"hexagon revisited"

patience55

zzerebrush said:

@ addict: ... who me? addict is what people who write too many posts in the forums are called ;-) I'm Patience55 ... today ... yesterday I was something else and who knows what I'll be tomorrow!

The title of this product suggests that the software used for the tutorials is - obviously - Hexagon.
Hexagon has a complete set of tools for UVmapping, so in my opinion these tools should be used, explained if needed.

Being asked to get UVmapper is just the same as if they had advised to get Lightwave, just to be able to follow the tutorials for Hexagon.
Weird? Right!

"just in case", the tutorial I was referring to was NOT done by Dreamlight ...

The second thing that put me off: starting to build some kind of cloth for a DAZzie - now, while certainly everybody has some kind of personal preference to model, in a tutorial I do not want to see any personal preferences (and if, it should be noted, like "... there is the normal way to do XY, but I prefer to do it MY way...").
So (still building the cloth) when I see somebody doing this without using the mirror option - think of a noob to Hexagon, or even 3D modeling entirely - it makes me want to grab into the screen, and push the right buttons for the person who is misleading folks :).

The same goes for pushing points to get the base for a more organic form (the dino), when there is the soft selection.
Please, do not get me wrong here: nothing against pushing vertices around - but if there are better tools for the job at hand, why not show them?
The person who did all these modeling parts - well, I strongly believe that he learned Hexagon himself while doing his modeling for this course (later he found the mirror option).

um, don't think there is any 'normal' way to do things in Hexagon ... there may be two or three ways to achieve the same results and everybody develops personal preferences which basically would work best with whatever their projects normally require.
Your 'strong belief" ... I haven't seen his videos but yeah ... have my own reasons for sharing that belief.

OK, then the issue about the white board, about finding it not needed to be more precise in his scribbling:
If I do not have the time to spread out my personal theories in public (getting paid for this, remember), why should I do it?

"... I do not have time for this!" Is the impression that first comes to mind watching this. The modeler even said this at one point where more work should have be done for a part of his show.

hehehehe ....

Anyway, there are more issues in this "course", but I think that - this time - my answer is long enough :).

Thanks for sharing. :-)

zerebrush_04a75c0166

@ whateveryoumightbecalledtoday:

>>> "...um, don’t think there is any ‘normal’ way to do things in Hexagon..."<<<</p>

True for every kind of task in reality or in your digital part of your life.

You even can scratch your left ear with your right hand coming from the back - hope you see what I mean to say following this true to life example!?

There is no "normal" way, but there is something like doing things "by the book". And exactly this is what anybody should expect from a tutorial: some mildly intelligent narrator that has enough knowledge of the software he is explaining to a broad scope of people. In this and many other things the makers of this course failed.

Now, nagging here about a piece of software - I could do better and more important things, surely.
Serves no purpose then?

Well, if only one fellow customer reads all this and then comes to the conclusion that this product is no "must have" (wish I had been smart enough to do so), then even this nagging has done some good.

Thanks for having patience with a non-native speaker - keep up the good work!

patience55

zzerebrush said:

@ whateveryoumightbecalledtoday:

>>> "...um, don’t think there is any ‘normal’ way to do things in Hexagon..."<<<</p>

True for every kind of task in reality or in your digital part of your life.

You even can scratch your left ear with your right hand coming from the back - hope you see what I mean to say following this true to life example!?

There is no "normal" way, but there is something like doing things "by the book". And exactly this is what anybody should expect from a tutorial: some mildly intelligent narrator that has enough knowledge of the software he is explaining to a broad scope of people. In this and many other things the makers of this course failed.

Now, nagging here about a piece of software - I could do better and more important things, surely.
Serves no purpose then?

Well, if only one fellow customer reads all this and then comes to the conclusion that this product is no "must have" (wish I had been smart enough to do so), then even this nagging has done some good.

Thanks for having patience with a non-native speaker - keep up the good work!

You're welcome.

Product reviews are certainly a good thing as so much abounds in the marketplace. Whether the conclusion is yeah or nay, they always serve a purpose ... and that being to help the consumer make an informed decision.