How to integrate Fusion 360?

Elarionus
null
Offline / Send Message
Pinned
Elarionus null
I do a lot of hard surface modeling, and some of the models that people are putting out of Fusion look incredible, and they put them out in a tenth of the time it takes me to make something like it in 3DS Max. The only problem is, the topology is worthless as a game mesh, which are the types of assets I mainly design. Is there a good way to integrate Fusion 360 into a game asset workflow other than retopologizing everything and hoping it looks good (I have better luck retopologizing organic models than hard surface)? Or is it just better to keep powering through in 3DS Max and save Fusion 360 for the visualization folks?

Replies

  • kittinzaa
    MOI 3D could convert NURBS to a nice OBJ
    I saw many people model in fusion and use MOI as converter
  • poopipe
    Offline / Send Message
    poopipe interpolator
    Bring the fusion meshes into max via the CAD tools - the topology is largely pretty clean and you can adjust resolution of curves etc. before converting to poly and optimizing properly 
  • musashidan
    Offline / Send Message
    musashidan quad damage
    I would advise strengthening your Max skills. Anything you can do in 360 can be done just as quickly in Max if you polish your techniques/workflow. I flirted with 360 on a complex asset or 2 to see if it was going to save time, but ultimately it didn't. This is due to the labourious Cad retopo/cleanup step. This is simply unavoidable, I'm afraid.

    Using Max I can simultaneously create high/low. You practically get the high for free using chamfer+turbosmooth. Booleans are not a problem as long as you understand the topology involved. 
  • poopipe
    Offline / Send Message
    poopipe interpolator
    I'd disagree in some respects - Dealing with filleted intersections or holes in cylinders etc. is definitely easier in fusion and as I mentioned above you can get pretty close to a working low poly if you adjust detail levels on correctly imported objects so you can cave a fair bit of time in that regard. 

    If you make the mistake of going via obj or using maya then its all a bit of a ballache but that's because you're doing it wrong. 

    However,  general madelling operations  in max are far quicker and more flexible  so you'll save a crap ton of time using it rather than fusion for 90% of your tasks   To me fusion is useful in the same way Zbrush is -i.e for a very specific set of tasks that conventional poly modelling isn't great at. 

  • musashidan
    Offline / Send Message
    musashidan quad damage
    Have you used the InsetSG3.0 modifier in the keyhydra/lazercut plugin? It's Max chamfer modifier on serious steroids. It's hands-down the best bevel tools of all the packages. Solves a lot of problems with boolean meshes. This and obviously knowing how exactly your topology is behaving is key to achieving speed/results in Max akin to a CAD modeler(plus the massive benefit of having Max's full arsenal at your disposal while you work) And lets not forget that 360 filleting can throw up errors in tight corners too.

    Interesting what you mention about the export mesh from 360. When I used it I was exporting .STLs to Zbrush for cleanup(although 360 spits out very clean STLs.) Tried the .obj as well and it was shit.
  • poopipe
    Offline / Send Message
    poopipe interpolator
    I have insetSG and yes,  it's brilliant (it's better than the one I wrote now) 

    I forget the exact formats but max can directly import CAD files as procedural surfaces which gives you control over tessellation etc. 
    They're triangulated but generally have pretty tidy topology, I'd definitely recommend giving it a try. 
  • musashidan
    Offline / Send Message
    musashidan quad damage
    Is that the .STEP import to Max body object you used? I tried that briefly but found there wasn't enough control. The nurbs solid fillets and cylindrical segments, for example, can't be controlled separately so when you optimise the fillet triangulation,(which you always have to do for your low poly) the cylindrical parts drop too much as well. Otherwise, there's too much manual cleanup involved. Maybe I just didn't spend enough time with it. Do you have any examples of low poly meshes that you auto-optimised this way?
  • pior
    Offline / Send Message
    pior polycount lvl 666
    "Dealing with filleted intersections or holes in cylinders etc. is definitely easier in fusion"

    It's all relative.

    On simple models ? Yes. On boxy weapons ? Definitely. When the user is okay with spending a lot of time fidling with a lengthy CAD process that may or may not play well with the design to be 100% matched ? Sure.

    In production, under strict time constraints, while attempting to create the usual semi-organic fantasy sci-fi shapes that are the expected norm - without room for improvisation because the design has been greenlit and is locked down ? Not so much.

    The reality of production is quite different from what is portrayed in youtube videos about "concept exploration in Fusion".
  • musashidan
    Offline / Send Message
    musashidan quad damage
    pior said:


    The reality of production is quite different from what is portrayed in youtube videos about "concept exploration in Fusion".
    Exactly. The simultaneous high/low workflow in a trad 3D program, for me, is as efficient as it gets.
  • poopipe
    Offline / Send Message
    poopipe interpolator
    I didn't say it was automatic but it's definitely not  the sort of crap we were dealing with 15 years ago from autocad and it's certainly not that laborious to clean up compared to a decimated Zbrush mesh.. At least the edges are straight... 

    It's a tool that can complement a workflow so imo dismissing it is unwise.  It may not work for what you're building now but that doesn't mean it won't for something else.
    If I've learnt anything over the last fifteen years it's that any advantage is worth taking - even if you have to deal with the Zbrush UI to get it. 
Sign In or Register to comment.