I found a new modeller for Panda3D

Hello all! Hope you are doing well! I have just found out a new [edit2]modeller[/edit2] for panda3d which is easier than blender! It is called blockbench. Website link:

I use it for making entity models for my minecraft mods, but there is also an option to create models for any game engine. After your model is done, you can simply export it as a .obj file and call obj2egg on it! It has simple modelling and the texturing can be done in the program it self, with simple pixel-by-pixel texturing on the model, after which you can export the texture and call the setTexture method in panda. I have never tried setting the texture and then exporting the model, so I recommend you first make the model, export it, then make the texture and export it as well.

Hope it helps!

Note: If anyone has doubts using blockbench, just ask me in this topic, and I will clarify them as I have been using it for a long time for my minecraft mods as I mentioned.

[edit]
You can also export it as a gltf file format and export it to panda however you are supposed to, but I can’t help with that bit as I have never used gltf. Sorry! :frowning: :frowning:
[/edit]

I see you are not aware that it is not necessary to create an egg. You can also upload .obj in panda.

And I don’t think mentioning this editor in conjunction with panda is appropriate. Since it has nothing to do with this engine, and even more so is not an exporter.

I don’t see a reason that someone shouldn’t mention a development tool that they’ve found useful and that they think might be useful to other Panda users.

It is true that this isn’t an exporter, I do think–rather, it’s a modelling-program that happens to export to a file-format that Panda can load.

Then, with such success, you can declare any 3D editor a tool for Panda.

Any that exports to a format that Panda recognises, or that we have an exporter for, yes.

The only reason that I see to reject such recommendations is to prevent clutter of the forum–which doesn’t currently seem to be happening.

And if it does, we can just move such recommendations to a single dedicated thread.

This is the point, it was definitely not stated that the egg format is supported.

It’s not, as far as I’m aware. But Panda can load obj files, and this exports to obj, so it works as a modelling package for Panda, it seems to me.

obj is not a native panda format, and it also has a number of limitations. And in general, this is a generally accepted format that is supported by other 3D editors. And again, it is not related to panda.

I’m not sure of the relevance of these two points.

It may not be an ideal format–but then, the egg format doesn’t support everything, either.

And it’s not native, but it is supported.

As to it being generally-accepted, that’s true–but I don’t see why that should stop someone from posting a tool that uses it if they feel that said tool is worth recommending to others.

It’s related, as I see it, by virtue of being a potential part of a Panda-developer’s pipeline.

Where is my position unclear?

This has nothing to do with Panda3D. The subject of the post and the title of this post are misleading.

And as I’ve explained, I disagree: this is potentially relevant to users of Panda3D.

I do agree that the thread-title is inaccurate, and thus potentially misleading, however. The thing described isn’t an exporter, but rather a modelling package.

That is why I suggested converting to .egg.

[edit]I made a model which should be a dog but it is some kind of monstrosity, and it worked. So I don’t see why others shouldn’t[/edit]

(Wow! First time my profile has shown 10 unread posts)

Sorry, I used the word export everywhere, I forgot to type modeller instead. Sorry! :frowning: :frowning:

1 Like

And why is this necessary… the purpose of converting to egg?

And agree, the wording: A new 3d editor(modeling software) for panda3D, not a very good wording. Such a combination of words should not be, so as not to mislead the community.

As you said, obj is limited but egg isn’t

If you want to say that the conversion fixes this, then you are mistaken.

If there was no animation, it will not appear. The only possibility that appears is manual editing of the file, but as a rule this is rarely necessary.

And the EGG is not the final format, there is no point in turning it into a data loop. The most correct option is to use BAM.

1 Like

Then we can call egg2bam.

I see you don’t seem to like this thread, but all I put in it was a new modeler that someone might find useful, and the posts should only be doubts about the modeler. If you don’t find it useful, you can just use blender or anything else. I was just mentioning that this is also there.

That might be true, but I was suggesting this because it is very simple.

Funniest thread I’ve seen in a while. An interesting tool nonetheless.

If you do have any doubts, you can also ask. Mostly, people might get confused with the texturing.

Thanks!

Serega is right, your post is misleading. If people search “panda3d model editor”, some will be disappointed when they find this. This was not designed for Panda3D in any way and will be only as good as Pandas support for gltf. Nonetheless, people interested in such simple modeler dont need much and this could work for them. So its not that relevant that it wasnt made for Panda imho.

edit: The more I look at it the less I like it tho. Its written in javascript and it uses Y-up coordinates.