Jump to content

Talk:Comparison of 3D computer graphics software

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Revised the version numbers of some of the software as stated on their webpages, as of this writing.

misc shortcomings

[edit]

I just removed some erroneous data regarding Linux systems, especially since it is trivial to extract a package built for one distro and run it on another - although satisfying dependencies may take a little work.
Should the Operating System section (or a new section) also mention on what CPU architectures it runs?
Is someone planning on filling in the "features" section? Some random thoughts on that:
Command-line?
Polygon/Basic Curves/NURBS
Something really exhausting: import/export formats?
74.85.42.110 (talk) 01:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what the idea was behind adding that section. Someone put it in and never developed it. The problem with something like that is where do you draw the line on features? The first challenge would be deciding if after market plug-ins count as features?BcRIPster (talk) 01:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Comparison of vector graphics editors article has a similar structure to what I'd like to see here. 74.85.42.110 (talk) 02:12, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Adding the available architectures the software runs on sounds like a necessary thing in such a comparison. Maybe it's best to draw the line to what's delivered when installing. And not counting plug ins that can be installed at any time but don't get delivered when the program is installed. Plugins that come with the software but are packaged and have to be unpacked or 'installed' should also count. Plugin's that have to come from the CD internet or any other place where the program gets installed in a seperate or integrated into the install procedure way should be flagged with something. Features are a tricky question here.
Maybe this can give some clues: http://wiki.cgsociety.org/index.php/Comparison_of_3d_tools
Saw it a while ago on BlenderNation: http://www.blendernation.com/cg-society-3d-comparison-chart/
Thelennonorth (talk) 10:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

pointless article, should be deleted

[edit]

Wikipedia is not a shopping guide, it's an encyclopedia, and the information here cannot ever be complete and up-to-date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.37.141.122 (talk) 21:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't agree that it's pointless, do agree that it cannot be complete and up-to-date. Thelennonorth (talk) 10:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not a shopping guide? I've been using it as a Consumer Reports for software all these years. I'm too young and pretty to go to Wikijail!! Yappy2bhere (talk) 03:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why shouldn't a potential purchaser use an encyclopedia to research his/her options? Encyclopedias are not for ivory towers, they are for people to use to find the information they need, including those wishing to select a product. FreeFlow99 (talk) 10:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sketchup

[edit]

Sketchup Basic isnt mentioned (freeware) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.198.201 (talk) 07:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Imports/exports

[edit]

The comparison should mention which imports and exports can be done with the programs. This allows the reader to see which program combinations are possible. Eg sketchup http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=36217 can import 3ds; allowing blender, ... to be combined with it. This program combination is eg handy for when GPS data is to be imbedded to a model —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.210.145 (talk) 10:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added some info, but it appears it will get crowdy fast, perhaps imports and exports column are best divided into subheaders where file formats are placed. A simple yes/no can then be placed per program for each format —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.210.145 (talk) 12:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A good approach would be to use the column headers for the programs and rows for the file format.
Because there are a lot of file formats, this can be a good way to structure the support.
Then in each cell, there can be yes, no or some extra info.
Thelennonorth (talk) 13:46, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not putting the file formats on a separate table if there are so many? Thelennonorth (talk) 10:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The melange of formats suits me fine, but then I only scan for particular formats I need and the formats I want, and ignore the rest. Sorting them into a large, sparse table would only make it more difficult to compare more relevant features in the existing tables. Still, it would be helpful if 3D formats followed 2D formats in the laundry list (though evidently not so helpful that I'd take the time to do it myself). Yappy2bhere (talk) 03:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On second thought, I think it would be more useful to see them subdivided something like this:
Wireframe Animation Rendering Imports Exports
Solid Edge ? ? ?
IGES, STEP, DXF, JT, ACIS (SAT), Microstation, CATIA (V4/V5), Parasolid, Autocad, STL, XML
ProE, SolidWorks, NX, SDRC, Inventor, MDS PDF, EMS, XGL

|- ! SketchUp | style="background:#9EFF9E;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" class="table-yes"|Yes || style="background:#9EFF9E;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" class="table-yes"|Yes || style="background:#9EFF9E;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;" class="table-yes"|Yes | colspan="2" style="padding:0px;" | |- | colspan="2" | JPG, PNG, TIF, TGA, BMP, SKP, SKP+KMZ |- | width="50%" | | width="50%" | 3DS, DWG, DXF, DEM, DDF |}

(Does this look right in IE?) Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:00, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree.Suggest put this information, including can edit, import or export Open Design Alliance file format .dwg.--Lagoset (talk) 10:01, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just expanded the Features table

[edit]

Formally, that is. It was waaaaay too skinny to be useful, so I twiddled field widths a bit and let the table fill the display width. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to how it's done - does anyone know of a policy or rationale addressing this.

Also, does anyone know what the DDF file format is, or why Google included it in SketchUp?

Yappy2bhere (talk) 03:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the expansion could be taken further, to include, for example :
  • Keyframe Animation
  • NURBS Modelling
  • Sub Divisions
  • Polygonal Modelling
  • Renderers Included
  • Particle (or similar tools)
  • and so on....
I do not know a lot about such matters, but I am curious to know what others think of this?
JamesGrimshaw (talk) 23:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Price should be replaced by license

[edit]

The "price" column should be replaced by a "license" column to reflect different degrees of "free". An example can be found here: Comparison of raster graphics editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.196.33.31 (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Missing software

[edit]

This software is missing in the article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salome_(software) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:6D40:3491:A701:18B4:BCEB:8EDC:FDC (talk) 14:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC) Salome_(software)[reply]

Comparison of approach

[edit]

This article tells us nothing about the usability of these products. Differing products use different approaches to take the user from idea to 3D model; it would be useful if these approaches were compared. For example, I started using Sketchup 8 a few months ago as it sounded easy to learn and sufficient for my needs. I soon discovered that to get anywhere I had to load multiple plugins (perhaps my needs were not as simple as I thought). Although many claim that Sketchup 8 is 'intuitive' I did not find it so; it was not obvious how to accomplish all sorts of things. I have just opened Sketchup for the first time in months and got that sinking feeling just looking at the workspace. The vertical axis does not even start off being vertical and the tools to change perspective are enough to make one seasick. Part of the problem is that a 3D model is being represented on a 2D screen and cursor movements in just 2 axes is not enough to describe object commands in 3 axes. Perhaps what I need is a system designed more for engineers where I can design 2D objects on a 2D space that is nicely square on, then extrude 2D shapes with commands rather than cursor movements? It would be nice to have some comparison in this article of these sorts of features between the packages.FreeFlow99 (talk) 10:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Split the table in proprietary vs free

[edit]
Application Latest release date
and version 		Developed by Platforms Mainly Used For License
3ds Max "2016" Autodesk Microsoft Windows Modeling, Animation (Video Games), Lighting, Rendering Proprietary
AC3D 2014-03-03
v 7.2.17 		Inivis Linux, Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling Proprietary
Bryce 2010-12-23
7.1.0.109 		DAZ 3D Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X Animation, Landscape Modeling, Fractal Geometry Proprietary
Carrara 2010-04-21
8.0 		DAZ 3D Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X Animation, Modeling Proprietary
Cheetah 3D 2013-12-30
v 6.3 		Dr. Martin Wengenmayer Mac OS X Animation, Modeling Proprietary
Cinema 4D
R17 		MAXON Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Amiga OS[2] Animation, Lighting, Modeling, Visual 3D Effects, Rendering, Simulation Proprietary
CityEngine
v 2013 		Procedural Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Linux Procedural Modeling of 3D Cities Proprietary
Clara.io 2013-07-09
 Exocortex Mozilla FireFox, Google Chrome, Microsoft Internet Explorer Modeling, Animation, Rendering Proprietary
Cobalt 2009-12-11
v8 SP2r3 		Ashlar-Vellum Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling, Computer Aided Design, Animation Proprietary
Electric Image Animation System 2009-05
v8.0. 		EIAS3D Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Animation, Lighting, Rendering, Film, Television, Visual 3D Effects Proprietary
form-Z / form-Z Renderzone Plus 2013-10-11
7.3 		autodessys, Inc. Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Animation, Modeling, Lighting, Render, Fabrication, Set Design Proprietary
Hexagon 2008-05-20
2.5 		DAZ 3D Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X Subdivision Modeling, UV Mapping Proprietary
Houdini 2015-01-15
v 14 		Side Effects Software Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, Linux Animation, Lighting, Modeling, Visual 3D Effects Proprietary
IClone 2014
v 6.0 		Reallusion Microsoft Windows Animation, Film and Television Previz, Videogame Asset Creation, Lighting, Visual 3D Effects Proprietary
LightWave 3D 2014
v 11.6.2 		NewTek Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Amiga OS[3] Modeling, Animation, Lighting, Rendering, Film and Television Previz, Videogame Asset Creation Proprietary
MASSIVE ?
v 3.5 		Massive Software Microsoft Windows, Linux Artificial Intelligence in Models Proprietary
Maya 2014
"2015" 		Autodesk Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, Linux Modeling, Animation (Video), Lighting, Rendering, Visual 3D Effects Proprietary
Metasequoia 2011-05
2.4.13 (Metasequoia), R2.4a (MetasequoiaLE) 		O. Mizno Microsoft Windows Modeling Proprietary
MODO 2014-04-24
v 901 		The Foundry Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Linux Modeling, Animation, Rendering Proprietary
Mudbox
v 2015 		Autodesk Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Linux Lighting, Sculpting (the deformation of the model) Proprietary
Pro/Engineer September 2009
2009 Wildfire 5.0 		Parametric Technology Corporation Microsoft Windows, HP-UX, Unix Modeling Proprietary
Remo 3D v 2.5.1 Remograph Microsoft Windows, Linux Modeling, Virtual Reality, Real-time modeling, Video Game Creation, Computer Aided Design Proprietary
Rhinoceros 3D v 5 McNeel Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X in beta Modeling, Computer Aided Design Proprietary
Sculptris 2011-07-22
v Alpha 6 		Pixologic Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Sculpting, Texturing Proprietary
Shade 3D 2014
v 14.1.2 		Shade3D Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling, Rendering, Animation Proprietary
Silo 2008-08-13
v 2.1 		Nevercenter Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling Proprietary
SketchUp / SketchUp Pro 2015-02-5
v 15.3.331 (Win64)
v 15.3.330 (Win32)
v 15.3.329 (Mac) 		Trimble Navigation Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Computer Aided Design Proprietary
Softimage
"2015" (Final Release) 		Autodesk Microsoft Windows, Linux Modeling, Animation, Video Game Creation, Lighting, Rendering, Visual 3d Effects Proprietary
Solid Edge 2014-08-08
ST7 		Siemens PLM Software Microsoft Windows Computer Aided Design Proprietary
solidThinking 2014
v 2014 		solidThinking Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling Proprietary
SolidWorks 2014-09-09
v 2015 		Dassault Systèmes Microsoft Windows Computer Aided Design Proprietary
SpaceClaim 2014-11-19
v 2015 		SpaceClaim Corporation Microsoft Windows Computer Aided Design Proprietary
Swift 3D 2009-06-03
v6.0 (Final Release) 		Electric Rain Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling, Animation Proprietary
TopSolid 7.9
2014 		Missler Software Microsoft Windows Computer Aided Design/ Computer Aided Manufacturing Proprietary
trueSpace 2009-05-25
v 7.61 		Caligari Corporation Microsoft Windows, AmigaOS Animation, Modeling Proprietary
E-on Vue
v 2014 		E-on Software Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Animation, Landscape Modeling, Lighting Proprietary
Verto Studio 3D 2012-10-9
v 1.3.1 		Michael L. Farrell Mac OS X, iOS Mobile Modeling, Texture Mapping, Lighting Proprietary
ZBrush 2015-01-29
v 4R7 		Pixologic Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows Modeling, Texturing, Lighting, Sculpting (the deformation of the model), Rendering Proprietary
Application Latest release date
and version 		Developed by Platforms Mainly Used For License
AOI 2013-09-23
v 3.0 		Peter Eastman Java Virtual Machine supported platforms Animation, Lighting, Modelling, Rendering GNU GPLv2
Blender 2015-11-03
v 2.76b 		Blender Foundation Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, BSD, Solaris, AmigaOS 4, MorphOS Animation, Lighting, Modeling, Rendering, Video Game Creation, Visual 3D Effects, Sculpting, Basic Post-Production Video Editing, Motion Tracking, Python Scripting, Fluid Simulation, Particles, Physics, Compositing GNU GPLv2+ / Apache 2.0 [4]
POV-Ray 2013-11-06
v 3.7 		The POV-Team Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, Linux, AmigaOS Lighting, Visual 3D effects GNU AGPLv3
Wings3d 2014-04-14
1.5.3 		Dan Gudmundsson (maintainer) Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, BSD, Linux Modeling, Sculpting (the deformation of the model), UV mapping BSD

References

  1. ^ https://www.salome-platform.org/
  2. ^ Cinema 4D
  3. ^ LightWave 3D
  4. ^ [1]

Discussion

[edit]

Why? The Banner talk 13:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comparison_of_3D_computer_graphics_software&oldid=1258458484"