designing.


    I'll get you lot talking if it's the last thing I do!! :roll:

  2. Gil

    Gil Active Member


    What is it you 're trying to get people talking about?

    Best regards, Gil
  3. JRSeese

    JRSeese Member

    You're out of your blinking mind! That's the most outrageous load of piffle I have heard since the state of the union.

    Even though I have no clue what you said, here's to a heated debate!

  4. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    Gil; I just want something to moderate!!

    J, thanks for pitching in. You mentioned big buildings over in another post. What software have you got? What geometry experience have you? Whatever, have a go at designing something. I started work on a model of my own house, for example.

    By they way, it doesn't really matter what software you use, what matters is having a go! But don't tell anyone I said that, otherwise they won't argue tooth-and-nail over what software is best; which was the point of my original post!

  5. JRSeese

    JRSeese Member

    I have MSPaint.


    The best you can do in MSPaint is make a reasonably straight line :wink:

    Did well in math in school, through algebra and geometry, it was trig that gave me fits. Quadratic equations get me excited, cosines do not.

    Although I'm no slouch with a computer I can't imagine sitting down at a keyboard without first having sketched out plans on paper... I like your idea of modeling your own house, what a great way to get started!

  6. Maurice

    Maurice Member


    I require a guarentee of immunity from prosecution before entering this discussion. 8)

    The moment you start talking about designing papermodels you bump into the word "geometry"
    Hey you already have. I wonder why. Perhaps because a paper model is essentially a geometrc entity.
    Onto that entity and purely as an incidental will be painted some graphics.

    Having said that, I hasten to point out that there have been some fantastic models that have geometric simplicity and graphic magnificence, but the potential for those is limited.

    Once you've mentioned "geometry" you will meet with one of two responses (which will apply seems to be determined by where you say it and where you come from).

    1) Deafening silence.
    2) An unashamed outpouring of unmitigated ignorance, misinformation and philibustering.

    The first comes from those who accept that they just don't have enough knowledge of geometry.

    The second comes from those who may or may not be prepared to admit that they haven't made the effort to acquire the necessary knowledge of geometry (although they may later recant on any such admission).
    Presumably they are interested in acquiring a reputation as designers. They may do so but only within the range of Herr Pleiner's "four cubes and three cones" category or within the range of recolouring other peoples basic work. Often this latter activity is referred to as "improving" the original design.

    Either response will produce the reaction that you will decide to just stop trying to help and go off and do your own thing in the way you know you can.

    The cause of papermodelling is not advanced.

    Have I been sufficiently contentious and have I been moderated out of existence ?

  7. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member


    Sufficiently contentious? Oh yes.
    Moderated out of existance. Somehow I don't think so......

  8. Peter H

    Peter H Member

    You have granted imunity from me Maurice. An MOB geometry lesson (there rarer than rocking horse manure.. :lol: :lol: ) is a sheer delite to read.

    A typical sequence could be doodling and sketching up a prototype then scanning and sliding it into a vector editor and overlaying with lines and polygons, remove the rastor templates and then finish off with fills and gradients.

    I hate arcs and circles with freehand work as they are a pain to work out their radius. A polygon with a lot nodes close together makes it easy to do and tweak.

    As for geometry....if you were building the Tey bridge or a model to sell then go for it..but for a bit of hit-and-miss then tweaking the design to fix the's never hurt anyone. Good reasons for both I think.

    I use a ancient version of Corel and Mayura(vector editors) that are 16 bit on my Windows ME but for sheer performance they leave any free or moderate priced rastor/pixel based editor back in the dust. Vector is all about manipulating objects and not pixels which even for a cloth headed person like me was not hard to pick up. It want a 16mm hair line on an A4 sheet of paper and thats what it gives you..period. Also a hair line is just's crisp at *any* overall size you want if it's read and used properly. None of this zigzag stuff and worrying about DPI.

    Another stupid thing that lately has been dragging the superior ability of pure vector designs down in the dirt is this moronic idea of making a vector design full of rastor image objects or more commonly called a rastor image in a vector wrapper. I am sure some people have this stupid idea that if it's a PDF then everyone will revere it. All there doing is making something that is crap, uses excessive bandwidth for it's size(vector imaging wasn't designed for this purpose) and confusing the issue for real gains by anyone who tries to work with small elegant vector images. If it's a JPEG or BMP then it's a JPEG!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Alas I have tried CAD software to do designs and failed miserably. I just find all the parameters to get just a line on the work area too complex to get my head around. In conclusion..I'm envious but it hasn't stopped me.

    What you design at the begining and work towards has a bearing on how succesful you are with vector and (ugh!!) rastor editors. My suggestion is start straight away with little add-ons and improvements to what you build already and work up to major work. My favourite is to fit 3D wheels to 2D wheel models and stuff like that. I've build complete cars that are 7 out of 10 but I fully aware I'm a builder and not a designer so I stick to my "day job"

    If I can pass any tips on about vector editing that fit my competency I would love to. Just ask!!

    Peter H
  9. Gil

    Gil Active Member

    Hi All,

    It's best to remember that CAD is only a notation system for jotting down design ideas...., they only enter the realm of "designs" after multiple build and revision cycles followed by several "stranger" builds. CAD is simply an accurate "sketching" tool to come up with line drawings, the 3D model followed by "developing" the 3D into planar surfaces ready for the paint shop. The paint shop is where most think the art of the craft exists..., contrary to that is the novel way in which the planar surfaces are manipulated to enhance and/or simplify the finished model. Collectively it is "the" art of card modeling. Knowlege of Geometry is nice to have but isn't a show stopping requirement to be successful in card modeling. Sometimes the best methods are the result of freehand cut and paste sessions.

    Best regards, Gil
  10. Maurice

    Maurice Member


    You have the purpose, power and precision of CAD grossly underated. It is certainly not merely a sketching tool and, used properly by a sufficiently competent operative, it can accurately predict the outcome so that a model doesn't even need test building. It is the only form of programme in which that can be done.
    In fact the test build need only be a confirmation, although checking at intermediate stages can help to keep the designers confidence up.

    Not everyone knows that - - - - or can make it work. :D

  11. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    Tangent. Tangential.

    Where this thread is going.


  12. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    I saw a peanut stand,
    Heard a rubber band,
    I saw a needle that winked its eye.
    But I think I will have seen everything
    When I see a CAD program design a paper model without a test build.

    I saw a front porch swing,
    Heard a diamond ring,
    I saw a polka-dot railroad tie.
    But I think I will have seen everything
    When I see a CAD program design a paper model without a test build.

    I seen a clothes horse he r'ar up and buck
    And they tell me that a man made a vegetable truck
    I didn't see that I only heard
    But just to be sociable I'll take your word

    I heard a fireside chat
    I saw a baseball bat
    And I just laughed till I thought I'd die
    But I'd been done seen about everything
    When I see a CAD program design a paper model without a test build....

    Go on, Maurice, show us!!

    Brill thread, eh?!

  13. From head to toe the CAD design for this model and base was perfect. The only reason it is being changed is due to a decision to double size it to improve detail (such as adding individually jointed fingers).
    Every component of the model fit as designed with no corrections.

    Maybe you need better software, or at least learn how to use it.
  14. Maurice

    Maurice Member

    Well now Tim

    I never did see an elephant fly
    But I have seen two pigs go by in the sky

    (One of them's a mate of mine. :lol: )

    Now if two of our lurkers were to de-lurk briefly I think they could confirm that once given the full patterns they offered no suggestions for amendment to a certain model.

    Of course if they don't you'll just have to take my word for it.
    And in any case you'll have to take my word for it that it was designed in CAD.
    In fact you'll just have to be sociable.

    Like I said - not everyone can make it work.

    as mad as Masamune :lol:
  15. Maurice

    Maurice Member

    Wel - - -err - - perhaps only nearly as mad as Masamune :lol:
  16. Actually I only thought I was mad, then I worked about a decade as a aerospace technical designer for a major aircraft manufacturer and got laid off with 30,000 others.
    Really I'm not mad, or vindictive, or depressed, or bitter, or angry, or even a little off the wall (maybe a touch off the ceiling).
    I'm just fine as long as the pretty nurse visits everyday with my medication. :wink:
  17. Gil

    Gil Active Member


    Sanity is a relative term..., it needs to be lost every so often so it can be realized once again when, and if it ever returns. Some have the insane idea that something only needs to be studied to death in order to copy it down ever so accurately on paper so's to make a three-dimensional model out of two-dimensional paper. Now to be really creative, the model should recreate each and every part out of the same material as the original. Anything else is, in a sense, pure and unadulterated fakery. If the fakery looks like the real article we then call it "art". So, you see, sanity is a relative term.

    Best regards, Gil
  18. wunwinglow

    wunwinglow Active Member

    Ha Haaaa! See, it can be done. And Dumbo DID fly, even without the magic feather!

    Masamune, can I ask what software you used, and maybe even for a mini-tutorial if you have the time? I have got close to a perfect build on a couple of occasions, with Rhino, but always ended up tweaking a few things in Coreldraw afterwards; and before 'painting' the model.

    Allowing for movement int folded joints is always a problem, you can work the geometry out in the 'perfect' world of CAD, but real paper, and my real inability to cut EXACTLY where my CAD package said I should cut, always leads to slight misalignments. That and the thickness of tabs, glue etc.

    Trouble is of course, you start moving one feature and there is a knock-on effect to others. But I must say your figure model is very impressive, and I'd love to know how you managed it first shot a bullseye!

    Thanks, Tim
  19. Maurice

    Maurice Member


    So Masamune gets asked for a tute and I don't. What is this - discrimination on the basis of claimed level of insanity or a pragmatic acceptance that I'd be even less likely to get round to such things than you would. :D
    Anyway, since you didn't ask, I use Turbocad mainly in 2D mode.
    It's true that CAD can't be expected to cope with your lack of cutting skill but otherwise it can accommodate the real world quite well.
    Most sheet material can be expected to fold about an axis in the middle of it's thickness. So the score for the tab should be !½ material thicknesses in from the outside corner of the required shape. However since you don't know the thickness of the material another person might use it's perhaps best to leave the line in its theoretical position and leave the judgement call to the builder. That also allows the option of deleting the tab and using butt or strap jointing.
    However things like internal formers should allow for the thickness of the skin that you're recommending and again the builder can adjust for what is actually being done.
    Keeping track of knock on effects is fun.
    Glue thickness shouldn't be a problem since you should be using no more than can be absorbed into the material. Any more or less is a defect.
    Hey look the designer can't do it all and accommodate everything and everyone even if some people do seem to think so.
    Building has to involve an input of ability and skill from the builder too.
    We are most fortunate in that we get to see some excellent examples of where it does.

  20. I'm not here to steal anyones' thunder, give me a can of beans and I'll make my own.

    A big consideration in designing is choice of material. At one time I designed in aluminum, fiberglass, titanium and composites. A single aluminum part folded along 10 lines with all the bend allowance and material calculations is quite enlightening (and one hopes the floor structure doesn't shift by .1" again). I account for paper characteristics in a similar (but less exhausting) manner as we did back at ******.
    One attribute I take effort to control is material build-up (ex: too many parts to the floor structure causing .1" differences each time), essentially; the more you stack, the more paper (or aluminum) thickness will alter the predicted result. With an aircraft model this can become critical at junctions of major parts that need to fit smoothly, and as exampled by internal formers. Most of my subjects don't have tight airstream shapes or need for inner structure, permitting areas to vent the tolerances.

    I'm currently using AutoCAD2000, DeltaCAD4.0, and CorelDraw10. By the time I have the 3-views and accessories prepared I know what parts are to be 3D or 2D origin and where critical junctures need to be closely analyzed.
    When my model is full 3D origin the feasibility calculations are planned before unfolding and implemented during and after. Eventually I have the whole mess arranged onto pages and exported to CorelDraw for paint up. By the time I've built it there are few corrections, and fewer as I improve the process. If the pattern is meticulously created errors can be limited but not entirely prevented, and always susceptible to the builders' skill.
    With Optimus Prime the loose tolerances at the assembly interfaces that allow positioning greatly aided to the one-shot success... but that doesn't stop me from wanting to improve from the shapes I originally chose, such as changing it to appear like the newest comicbook version instead of the 80's animation...

    Software is only part of my process, many of my models are partly designed in a pocketpad I keep with me on my daily walks and when going anywhere. It currently has sketches of possible ways to layout and flatten human body components for various build sizes. I seriously believe I can pull off a model of 'Saotome Ranma' using one A4-L sheet... or at least try.

    Repeating from mention elsewhere; each designer has their own methods, you can learn their techniques then forge processes that work for you. From myself an example subject would be needed to demonstrate with, otherwise I'm just scribing philosophy. I've paid my dues to get to this level with 2 decades of effort in skills ranged from creative to technical (yes, I am a nerd).
    Patience, experimentation and creative thinking will help you design. As long as we don't spend time attacking each other progress can be made here, models can be made.

    "Shake me, I'm a magic eightball!"

Share This Page