In addition to getting my layout just right down to the ft, and using current materials (ie, hardwood, cabinet placement). I modeled out HVAC ducts and overall system.
I had planned on doing major renovations (including plumbing, electric, networking) and would have modeled those as well since the walls would be exposed. But ultimately, due to changing political atmosphere, decided to put these on hold.
It does have a learning curve but would have been made collaboration with at architects much easier (exchanging ifc files).
Might be easier up front but lose out on sharing/communicating your designs to different types of people.
https://github.com/grebtsew/FloorplanToBlender3d
The learning curve on your own is like a kick to the berries... However, we found these courses, and some after market assets libraries make it workable.
Should wait for the $19.99 deals to take these courses, and pay attention to the stated Blender version during instruction:
https://www.udemy.com/course/blendertutorial/ (low poly model skills)
https://www.udemy.com/course/blender-animation-rigging/ (some overlapping material, more rigging)
https://www.udemy.com/course/blender-3d-sculpting-course/ (stuff is out of date in this one, but if you can tolerate the kids antics... one may learn a lot about retopo and non-human sculpts.)
Textures:
https://blendermarket.com/products/sanctus-library-addon---p... (Awesome... can bake wood, metal, brick, tile, plastics etc.)
https://tinynocky.gumroad.com/l/tinyeye (Fantastic totally underrated eye tool)
Assets:
https://blendermarket.com/products/poly-haven-asset-browser (assets are free on their site too)
https://static.makehumancommunity.org/mpfb/releases/release_... (free low poly random people)
Would also recommend looking at speed sculpts for tips about how to fix humanoid meshes:
https://www.youtube.com/@BranSculpts/playlists
For advanced users, there are also working rudimentary ZSpheres/Metaballs support similar to ZBrush, fabric quad stitching, and volume aware re-topo process tools:
https://bartoszstyperek.gumroad.com/l/ahwvli?layout=profile
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0GW8Na5CIE (how to get blender workflows to work on lower end GPUs)
Rigging tools:
https://blendermarket.com/products/auto-rig-pro (UE5 export helps)
Went through several grand worth of plugins this year for a project, and these paths proved useful.
Best of luck, YMMV... =3
Seems like it has most of the same offerings as Bonsai just by browsing the marketing materials (support for IFC). Not sure if it’s native IFC or translated to their proprietary format, likely the latter.
With that said, seems like it’s more or less the same learning curve (ignoring price)
https://ifc43-docs.standards.buildingsmart.org/IFC/RELEASE/I...
I suspect it’s something that’s not offered out of the box though.
Different class of products.
For Electron apps, often it's the choice of having a desktop app or not having one at all.
> For Electron apps, often it's the choice of having a desktop app or not having one at all.
Maybe it would be better to have none at all. Having an electron app is an excuse to say "we already have a desktop app, so we won't make a native one".
I remember when it was 2 MB!!
It's in fact still quite small if additional 3rd party libraries are disabled.
It's possible to make a much smaller download that removes OpenCollada, FFMPEG, OpenEXR, OpenImageDenoise, OpenVDB ... etc. However it's a hassle to distribute a second version at a time when the current size is manageable for most users.
It doesn't matter if it can or can not do 60fps. Installing yet another copy of the browser just to run that small web app is just wrong.
Then there's also annoying differences between browsers when capturing the mouse - which is needed for camera controls (all browsers show some sort of popup while the mouse is captured, with Safari even shifting the canvas around).
TL;DR: it's possible in theory, but can be very annoying when actually trying to do it, mostly because most web APIs are badly designed (WebGL2 and WebGPU are notable exceptions, but they still lag far behind native 3D APIs).
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42113898
https://younganimator.uk/submissions/16f0edf9-4fff-43d5-b82b...
https://younganimator.uk/submissions/96059d6c-796e-485f-9582...
15 years years back, this was the first big OSS project that I contributed to. Since I was a greenhorn, the patch I submitted (there weren't 'PR's back then :) ) was, to say the least, rather shoddy.
Ton Roosendaal helped me patiently on the IRC (I think they were on Freenode back then, not fully sure), guiding me through the changes needed to make it acceptable to merge it.
I learnt a ton just hanging out in the dev channel. Good times. It was a great product even back then but it's amazing how much more awesome it has gotten since then.
Great work Blender team.
They made tiers, made it simple and easy, and promoted it.
Before the fund really was pushed... they were getting about 5,000 USD per month to develop it... Now it is sitting at 215,000 USD per month.
More money = More developers. More Developers = Better product.
Yes it didnt happen overnight that increase, but it was slow and steady.
>More money = More developers.
There was actually another "kickstart" before that kickstart.
Blender's open-source timeline has a very unusual history in that it was a commercial product funded by €4.5 million in VC capital. Those original investors lost their money by selling in a "down round" to a 2nd set of investors. Those later investors also then lost their money by selling back the source code for a discount of 100k EUR to today's non-profit Blender organization.
https://docs.blender.org/api/htmlI/x115.html
One of the reasons (but not the only reason) that other examples of open-source projects like ... Gimp lagging Photoshop, or FreeCAD not being as polished as Fusion360/SolidWorks ... is those tools never had millions in investor money paying the salaries of 50 developers to kickstart them. E.g. FreeCAD has a non-profit fund but it doesn't attract the same mindshare as Blender did in 2002: https://www.google.com/search?q=freecad+non-profit+fund
Just because Blender started a fund doesn't mean any open-source project can also just "start a development fund" and attract the same level of donations. Blender has some extra history and circumstances in the timeline of "cause & effect" that a random open-source project can't easily replicate.
Blender circa ~2002 had a level of mindshare + evangelism + momentum that most open-source projects do not have. Those ingredients have to be there first to help attract donations to the fund.
Before that, I'd say open sourcing the project is what really gave it a second wind.
If I remember a talk correctly by Ton Roosendaal, the company behind Blender development went bankrupt and development stopped for a while, as it was closed-source at that point. Eventually, he started a fundraiser to get funds to re-acquire Blender and open sourcing it (the goal being 100K EUR or something) which was successful and made Blender into the open source project we know today :)
I donate yearly, and its worth it.
That said, Adobe has been doing pretty much the same thing in all their spaces, and it hasn't spurred open-source competition in the same way (though plenty of proprietary competitors have been boosted by it)
BLENDERHEADS - Ep.07
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8A59Jtluxw
Enjoy the seventh episode of Blenderheads, a series about the people behind the Blender project. In this episode, we follow the process around Blender's showcase named Project Gold, by @BlenderStudio . The editor and director –documentary maker Maaike Kleverlaan– works embedded in the Blender headquarters to cover the activities and conduct interviews.
Using Blender for a video game production is entirely normal now, but was unthinkable 15 years ago, and starting a new game company which depends on Autodesk tools instead of using Blender is quite foolish tbh.
You might want to check out my Youtube channel for some free tutorials: https://www.youtube.com/@PhialoDesign
Or classes on Skillshare:
Here is one of my most successful classes, a complete workflow "From Sketch to (printable) Model": https://skl.sh/3219zVE (from 2020 but still 100% doable with current Blender version!)
Or my "Blender for Absolute Beginners" class that is a bit more recent, a thorough introduction to Blender and creation of a simple 3D printable bird :) https://skl.sh/3xw8S77
(Both links give you a one month free trial of Skillshare, and you can watch the intro video without logging in)
You may also buy my beginners course directly here: https://gesa-pickbrenner-s-school.teachable.com/p/learn-blen...
Cheers :)
As for 3d printing there are other software which is simpler if you need to do simpler things. But you can not go wrong in learning Blender for 3d printing as well.
https://old.reddit.com/r/blender/comments/1eekomd/beginner_d...
I think to get an expert answer on the topic you'll need to listen to what a beginner has to say, so I believe the link I provided is a good source to look into.
Hey ChatGPT, how you define an empty box in Blender Python?
import bpy
empty = bpy.data.objects.new("Empty_Box", None)
empty.empty_display_type = 'CUBE'
empty.empty_display_size = 1.0
bpy.context.collection.objects.link(empty)ChatGPT: The OpenSCAD statement difference(){ cube(11); cube(10); } creates a shape by subtracting a smaller cube (10x10x10) from a larger cube (11x11x11). Here's how you can create the same effect in Blender using its Python API:
import bpy
import bmesh
# Create the larger cube
bpy.ops.mesh.primitive_cube_add(size=11, location=(0, 0, 0))
cube1 = bpy.context.object
# Create the smaller cube
bpy.ops.mesh.primitive_cube_add(size=10, location=(0, 0, 0))
cube2 = bpy.context.object
# Add a Boolean modifier to subtract the smaller cube from the larger cube
mod_bool = cube1.modifiers.new(name="Boolean", type='BOOLEAN')
mod_bool.operation = 'DIFFERENCE'
mod_bool.object = cube2
# Apply the Boolean modifier
bpy.context.view_layer.objects.active = cube1
bpy.ops.object.modifier_apply(modifier=mod_bool.name)
# Remove the smaller cube from the scene
bpy.data.objects.remove(cube2)I don't think there's any other open source project that does release notes with such amazing quality as Blender.
For that matter, very few commercial software companies reach this level of quality in their product websites. Note how the Blender page doesn't break scrolling, doesn't fluff up everything with useless adjectives like "delightful" and "beautiful", etc.
Now, I haven't done serious 3d work for many years, and recently tried getting into Blender again on my Mac laptop with a Magic mouse. It was a horrible experience.
Can anyone recommend a good mouse you can buy nowadays (so not something like the original SGI workstation mouse that had 3 buttons and no scroll wheel, unless those are still readily available...I loved them!) that works well in these programs. I remember the key differentiator being the scroll wheel which also acts as the middle button. Getting this wrong can make for a frustrating experience as it will zoom the view while trying to middle click.
Now I use this somewhat anatomical three button mouse from logitec: https://www.amazon.de/dp/B07W4DGC27?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_a...
What I wouldn't recommend is one of those Apple mouse types, where everything is touch. In general, touchpads do not do well with Blender.
And the recommendation further below, getting a gaming mouse and mapping the numpad to it, is very smart!
Later, I have used various mice and also other alternative pointing devices, e.g. trackballs, track points and touch pads, but in the last few years I have settled on using a small Wacom Intuos tablet and stylus as the pointing device, instead of a mouse, with the tablet configured in its "Relative" mode, not in its default "Absolute" mode. In the "Relative" mode, the stylus behaves exactly like a mouse.
In my opinion, a good stylus is much better than any mouse. It is much more comfortable, due to the natural position of the hand. It is much faster, because it is extremely light and it does not touch the tablet. A minute movement of the hand would move the cursor instantaneously from one corner to another. It is more accurate than any mouse, as you can easily draw or write freehand with it. Because the stylus is very light, I can keep it between the fingers when typing on the keyboard (while touch typing with all fingers), so unless I want to type a long text, when I drop the stylus on the tablet, the transitions of the right hand between keyboard and pointing device are much faster than with a mouse.
The Wacom stylus has 3 buttons (one being the tip of the stylus). They can be programmed for any function. I prefer the tip to be left click, the next button as the right click and the last button as the double left click. The functions can be changed at any moment, so if you want within a program to have one button as middle click, you can do that instantaneously. There are a few buttons on the tablet (which has the same size as a mouse pad), so you could also put middle click or any other function there.
Nothing beats using a Wacom tablet or similar though, even for boring 3D stuff. Not sure why, but I just end up with ridiculous precision compared to any mouse.
But also it's worth giving a graphics tablet a try and see if that works for your workflow. I find it much easier for sculpting.
Huge congrats and thank you to everyone who contributed.
But what I see here now is disappointing—people who most likely don’t even have an understanding of the CG industry, real post-production, 3D programming, and so on, trying to push immature arguments. Discussions about whether Blender can have an "abstract Linux moment," or if it can be adopted by big players, lack depth and seriousness. It's just sad to see discussions at this level.
On the other hand, in the world of post-production, we face big problems with very expensive per-seat software from large vendors. We need solutions because even the best industry-standard software—not Blender—has bugs and lacks necessary features. Sometimes, small software projects build communities, push boundaries, and save you at the peak of a deadline, but they’re still not perfect.
You need to understand that Blender is young and has only recently started its own path. It's a very good tool, first and foremost, and it can offer much more if you’re a strong artist or programmer.
But it’s a tool that anyone with knowledge of coding or 3D programming can improve. You don’t need to pay for a license or deal with closed SDKs.
Sure, businesses build around stability, and Blender isn’t a first choice for many. Investors don’t want to make risky decisions. But very soon, we’ll see Blender integrated into pipelines alongside other tools. In the end, it will become the first-choice software for many tasks in the CG industry.
Over the last decade, I’ve seen different companies acquire solutions, integrate them into their own tools, and claim they "innovated"—but they often killed the original ideas and didn’t push anything forward. Most of the major advancements in the CG industry have come from open source or studios that made their tools available for everyone.
Just look at how many new technologies Autodesk has developed in the last decade: none. They just bought solutions or received them from open source.
Stop being narrow-minded and look at the bigger picture