How to Choose the Best 3D Software for You

[Jordan Pelovitz]

Hey everyone. So I've been doing a lot of stuff lately in the education space IRL, and I see this all the time online as well - people want to know what software they should use to make a 3D printable model, or prototype, or game model - whatever.


Usually the answer they get is "use X or Y package", because the actual answer is really in depth and requires the user to have a larger understanding of the mechanisms behind creating 3D geometry than just what tools to use.


To address this, I wrote this article as something to help both newbies getting into the world of 3d modeling, and for professionals looking to learn more about other modeling techniques that they might not encounter in their day to day.


I hope people find it at least as informative and fun to read as I found it to write!


Here's the link!

[curious aardvark]

well i did note one major exclusion.

You didn't mention openscad.

It's the only program i use, I just don't like the graphical programs - plus it's the number one parametric cad program used for 3d printed models.
All the customisable things on thingiverse are modeled with openscad.
And it's so easy to learn and quick to produce a 3d printed model. It has to be mentioned in any article on 3d printing design.
Okay your article is about all types of cad - but still, openscad is a major player in the field.

Not only is it free - but there are versions that even work on android tablets.

Other than that (lol) very good article.

[Jordan Pelovitz]

Hey curious,

I didn't mention OpenSCAD because I think for the vast majority of people, it's too difficult to approach (there's a reason GUIs were invented ). Thanks for pointing it out though - I'll add it when I do the next round of updates, but I don't think it could be considered a "major player" in the field, unless you could give some relevant examples of it's wide use and use in industry?

Thanks for reading!

~J

[curious aardvark]

well much of the content of thingiverse is created with openscad.
All the clever chainmail type things and all the customisable items - not sure how much more mainstream you can get - as far as 3d printing is concerned.

And as for difficult - I find it MUCH simpler, faster and more logical than any gui system.

In the last two days I've designed two parts for household machines.

One was a part for a mates workbench. Took five minutes and about 4 lines of text.
The other is an adaptor to use dyson accessories on a new vax vacuum cleaner.
That was 3 lines dead and a difference operation and took about a minute.

Either of those items would have taken much longer on any other package. And would not have been guarenteed to be 100% manifold, or exactly the size I want down to 100ths of a milimetre.

(there's a reason GUIs were invented

And the answer to that is simply: Modern complex gui based cad packages are the reason Openscad was invented. It makes many things faster, simpler and infinitely better suited to 3d printing.

[Jordan Pelovitz]

I believe that your desires and experiences are somewhat unique in the CAD modeling/design/CG worlds. The closest thing that I have used to OpenSCAD's programming language is Rhino's keyword-based toolset, which I found very fast and intuitive once you had memorized a list of your most commonly used nurbs operators. But many people do not come into 3d modeling with that list innately memorized, and what's more, many people find manipulating 3d objects through words to be more difficult than simply grabbing it with their hand or a suitable alternative (i.e. a mouse), and spinning it around themselves. So when it comes to modeling, direct editing is typically where many people are able to start from scratch, whereas feature-based CAD modeling is traditionally more difficult to learn on your own, due to a required knowledge of pre-existing operators and functions.

Thus while OpenSCAD may be technically faster for prismatic shapes and simple constructions, it requires more of an up-front investment of time in learning it before a user becomes effective. In addition, I'm assuming it's limited to mostly hard surface models, because from my point of view, it seems like it would be extraordinarily difficult to adequately describe formed organic shapes quickly and effectively?