Do they still use 'be all you can be" in those adds?
I think the Army is having trouble getting new recruits. We did use quite a bit Photoshop on that. Modeled in Wildfire and rendered using image
studio then photoslop all over it.
I think now its an "Army of One" (ha ha, I guess they think kids these days are more self absorbed than they were in the 80's). Regardless, 3D renderings are sure to have some kind of impact on the Grand Theft Auto set. Nice work, though I might add maybe you can bolt some extra plated armor on the undercarriage in case of IED's.
We modeled it in Wildfire then rendered it in Image Studio by Alias for
a pitch to Leo Burnett potenital idea to talk Army into getting this
body paint style hummer to travel to NASCAR races promoting the enlistment.
I was wondering if you could maybe expand on the compatability between Pro and Image Studio.. how was it exported? problems encountered? etc.. Alias .obj don't support surfaces to the best of my knowledge.
We model in Pro/E with Top Down design the hummer. The
skeleton has all the curves and surfaces. The details go into the individual
parts. Exported via IGES all those parts. Read them into Alias (step not necessary). Placed decals and some materials in
Alias. Read in the Wire (alias native
model) into Image Studio (that is the product our photoreal competition is
<i style="">I wonder why PTC does not market Pro/CONCEPT
like the Image Studio product. I did
mention it to PTC marketing in an email.
Who am I?[/i]
Image Studio reads in the wire model ok. It takes step too. There we compete any logo maps and materials
applications. The final render always
gets messed with in Photoshop. There we
add depth of field by blurring items in the distance.<i style="">[/i]
<We model in Pro/E with Top Down design the hummer. The skeleton has all the curves and surfaces. The details go into the individual parts. Exported via IGES all those parts. Read them into Alias (step not necessary). Placed decals and some materials in Alias. Read in the Wire (alias native model) into Image Studio (that is the product our photoreal competition is giving away)>
Why don't you read in the PRT file direclty Alias Studio (since it is capable of doing so natively)?
I transfer data between Alias Studio and Proe all the time and I am finding to have smoother tranfers using the Granite in & out translators than IGES.
<I wonder why PTC does not market Pro/CONCEPT like the Image Studio product. I did mention it to PTC marketing in an email. Who am I?>
I used both and IMO the two products don't compare at all.
<This is the direct link between PTC and ALIAS that was once called Granite One. I want to write an indepth article on Granit one or Alias Direct Connect within the month. Maybe I shold poll the users here for info on the products? Me? I prefer to remodel it all in Pro/SURFACE. >
At some point there was a White Paper available about the Granite One interoperability between Alias StudioTools (not ImageStudio though!) and Proe. Not sure if this document is still available on the PTC or Alias web sites.
could probably compare anything. Maybe the two products don't
compare because you don't have experince with rendering tools.
The rendering package in Pro/CONCEPT
is so much more powerful than that of Pro/ENGINEER. If you were to
evaluate Pro/CONCEPT you might overlook it's rendering advantages if
you did not have rendering experiance. And I believeit
is the same rendering engine. Pro/CONCEPT is Basically a more advanced user interface. I should look into it more
but maybe Lightworks developed the Pro/CONCEPT package? Look closely at the materials. A user can adjust the depth of a valley on a leather. A user can also adjust the frequency of
valleys. Imagine having a parametric
modeler with parametric surfaces. It is
about time. I would like to be apart of
a team at PTC to write a proposal for what this would cost. To integrate a lightworks engine to Wildfire
4.0 where the PTC interface could take
full advantage of all the procedural tools in Pro/CONCEPT.
In the meantime PTC should market the Pro/CONCEPT tool just
like Alias markets the Image Studio product.
Most engineers who test Pro/CONCEPT dismiss the product because of it
How is your job search going? You ready to come to <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Chicago</st1lace></st1:City>?
To answer your question. I do not consider Pro/SURFACE better than
ISDX. Or ISDX better than Pro/SURFACE. I have been using
Pro/SURFACE for over 10 years. Maybe I am biased. It is a powerful
surfacing tool. I like the parametric constraints Pro/SURFACE will allow
me. I crave the robust nature of being able to prove form inside
Pro/SURFACE. ISDX on the other hand takes it's strength by nature
of being a freeform surface modeling tool. With the parent child relationships
ISDX can create and the robust nature of parametric surfacing tools Pro/SURFACE
allows me, it is the combination of Pro/SURFACE and ISDX that makes a killer
Bart - thank you for the long explanation. I understand your point although I didn't feel this way when using V1 (which I own) and V2 (which I evaluated but didn't think it was worth the update). Now I realize that a V3 of the product so things might have changed.
From what I remember Pro/CONCEPT indeed has a quite nice and extended library of materials. But personnally I didn't the lighting and environments looks and controls. As a whole the product felt very sluggish to me. Hopefully nice improvements were made in V3 in that respect.
But I am also biased since I have been using Alias Studio as my main modeling and rendering package for +10 years. The rendering in Alias Studio hasen't been improved for a long time and don't support all the latest rendering technologies (ie Global Illumination, HDRI, etc.) but it often suffices for my needs and those of my clients. It nice and efficient to have everything in one package. But depending on the desired end result, I also use Mental Ray for Maya.
I have used ImageStudio at times but I prefer Maya for that it offers more controls and flexibility, and it contains the same functionality but without the presets.
As a photo studio environment, ImageStudio has a much nicer setup/layout and look and feel than Pro/CONCEPT - which make sens since it was developped for that purpose only. Compared to Pro/Concept it lacks of the extended library of materials.
There is definitly room for improvements with the LightWorks rendering engine used in Pro/CONCEPT and Pro/ENGINEER since the latest version support some of the latest rendering technologies (ie Global illumination, etc.). It's only up top PTC to hook this up.
The other nice thing about the LightWorks rendering engine is its support for material librairies from the like of GE Plastic, Mold-Tech, etc (see www.lightworks-user.com for details). Support for these librairies should make it into WF3 I believe.