how to get an avatar into Sketchup???

[Tenly]

sketchup doesnt import obj but second life only supplies obj avatars. how do I get my Female_AV.obj file into sketchup, or where can I find a reliable avatar to use in sketchup? and is sketchup even worth considering for learning to create mesh clothing?

[WolfBaginski Bearsfoot]

I know there are one or two third-party programs which will do the conversion, but they cost money.

A quick check shows that Sketchup will import 3DS files, and I know the free Wings3D program will import .obj and export .3ds so that might be an answer. If I recall right, the .obj data for the AVs is scaled for Poser, and you may have to re-scale the model. Wings3D has options for that, and can also export in COLLADA format and produce sculptmaps.

Sketchup also does COLLADA export but I'm not familiar with the details of what it does.  

[isabellalecour]

I have the basic SketchUp and have used it mostly for architectural and construction projects. I don't really see a way to create mesh clothing with the program. Maybe I'm missing something or it's a feature of the Pro version of the program. 

I'm hopeing the experienced mesh maker comment on this. 

[Chosen Few]

Sketchup is not suitable for doing anything character related. It doesn't have any rigging tools at all.  It also provides no way to control the vertex count, UV layout, etc., of anything created in it.  Thus, it's barely even sufficient for making any models at all for realtime use.  It's a simplistic, overly dumbed down, extrusion modeler, nothing more. 

The irony with Sketchup is that its "simplicity" actually makes it harder to use than it otherwise would be.  Its lack of a standard set of modeling tools makes common tasks take ten or twenty times longer than they otherwise would, because there's only one way to approach them, and it's far from the most direct way.  Trying to be a 3D modeler, when you just have extrusion as your only tool is like trying to be a carpenter and only having a screwdriver.  It CAN be done, but it's gonna take a really long time, and the results won't be very good.

Speaking of results, let's talk about that.  The under-the-hood structures of models produced in Sketchup tend to be pretty amazingly disastrous.  Nearly every time a client of mine has thought they could save money by acquiring a bunch of Sketchup models for a project, they've actually ended up spending more, because I've had to recreate all the models from scratch.  Almost without exception, the models have been unacceptable for realtime purposes.  They're just about always chock full of multiple duplicate vertices, extremely odd redundant hierarchical arrangements, UV map nightmares, etc., etc., etc.  Reparing them is like trying to clean up an explosion at a spaghetti factory.  Untangling it all takes many hours, or even days, per model.  In all my years in the 3D industry, I've never seen worse models than the ones that come out of Sketchup.

Do yourself a favor, and steer clear of Sketchup.  Get yourself a proper, full featured 3D modeling program.  If you don't want to spend money, go with Blender.

 

 

To all those who might reply, "but Blender is too hard to learn", all I can say is there's no way to cheat your way through this with an "easy" program.  You're going to have to hunker down and actually invest the time, effort, and brain power that is REQUIRED in order to learn how 3D modeling works.  Blender, just like Maya, Max, and all other programs in their class, is actually quite elementary, if you just take the learning process one step at at a time, like you're supposed to.  Don't expect instant gratification.  It'll be a few weeks of solid effort before you conquer the basics of ANY worthwhile 3D modeling program. If you think that's a bad thing, then 3D modeling simply isn't for you (or more to the point, YOU are not for 3D modeling).  If, however, you are willing to exercise some patience, and embrace the challenge, just like the rest of us did, you'll do great.  I've never seen anyone actually fail at this.  I've only seen people either quit too soon, or not quit and succeed.

[Tenly]

ugh. its not that I dont want to learn blender...its that the user interface is completely NON intuitive. whoever built this thing obviously didnt test it with solid UX in mind. certain tools should always be visible and they simply are not. and I have taken tuts over the past year here and there. but as noted, the simplest thing, such as being able to select the avatar and MOVE it, are not readily apparent. this is truly one of those tools where if you are not constantly using it, your going to forget where everything is.

I think part of the problem is the limitations of my lame tiny little mac keyboard and mac mouse--both of which are lacking features required to use blender successfully. It looks like Im going to have to dig out the old mac keyboard and my PC mouse. I love macs, but what the hell were they thinking by making a keyboard and mouse that arent compliant with 80% of ones software?

that being said, thanks for the words on sketchup. I soooo believe you. on importing the avatar I couldnt do anything with it. Also tried Art of Illusion...again no good results.

I believe blender does have everything one needs. Id rather have zbrush or modo, both of which have intuitive tools, but I simply can not afford that kind of money ($600 and $1000 respectively). 

Daz has a cool tool named scuptris..its free but I couldnt see how to import an avi into it let alone rig it. but I love the way it works with push pull. this is what I want. a tool that lets me nudge the folds when I want to nudge and do everything blender does but with an INTUITIVE user interface. 

ugh...now where is that old keyboard....

[Chosen Few]

A Mac keyboard shouldn't be a problem.  The Mac one-button mouse, however, is.  A 3-button mouse is a standard requirement for most common modeling software.

As for Blender's interface, I would have agreed with you in the past that it's problematic.  In fact, if you scour the old forums, you can find quite a few posts by me on how bad it was.  But it has gotten significantly better in recent versions.  It's actually extremely intuitive now, assuming you're familiar with the most basic fundamental principles of 3D modeling. If you "speak 3D" already, then it's just a matter of learning Blender's particular quirks, just like with any other program. 

However, if you're just getting started for the first time, then you're right that there's no way to simply intuit your way through it.  But it's important to understand the issue there is not a Blender thing; it's a 3D modeling thing. The exact same can be said of every other program in this class.  They all work according to a certain logic, and you must put in the requisite time to absorb that logic before any of it becomes intuitive. Once you get it in you, it just clicks, and you'll be amazed that you couldn't grasp it before.  But until that happens, there's no way to force it.

Whether you're talking Blender, or Maya, or Max, or Lightwave, what have you, they all require the same amount of basic training in the beginning.  It's far less about the software itself than it is about the principles of 3D modeling in general.  Whether you're self-training via tutorials, books, videos, etc., or you're doing classroom training, a sizable amount of discipline and dedication are absolutely required.  You as the learner must be willing to start at the very beginning, and follow the entire course of training, step by step, letting each lesson build upon the last, without trying to skip around, and without trying to distill out just whatever parts you think you need to know. 

In the beginning, it can be uncomfortable, especially if you're very intelligent, and are used to being able to just figure things out.  There are no shortcuts with this. Simply figuring it out is just not how this stuff works.  However smart or cabable you may be doesn't  change that.

When you're first starting, you don't yet know enough to know even what it is that you don't know, so in order to succeed, you MUST let go of all preconceptions, and just let the training flow.  Otherwise, you inevitably just make it harder and harder on yourself at every turn.  As I so often find myself saying on this subject, don't put the cart before the horse.  By the inch, it's a cinch; by the mile, it's a trial.  Patience, Grasshopper.  You get the idea.

 

As for the other programs you mentioned, I'll give you my two cents on each:

1. Zbrush

Zbrush is a great sculpting program, of course.  But it's crucial to understand that a sculpting program is not a modeling program.  While they do become more and more similar each year, as sculpting programs add features common to modeling programs, and modeling programs acquire better and better sculpting tools, they still remain two very distinct categories.  If you have to pick just one or the other, go with a modeling program every time.  There's nothing a sculpting program can produce that a modeling program cannot, but there's plenty that modeling programs do that sculpting programs can't even touch.

As a general rule, sculpting programs are meant to be used in conjunction with modeling programs.  They're not really supposed to stand alone.  They're best used to enhance your models, rather than to create them from scratch.

Also, it's worth noting that sculpting programs are best used with a Wacom drawing tablet, rather than with a mouse.  To take full advantage of how the sculpt brushes work, you need the pressure sensitivity of a Wacom tablet.  (Seriously, it cuts your work time by at least two thirds.) So, that's yet another hardware concern, in addition to ditching that one-button mouse. 

As an aside, for what it's worth, I've always hated Zbrush's UI.  It's perhaps ironic that while its painting and sculpting tools are so fluid, its camera controls and overall scene controls are anything but.  It's for this reason above all others that I use Mudbox instead of Zbrush for sculpting.  Mudbox costs more than Zbrush, but it's worth every penny.  Mudbox provides a MUCH better user experience.  (Granted, I'm a bit biased, since Mudbox was designed for Maya users, and I AM a Maya user.)

 

2.  MODO

MODO has a lot of great features, but I'm always leery whenever anything is marketed with such phrases as "You can do ______, without even having to know what _______ means."  First of all, that's never ever true.  Second, it suggests that things have been dumbed down, at the great expense of control.  Knowledge should never be presented as unnecessary or superfluous.  Whenever it is, there's something wrong.

That said, in the hands of someone who does know what he or she is doing, Modo is a great program.  Just don't make the mistake of thinking you can just pick it up and get results from it right away.  You still need to learn the fundamentals first.  There's no way around that, no matter what the advertising says.

 

3.  Sculptris

I'm not sure why you thought Sculptris was made by DAZ.  It's made by Pixelogic.  It's a little freebie, designed primarily to sell Zbrush.  It gives you just enough to get you going with the basic Zbrush workflow, while leaving you just frustrated enough at the lack of a complete tool set to want more.  Your problem-solving subconscious then goes to work, and you end up concluding that purchasing Zbrush is not only a good idea, but it's your own idea.  Unless you're really paying attention, you don't consciously realize how you've been sold.  It's very clever marketing.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, by the way.  Purchasing Zbrush IS a good idea, after all, if you're going to use it.  I just think it's worth realizing that that's actually what's going on.

 

Anyway, give Blender a little time, and I'm sure you'll be happy to discover that it's far more intuitive than it first seems.  Again, it hinges mostly on accumulating enough experience for the underlying logic to click, and then it's down hill.

I hope that helps.