Badly organized models
-
They're advocating good practice, and if I were making models to sell, as models, I'd be very careful to make a perfect model.
That said, I don't think you can complain about free models found on the internet, especially if they weren't built the way you would like for your specific purpose. I shared some of my houses on the old forum. If someone were to come to me and rebuke me for the fact that they're nothing more than a shell with minimal detailing, I'd say "you're absolutely right. I'm a landscape designer, I needed a house to serve as a backdrop and context for my design. You want a detailed architectural model, hire an architectural modeler and quit griping about what you found for free."
I get what he's saying, and I agree in spirit. But the way it's framed doesn't make me want to agree.
Dave
-
hi dave,
you are right in that i should not be complainng about something i get for free on the web. but, once that is agreed upon, if you make your work available in this way why not make it really available by allowing others to explore it and put it to several uses?
the first person to benefit from a well organized model is its own author.
however, i respect all opinions to the contrary.
-
I have mixed feelings about this.
On the one hand, sharing models with all the layers/groupings, etc would give the recipient much more control over the model, obviously, but it also shows them how I did things. Sometimes helpful, but also, sometimes, more than I would like to share.
OTOH, exploding everything allows the recipient to use the model without "using" it. For me, this is as close as you can get in SU to "locking" the model, preventing ( or at least making it difficult) others from modifying it.
Almost all of my models are built for clients and I don't share them at all, but if I did I would explode them for viewing purposes. If I were to post something, for example, here, with the express intention of providing a tool that others could use to maximum benefit, then I would go for the "perfect" model and provide all groupings/layers.
As far as workflow, using components for anything with more than 2 instances, grouping everything into it's constituent parts, and layering extensively (though I hate SU's layer system) are all basically critical to producing usable and editable models.
-
@unknownuser said:
OTOH, exploding everything allows the recipient to use the model without "using" it. For me, this is as close as you can get in SU to "locking" the model, preventing ( or at least making it difficult) others from modifying it.
chuck,
in this case, why bother uploading the model at all? a locked model or a disorganized one is useless. a few images would do the job.
-
I wouldn't go so far as to say useless.
You can still fly around the model and see how the design elements work, and you can still fly through the model and explore interior spaces. perhaps this helps someone decide if they like 8' or 10' ceilings.
What if you were demonstrating a landscape design, why would providing a grouped model help when editability is not the point?
Especially if I were providing a model for design considerations, while images would give some info, a model would be much more useful, but grouping and layering just gives someone the option of taking your model to someone else and cutting you out of the loop.
If the SU viewer allowed layer control (which is ridiculous that it doesn't) and there was no free SU that gives anyone the ability to make your model their own, then I would include layers in a general sharing. But since googleSU gives editable power to anyone, I see no reason to provide a "clean" model when one with no groupings/components gives them the same information while still making it very hard for them to take my model and "use" it for commercial purposes. Maybe I am just paranoid.
Of course, if I am uploading a model that I want everyone to be able to use and modify, then of course I will keep all the groupings, etc..
I am actually in a contract now where I provide the model to the client at different stages of the job so they can use google SU to explore it and make suggestions/changes. I send them a model that has most of the layers, so they can see the floorplan without the roofs, make the kitchen appliances disappear, etc, but I also completely explode the model before I send it. This gives me a degree of insurance while also allowing them to use the model to finetune their desires.
Works great.
-
right you are, chuck. it just goes to prove that everything has many aspects to it. thus there is never a definitive truth that applies to all situations.
cheers.
-
for example a chair as a component.. if i would upload it, i would explode it. you can still use it as a chair, but modifying my work is timeconsuming. it is about securing your work and even your employment/project, like chuck said.
-
eeva and chuck,
you have convinced me. one more reason to cherish this community.
-
Dang, I should of asked you for some models before you reappraised.
Just kidding, Edson
I appreciate your selflessness and trusting attitude and am a bit ashamed to not be that way.
-
Chuck,
I think that's due to him being a teacher and a true teacher just shares selflessly...
-
besides, there is no stopping someone who is decided to make inappropriate use of someone else's work. an exploded or locked model will only make it more difficult for the one decided to steal it.
one of my beliefs is that designing is re-creating what is around us. the beginning of a project is more often than not an existing project. however, this should be done openly and honestly, acknowledging the influence, crediting the project that has helped one go ahead and transcending it to make one's creation a unique thing.
-
Very nicely put Edson.
Advertisement