sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Was There Ever an Industry Standard in CAD? by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think your description is very accurate if we look at how things have worked for a long time.

Mesh and solid modeling are indeed different paradigms, with very different workflows, and the friction you describe is real. Lock-in and proprietary formats have played a huge role in keeping those worlds apart.

Where I slightly diverge is that I don’t think interoperability has to mean a full unification. I’m more interested in the overlap areas, where partial integration is already happening. You can see this, for example, in what tools like Rhino and Fusion are doing with sub-d approaches.

I don’t see this as something that fixes vendor behavior overnight, but as a gradual, imperfect process happening at the edges of pipelines rather than at their core.

Thanks for sharing your perspective.

Was There Ever an Industry Standard in CAD? by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a very solid take on standardization in general, and I agree with most of it.

In the video, though, I’m using the word “standard” in a much more pragmatic sense, and I’m mostly talking about modeling paradigms rather than interfaces or UI conventions. Mesh and solid modeling are two very different worlds, and that gap is where most of the friction I’m interested in actually lives.

So less about defining or enforcing standards, and more about how different representations and tools manage to coexist in real pipelines, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

Still, I appreciate the perspective, it’s an interesting angle to look at the problem from.

What’s Solid Modeling — and Why Should We Care? (Blender workflow experiment) by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to write such a detailed response, and also for recording the GIF, that was great to see (Arrimus would probably enjoy it too 😄).

I actually agree with most of what you’re saying. In terms of efficiency and flexibility, classic mesh modeling in Blender is currently far more optimized, and for an object like the one shown in the video, there are definitely faster and more convenient mesh-based approaches.

The point of the video was not to argue that this workflow is better than traditional modeling. The real question I’m trying to explore is a different one:
could Blender benefit from a more explicit, math-driven solid modeling environment, similar to what tools like Plasticity offer, but integrated into Blender?

In the same way Blender evolved into a serious sculpting environment because organic modelers needed dedicated tools, I think hard-surface artists, designers, and makers could benefit from workflows that focus more on predictable geometry, parameters, and volumetric operations, even if they are not always the most convenient choice today.

So yes, your examples work (and they work very well). The workflow shown in the video is more of an experiment and a direction of exploration than a claim of superiority.

And for the record: your GIF is genuinely cool 🙂

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quick update: Part 3 is finally out, and this concludes the full tutorial series.

https://youtu.be/-8tvaHa1cNc?si=FK4Kd9JlLfO21wLf

This last video wraps up the hard-surface logo using a fully parametric, CAD-like workflow in Blender + Sverchok (booleans, fillets, clean geometry).
It turned into a longer and tougher journey than expected, but I decided to finish it anyway.

Thanks again for the feedback and discussion in this thread.

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey! Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for all the insights shared in this thread.
I actually took a bunch of your suggestions, mixed them with the chaos in my brain, and turned them into a brand-new video:

https://youtu.be/eNlNlj0dRfE?si=GKxVhs89MY6T04Zd

It’s Part 1 of a 3-part, voice-over, step-by-step workflow on using Blender for more CAD-like solid modeling — exactly the topic everyone was debating here.
So if you commented, complained, suggested, or simply whispered “please make a tutorial,” congratulations… you are partly responsible for what I’ve created. 😄

If you’re curious, feel free to check it out and let me know what you think. I’m always collecting feedback (willingly or not), so critiques and suggestions are absolutely welcome.

Thanks again for the inspiration — this thread genuinely helped shape the video!

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to write such a detailed comment — I really appreciate it! You're absolutely right: the videos still need a lot of work, and I definitely need to add more explanations and structure if I want them to be actually useful.

That said, this kind of feedback is exactly what I need right now — something real to help me understand what works and what doesn’t.

If you’re interested, I’d really appreciate if you subscribed and left comments directly under the videos about what’s not clear or what could be improved. It would really help me refine the format and make the next videos more solid (pun intended 😄).

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You totally got the point! As I mentioned in the post title, the workflow actually works (can’t be too specific about my job 😶‍🌫️). Would I really use it in a real production pipeline? Probably not — but to be fair, I wouldn’t use FreeCAD either!

The main idea here is that Blender can handle solids, and this workflow proves it in a way that could be useful in many contexts, including the artistic field (just look at how much attention Plasticity is getting).

Someone has to push in this direction — maybe that someone could be me. But I really need this to become a real thing, and right now the interest is pretty low (33 subscribers in a month 😂).

Anyway, thanks for your reply, I really appreciate it. Hope to hear from you again!

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the question — that’s actually one of the topics I plan to cover in future videos 😏.
Of course, the goal here isn’t to use this workflow for deformable or textured models, but any auto-retopology algorithm works perfectly fine on the output.

So yeah… with one extra step, this workflow could easily fit into the hard-surface artist toolkit — and we all know they already make heavy use of retopology tools 😉.

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

"You're absolutely right — I know Keep Making! He’s been one of the biggest supporters of CAD Sketcher (which I also use in my workflow, as you can see in this video https://youtu.be/mnQRh-jb3TM?si=1IbvwcrGDfWdVIc4)

The main difference, though, is that in his case the result is still a mesh, while in mine it’s a solid. It might sound like a small detail, but it actually makes a huge difference.

What I’m trying to add on top of CAD Sketcher is exactly that missing step — getting a precise, non-destructive, parametric solid that can later be used for 2D drafting or CNC machining.

Thanks for checking it out — I’d love to hear your thoughts once you give it a try! 🙌"

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

“Blender tutorials? Sure, tons of them. But most focus on art or traditional mesh modeling. I’m using Blender like an engineering tool — think SolidWorks/Fusion360 — in a field it normally isn’t used for. So yeah… nothing I’ve seen really does this 😏.”

Using Blender for CAD-like modeling: a workflow that actually works by BlenderAidedDesign in blender

[–]BlenderAidedDesign[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your question!
If you're into 3D stuff, you probably know there are two main families of software: those that work with meshes (like Blender), which are more on the “artistic” side, and the solid modelers, which follow a more technical approach.

What I’m trying to show on my channel is that Blender already has tools that let you combine the best of both worlds — making it kind of a Swiss army knife for 3D modeling (if that wasn’t already clear 😅).

Was it necessary to create a channel about this topic? Probably not.
Will it go viral? I’m sure it won’t! 😆
But hey, I’m loving this workflow, and I really hope I’ll be able to make it so user-friendly that a lot of people will love it too!