
3D Modelling in a Browser - redindian75
https://www.vectary.com/
======
AlunAlun
See also: Clara.io [0], Onshape [1], Lagoa (bought a few years ago by
Autodesk) [2]

I must confess I struggle to see the long-term market for these services - I
was working on a startup in the field for a while, and eventually decided it
wasn't worth continuing.

The only thing these services really offer above desktop equivalents (which
Autodesk totally dominate) is the collaboration (like Google Docs for 3D). But
do you really need to collaborate to create 3D? Maybe to review/annotate etc.
but to actually collaborate during the process of creating an object/scene?

To put it another way, are you going to convince your entire art team to leave
behind the toolchain they have used their entire career, just so they can
'collaborate'? And if so, do you think Autodesk are going to let that happen?
(Obviously not, as they bought in to the field a while ago).

[0] [https://clara.io/](https://clara.io/)

[1] [https://www.onshape.com/](https://www.onshape.com/)

[2] [https://architosh.com/2014/11/autodesk-reportedly-
acquires-c...](https://architosh.com/2014/11/autodesk-reportedly-acquires-
cloud-based-3d-design-platform-lagoa-for-60-million/)

~~~
eerikkivistik
I'll plug our product here as well [https://3dc.io](https://3dc.io)

~~~
jonnydubowsky
I've recently started using 3DC and find it to be a wonderful creative tool.
It's super intuitive and easy to use on the go, on a mobile device. I look
forward to using it more in the future.

------
spectramax
I am a Mechanical Engineer and we use SolidWorks for CAD. I was surprised to
find there exists no 3D modeling software (Nurbs / Polygonal based) that I can
model using accurate dimensions. 3DSMax, Maya, Modo, C4D, Blender, Houdini,
you name it. I understand that they’re not doing parametric modeling such as
SolidWorks, Inventor, etc. but there has to be a way to merge both modeling
paradigms. I was honestly shocked at this fundamental lack of capability.

I wanted to accurately model a product for visualization and there is no way
to specify dimensions. Everything is done by “eye” in the visualization
industry. When accuracy is required, especially proportions, manual element
dimensions are typed in during creation of primitives.

I am used to the extreme discipline and constrain based modeling in
engineering. Does anyone know why visualization folks don’t care about
dimensional accuracy?

~~~
throwaway936482
In blender at least you can specify the size of any primitive, measure the
length of any edge, measure between any two points, move a vertice, object, or
face by a specified amount etc. so this is just not true for blender at least.
You can also annotate any dimension easily with a dynamically updating
annotation. What you can't do easily (unless you're prepared to do some
serious python scripting) is parametric / constraints based modelling because
it's not a parametric modelling program. I'm not sure what else you'd want.

As to why visualisation folk don't care about dimensional accuracy, we do when
necessary, but unless we're designing for 3d printing there's no point in
worrying about things like clearances and tolerances since we're not making a
physical object. Also, especially if we're doing arcvis, the demand is to
knock out large quantities of models very quickly, not produce a perfect
replica. I'm not going to worry about the exact dimensions of a piece of
complex equipment or furniture I'm modelling if I need to produce a fully
textured model in under an hour.

~~~
spectramax
I’ve seen countless tutorials - Eames house to Braun products, even full
furnished houses on YouTube. _No one_ cares about dimensions. It bothers me so
much that it should be _fundamental_ to designing anything - I would argue,
even dragons.

I think it’s the culture and people involved in 3D modeling that do not have
the discipline - at the risk of sounding snobby. If customers demanded a
feature, modeling software companies would supply those features.

“Ball park” dimensioning is like nails on a chalkboard.

------
andybak
Does per monthly pricing turn off a lot of people?

My usage patterns are pretty uneven and - although I know I can
unsubscribe/resubscribe - I end up feeling like I'm probably wasting my money
when I'm not using it (despite the low price)

It's irrational but there you go.

Does anybody consider a per-usage pricing model? Is there some reason why that
is a terrible idea?

~~~
badsectoracula
Yes, i do not mind paying for quality software, but i want to have control
over it. This means payment once (...i am ok with buying new major versions as
long as the developers aren't releasing a major version every year or whatever
to force people repay) and i get an installer .exe (or whatever) that i can
keep on my external HDD for as long as i want and there isn't any need for
online authentication/DRM (i am ok with key files as used by Total Commander
and WinRAR).

Sadly, as time goes on this is becoming increasingly less common.

~~~
throwaway34241
I don't like that model for anything I want continued support for (excluding
things that are more or less complete like WinRAR or games).

The problem with the traditional pay once (with paid upgrades) model is that
in order to continue developing the software, developers need to be paid every
month. So a hugely variable revenue stream needs to be converted into a
monthly one. Maybe by being very conservative about spending on developer
resources to leave a big buffer.

There's also mismatched incentives, since if all your revenue is from paid
upgrades it might make more sense to focus on flashy new features even if the
majority of users care more about stability and bug fixes.

There's the issue of how much effort to spend back-porting bug fixes to older
versions. Users will rightly be annoyed with having to choose between bugs and
an upgrade that (they consider to be) not worth it, so the devs probably have
to put in some effort. But then with the old model the developers are putting
in more work _and_ fewer users have access to new features, and the total
amount users are paying still has to be high enough to fund everything.

These days I'm happy to pay for things I use on subscription (as long as the
total cost is reasonable).

Maybe a good middle ground is something like the JetBrains model, where a
1-year subscription also comes with a permanent license for the version at the
time of purchase, so you can at least open your old projects.

~~~
badsectoracula
As a user i do not really care about the developer's business plans and
especially i do not care on trying to make my purchasing decisions based on
guessing what the developer _might_ end up doing in the future. I prefer to
act on what is available for me right now and have control on the software.
Hence the preference for pay-once, DRM-free software with an installer i can
download and keep myself.

And BTW, a developer focusing on flashy new features instead of stability and
bug fixes is something that is independent of the monetization scheme. If the
users want stability and bug fixes while the developer provides only new
broken stuff, then the developer is simply not listening to their users which
can happen (and often happens) regardless of if the software is paid once or
subscribed to.

TBH I think you are looking things a bit too much from the developer's side.

FWIW i do not mind 1-year subscriptions with a permanent license, although i'd
prefer the permanent license to be for the end of the year, not the start
(especially if there is a chance that the files you worked on with the last
version wont work with the earlier version). It is essentially "buy once, get
free upgrades for a year". Assuming of course the other things i mention
(offline installer, no authentication needed, etc) still apply.

------
redindian75
Here is a video of what is possible inside a browser!
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dC1ZRdf9JM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dC1ZRdf9JM)

Wow! (not affiliated with them)

~~~
exodust
Wow so it plays electronic music in background while you work. That's
different.

------
drcode
...so, what kind of rendering tech does a tool like this rely on these days?
WebGL? What's considered best practice on this front these days?

~~~
AlunAlun
WebGL, which is now supported by all modern browsers, with WebGL2 (more
flexible, fewer restrictions) around the corner. Most of the professional
level tools as exhibited by the OP will be using a custom engine built on top
of it.

For smaller projects, the excellent Three.js [0] is an easy way into creating
3D in the browser.

[0] [https://threejs.org/](https://threejs.org/)

~~~
tokyodude
WebGL2 is not around the corner. Apple has indirectly made it clear they will
never be shipping WebGL2.

WebGPU is "around the corner". Apple/Mozilla/Google/Microsoft are all working
on it. Google and Mozilla will ship it. Apple and Microsoft remain to be seen.

~~~
PudgePacket
[https://caniuse.com/#search=webgl2](https://caniuse.com/#search=webgl2)

It's supported in safari, currently gated behind a setting though.

~~~
tokyodude
No it is not. That report is wrong.

Apple added a flag. They didn't add an implementation. There is zero code in
WebKit to support WebGL2. All there is is a stub that returns a WebGL1 context
when WebGL2 is asked for. Feel free to dig through the WebKit code. You'll see
there is no WebGL2 code, all the functions are actually missing and no code
has been added in > 3yrs. Try running the tests.
([https://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/sdk/tests/webgl-
confo...](https://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/sdk/tests/webgl-conformance-
tests.html?version=2.0.1)), click off "all" then search for "conformance2",
check the box and run. You'll see almost nothing passes.

------
svachalek
This looks pretty cool. Tinkercad is another tool like this that works in a
browser. I find Tinkercad is a little more intuitive but from what I can see
this seems to be a little more powerful.

------
schiho
To get extended functionality, you need to sign-up for a Premium account. This
tool need's to be more open in first place as 'fully functional' before it can
attract people to sign up for premium account.

The 'collaboration' aspect isn't what will sell this product. It could have
potential when they allow creator's and designers to fully explore it first.

------
cannedslime
So can you actually do useful work in this? Or is it just drag & drop of
prefabs like the marketing would lead you to believe?

What about modifiers and tools, what can I actually make with this aside from
drag&drop of prefabbed iphones?

Why would I choose to pay for some cloud BS over just downloading blender?

------
jpm_sd
We've come a long way since VRML [0] running in java applets!

Re-live the experience:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eghlSdGvuC0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eghlSdGvuC0)

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML)

~~~
cr0sh
> We've come a long way since VRML [0] running in java applets!

I'd argue "yes" and "no" on this at the same time...

With VRML, it was designed so that - like HTML - anyone could easily create 3D
objects and "worlds" using a simple markup syntax that was very similar to
HTML (IIRC, both are subsets of SGML?).

It was easy to create something really quickly that could be interacted with.

These tools, while they simplify the creation part (somewhat), are more akin
to today's "web site builder" systems vs raw HTML in an editor.

What you get out of them, though, isn't anything like HTML - if you are lucky,
you'll get a standard file format or maybe JSON - but then what do you do with
that? Furthermore, it isn't likely very human readable or editable.

WebGL - and libraries like three.js built on top - are all well and good, and
allow for much easier access for 3D graphics work - but neither are anything
like VRML.

There are some VRML-like tools out there - one that comes to mind is Google's
A-Frame:

[https://aframe.io/docs/0.9.0/introduction/](https://aframe.io/docs/0.9.0/introduction/)

So some stuff like the old-school VRML is out there, and VRML had it's issues,
which is part of why it didn't survive (the other part being that it was too
early for the available PC hardware - unless you happened to own an SGI
workstation at the time).

It's one of those pieces of "pioneering" technology that came too early for
the tech - but gave us a glimpse of what might be possible in the future (much
like the first "wave" of virtual reality hardware technology).

------
ivarv
To add to the list of other similar projects already mentioned, Nunu Studio[0]
is a solid MIT-licensed tool based on three.js.

[0] [https://nunustudio.org/](https://nunustudio.org/)

------
dbcurtis
Dimensions? Master model? Assemblies? Or is this only for pretty pictures?

~~~
rushsteve1
It claims to be for modeling not CAD. Think Blender not Solidworks.

So ultimately yes, it's for pretty pictures.

~~~
joshlegs
blender can create 3d printable STL files, so if we're "thinking Blender,"
then that implies we can 3d model for printing, if i understand what you're
saying

~~~
mmcwilliams
I think a better distinction here is mesh vs. solid geometry. This is a tool
for creating mesh-based models and has a focus on rendering. STL is a mesh
format that you can print with consumer 3D printers and it looks like Vectary
supports that as an export format, but it's not a product built for
engineering or mechanical design.

That said it looks really cool and I would definitely print something made
with it. Trying that out now, actually.

~~~
bcohen5055
The distinction you are looking for is parametric vs. geometric.

Parametric models such as Solidworks or Creo use complex equations to derive
the 3D geometry. Geometric models use a point cloud built from polygons to
develop surfaces. These point clouds are defined by the user and are not as
"stable" when used in product development setting where you are trying to
create multiple iterations/sizes of an object

~~~
nraynaud
it's more like Brep is the distinction, is the internal representation a list
of operations on a Brep model?

But it's true that model history is preferred for mechanics, but I have seen
some proto model history in 3DS max with the modifier stack.

------
rubatuga
Amazing choice of typography and design!

------
dvfjsdhgfv
Oh man I hate receiving spam from these people. They don't provide an
unsubscribe link, and when I ask them to stop sending me these e-mails, they
say they won't and that I should manually log in to their website and delete
my account. I don't have time to deal with this but I hope someone takes them
to task for that.

~~~
jolmg
If you mark it as SPAM, it should cause their mail reputation to take a hit,
and your mail server should prevent their emails from getting to your inbox.

