Pretty much what the title says - anyone have a recommendation for training courses to learn Blender (focus on sculpting, object creation - less on animation, etc.). Would prefer a progression style course set, but open to all ideas.
Willing to spend some money, but not looking to dump hundreds into a couple hours of training…
Why wouldn’t you consider just going to YouTube? Find a YouTuber who’s style meshes with your method of learning and view their videos. That’s how I learn 90% of what I need to know these days.
Here’s a recommended search term that might get you started:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=blender+tutorial+3d+printing
YouTube is a good choice, but if you want more course-style training, I’ve used LinkedIn Learning (formerly Lynda.com), which has several Blender modeling courses that I’ve found very helpful. If you live near a big city (in the US), their public library may provide a free LinkedIn Learning account using your library card. Check your local libraries websites to see what’s offered. Otherwise there’s a free one-month trial so you can see if you like it enough to pay for it.
I have watched a few training videos on youtube. There just seems to be a gap between the very basic and the “watch someone make an amazing statue in 30 minutes” videos. I am looking for something to fill in the middle. Been looking at Udemy and will check out LinkedIn training.
There is a reddit post that has links to many of the best Blender tutorials on YouTube.
Blender is a visual effects software for creating medias that are meant to be viewed on 2D medias, like screens and prints. While models created in Blender can be 3D printed, but the result can be faceted because all visual effects software uses interpolation to make objects appear smoother on monitors than they are in the real world.
One exception is sculpting, STL generated from sculpt tends to be quite large in file size which can cause issues with slicers. If your goal is to create figurines, then Blender is a good starting point. Otherwise stick with parametric CAD like Solidworks and Fusion 360. Once you go parametric you never go back.
But… (I think) Blender does have parametric support?
I came across this thread and want to ask (if it can be conveyed easily in words…) what’s special about the parametric features of those two applications?
I’m a Linux user and those two applications aren’t natively supported. Even if they were, I’ll never use Fusion360 because I think the company is scummy and I want nothing to do with “cloud connected” or spyware-ish/DRM-like security nonsense. So, those things aren’t an option for me anyway.
I have used FreeCAD some, so I think I understand the concept (probably an incomplete understanding since people say FreeCAD is lacking features). I’m doing a combination of traditional mesh and parametric modelling right now in Blender.
Maybe those that don’t use it aren’t aware, but nowadays Blender has non-destructive features called Modifiers and Geometry Nodes (shown below). I’ve found them quite powerful. I’m using these to automatically generate geometry features that I got tired of re-doing when I changed a base design, and to prevent the base design geometry from getting too complicated to tweak.
So I feel like Blender has significant support for parametric modeling (albeit maybe incomplete), in addition to what I consider very strong mesh editing capabilities I’ve been using for precision design. I can only assume that it’s not enough (or maybe it won’t scale well in complexity).
So other than designing the next Starship or something, is it possible to give a simple example of something that FreeCAD or Blender cannot do at all even with Modifiers and Geometry Nodes?
I’ll give it a shot.
Since you’ve already used FreeCAD, I’ll reference that. The power of parametric design is that changing one dimension, angle, or parameter updates the entire model. This is ideal for refining designs for 3D printing. For example, I’m working on a bracket from a STEP file. It has threaded holes, and I want to adjust the bracket’s dimensions while keeping the threads intact. In a slicer, I can only scale the X, Y, and Z dimensions of the entire model, which would compromise the integrity of the threads, but CAD allows me to modify specific surfaces and fine-tune dimensions or angles.
Now take Blender. It has some limited CAD capabilities but isn’t the right tool for the job. Where Blender excels is in simulating how light interacts with surfaces and managing object motion based on pivot points, making it invaluable for 3D animation.
The example below from Blender demonstrates its focus on light, surface, and texture. While some CAD programs (e.g., Fusion 360) have rendering capabilities, just as Blender can perform limited CAD functions but isn’t the best tool for it, CAD can handle some rendering but isn’t optimized for that purpose.
Parametric modeling and parametric design are two different animals.
Parametric modeling is a method of building a 3D model in a series of sequential steps, each step is related to the previous ones (but doesn’t have to). When it’s built correctly, changing one step’s parameters would changes all the steps below it. Thus the model is automatically rebuild. It’s a very powerful tool for fine tuning design or adjusting tolerances.
Parametric design is using algorithm to create and manipulate geometry, which is what Blender’s geometry node is. Rhino’s Grasshopper is a well known application for that.
Blender’s geometric nodes can be setup for limited parametric modeling, but it’s very cumbersome to link all the nodes.
Solidworks Maker version costs $50/year. It’s a good way to learn parametric modeling. Just keep in mind the regular versions are very expensive and it has a greedy “retroactive pricing” for perpetual license, which means you have to pay full price for each version you skipped in order to upgrade. 
I guess the difference is mostly convenience and productivity. I’ve been using Geometry Nodes and Modifiers entirely for alterations to the mesh, or parts that get attached to the mesh (not visual or lighting stuff like most examples show).
But maybe complex cases get too much to handle. This shows the final result for my most complicated 3D printed design:
But, it lets me tweak the size (fit tolerance) of the parts without doing anything manually to a mesh - and without re-doing frikkin connectors in a slicer over and over again.
I’ve also used FreeCAD and Blender together once or twice. I’ve had to fix messed up models sometimes (not all of my own design) and Blender has worked out well for altering or cleaning up messy meshes that the slicer sometimes doesn’t like. The “automatic” fix algorithms (“fix non manifold” etc.) seem a little hit or miss.
I should probably get into the FreeCAD thing a little more often. I’ve gotten very accustomed to Blender’s interface.
Here’s an example of some fine grained scale control. I can see how it would get cumbersome if you were doing a lot of this kind of thing. But, at least it’s fun and looks cool. 
What I’m essentially doing is replacing the cut and connector functionality that our slicers have. I have completely custom designed connection tabs which click into place, and long rectangular shaped “pegs” which are way stronger than a bunch of plugs or dowels would ever be. This lets me control the fit tolerance spacing on all three axis independently, which our slicers can’t do either. (And of course I use Boolean nodes to automatically cut the negative side of the connectors.)
Probably easier to do in a CAD application, but it’s cool that Blender can do it once you figure out the right node types to use. Not really a replacement for CAD but I’ve been able to replace slicer cut/connector functionality.
So, if you are going to use Blender for 3D printed designs, be sure to do the Geometry Node tutorials in addition to the Mesh and Modifier ones.
