The CAD Insider: Most of us work in 3D. Quite a few buildings are 3D BIM. Product design is done with solid modeling. Even mapping and GIS professionals realize the world is not flat. But even while making and visualizing in 3D, we often have only our imagination to see our creations in the world in which they will exist. A new building has to be imagined in the city block. A car has to be imagined being assembled on the line.
5 comments:
I love this idea of creating a 3D model from a simple image. This would make work a lot easier, especially when people are getting concepts from other buildings and sculptures. There's the whole concept that no art is original. Even if it's an original piece, especially with social media and blogs, anyone can comment and say that a piece of art is the same as something else. But moving on, I think this technology is taking "time management" with design and architecture to the next level. With 3D models, engineers and TD can see the full object which is better than guessing and checking to know exactly what the object is. And being a bisual person, I really like this idea because it helps me see an object as a whole instead of in parts so I can see how it should look like in the end. Thank you new and improved technology for making my time management easier for the future.
So this technology seems cool and all, being able to essentially take a few photos of something and have it modeled in 3D for you. I’m sure that there are industries out there that think it as a potential godsend. But to us, part of our whole job is creating an environment that has never existed before. This software would only be able to model things that already exist, and I guess that could be great if you want to digitally model part of the physical model a designer sends you, but I fail to see how that would be significantly easier and more useful than current drafting methods. A lot of people still work in 2D, and it’s very important to understand how to represent 3D ideas in two dimensions. I guess what I’m getting at is that if this technology becomes easy to obtain and use, it should be used in an effective way, otherwise there isn’t any point.
I actually have to disagree with Alex. I do believe that this technology can have a practical use in theater. Maybe not necessarily in the actual designing of the set pieces, but it could potentially be used in order to assist designers and technical directors with their process. If this technology can make a 3D model from simple point and shoot photographs, then what's to stop a designer, who's designing in 3D, from using this method to create a 3-Dimensional model of the theater space they are working in (especially if the designer is unfamiliar with the space they are designing for) and use this model as a environment in which to design their set. In drafting class, Dick Block talked about when a designer is given a draft of a theater to show how much space they have, it is common for important things to be ignored or forgotten (i.e. "Oops, we forgot to tell you that theres a air duct ten feet above the stage, so you cannot build any higher") This technology can completely eliminate that issue and make designing is spaces you've never been in, significantly easier. This could also work for technical directors. If there is a set piece, such as a wall or door, and there is doubt that this item would fit into the rest of the set properly, a 3D model could be made and placed into the environment of the design itself to see how it would fit. Of course there are always other ways to go about doing these things; a designer could model the theater themselves or the technical director could just check the model, but this technology makes these things easier, which is exactly the purpose of technology like this.
I think 3-D modeling scanning is a great technology that I hope is utilized more in the future as we progress. Not only is it astonishing to see objects and environments re created into 3D models, but also there is a lot of promise for this technology. It would revolutionize architecture, as we know it because suddenly a 3D model of a proposed project could fully be considered in relation to the existing area. When coupled with things like lighting effects and other programs and tools to help formulate real information from simulated space the implementation could be huge. Scenic design could also be improved as 3D mapped theaters could provide designers with a real feel of a space without having to actually visit. Yes ground plans serve us in this case for now but its no the same level of realism and understanding as a 3D model might provide. 3D scanning may not be the most revolutionary thing ever, I mean we’ve used orthographic visuals for a long time in almost all industries where it would be most beneficial, but it would still improve consideration of real space, and would also generally just be really cool.
Although I think this technology proves to be extremely useful for infrastructure jobs or architects, I don't see this particular 3D modeling very helpful for theater. I think architects could use this to learn more about how buildings may interact with other aspects of a city or urban area, but I think this program is less important for modeling sets. Of course, programs like AutoCAD and other 3D Modeling programs are very helpful for theatre, but this one seems more architecturally/industrially focused. However, I do agree with Henry's comment above that this technology could be used for allowing designers to "visit" a theatre without physically going there. Perhaps there will eventually be a program like the one in this article that specifically caters to theatre artists! That would be very cool, since this program is not theatrically focused. Maybe a kind of mix of this program, AutoCAD, and some theater-specific program abilities?
Post a Comment