During COVID I learnt Blender for 3D modelling. It is still my go to.

Many people complain about it being a mesh editor but it works for me. The sheer variety of tooling and flexibility in Blender is insane, and that's before you get to the world of add-ons.

I want to learn Geometry nodes and object generation as I think they will address a lot of the "parametric" crowd concerns. This v5 is meant to be a big step in ease of use of this.

Also, I'm not sure if the different tooling lets me see all the flaws of online "parametric" models, or whether I'm being pedantic. They get frustrating. I have Gordon-Ramsay-screamed "How can you fuck up a circle!".

▲

jwagenet 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

In MCAD, “parametric” does not mean a high level part or feature is driven by editable parameters or procedurally generated features. Parametric refers to the underlying storage format representing part features in a parametric way rather than as a mesh. Mesh formats like stl cannot represent a circle by its position and radius, while a parametric format like step can. This distinction is more akin to raster (bmp) vs vector (svg) graphics. Both can be generated procedurally by “parameters”, but only with svg can sub-features be faithfully extracted or transformed.

	▲	_carbyau_ 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Sorry, separate point: >Mesh formats like stl cannot represent a circle by its position and radius, while a parametric format like step can. This is where I think the Geometry nodes can help. A node (function) can be used to represent the circle with inputs and outputs set or changed as required.[0] I have not fully explored this space though and so my "hopes and dreams" may well be as useful as thoughts and prayers... [0] https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/modeling/geometry_...
	▲	_carbyau_ 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I have some understanding of "parametric" vs "mesh". I looked it up when I saw so many people going on about it. Maybe it is the export or something. I run the 3D toolbox and often models are not manifold. I see things like two circles in slightly different positions but both are connected in different ways to the surrounding "single" instance model. Things like this mean you end up with "infinitely small volumes". There is no fully enclosed "volume" and so mathematically there is "nothing to 3D print". As a model this makes no sense to do, and so it irks me. But clearly the slicer software doesn't care or autocorrects and people make their 3D print happen just fine.

▲

throttlebody 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Alibre has a free option, which does not include sheetmetal bending but otherwise solid software

	▲	zargon 36 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Alibre does not have a free option. They have a 30 day free trial and the low cost Atom3d package. I bought Atom3d and never use it because it's too painful. If I'm going to endure that much pain I might as well use FreeCAD which at least runs on Linux.