As far as I know, the main hassle with normal maps is that the directions (encoded in the color channels) are used differently in various contexts. I can give an opinion from a technical point of view, though. That's something outside my comfort zone. > I guess I have one last question, If I high poly sculpt and do a low poly retopo with a bake in MODO, can I get that normal to play nice in SD and SP? > I have used Blender for 2+ years, it still is hard for me to get into the workflow. But also found a thread that seems to offer a solution to this I have read some threads where MODO's normal maps were fidgety. I guess I have one last question, If I high poly sculpt and do a low poly retopo with a bake in MODO, can I get that normal to play nice in SD and SP? I have checked out a couple tuts on it and yeah, this is a lot more powerful then Blender for my work style. So basically I was talking about UV and retopo tools. I am not even really talking about characters but more about hard surface props/scenes, I have more of a draftsman background with AutoCAD, this is why although I have used Blender for 2+ years, it still is hard for me to get into the workflow. My main goal is creating 3D game models from high poly to low poly and using substance graphs for them in UE4 and Unity.
#How much is modo software software#
I have used 3D software since back in 2001 with Lightwave so i am totally on top of how all apps treat modeling different. Yes, what you said exactly makes sense to me. You don't have the plugin "interactive on the fly changes", but maybe that's not what you need, if your materials are "done". You _can_ use substances in modo Indie through an ugly workaround: Save the channel files (texture files) and load them into modo, setting them to the needed channel type (color, bump, normals etc). Not a real help, I realize, but modo Indie isn't a big investment, so you cannot really go wrong there In any case, a limited-to-certain-KITs scripting support would not give you one of the major benefits of having the means of "scripting everything" around modo.
#How much is modo software full#
I would ask myself if a full modo license makes any sense for my use cases if (full) scripting support was available at Indie costs.Īnd if, for example, ACS was usable in modo Indie (or even more interesting: Mesh Fusion) this would mean that the KITs would be far more expensive than the hosting application. But: If you are productive in Blender and don't see specific problems (that modo might solve), I have my doubts if modo Indie is - as a solution - the best way.īut learning modo at "Indie costs" might be a good thing if you later decide to make use of a full license.Īs for the plugin-and-scripting thing: I am very interested in seeing what TheFoundry will come up with. I think you'll like the retopo- and UV-tools, maybe the modelling tools are also a change for the better. Workflows are different - not only because of the "coop"-thought, but quite generally. So I would ask myself: What exactly do I need a specific tool for? I doubt that modo will ever go that road to the extend Blender does.īoth approaches have their pros and cons for sure. I don't consider the export limitations that serious.īlender, from my POV, is more about "giving the user a complete suite as far as anyhow possible". for learning the tools) application with modo Indie. It is this that is harmed by the current lack of scripting support in modo Indie, other than that limitation you get a "fully functional" (i.e. One of modo's foci is inter-cooperability, meaning "working with other tools in a pipeline". Modo's and Blender's approaches are difficult to compare. If "learning for learning's sake" is your deal: Sure, it is worth every minute you spend on it.
![how much is modo software how much is modo software](https://www.digitalmediaworld.tv/images/stories/Nov-17/2/Foundry-Modo-11_2-screenshot2.jpg)
Is modo worth the learning curve? Well, that depends on what your goals are.