Hello @3d-PrintCreator,
I have decided to go a little deeper into the matter to show how I work (I can’t speak for other people). This is because you describe your work yourself and the effort this involves for you (your text can be found at the end of this article). It should always be borne in mind that every “artist” and “designer” uses the tools they are most comfortable with. I find the different ways of working interesting and it’s worth looking at them.
For artists, it is more a matter of intuition as to which tools are best suited to their personal creative process. They often follow an inner impulse, a feeling or a vision. The choice of tools is often subject to this intuitive decision; in-depth knowledge of their materials and techniques is an advantage. For designers, it is more the knowledge and skills of the tool. But designers are also artists. But artists are also designers when I look at computer-aided modelling. The boundaries are disappearing more and more through computerisation.
I can’t commit myself to certain processes or tools, it always depends on how I’m “ticking” on any given day. One object that I designed is very “classy” or “elegant” (it was spontaneously labelled as such by a florist when I was looking for a suitable planting for it). I described how this design came about in the model description:
The artist was definitely in the foreground here. The creative process was as I described it in the text. In fact, I only used one tool that I am now familiar with. The break points on the object are handmade: by changing the mesh of the basic model by selecting individual mesh points and then shifting them spatially. But here, too, I had to do several things in succession: Create the basic object, refine the mesh of the object, move the correct points in the mesh to create the most realistic-looking break line possible.
Then split the object in the centre to create a matching counterpart and position both halves as shown. Then this had to be adapted functionally. But it should still be a harmonious result. The inner pot is adapted to the outer shape of the object by working the mesh by hand again.
After everything was finished, I reworked it in Meshlab and corrected some areas in Meshmixer. If the mesh is not error-free enough, I usually do a kind of reverse engineering by resampling the STLs and then obtaining a flawless mesh without errors. If, in rare cases, I can’t find a way of eliminating errors, I try to make the object printable in the slicer, using modifiers, etc. If this works, it’s the salvation for a design. Because I then export the G-code and create a new, error-free mesh as an STL by resampling it.
My watering can looks simple, but it was also made this way:
Several objects assembled from individual parts to create the shape. The pattern on the outside of the Watering Can serves as a secure grip so that it does not slip out of the hand. This pattern is based on the basic shape of the Watering Can, but it was not specially created and placed on it. Nor was it cut out. The not-so-simple regular pattern is created in this form by shifting the polygons in the mesh of the object. The shape of the watering can is functionally successful (I use it myself, but at the same time it is optimised for 3D printing. When designing, attention must be paid to all angles of the geometry. So this object can be printed completely without a support structure. Some people find this Watering Can and think it’s great. It doesn’t win a competition because the effort (round about 5 days) and uniqueness are not obvious. For many people, it is “just a watering can”.
My most elaborate object to date, which I created specifically to try out something new, is this clock:
I’ll try to keep it a little shorter. Almost exactly 4 weeks (around 30 days) to the day of completion. From the first sketch, through the first steps to transfer the proportions into reality, to the final assembly of this clock. The ornaments consist of around 80 individual objects, which were combined with each other according to a sketch. They are not quite perfect for me yet, but they have their own charm. Meshlab and Meshmixer, creating new meshes for further processing, etc. were also on the agenda here. The multi-layered roof structure was a challenge in itself. The base and the roof, for example, consist of several square objects placed on top of each other, which are rounded at the outer edges and were reworked at the end so that the shapes merge into each other.
I created the cutouts in the roof from the solid body that roof was at some point during the creation process. To do this, I created new objects both to create the cutouts using Boolean subtraction and to fill this cutouts with precisely fitting elements. Overall, it was a lot of fun and you naturally grow with the tasks. Finally, I can add that this watch model is a reduced design (which was more suitable for Halloween).
Best regards!