Green Toaster's Car Sketches
-
Thanks for the nice comments.
I'm at a point where I should really begin to "show" some of the things I've learned by making some tutorials. The one you mentioned can get someone started with shaping but there is much more to it than that tutorial shows, of course.
Honestly, every time I make a body for a car I learn something new - I'm always trying something different - it's very satisfying when something actually works. One key to mastering amorphic shapes is the transition between two areas. This can really make or break an otherwise good looking design. I know this because I'm struggling with it but I'm getting better with it and have learned some helpful tips.
I've been writing tutorials and teaching mostly adults how to use CAD since 1988. I am looking forward to sharing what little I know about this stuff with some through tutorials.
I'm not sure if "stiching" is the right word, but I use this word to describe the "manually defined surface geometry" which seems necessary when defining the transition between two shapes - among many other uses. Imagine two spheres on a table - a grapefruit touching a golf ball. How would you create a nice looking surface that joined the two shapes together? That's one of the tutorials I'm doing.
Happy Sketching,
Brad
-
Remember...
A professional photographer takes thousands of pictures... but you see the few really good ones in the press...
A professional car designer has thousands of ideas... but you see the few really good ones...
Keep making those ideas... WE can see some good things evolving. You need to have dozens of ideas until you think that you have the right one. You WILL know when it's right.
Don't confuse the process with the idea. What you portray in SUp [or anything else] is only a tool to explain your ideas to others (and sometimes yourself!). You need to get that idea out of your head and down your arm and into your fingers and into your keyboard etc and thence into the program... so we can see it too...
.
-
. . . this doesn't really look new, but I was trying a new technique to get a smooth transition between concave & convex surfaces so, I built this quick front end and this technique is a bit quicker than what I usually do . . . and I'm satisfied with the results - it should look great if I poured more time into it . . . I call this "surface modeling snack for thought" . . .
-
But still no finished cars......
-
Maybe some of you know this maybe not. I am 13 and will be 14 next month. I want to get as far possible with me designing cars with sketchup. I was just hoping any of you have any tips. this is my latest car and ive been rendering it with kerkythea. I am no expert. Any advice is welcome. I made an animation also Heres the URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgCsxohyNtQ&fmt=18
[flash=425,355:1g64gtxa]http://www.youtube.com/v/hgCsxohyNtQ&hl=en[/flash:1g64gtxa]
-
@unknownuser said:
But still no finished cars......
. . . yes . . . here's another form study . . . I already ripped out the area under the windshield on either side of the nose hump . . . again, just something quick . . . I might finish this one . . . nahhhhh . . .
-
. . . a minor adjustment . . .
-
. . . more fiddling . . . S/U is sort of like a surfacing spreadsheet - very easy to do lots of what if's . . .
-
. . . did this one while on the phone w/relative that has no life . . . TMI, TMI, TMI . . .
-
. . . little more . . .
-
This turned out to be the most hideous thing I think I've ever done with CAD. The shaping of the body was a really great learning experience - but I feel like I just baked a cake and mixed in sand instead of using sugar . . . yechhh . . .
. . . this is dead dog ugly . . . oh well, on to the next one, eh . . .Happy Sketching,
Brad
-
you really don't have much patience do you? 
....at least you inspire us often. -
I dunno - patience is relative, I guess - really depends on goals and perception. I'm not really interested in publishing a finished work. I have so much to learn about body shapes - plus, this is especially intriguing to me, thus, I enjoy it very much. I look back at the beginning of the thread - I have such a long way to go, but I have achieved a few tools which help me represent with geometry what's going on in my head . . . my "end product", the models I'm posting, are usually just a vague, distorted remnant of the fleeting thoughts spinning around in my head. Still, as I press on, I can see some progress (hoping not to sound as though I am confident or prideful).
Obviously, modeling time varies with each different body shape along with skills necessary to define the shapes. Adding specific details, creating "good" transitions, ripping stuff out and doing it again - it's frustrating, at times because often the difference between disaster and something very nice isn't a large difference in geometry - or the time it takes to create & edit the stuff.
Here's one I began working on today because I liked it - it's based on one of the Mitsubishi concept cars, though, difficult to see that when looking at my version (ha).
Happy Sketching,
Brad
-
This will have to wrap it up for now - I've been putting off some stuff while I've been having fun . . . er, I mean. while I've been learning how to teach my students how to use SketchUp . . . I'll post some more stuff in a week, or so . . .
Happy Sketching,
Brad
-
Okay - just one more simple quick shape . . . done while watching a movie w/my daughter . . .
-
Gimmie ten minutes, I'll give you a car . . . note the "blocky" shapes with a minimum of surfaces to get the point across - rough, but very fast . . . I was eating Fruit Loops while I did this car . . .
Happy Sketching,
Brad
-
. . . more playin' around w/shapes . . . I think this one could be salvaged but it'd take lots of time to make nice transitions & clean it up . . . I was using an older version of the Ruby script SketchyFFD . . . just more food for thought . . .
. . .Happy Sketching,
Brad
-
I think it is a lot of fun to test one's self and see how realistic a car one can make in SketchUp. It is an interesting brain challenge.
However, I do have a bone to pick with those individuals who pepper their Architectural Models ( Landscape Models etc) with tons of high priced, high poly complex cars. I'm sure it is testosterone related, but the fact is, that the model is about the structure. All entourage, including the cars, is intended to put the model or structure in a living, breathing context. The entourage is to serve the structure. Best way to do that is to make the cars nondescript, the entourage to blend in. The best way to do that is to use less detailed cars, more common cars, people and foliage whose colours are similar in value and colour to the less important parts of the building. I've seen renderings where these amazing sports cars are lovingly rendered and are front and centre, and the structure being shown is all but lost in the background.
My rant for the day.
Love the car dialogue and how to's, though. -
@unknownuser said:
I'm sure it is testosterone related, but the fact is, that . . .
LOL!Here's another ultra-quick model . . . yeah, I know, more of the same, nothing new . . . I'm just trying to stay in touch w/the s/w . . . a pillars are way too thick . . . blah, blah, blah . . .
-
Why dont you make the bumpers lower or bigger and make the roof a teeny bit smaller?
Advertisement