[geeks] Re: [rescue] O2 graphics compared to entry-level Octanegraphics?

[Joshua D Boyd]

On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 11:31:46AM -0400, Kurt Huhn wrote:

> 5.somthing.  It *might* be 5.0, but I'm thinking it's a later rev.  It's
> not up to par with some modelers out there, but to me the GUI is more
> useable than Blender (RIP).  I don't mind using an older version, as I
> don't do CG animations for movies or anything - I'm just a hobbyist.  

I rather like Lightwave's modeller.  Much nicer than NURBS in my opinion, 
but pretty weak compared to other subdivision surface modellers.  

The character animation tools are better than Max's used to be out of box, 
but Max had amazing plugins that really helped out.  But, it had enough
to allow for a lot of fun.
 
> Mostly it gets used for building stuff in 3D before I go out the garage
> and cut up wood to make them.  I'd rather make mistakes in virtual space
> than slice a piece of $60 oak plywood the wrong way.  I just started
> using it, replacing Rhino on the Windows box.  Rhino is nice, but I like
> not having to use windows for this type of work.

For what you do, it sounds like a nice mechanical cad package would be more
appropriate, but that would probably break the bank.

Still, how hard would it be to build such a program specifically for wood
working.  We would need a drill simulator, a saw simulator, a bend simulator,
lathe, screws.  What else?

-- 
Joshua D. Boyd