I'm learning to model in Blender.  It's fun, and I'm progressing.  But I am wondering out loud, is it worth my time to learn to model with polygons, or should I instead just focus on learning to sculpt really good, then just use retopology to make it into quads?  Seems like anyone can do that, but learning to model in polygons from the start is the hardest thing.  I think they call it poly modelling, or box modelling, or whatever techniques.  The point is, am I just wasteing my time here learning to do it that way?  Seems like sculpting and retopology are what the pros do more now, and there's less of actually creating models from a box or polygon these days.  Everyone seems to just block out a model in sculpt application, then just "draw" polygons over it, like tracing or paint by numbers so to speak.

Any opinions?  I see there are still some old fashioned modelers doing some great work here, but the more I look around, the less likely I feel it is helpful to know how to create objects out of pollygons, when I can model it using the sculpt tools really fast, then just spend a few hours drawing quads over that with Blenders Bsurfaces or whatever.

Hi, David.  Welcome to the modeling forum!

Simply put, there is definitely a need for knowing how to polygon model objects, using traditional sub-d and box or edge modeling techniques.  Why would you wish to create a simple table, for example, in a sculpting application, when you can model one very simply and efficiently from a box in any 3d modeling package?  When it comes to quickly creating most hard-surface objects with good topology, poly-modeling is still much easier than virtual clay sculpting.  Even some organic shapes can be faster to achieve using subdivision modeling from standard polygons.

Sculpting from virtual clay definitely has it's advantages, and with the awesome retopology tools available now in packages like Zbrush, 3DCoat, and even the native tools in some general 3D applications, it's becoming a standard method to achieving complex organic or semi-organic results very quickly.  To say it isn't worth it to learn to model, however, is not being logical.  Retopology, or should I say, good retopology, will require some knowledge of how edge flow and polygon placement affects smoothing, subdivision, and UV's.  The  best way to understand this is to learn how to model in polygons to begin with.

PS:  I noticed your first post to the galleries here is actually a render containing one of my freebie models.  Thank you for mentioning it in your description, by the way!  Just so you know, that particular chair model was created entirely with Sub-D modeling techniques in just a few hours..  I think if I were to create the same model by sculpting it first, then retopologizing, it probably would have taken a bit longer.  Also, be aware that detailing models in applications like Mudbox, do require a quad topology to begin with.  Again, this comes from a basic knowledge of how to model things "the old fashioned way" first.  Not sure everyone would agree, but I'd be eager to hear from those with an opposing view.

Hope you keep posting to this forum.  It needs more activity. ;)

I'd just like to add, as it wouldn't let me edit my post above, that I believe it's important to know both modeling and sculpting, in order to achieve the best results overall.  Depending on if you are looking at this from a professional perspective, or just as a hobbyist; knowing how to poly model object will never be a waste of time.  If nothing else, it will build a solid foundation of skills that will surely assist you in whatever you are doing in the world of 3D.  It's never a waste of time to learn something anyway.

Just to add to what Lux has put so well, modeling is only the first (and perhaps quickest) part. You'll also need to look at UV mapping and texturing.

Thank you for the fast replies, guys!  Luxxeon, that was a very thoughtful and in depth response, and makes a lot of sense. I was hoping I would have your attention here, but didn't expect the detailed reply you gave me, and I must thank you for that.  I think my primary issue with learning to model things with polygons comes down to this.  I'm 44 years old.  I'm not a college or high school student.  I just got into 3D about 5 years ago, maybe less.  I have a family, I have kids.  I have a full time job outside of this industry, and 3D is just a hobby (so far).  I tinker around with Poser a lot, and I have started learning Blender.  I'm learning how to model, but I am not having a good time with it.  Not because of the software, but because I'm old, and I was never good at math or geometry.  Ever.  I'm far better at hands-on artistic creation, like sculpting.  So for me, using Sculptris was a dream come true.  I was able to create very realistic models with it quickly.  The problem was always that I couldn't use them for anything other than a clay render to admire them as a static object in empty space, because the polygon count was usually too high to import into any other software, and even if I could, I wasnt capable of adding much more to the scene once I got the objects there.

So I started learning Blender to see if I could model "properly", and get the results that people like you, and others who know how to do that kind of thing get.  Sure. I could model a table, or a simple chair (definitely not the kind of chairs you model, mind you), but that's about as far as I can get.  I can NOT, even if I follow good tutorials, figure out how to model anything more complicated than that.  Call me stupid, but I've tried for a while now, and I can't figure it out. It's just too complicated for my old brain to understand, and too many features or tools to remember.  I can barely remember what brush to use when sculpting, nevermind dozens of hotkeys and modelling tools, and knowing which ones are what I need for doing what I want in my mind.

So is modelling just not for me then?  What do you say to someone like myself, who JUST CAN'T GET IT?  Am I not cut out to create my own stuff then?  All I know how to do is sculpt the shape I want, then I can, in a limited kinda way, use the retopology tools in Blender to create squares and triangles over that shape so that the model is usable.  I like the idea of automatic retopology, like I see in Zbrush, but then I hear you and others in the know say that you still need to know how the polgyons should "flow" to get good results, so I wonder if automatic retopology is ok to use, or useless to me in the end?  Maybe only useless if I want to sell or share my models then?

You could try another application besides Blender, and I'm not saying Blender is bad. There are a few free ones like Wings3D, or low cost, like Hexagon that might work better for you. So look around and see what else is out there. And then you might discover after trying a few others, that Blender works better for you.

There's a lot of similarities between modeling applications, so learning one will help you learn another.

Yes, Perhaps try another app for poly modelling. I don't like blender, doesn't suit my workflow but many love it. Workflow is a very important part of the process.

With regard to Sculptris etc, I can't model from a sphere, I need to import a mesh with the shape and add details. Perhaps if you can make a low poly model then sculpt and go down the normal map route, it may suit you more. Oh, and forget the age thing, I'm 51.

Thank you, cjd and airflamesred.  My problem isn't so much the software anymore.  I've overcome the complicated keys and "shortcuts" (what a joke that term is) as it pertains to modelling stuff now in Blender.  BUT (and this is a big but) I just don't know when to use certain tools, and unless I'm following a specific tutorial word for word, and move for move, can never figure out how to get a wireframe mesh that looks good.  Let me give you guys an example of what I mean...

I'll sculpt something cool in Sculptris, or in Blender using the sculpting tools, then I'll go ahead to create some retopology.  This, to me, is the only way I can model a proper object. But even using this techniques, I end up failing.  I start by creating strips of squares along the surface of my sculpt, then connecting the strips, and keep going until it's all filled in.  But I alway always end up with a model full of ngons or triangles, and if I try to subdivide it, it has nasty creases, bumps, or whatever where I don't want them.  I've never found a tutorial which shows you how to build retopology square by square, and how to mathematically figure out how to keep everything in squares, so that it looks pretty when you go to smooth it, and so on.  So even with this "cheat" technique, I'm not very good.  Forget about creating something from a box using edge cuts and extrusions, and all that. I wouldn't know where to begin half the time,.

OR I'll be following a traditional style modelling tutorial, and then see the guy do something and for the life of me can't figure out how he did it, what he did, or whatever, and that's all it takes to lose myself in that tutorial.  I think I finished maybe 3 or 4 complete models based on tutorials, but I tried probably DOZENS of tutorials.  Only finished 3 or 4.

Modelling is just hard.  I really really wanna learn it so I can some day maybe make some money doing this hobby.  But it doesn't seem likely,.  I'm just stupid when it comes to geometry.  I wish automatic retopology gave perfect consistant results, and us sculptors wouldn't have to worry about things like squares or triangles.

Oh, I tried Wings even before Blender.  I had all the same problems.  So it's just me I guess.

I think in my case, I would really need to learn this thing in a "school" setting.  I'm thinking the only way I'll get my head around it is if I have someone next to me, helping me along, so I can ask questions while I work, etc.  Online tutorials and just following along that way isn't working for me, because I'm really bad at geometry.  I might have to look into taking classes at a University or something.

How does one go about that? Anyone know?  I wouldn't even know if our local colleges have 3D courses.  It's a little frustrating.  I'm NOT giving up though.  I'll post some of my "models" later, so you will see just how bad I am,. hahaha

If you're not an animator, and just doing this as a hobby, then why stress over topology?  Search the forum for topology or ngons, and you might turn up some of our discussions on this topic.  The auto-topo features in Zbrush have improved greatly.  If you can draw simple curved lines, you can create decent topology now.  Just draw some curves on the surface indicating how you want the automatic retopology to run the edge flow, and it does a decent job following your concept.

It doesn't get more simple than that, mate.  If Zbrush is out of your price range, then 3D Coat has the same kind of thing.  I mean, you don't need a perfect quad mesh unless you plan on deforming the mesh for animation, or if you plan on creating high res displacement or normal maps with detailed sculpting on the base mesh.  That's it.

Auto-topo is dummy proof, and should be good enough for a hobbyist needs.  Is learning to model a waste of your time?  Only you can answer that.  Would learning a second or third language be a waste of your time?  How about learning to juggle?  Learning to model is much the same, in a personal sense.  It's a skill.  You either wanna learn it, or you don't.

I agree with all the things luxxeon said.  Learning to model is very useful if you wanna make your own models, which you already do.  The thing about sculpting stuff is that you get a really heavy mesh, and sometimes you can reduce the polygon count, but most of the time you have to use it as is.  Unless you know how to create detailed maps from the surface, and use them on a low poly model.  Most people don't know how to do that, I don't think, and make it look as good as the high poly version.

Bsurfaces in Blender is the best way I know to paint polygons over a model, but you're right, it does take some understanding of geometry to get a good result.  Stick with it though.  I mean, it may be frustrating, but keep at it.  As long as you don't have anything better to do at the time, it's not a waste.  You'll eventually learn it, and at least be able to get a result you can use!  That will make it all worth while right there!  Don't worry about keeping it all squares right now.  Try to make them all squares or quads, but having a few triangles in there won't hurt anyone.  Sometimes you have to.  Ngons subdivde bad, so keep away from anything with more than 4 sides, and you should be fine.  That's easy to do.  Just knife cut any polygons that have more than 4 sides, and make it into less than.

Stick with Blender!  Don't give up.  It's free, and it's just incredible.

Dude you can do it. SinnerSaint  is right you are being to self critical. Work on your modeling and stop driving your self crazy with  perfect topology.  I mean learn about good topology and try to work it in there but  don't stress over it. You will get better. As far as tuts go don't worry about whether you built an entire complex model but what kind of tools did you learn to use. As you practice you will acquire more of these skills to put in your modelling tool box. Open up Blender and just look through the tools and play around with them. Search YouTube for tuts on these tools and then try to  use the tool to build or alter something simple. The most important thing is just enjoy what you are doing. If you don't you wont stick with it. Besides It's not worth driving your self crazy over. Start a project on something you would like to build and start a thread in the Blender forum or the modeling forum or both. the folks here will help you out.

I'll sculpt something cool in Sculptris, or in Blender using the sculpting tools, then I'll go ahead to create some retopology.  This, to me, is the only way I can model a proper object. But even using this techniques, I end up failing.  I start by creating strips of squares along the surface of my sculpt, then connecting the strips, and keep going until it's all filled in.  But I alway always end up with a model full of ngons or triangles, and if I try to subdivide it, it has nasty creases, bumps, or whatever where I don't want them.

One rule of thumb to always keep in mind when it comes to topology is to always think in even numbers.  If you create poly strips which always consist of an even number of polygons, and bridge them together with an even number of edge segments, you will always end up with a quad mesh (topology which consists entirely of 4 sided polygons).  If it is not mathematically possible to maintain quads, no matter how you create your poly strips, then that's ok.  Just try to place your tris in flat, planar areas of the mesh, and it should subdivide just fine.  It's that simple.  So just remember to think in terms of an even number of edges or polygons, and that will help you to create a good quality topology, almost always. As others have suggested, don't give up.  Keep going, and start out as simple as possible.  Start in this thread.  Think of a simple object you would like to learn how to model, but wouldn't be able to finish on your own at this point.  Post the name or picture of the object here, and I promise I will help you create that model from start to finish, in this thread.  I normally do not use Blender to create models, but I will either post video or series of screencaps to help you along, using Blender.  Guaranteed, you will be able to build that model, and it will be easier than you think.

Wow!  That's really generous of you, luxxeon!  Like a personal modelling tutor? lol..  That's really kind of you!  But I must warn you, I can be a difficult student. lol.

Hmmm.  Lemme think.  What would be a good object?  Well, for one thing, I've been trying to follow this tutorial in Blender...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j67oRv524bY

It's a tutorial about how to model a beer bottle cap.  It's a great tutorial I'm sure, but of course I've tried several times, and my result is not like the video.  Not sure where I go wrong, but I thought that would be an easy model. I get screwed up once it comes time to array I think,

So I don't know, lux.  I can hardly believe you're being so kind.  Surprise me!  I'll try to follow along with whatever object you think might be easy enough.  Thank you very much for the offer, but don't feel like you're obligated.  I know you're busy and all.  I'd just be happy if you answer my questions when I have them.

Thank you to everyone who answered with encouragement.  I'm not gonna give up!  Gonna keep pushin forward.

Wow!  That's really generous of you, luxxeon!  Like a personal modelling tutor? lol..  That's really kind of you!  But I must warn you, I can be a difficult student. lol.

Hmmm.  Lemme think.  What would be a good object?  Well, for one thing, I've been trying to follow this tutorial in Blender...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j67oRv524bY

It's a tutorial about how to model a beer bottle cap.  It's a great tutorial I'm sure, but of course I've tried several times, and my result is not like the video.  Not sure where I go wrong, but I thought that would be an easy model. I get screwed up once it comes time to array I think,

So I don't know, lux.  I can hardly believe you're being so kind.  Surprise me!  I'll try to follow along with whatever object you think might be easy enough.  Thank you very much for the offer, but don't feel like you're obligated.  I know you're busy and all.  I'd just be happy if you answer my questions when I have them.

Thank you to everyone who answered with encouragement.  I'm not gonna give up!  Gonna keep pushin forward.

Glad to hear it!  The key to becoming a good modeler has a lot to do with some basic principals.  Some of those principals are out there to learn for free from others,and some only come with time and experience, and practicing certain drills every day,  As I've mentioned, Blender is not the package I typically use for modeling, but I have become somewhat familiar with it over the past year, and all of the basic principals I've learned in 3dsmax apply when I use Blender as well. The video tutelage you linked to there is very interesting.  I don't think I've seen that technique used before to create that kind of object.  Not that there's anything wrong with the tutorial; it's very good.  I like the result there, although I would have probably approached the model quite differently.  Give me a few hours, and I'll put together a quick video of the technique I'd probably use to create that same kind of object, and you can decide if you feel it might be easier.  I'll do the video with Blender.

One thing to keep in mind is that Blender can be customized per user, and although I did not change any hotkey shortcuts, the look of my interface may differ from yours slightly.  I will also be using several addons, which come with the latest installation of Blender 2.72 or higher.  Particularly, the Pie Menu, Dynamic Space Bar, and Icons addons.  If you have Blender 2.72 or higher, I highly recommend enabling these addons.  I wished they were available when I was first learning to use Blender, as they definitely make the workflow much easier, and do not require the memorization of quite as many hotkeys, which is something you mentioned was an issue.  They won't be necessary, but I'll be using them in the video, and it might make it easier to follow along.  If not, I will help guide you through the video here in the forum anyway, after I post it.  So if you watch the video, don't get scared or confused straight away.  I'm not sure I'll be able to add audio, because my mocrophone is acting up on me lately, but I will annotate the video, and answer any questions you have about it in the forum.  I'll be online most of the day after I post it, so I should see your posts fairly quickly.

One thing I do insist you do is make sure your have your Loop Tools addon enabled in Blender.  I'm not sure if they are enabled in the latest builds or not, but you can enable it, as well as any other addons, in the Blender User Preferences.  Just go to File > User Preferences > Addons, or hotkeys CTRL+ALT+U, under Windows.

I'll post a link here when I upload the video.

Here you go, David.  I'm sorry there's no audio.  I'll get my mic working for the next tutorial, but I do have annotations enabled in the video, explaining everything I'm doing.  So make sure you have annotations turned on in your Youtube preferences, if you can't see them.  I don't expect you to use the Pie Menus, or have the same hotkey configuration as I do, but I do explain exactly what's going on in the annotations throughout the video.  If you can't understand or figure out how I did something, post the question here, along with the time in the video it is happening, and I'll try to respond in a timely fashion.

This is my first Blender video tutorial - actually, it's more of an example than a full tutorial - so please bear with me if I make a keystroke error, or if I'm using menu items instead of hotkeys for certain things.  I am not quite as familiar with Blender as I am 3dsmax, and my workflow is not as fluid.  However, I think the principals here should be easy enough to follow.  Let me know.

http://youtu.be/U4Q2rJ5roFA

Again, if you get confused, simply post here, and I will walk you through it on the forum.  I hope you find this a little easier than the other way, but everyone has their own way of doing things when it comes to modeling.

Really good Lux, much better method than the Blender link. I have used that bend technique on tyres but no real need on this.

Holy wow!  Thank you so much for taking the time to do this for me!  Seriously, I'm humbled by all the work you put into this, and really really owe it to you to learn to model this object!  I just got home from work tonight, and won't have time to try out the tutorial you made yet, but I PROMISE tomorrow I will definitely watch the video, and model along as best I can.

Will you be around tomorrow? Saturday?  I'll post any questions I have to the thread here, but I'm definitely excited to try and complete the model.  It definitely looks a lot easier than using arrays and bending and stuff.  I'm sure those things have their place, and some people like to model that way, but it just didn't make sense to me.  Just watching this video real quck tonight, it looks like I may be able to do this.  Ok, I'll post my questions and progress tomorrow!

Thank you once again, luxxeon!  That's incredibly nice of you.

Really good Lux, much better method than the Blender link. I have used that bend technique on tyres but no real need on this.

Thanks, Mark.  Yeah, that's the first thing I thought when I watched that other tutorial.  I actually hadn't seen a bottle cap created that way before, in any package. David, take your time.  I'll be around when or if you have questions, or run into trouble.  Feel free to hit me up any time personally at my email too.  I don't want to list it publicly here in the thread, but I'll send it via private message if you wish.

Hi, Luxxeon!  Ok, i've started the tutorial, but right off the bat I'm running into some problems.  I'm at the stage where I need to extrude each face inwards, and then scale them smaller, as you show in the video.  My problem is with the scaling.  I extrude with individual, and then hit the S button to scale, but when I try to make the squares smaller, this happens...

Not sure you can tell what's going on here, but the scaling isn't doing what it does in your video.  In my case, it's just pushing all the squares deeper inside the tube all together, as if I was still extruding them.  I'm not sure what step I missed here. I'll keep looking over the notes in your vid, and try to find it while I wait for you to see this post.

Thanks again, Luxxeon. It's probably something stupid I'm overlooking here.  Sorry.

No prob, David.  First and foremost, be sure you are watching the video with Youtube annotations on.  Annotations of exactly what steps to take should appear many times during the video, in different locations on the screen.  If you watch the video at around :33 (thirty-three seconds), you should see an annotation appear at the lower right, which prompts you to change your Pivot Centers to "Individual Origins".  This is a separate step to using "Extrude Individual" tool, and does make a difference in how things will scale or rotate in the scene.  I can't tell, by the way you cropped your screen-capture, if you actually have the Pivot Centers set correctly at this point, but I do not believe you do, so you may have missed that step.

In the Blender UI, down on the panel where the icons for your transformation manipulators are, and where you can switch between vertex, edge, and face selections in edit mode, you will find an icon for "pivot center for rotation and scaling", and it has arrows right next to it, pointing up and down.  Press on that, and a fly-out with multiple Pivot Point options will appear.  You need to select "Individual Origins". from that list of choices.  Once you do that, you should be able to scale those faces exactly as I did in the video.

Let me know if you have trouble finding it, and how you make out afterwards.

Where are the Gorilla 3D tutorials when you need them? (Anyone remember those excellent tutorial vids? I can't find them, or I'd link them. :( ) They were excellent tutes that targeted the most basic 3D modeling principles with wonderful precision and easy-to-understand language and examples. If anyone finds those, please link them!

As far as "learning to model" goes, I can't see why anyone who enjoyed 3D wouldn't jump on the chance! However, it's not as easy as it looks in the movies... The most important thing any new 3D modeller needs is a tool that is friendly to a learning 3D modeller. Unfortunately, Blender would be last on that list, in my opinion. Blender is a powerful program with outstanding capabilities. But, it is not an easy application for a learning 3D modeler to use.

I would recommend Hexagon. I say I "would", because it could be difficult to use on some newer computer systems and it's not really in "active" development. It's just sort of plopped down in DAZ's inventory, not doing much. However, if you don't mind shelling out a few bucks and then getting it up and running, it's the best and most powerful "newbie modeler learning tool" out there and I've tried 'em all. (Wings3D and Animator were nice little packages when I tried them, but Hexagon is much better.) Sure, it has its issues, like sometimes wonky UVMapping and its resolution limitations for producing a uv image, but that can be overcome by using the free UVMapper proggy, which has been around forever. (There are also some crash issues, here and there, with some machine configs. I get around those problems by running it using a basic Intel chipset option and it works fine, apart from some screen-clipping on occasion. )

The important thing is that Hexagon gives you immediate and intuitive access to every single basic 3D modeling tool and process that you will need. A new modeler MUST have easy and frequent access to such tools in order to be able to learn how to properly use the skills they are trying to develop. It's extremely difficult to learn how subdividing effects a model, for instance, if you have to go through eighteen steps and then sacrifice a goat to your computer in order to get the program you're working in to produce a sub-d'd mesh. Want to move just one vertice? Some programs make you go through a different option every time you want to move on a different axis. How in the world can anyone "learn" having to struggle with fiddly problems like that? A learner must have the option to use the tools they're learning with, frequently.

In my opinion, the issue isn't that learning how to model 3D objects is "hard." It's that the program the OP is using is not intuitive and is not friendly to a new modeler, so that makes learning basic skills a real chore. A "learner" must have easy and frequent access to the tools they're learning with. One can "doodle" complex objects quickly and easily in Hexagon, just in order to learn the basic skills of pushing verts around and what "not to do."

Should one learn 3D modeling? Absolutely. I do it for fun and a general interest in 3D modeling going way back. I enjoy learning "why" just as much as I enjoy learning "how." That made it a simple choice, for me. But, even for people who are just enthusiatic renderers, learning how to model your own objects can save hundreds of dollars, perhaps even thousands, that would otherwise be spent on other people's products, products that weren't "exactly" what was wanted. There isn't anything I can't model and if I want it and really want to enjoy it, I create it myself. (There are some things that I won't model, though. :) )

CHECK IT OUT!  Think I got it!

Yes, I did have some trouble at first.  Mainly, I just wasn't reading all the notes you had in the video closely enough, so it was my fault.  But after several tries, I got this thing!  I think it looks awesome, THANK YOU!

Now I gotta go and try to make a render of this thing.  That's the fun part for me.  Really awesome tutorial, luxxeon!  This might be only one of a handful of tutorials I actually completed!  I'll make a render of a scene tomorrow with it, and show you.  I think I learned quite a bit here.  For one thing, the ability to make selections on all of the same kinds of faces, and also changing that pivot thing so that my scaling works the way I need it to.  I hope you make some more videos for Blender like this one, but I really really would prefer if there were audio, and verbal explainations of what's going on.  This was great, but reading the notes made it a litte harder.

One thing I did that helped was I wrote down all the notes in the video on paper, as a step by step guide, then I would read them as I worked on the model!  That actually helped a lot!  Thanks a ton!

Nice work there, David!  Congrats!

I too went through this tutorial in Blender.  My first problem came at the use of the similar selection.  No matter what I did there, the select similar would not grab all of the correct faces, like it did in Lux's video.  Did you experience any problems with that?  Just curious.

Congrats David, nicely done.

Thanks, Cybermonk!  And thank you again to everyone who posted encouragement in this thread!  I'm very pleased with this accomplishment.  I actually went back and did this tutorial over again a second time, and got an even better result the second time around, and got through it without any problems!  Then I decided to do it a third time, just for fun, and to practice!  This is probably the most complex model I've accomplished in Blender without sculpting first!  I know, please don't laugh!  lol

Anyway, I haven't got around to rendering a scene yet, because I really wanted to get this tutorial down like second nature before moving forward.  I wanted to accomplish this model in about the same time or better as it is shown in the video.  Now I'm able to model this thing without the video, which I've never been able to do before!  So I recommend that to anyone who is learning to model, in any software.  Don't just go through a tutorial once.  Find a simple tutorial which is well done, like this one, and go through it several times, until you can do it perfectly on your own,  I think that's the way to learn how to model, at least for someone like myself, who has been struggling.

I looked into Hexagon, as Morkonan suggested, but to be honest, I don't wanna switch software now, even if it's supposed to be easier.  I think switching at this point would only set me back.  I'm happy with Blender at the moment, and I think what I really needed was a confidence boost, which this has given me!

Luxxeon, please make more Blender tutorials like this one!  Audio would be even better, but as long as they are annotated in detail, it's ok.  Just as long as they are around 5 minutes or less in length.  Longer tutorials tend to lose me faster.  This one was perfect for me.  Thank you!

I looked into Hexagon, as Morkonan suggested, but to be honest, I don't wanna switch software now, even if it's supposed to be easier.  I think switching at this point would only set me back.  I'm happy with Blender at the moment, and I think what I really needed was a confidence boost, which this has given me!

Congratulations! I don't remember what my first 3D model was, but when I finally decided to get "serious" about it, my first model was an ampule... (Cask used in ancient times to store goods in for shipping, just in case...) :)

Silo2 is out, if you're interested. It's much like Hexagon in that it's a no frills, but still powerful, 3D modeling program. If you're familiar with Steam (Game hosting service) it's on sale there for around $80, which isn't a bad deal at all. It isn't really in development, though, but it's a decent modeling app and very easy to use.

When you get frustrated, and you will :) , remember that half of 3D modeling is knowing the application you're using. Once you get past the basics of constructing good geometry, UVmaps, etc.., then you can take that knowledge into any 3D application you wish. (Polygon based) That is why I suggested you look around for a more "friendly" program. What you need when you're starting out is constant and easy access to all the common tools you will need to use in order to learn all the basic principles of pushing verts around in a simulated 3D environment. Even a product like "Pegasus Modeler", available here IIRC, isn't a bad modeler to learn on. The most important thing is that you get to practice easily and can quickly jump in and start fidgeting around with various tools, just so you can see what they do. If you have to jump through twenty steps in order to sub-d something or in order to extract or extrude something or even to perform boolean operations (where are "teh devil" and should be done by nobody, nowhere :) ) then you're not going to practice those skills as often. Again, half of the issue of 3D modeling is learning the package you're using and the other half is the knowledge and creativity you bring with you. If your bucket is already half-full of all the basic knowledge and creativity you need to move on, you can pick up any 3D package and understand almost exactly what everything means, does and what the consequences of it doing it might mean. (Unless it's Blender, which is uber-powerful, but the UI was designed by... Well, it wasn't. ;) )

Good luck and welcome to the joys of 3D modeling! You're hooked! You're excited! You see the power beneath your hands and you can grasp it! Now, you'll walk around all day, looking at common objects and plotting out how to model them in your head. :) Don't laugh - It will happen!

Not a fan of Blender by any means, but what software you referring to when you say "jump through hoops to sub-d something", Morkonan?  I don't know of any program where that is any more difficult than a hotkey or modifier.

Luxxeon, please make more Blender tutorials like this one!  Audio would be even better, but as long as they are annotated in detail, it's ok.  Just as long as they are around 5 minutes or less in length.  Longer tutorials tend to lose me faster.  This one was perfect for me.  Thank you!

David, the length of the tutorials will usually depend on the complexity of the object in question, and the mesh to be created.  However, I don't know if you've seen my latest Blender video yet.  I uploaded it shortly after posting this beer cap tutorial.  This is my second modeling demo using Blender, and it's actually more of a modeling exercise than a proper tutorial, but I think you'd benefit greatly by this one.  It's a technical modeling exercise, intended to illustrate several useful tools you might not commonly think about using in your workflow, but when used properly, can exponentially reduce the time it takes to model some fairly complex geometry. In this video, we aren't working towards achieving a typical real-life object (although it can become one with some imagination), but instead focusing on topological aesthetics, and quickly building an arbitrary shape of some complexity, in very little time.  The resulting model in this tutorial is actually more complex, but can be constructed in less time, than the previous model you've already mastered in the first tutorial.  If you're feeling brave, and have about 4 minutes to spare, you might wanna give this one a try,  The process is faster, and easier, than the beer bottle cap, in my opinion.

http://youtu.be/BHlSFl00SSo

Of course, I'll check this thread for any questions you may have.  If you get stuck for any reason, just contact me.  If you complete this video exercise successfully, as you did the last, then I recommend doing the same thing you did before; go through it again, several times, until you can do it without looking.  If you fail or get frustrated, take a break, then let me know what went wrong.  Most of all, have fun with this.  In the end, there's no right or wrong shape here; just get to know the tools used, and the hotkeys to call upon them.  One step at a time.  Good luck!

Not a fan of Blender by any means, but what software you referring to when you say "jump through hoops to sub-d something", Morkonan?  I don't know of any program where that is any more difficult than a hotkey or modifier.

I was blowing it out of proportion for illustration, of course. :) Once one learns any program, it's much easier to use. But, learning a program has a great deal to do with it's interface and how intuitive it is. The more intuitive and user-friendly an interface, the faster it can be accessed and meaningfully explored. Blender's interface is far from... intuitive. But, that's also true for some other very powerful modelers. Yet, not all of them are that way.

My point is that for a learning modeler, who has yet to learn the basics of not only "what" but also "why", it's critical that they have easy access to the tools that will demonstrate the principles they need to learn. They must have frequent and easy access in order to practice the skills that will need to become second-nature to them in order to progress, just like anyone else would in any other craft. One of the joys of many modeling programs, even fairly powerful ones, is an intuitive and easy to use interface where most common functions are not buried in "hotkey commands." Sure, for speed and, apparently, industry practice, 3D modeling involves the use of lots and lots of hotkeys... But, hotkeys are not "intuitive." They simply "are" and their use is not as easily interpreted in a point-and-click age. Hotkeys have little association with "whats" and "whys" and are just simple "hows." They're part of an application, not an intrinsic and functional part of the process of "learning", in my opinion.

I don't like Blender. But, that's because I don't know Blender. It's certainly a powerful program with a great many features that relatively few commercial packages include. Certainly, for the price, there is no better program available inasmuch as its capabilities. But, as a "learning tool", I think it leaves a great deal to be desired. It's just not designed to be easily functional when compared with other packages, even those used by some professionals.

My caution was only to note that the frustration that a new modeler may feel can be as much caused by the application they're trying to use as their lack of knowledge. That a person may find one program more difficult to learn than another is a given. But, that one may think that all programs are similarly difficult to learn and, therefore, it must mean that the skill is just as difficult and confusing to learn does not necessarily logically follow - There are many more intuitive and easier to learn 3D modeling applications than Blender. Someone new to 3D modeling may not realize this and, thus, nobody would ever benefit from what their talent, if exercised, could bring, since it was needlessly abandoned in the mires of apprenticeship. :)

Agreed, Very few seem to find Blender that intuative but it's free, and rightly or wrongly, those starting out on a 3d journey are going to be drawn to it for that reason.I don't get your beef about hotkeys though. As more features are added, you need to access them and quickest way I've seen is via that radial array in Maya/Blender or hotkeys. I use hotkeys all the time because it suits the pace I work at.

Agreed, Very few seem to find Blender that intuative but it's free, and rightly or wrongly, those starting out on a 3d journey are going to be drawn to it for that reason.I don't get your beef about hotkeys though. As more features are added, you need to access them and quickest way I've seen is via that radial array in Maya/Blender or hotkeys. I use hotkeys all the time because it suits the pace I work at.

I can't speak for Morkonan, Mark, but I have a similar opinion when it comes to Blender, and only for Blender.  I don't know if that is what he actually meant.  I'm sure he will reply in turn. Hotkeys and shortcuts are an absolutely essential and crucial part of any 3d application worth its salt; and any application which does not utilize, or have the ability to set or customize, hotkeys should be avoided like the plague.  A package which does not support hotkeys or keyboard shortcuts will not grow with you, as you become a more seasoned modeler.  Imagine having to access icons for heavily used features like adding edge loops, or making extrusions, perhaps hundreds of times per session.  This would become laborious and cumbersome as you became more proficient.  It would slow you down, and ultimately take forever to model things.  That said, the use of keyboard shortcuts should be something you grow into learning, and incorporated into your workflow at your own pace .  Entry-level beginners should still have access to features through a UI icon, if they wish.

The "problem" with Blender when it comes to hotkeys is that some features in the software are not accessible through the UI, and can only be done with a keyboard shortcut.  For example, making a marquee selections on element groups in Edit mode.  The circle and box marquee tools are common selection tools in most other applications, which can be done without engaging a hotkey (even without entering a "mode" for that matter).   In Blender, this can only be accessed with the help of a keyboard shortcut.  Blender is one of the only 3d applications I've ever used where this is the case, and to someone just learning 3d at an entry-level, this could be a bad thing.  It forces them to immediately memorize something that is not part of the fundamental learning process they are trying to accomplish.  There's a reason the developers chose to do it this way, of course, but even for an advanced user coming from another package, this can become a sticking point, along with so many other hotkey combinations required to do various things.  Of course, the professional Blender user would argue this is the streamlined nature of the software, and to simply read the manual if you're starting out.  However, not everyone has a decade to spend learning.  This is why I feel the pie menu addon  should be a default required feature in Blender, to cut back on the amount of hotkeys a user will need to recall.  I believe this was one of the arguments raised by outsiders as to why Blender has not been quickly picked up and used by many industry professionals yet.  No studio has the time and resources to train their staff to learn the unorthodox UI and keyboard shortcut system Blender uses.  There's no official company tech to call upon to assist in training either; no official customer support, as some paid professional software does have, for their larger registered clients.

Hotkeys should be something a user chooses to use, and absolutely should use, when they're ready to speed up their workflow.

Good points.  Blunder, I mean Blender, is a perfect example of an interface design disaster.  I know the fans point out all the positives about the structure of the application, but what they did there was reinvent the wheel, when the wheel wasn' t broken to begin with.  I think the original designers took some chances, and in the end came up with something that made sense to their brain, but it happens to not make much sense to everyone else.  Andrew Price describes the design flaws best:

http://youtu.be/xYiiD-p2q80

Nuff said bout that. Cinema4D, in my opinion, is the best example of a powerful software designed for usability on all levels.

I can't speak for Morkonan, Mark, but I have a similar opinion when it comes to Blender, and only for Blender.  I don't know if that is what he actually meant.  I'm sure he will reply in turn. Hotkeys and shortcuts are an absolutely essential and crucial part of any 3d application worth its salt; and any application which does not utilize, or have the ability to set or customize, hotkeys should be avoided like the plague.  A package which does not support hotkeys or keyboard shortcuts will not grow with you, as you become a more seasoned modeler.  Imagine having to access icons for heavily used features like adding edge loops, or making extrusions, perhaps hundreds of times per session.  This would become laborious and cumbersome as you became more proficient.  It would slow you down, and ultimately take forever to model things.  That said, the use of keyboard shortcuts should be something you grow into learning, and incorporated into your workflow at your own pace .  Entry-level beginners should still have access to features through a UI icon, if they wish.

The "problem" with Blender when it comes to hotkeys is that some features in the software are not accessible through the UI, and can only be done with a keyboard shortcut.

You've picked up on my issues with packages like Blender, perfectly. :)

A person new to 3D modeling runs out to download Blender. They're enthusiastic, since they've spend weeks clicking through renders and vids, looking at neat objects, favorite sci-fi themed vehicles, blah, blah, blah... So, they balk at Modo, grumble at Maya, have a heart attack when confronted with the price of 3DS, and shout with glee when they find a 3D package that is touted as "just as good as any pay package." So, they're off, ready to enjoy the world of 3D modeling.

But, here's the problem - When a new user clicks on an object, vertice or face and then wants to do something with it, but only knows that they have to hit a hotkey combo, for some reason, then there's less of a intuitive, object or process-oriented approach towards teaching the learner that certain functions are, by necessity, tied to certain actions or certain structures of objects. It becomes an issue where a standard learning procedure of associating tasks intimately with subsets of tasks is missing a stage of visual association, going straight into concepts that may stretch widely across many different operations in 3D modeling.

Hotkeys are part-and-parcel to the 3D modeling experience, especially for learned modelers intimately familiar with their platform. The same goes for some common UI command sequences and, for instance, Blender fans may wonder why new users balk at having to scramble through menu functions that would seem odd to new users, since they do that effortlessly, using muscle memory, every day. That's something else that is a bit overlooked - Muscle memory is a very important part of our general lives and learning experiences. Good ol' "grey matter" take a bit more effort to train. There is some muscle-memory involved in hotkeys, of course, but what's more important to the learner, in my opinion, is more of an easy and intuitive association of certain commands in any software with the function that they are intended to support.

Imagine, for instance, that the UI for a 3D modeling package consisted of something like a big random list of hotkey commands and a working space that just had a manipulator in it with a default 3D sphere sitting in the middle of the workspace. Oh... Well, that's something like the workspace of Blender, isn't it? :) (I haven't glanced at new releases of Blender, on purpose... So, that summary might be inaccurate. But, the spirit of it is likely not. ;) And, what's up with a default object sitting in the middle of the workspace I'm about to work in, that presumes I am somehow going to always start with a sphere, yet there's almost nothing in organic or inorganic modeling that can be easily based on a default sphere.... Obviously, it's a UI designed by committee.)

The point is that in order for learning to be "easy", the commands of the UI need to be not only easily available, but should be as easily associated with the desired tasks as possible, using all of the senses available to the student. ("Visual Association" is important, too.) It's more difficult, even though it is often necessary, for hotkeys to be associated with specific tasks than it is for UI buttons that are visually organized in an intuitive manner, likely grouped in a panel with similar tasks. I'm not saying I'd rather have everything reflected in a UI, but that sort of thing is very desirable for someone who is first learning such a skill. And, this may be why Blender may frustrate more new users, more potential modelers, than is necessary for a learning modeler. Other free, yet simple, packages exist that could teach new skills more effectively than Blender. Though, I do acknowledge Blender's power, its versatility, and the fact that I consider it a benefit to the 3D community, even though I don't use it.

These are all interesting assessments of Blender.  As a user, I both agree and disagree, of course, with how it is perceived by non-users.  Blender opens a new scene with a default cube, not a sphere, by the way.  The cube is widely known as the basic starting object for almost any model you wish to create in 3D, so that's why they chose it.  This is actually meant as a convenience to people just learning.  Once you become more used to the software, you can set it to open an empty scene in the preferences, and switch the mouse controls to work with left click instead of right click as well.  The only thing I think they need to change is the default right click.  Every software on the planet uses left click by default, even non-3D software, so it should be left click.  I think that alone would make it much easier to learn.

Blender has a select menu at the bottom of the 3d view port. on it are all the different selection types. Beside each command is the shortcut. If you want to create a short cut simply right click on the command and use the  menu this brings up to do just that. Also there is an addon (Dynamic Space bar) that brings up most menus you need via you guessed it the space bar. Want to doe something with Vertices? Hit the space bar select edit mesh tools, then select the vertices menu and voila all the vertices commands and the short cuts.

Blender has a select menu at the bottom of the 3d view port. on it are all the different selection types. Beside each command is the shortcut. If you want to create a short cut simply right click on the command and use the  menu this brings up to do just that. Also there is an addon (Dynamic Space bar) that brings up most menus you need via you guessed it the space bar. Want to doe something with Vertices? Hit the space bar select edit mesh tools, then select the vertices menu and voila all the vertices commands and the short cuts.

Excellent point, Cybermonk.  The pie menus and dynamic space bar are two addons I recommended to David at the start of this thread.  They are invaluable tools for quickly accessing the expected features in the software; lessening the click count, and also the keyboard shortcut recall, for both beginners and seasoned users.  They are great tools.  Currently, these addons aren't enabled with the default 2.73 installation, at least not in the one I installed; however, I expect in the next release, or perhaps several forward, they will be.  It's also useful to enable the Icons addon, and all of the additional mesh object addons, for complete freedom in the modeling workflow. Beginners should also be wary, however, when following tutorials on Youtube or other resources, which Blender version is being used, and which addons they have enabled.  Keyboard shortcuts may be different for various releases, and addons can also affect how the shortcuts work.  Unfortunately, I've noticed many Blender users who create tutorials do not specify which addons they have enabled beforehand, and this can lead to confusion as well.  It will help new users tremendously once these addons become standardized with each installation.

"Want to doe something with Vertices? Hit the space bar select edit mesh tools, then select the vertices menu and voila all the vertices commands and the short cuts".

Prime example, 3 commands just to be able to get to the point of being able to edit verts - and only verts. There is absolutely no reason why line, vert and face selection cannot all be available for selection at the same time or any combination of them.

Anyway that's enough of ridiculing Blender, shall we model something!

You can select line, vert, and faces all at once. Space bar multi select menu. Also at the bottom of the 3d view port are the buttons for all 3. Select one and then shift click the rest to add them to selection type. If you mouse over these it will inform you of this option.

You can select line, vert, and faces all at once. Space bar multi select menu. Also at the bottom of the 3d view port are the buttons for all 3. Select one and then shift click the rest to add them to selection type. If you mouse over these it will inform you of this option.

Hmmm.  Cybermonk, is there a way to customize hotkeys to toggle the selection of verts, edges, or faces directly?  For example, in 3dsmax, the hotkeys for each sub-element are, by default, mapped to the number keys of the keyboard.  NOT the numpad numbers, but the 1-9,0 at the top of the keyboard.  1=Vert selection, 2=Edge selection, 3=Border Edge selection (open face edges), 4=Faces, and 5=Individual Elements, or unwelded object islands.  There's only three selection options in Blender, but it would be much faster and more convenient if we could just toggle between them quickly, from a keyboard hotkey, instead of a hotkey to bring up a menu to pick one.  After a while, and during a major project, that does become tiresome. Same thing with the DELETE function.  Blender constantly asks me, through a flyout menu, if I want to delete.  Whenever I press Delete on keyboard, or X, I get a menu asking "Delete?".  Can we not bypass that?  If I'm pressing delete, I just want to delete.  I dont want to click a confirmation.  If I make a mistake, I'll just CTRL-Z it.  There MUST be a way to disable all of these menus.  Another example:  when I wish to open a New scene.  I go to New in the file menu, and then I have to click another flyout menu saying "Reset Startup File".  I wish it would just do it, without the prompts.

Hmmm.  Cybermonk, is there a way to customize hotkeys to toggle the selection of verts, edges, or faces directly?  For example, in 3dsmax, the hotkeys for each sub-element are, by default, mapped to the number keys of the keyboard.  NOT the numpad numbers, but the 1-9,0 at the top of the keyboard.  1=Vert selection, 2=Edge selection, 3=Border Edge selection (open face edges), 4=Faces, and 5=Individual Elements, or unwelded object islands.  There's only three selection options in Blender, but it would be much faster and more convenient if we could just toggle between them quickly, from a keyboard hotkey, instead of a hotkey to bring up a menu to pick one.  After a while, and during a major project, that does become tiresome.

Same thing with the DELETE function.  Blender constantly asks me, through a flyout menu, if I want to delete.  Whenever I press Delete on keyboard, or X, I get a menu asking "Delete?".  Can we not bypass that?  If I'm pressing delete, I just want to delete.  I dont want to click a confirmation.  If I make a mistake, I'll just CTRL-Z it.  There MUST be a way to disable all of these menus.  Another example:  when I wish to open a New scene.  I go to New in the file menu, and then I have to click another flyout menu saying "Reset Startup File".  I wish it would just do it, without the prompts.

Maxxx, this is an issue which the Blender community is aware of, and is being considered, just so you know: https://developer.blender.org/T37422

https://developer.blender.org/T37801

And several threads on the subject in various Blender forums:

http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?291396-Direct-Delete-via-input

There are python scripts for Blender which allow deletion of objects directly, without prompts or warnings.  I haven't seen any which bypass the menus for deleting sub-elements, which I would find more useful.  However, I'm sure this will be something addressed in future releases.  It's definitely an important issue; especially as more users from outside applications move with interest in learning the package.

The only logical solution to quickly deleting sub-elements in edit mode is to simply map one or more of the delete options to a keyboard shortcut(s).  Think about which option you use most often, and map it to a shortcut.  So, for example, if you wish to always dissolve edges, you can map that delete option to a hotkey.  This can get complex in Blender, because there are so many hotkeys already assigned to various actions, you need to be sure it's a hotkey combination which isn't going to overwrite an important shortcut which already exists.  Use with caution.  It makes sense to map the most desired delete routine to the Delete key, and then the X key can be maintained for the menu options as usual.  Or vice-versa.  This will certainly serve to improve the pace in your modeling workflow.

A-HA~!  Once again, I see the light!  That must be what Cybermonk was alluding to as well.  So the same thing can be done to direct selection of sub-elements too, I assume?  Like mapping the number keys on the keyboard to toggle directly between vertices, edges, and faces?  Thanks, guys!  That will definitely help speed things up!

Lux, what did you mean by "I haven't seen any which bypass the menus for deleting sub-elements, which I would find more useful"?  Isn't that the solution you just gave me, or am I not understanding something more?

Yes you can. You can right click on a command to assign a hot key. In this case say the vertices select. Hit the space bar , then the multi select menu, then right click on the vertices select command and add the hot key. The only problem is if it is already bound to another key this will cause problems. You need to go into user preference on the input tab to change this. Once there change the search from name to key binding and then type in the key you are looking for.This will save you from scrolling through a bunch of short cuts. Find the command that is interfering and change or delete the key binding.  You can actually assign the vertice key binding from within the input tab but it faster to do the right click thing than try to hunt for what you need in amongst all the other stuff in there.

Here is a you tube video that explains this pretty well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFmrNSX1hSs

Yeah I think Lux is right there is not away to get rid of the are you sure popup. Your are right too Max this kind thing should be context based  If you have an edge selected then any command you give should be directed at that sort of element. Oh well maybe in the future they will tune this up.

Lux, what did you mean by "I haven't seen any which bypass the menus for deleting sub-elements, which I would find more useful"?  Isn't that the solution you just gave me, or am I not understanding something more?

I suppose I'm not being entirely clear. I was thinking about something which would automatically, and simultaneously, create a delete process for sub-elements, which would allow you to completely delete vertices, faces, or edges, as you would  expect them to be deleted in other packages (ie., removed from the scene entirely; not dissolved, collapsed, or removed with adjoining vertices or edges remaining).  As it is, you need to assign this to a hotkey yourself, manually, for each sub-element. ALT-X, for example, to remove selected faces, bypassing the multiple choice menu. One limitation I came across is that it seems you can not re-assign the Delete key for this task.  Even if you successfully assign it as the hotkey to directly remove faces, edges, or vertices, pressing it always seems to bring up the delete selection menu.  Not sure if that's hard-coded into Blender, and can't be overwritten, or if it's a bug?

Interesting!  Well, thanks to this conversation, I now have set up hotkeys with the ability to jump between subobjects very quickly, and my workflow has just made a huge turn for the better!  Thanks a million, guys!  I was growing very menu-weary for the longest time.

Great information, guys!

I have to thank David for asking all the same questions I have, except about the age thing. I'm 51 and I don't care, lol..except that I cannot run 12 miles in an hour and a half anymore, I kind of care about that.

This is a hobby for me.

My question is about the 3D products out there and the terms, methods, and such. I've bought a few things and learned the hard way to pay close attention to what file extensions are listed, and even then a product does not always import or render quite right. 'Course, this rendering might be my skill (low) level. I've been using DAZ3D 2.6, now upgraded to 2.7. 1) Is DAZ a good choice to learn from? My reason for using DAZ is that it was free and for me this is a hobby. I can buy the cool complex things and build scenes and take my time learning to create objects, people, etc. 2) Is there a better source to learn the terms/language used in these programs?

I'd appreciate advice, thanks in advance.

It really depends on what you want to do. If buying backdrops and props to place your figure in is all you need to do then DAZ will do the job. That said, as a hobbyist myself, I wouldn't be spending money on that kind of stuff when I can make it myself.