Talk:Blender 3D: Noob to Pro/Archive 6

Development required
Every Tutorial in Unit 2, 3 or 4 with a status/stage short under the 100% has to be taken care of. Unit 1 is very good and Unit 4 has some good sections but also very bad or non-existent sections. The points given below are too outdated to even read.Animajosser (discuss • contribs) 18:26, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

A plea not to use small pages that disadvantage most people
I know it is generally considered that smaller web pages are somehow "better", but this seems to be one of those generally accepted beliefs that goes unquestioned, yet is actually wrong. The idea behind Wikibooks is to make books freely available to everybody, but slicing Wikibooks up into tiny pieces severely disadvantages people who do not have fast, cheap, always-on internet. That is, most of the people in the world.

This is spectacularly evident in the case of Blender 3D: Noob to Pro. This wikibook used to be available as three large pages: "Beginner Tutorials", "Advanced Tutorials", and "Miscellaneous Tutorials". That allowed people to easily download the wikibook for offline use. However, now that the book has been decimated into 254(!) parts it is virtually impossible to use offline.

The Collections service only makes PDF format available for downloading and that seems to be broken. PDF is a terrible format for viewing on computer and is really suitable only for printing on dead trees, which is impossible anyway for those of us who don't have printers -- most of the people in the world. Also, it doesn't display animated GIFs or videos or play sounds (HTML does), and the format is often up to ten times the size of the HTML pages it is created from. Those same people who do have always-on, fast, cheap internet will also have computers with lots of memory, so reading an enormous PDF file will seem to be no problem for them, but for the rest of us (most of the people in the world) PDF is an absolute blight. It can't even be converted back to the original HTML for viewing on screens.

The current version of the book could be easily and naturally divided into 6 big pages:
 * Background
 * Basic Modeling and Shading
 * Broadening Horizons
 * Taking Off
 * FAQ, Glossary, and advice
 * Miscellaneous Tutorials

Blender 3D: Noob to Pro is a truly amazing piece of work. Please let it be available to those of us who must work mostly offline and without printers -- we comprise most of the world's internet users. Please don't exclude us.

Miriam e (discuss • contribs) 00:07, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with Miriam's statement. It's a bit of a hassle to have to manage between so many different webpages when they are all so tiny. A good example that I can think of for combining webpages would be putting the first three sections of 1B ("Overview", "Keystroke, Button, and Menu Notation", and "Non-standard Input Devices") all onto one page. Theonixie (discuss • contribs) 15:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Todo Page
Thought I’d mention the Todo page, though it’s not quite clear why that exists (and has its own discussion page!) separate from this discussion page, which would seem to be the natural place to discuss things needing doing. It doesn’t seem to have been used in a while, anyway.


 * Ldo (discuss • contribs) 05:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Please Rename This Book!
After spending the past two or three weeks going through several of the pages, discussions, tutorials, always with the attitude that even though they were written for an earlier version of Blender, that the interface changed significantly since then, that even though several commands given no longer apply, there could be something gleaned, something of value learned.

Probably the most lasting thing learned from this experience is that you should not try reading something written 7 or 8 years old appended with (maybe) parenthetical update notes as the frustration from an imposed aging filter does not lend itself for material that's constantly changing and a targeted group of newcomers hoping to learn.

Therefore, it would serve readers new to Blender much service if they were informed straight up that this book is not current by renaming it to:

 Blender 3D, v2.4x: Noob to Pro 

along with something like the following:

Kbellis (discuss • contribs) 14:28, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm going through the tutorials right now, and I'd like to know if this book still need updating. It's been a year now since you wrote this, have things changed since then?.2A01:E35:8AB6:1930:F454:B7EE:9D:58A9 (discuss) 07:39, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it still needs updating. The interface has changed significantly (for the better, in my opinion) making some of the tutorial steps unnecessary or able to be achieved in simpler ways. I'm hoping in a month (maybe two) I'll have the time to go through some of the tutorials and add some tips for the new version's interface, which I'm still learning to use properly. --Miriam e (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks.2A01:E35:8AB6:1930:D052:451C:4C06:201A (discuss) 15:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I should add that I think most, perhaps all, of the tutorials in Noob to Pro still work with the new Blender interface, just that the new interface makes many things easier, while being initially confusing to those used to the old interface (like me :) ). --Miriam e (discuss • contribs) 00:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Don't rename it! It has many pages for blender 2.5x, 2.6x and even 2.7x. It has to be completely converted to 2.5x+, not abandoned. Nobody is going to use blender 2.4x or below, when a much further developed blender 2.7x and nearly 2.80 is coming with Cycles, Freestyle and a much better interface and addons for e.g. for Pixar Renderman. Animajosser (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey Animajosser, should the above still hold for 2.8? There are a lot of interface changes in the new 2.8 release, and as I'm going through the tutorials, I'm wondering if I should be completely replacing the shortcuts/views for the past releases or if I should be adding the new shortcuts off to the side. Brycestevenwilley (discuss • contribs) 01:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes. I cannot understate how useless this book is in it's current state. It should be made very clear that it was written for legacy versions. Wolfos123 (discuss • contribs) 14:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Questions about text

 * Q: how can I download the ENTIRE book in PDF-format?
 * A: it can be downloaded here, it is split in 3 parts though.

er... maybe i'm missing the 3D woods for the textured trees, but i don't find the pdf files at the link above.


 * Q: On the page linked above, Blender 3d: Noob to Pro is not listed. Is there another place I should look?
 * A: There are two other ways. The first is to create a collection (under Print/Export, to the left) and then download it as a PDF.  The other is to use User:Sendoshin/Collections/Blender 3D: Noob to Pro, a collection I have already created myself.  The latter method is faster; the first method gives you more control over what is and is not included.  - Sendoshin (discuss • contribs) 07:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Update: The collection linked above has been accepted as the official version; it is now a redirect to Wikibooks:Collections/Blender 3D: Noob to Pro. Feel free to use the new location instead. Sendoshin (discuss • contribs) 22:14, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

A*Okay, well what worked for me is to download the Wikibook as ODT and then convert it to a PDF.
 * Q:Cannot open to PDF. It says "The file you are trying to download does not exist: Maybe it has been deleted and needs to be regenerated. " or opens another page and acts like its going to display but, it displays nothing but a blank page. And this book is not listed on the PDF page on Wikibooks. -TheEnder
 * The Collections system for downloading books seems badly broken at the moment. I spent 4 hours adding all 254 pages to a collection then tried to download it as epub format, but failed with an error message, then tried as ODT and failed with the same error. I noticed broken PDF documents in my /tmp directory. It only sends PDF. Miriam e (discuss • contribs) 09:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I updated the PDF Version linked on the main page of this book just now. So you can simply download that and got an up to date copy.--Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 15:12, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion
I'm wondering if we can add a new page that explains in DETAIL, normals, and animation keys, Bake, etc.... Since frankly, most of the tutorials just let you set the parameters and don't bother explaining what they do in detail. It's just a suggestion though..... 492star (talk) —The preceding undated comment was added 02:14, 25 February 2010.
 * I, too, hate long sequences of steps that don’t shed any light on what effect they’re trying to achieve. Far better to have a short sequence, explain how the result from that falls short of what you’re trying to achieve, then another short sequence to fix part of the problem, and so on. Like I did with my Simple Wood Texture example. Ldo (talk) 03:13, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if we really need the isometric projection page, as I don't see that Blender actually supports it.

I added info about normals to Blender_3D:_Noob_to_Pro/Simple_Vehicle:_Body, as it is required to deal with the results of one of the methods to make the truck bed. Pearts (talk) 22:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Printing?
If anyone would take this book to a publisher, and I can order it in Holland I would definitely order a copy. I really prefer a real book than an e-book.

Mediawiki recently added a feature that lets you order a real book. In the sidebar, click "Create a book" under "Print/export". LeftClicker (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Alternately, you can use the collection I've already created to do the same thing - just choose "Order Printed Book" instead of "Download PDF". The link is at the top of this page.  :D  Sendoshin (discuss • contribs) 03:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Merging Other Material
There are two books suggested to be merged into this one, and I think it would be a good choice.

I agree! Pearts (talk) 14:11, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

moving sections around
it's silly to show painting in die easy, but show us a finished result in the peguin, I think they should be reversed Pearts (talk) 14:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

die easy 2 and die another day need to be reversed in position as die easy 2 is now in sync with the more recient version of blenders Pearts (talk) 14:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

gingerbread man need to go to misc as it serves no purpose Pearts (talk) 14:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The Vision of the Book
taken from Talk:Blender_3D:_Noob_to_Pro/Mountains_Out_Of_Molehills

Since you're planning on helping out a bit around here, let me sort of explain what my vision is for the book.


 * Beginner Tutorials focus on learning how to use the tools, hotkeys available in the blender. this is mostly technical documentation


 * Intermediate Tutorials focus on the artistic use of the tools learned in the beginner tutorials. Some people say that you can't teach somebody to be an artist.  I beg to differ.  The ability to become an artist is in the desire.  Artistic modeling, artistic lighting, artistic scene creation, artistic animation.


 * Advanced Tutorials focus on the advanced functions of the Blender, such as python scripting for advanced animation, advanced modeling, etc.


 * If you can see my vision here (and if you can agree with it), then you'll see why I want subsurf edges to be in the Beginner Tutorials. Obviously a lot more tutorials will need to be created in the Beginning Tutorials part to make it comprehensive.  --Spiderworm 21:56, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Problem downloading PDF linked in additional resources
I've tried multiple times to download the PDF copy of Noob to Pro provided under the link in additional resources and each time the download is nearly halfway completed when it suddenly completes and Adobe Reader opens saying that he document is corrupted and is unable to be repaired. Any ideas on how to overcome this issue would be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nk.warren77 (talk • contribs) 10:51, 23 October 2010
 * In the future, please sign your talk page postings with four tildes like it says in the notice.
 * I tried the link, which led me to http://pdf.letworyinteractive.com/download/category/1-pdf?download=2%3Ablender-manual-20100622, and that downloaded fine. I notice that the file is 1561 pages.  Perhaps your download session timed out at one end or the other. --Stepheng3 (talk) 20:28, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn't Noob to Pro, by the way - it's the Blender Manual. :D  For a PDF of Noob to Pro, see the top of this page. Sendoshin (discuss • contribs) 03:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Possible style change
Colleagues:

Thank you all for this book. It is extremely useful in its present form.

I have been working through the book, mostly from front to back, but with some diversions. One thing has struck me as a problem, and I think I can see a path to a solution.

The problem is that it is essential to provide detailed instructions to the Noob, but these detailed instructions become repetitious as the reader gains experience, and in the more advanced and complex examples they can interfere with the flow of the higher-level explanatory text to the extent that a user can lose the thread of the narrative. So when I read a section that says "create a vertex," I want to know exactly how to do it if I do not know or if I have forgotten, and if I am trying to actually follow along in my Blender window, but I am very distracted and irritated if the method is repeated inline and I already know it, or if I am reading to get an overview.

I think the solution is to create a footnote (like a reference on Wikipedia.) The text will still say "create a vertex", but the exact keystrokes will be given in the footnote. For more complex operations, the footnote will also give a link to the earlier location in the book where the technique is explained.

I think this solution has several advantages, one important advantage is that it takes advantage of linking while still remaining viable when the book is printed.

Clearly, In an article that is intended to explain the technique, all of the keystrokes should be inline. They should only go into footnotes when the technique has already been explained in an earlier article and is being used as an element of a more complex technique.

Please comment. I will create a "worked example" of the concept for further discussion unless a preliminary discussion here is negative.-Arch dude (talk) 17:30, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Please contrast the current-style Blender 3D: Noob to Pro/Spin a goblet with the proposed User:Arch dude/Spin a goblet. -Arch dude (talk) 01:53, 12 December 2010 (UTC) (See below.)

I see that this book has its template for keystrokes. I just want to note that (for a help page) I imported Template:Key press. – Adrignola talk 22:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I use the book's keystroke templates in both the "standard" and "proposed" version. They are inline in the standard version, and in the footnotes in the "proposed" version. If anything, these templates are more distracting inline than Blender's standard conventions. However, I think that they are just fine in the footnotes. B3D:N2P/Do is perhaps preferable to Key press, because it uses a white background for modifier keys and a grey background for execution keys, but the difference is not really important. -Arch dude (talk) 00:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Having received no comments on the proposal, I switched the tutorial to the footnoted version. To see the inline version, go to the old version. -Arch dude (talk) 16:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

-- this is a great idea! Pearts (discuss • contribs) 00:56, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Print version
I would agree that this page should no longer be used. It nearly crashes my browser trying to load it. The PDFs on demand via the collections can also be printed and I personally believe they should replace all "print versions" entirely. – Adrignola discuss 17:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Collective Flow
It has been noted (see above, in the "Possible Style Change" section) that the articles in this WikiBook are not necessarily optimized for compilation into a coherent whole. Each article is designed for web viewing, and is therefore fairly self-contained. This isn't a problem on the web, or even when printed as a stand-alone article, where being self-contained is, after all, A Good Thing™. However, when the same articles are collected into a PDF or print-on-demand book, the various articles frequently don't even reference that the others exist, which is not very good for the flow of a book. In order to address this, I propose going through each article, in the order it appears in the ToC or the Collection (the two are currently synonymous, save for several pages that don't exist), and editing it to:
 * Fix the Navigation templates to point to the actual previous and next articles
 * Acknowledge what has been said in preceding articles
 * Lead into following articles
 * Change redundant (appearing after the first time) instructions so they:
 * Will be collapsed or moved to footnotes by default
 * Will be consistently presented through the whole book
 * Will be omitted when the article is viewed as a Collection (PDF or print-on-demand)

It might also be good to rearrange some articles in the ToC/Collection so the topics themselves will flow naturally from one to the next - I haven't actually read through the whole book as of yet, so I'm not sure how much of this actually needs doing, and how much has already been done. Ultimately, of course, this is a community effort, and therefore a community decision. - Sendoshin (discuss • contribs) 04:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

-- you are one of the few who is well versed in written communications, so please do what you can for all the future readers, as most of us find this aspect of book writing quite boring. Pearts (discuss • contribs) 00:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree, maybe we should make those into guidelines? I'm not sure about using footnotes to hold unnecessary information though, wouldn't it be better to just give the information required and forget the useless stuff? e.g If you're writing a module on how to make a detailed 747, just leave out the "Switch to Edit Mode" stuff in favor of "Scale the first 5 fuselage loops by 1.2x". --JamesNZ (discuss • contribs) 05:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Delete the 2.4x reference?
I think we should delete "Although a fantastic resource, absolute newcomers to Blender will have to install and use version 2.4x...", it seems unnecessary. What do you think? --JamesNZ (discuss • contribs) 05:13, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

probley needs to be reworded to say that most of the tutorials where written with 2.4x in mind. Pearts (discuss • contribs) 03:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

That would be better, I'll change it. --JamesNZ (discuss • contribs) 04:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

As I make my way through the tutorials, it strikes me that whenever material is updated, it's worth removing most references to archival versions of the software. Anyone learning Blender through the tutorials will of course have downloaded the most recent version, and preserving references to how older versions worked is distracting at best. Those who are seriously invested in older versions of Blender will no longer be reading tutorials. No? Arnoldofcrete (discuss • contribs) 22:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Another 2₡ - I completely agree with Arnoldofcrete's remark. As of v2.65a, much of the interface has changed since the bulk of this wiki book had been started with keyboard shortcuts no longer working and screen captures that no longer apply. The band aid approach of appending a parenthetical note to a section predicated on an earlier release has its place, but also has its limitations.

Though I'm only now beginning to learn this program over the past two weeks with many thanks to all who have contributed to this wiki book with all of their kind and selfless work, it appears that v2.5 was a watershed event. This leads me to think that with each major release, the wiki book should be cloned, renamed to reflect that major release; e.g., Blender 3D v2.5: Noob to Pro, the various sections updated, the inapplicable purged and new bits created.

Kbellis (discuss • contribs) 21:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Yet another 2₡ - I totally agree. I'm starting from scratch on version 2.72. Thanks of course to all who have contributed (for free, I understand), but there seems to be too many repetitions of the same issues along with too many defunct bits of info from previous versions. Ideally the tutorials would only cover each issue once and thereby create a lean-and-mean per-edition basic grounding. In comparison with propriety software, Blender seems stunningly creative and community-minded. So a better intro for newbies would go a long way to pushing its presence even further.

Table of Contents
I've found this book a few days ago while searching for beginner tutorials. Having been reading it for a few days, one issue I have right off the bat is the lack of a proper table of contents. Or, to be more specific, a table of contents that links directly to each section using bookmarks (like this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/37844107/Photos/Contents%20example.jpg). This would make moving back and forth between sections much easier, especially because new users like me will probably be jumping back and forth to remind ourselves of commands, settings, etc. I'm actually kinda curious as to why this wasn't in there to begin with. I realize that with a book of this size, this would require a huge amount of effort, and I'm willing to help if and when I can (i.e. when I don't have homework and I don't want to play games or surf the web). So, does anyone else think this is a good idea and want to help add this? BBlender gGuy (discuss • contribs) 21:17, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Image on the Cover
I feel like there should be something more on the "cover" page (really just page 1). It just seems a bit boring to me as is. I would suggest the Blender logo, and I found a high-res on on Google if you want to use it: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DjogBLK0-DA/TuSK_wb0MoI/AAAAAAAAAjE/0S34nPPFqpw/s1600/blender_logo.png

Actually, I could do this myself. How would I go about adding the image to the PDF? BBlender gGuy (discuss • contribs) 21:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Images are uploaded by using the Upload file option which you will see on the toolbox menu to your right. Once the image is uploaded, you can include it on the cover page where it will automatically become part of the PDF QU TalkQu 22:54, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, I uploaded the file, how do I add it to the PDF? BBlender gGuy (discuss • contribs) 22:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)BBlender gGuy (discuss • contribs) 02:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Red Links
I found the follwing red links. Meaning pages that were included but didn't exist:

The following items caused errors:

PDF version problems
Not all of the keystroke images show up in the PDF version. For instance, in section 29.1 the online version says to bring up the Snap menu with Shift + S but the PDF version omits the S. The whole PDF is riddled with these errors and it makes it completely useless. In general it seems to be multiple keystrokes that go wrong so I suspect it's an artifact of converting to PDF format, but whatever it is it needs fixing. Reyk (discuss • contribs) 22:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for pointing out this issue. It is resolved with the PDF I uploaded a few minutes ago. Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 06:22, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. Glad to see it was an easy fix. Reyk (discuss • contribs) 22:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Another example of missing images is in chapter I, unit 1, par. 16, e.g. after Render Context you have "File:Blender255RenderContextButton.png" instead of the icon. P.gibellini (discuss • contribs) 09:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete Tutorial
The page Blender 3D: Noob to Pro/Model the Solar system is far from complete and not fit for inclusion in the book in its present form. I am taking it out of the table of contents and saving a link to it here until it is improved. Ldo (discuss • contribs) 02:57, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Obsolete 2.4x Scripting Pages
I have removed links to the following obsolete pages that described scripting in 2.49 and older:


 * 1) Procedural object creation
 * 2) External scripts
 * 3) Creating a GUI for your script
 * 4) Export scripts
 * 5) Import scripts
 * 6) Scripts for modifying meshes [[File:00%.svg]]

I’m not sure whether these should be deleted, or whether any material on, say, import/export can be resurrected/adapted to the current Blender scripting API. Volunteers welcome. :)


 * Ldo (discuss • contribs) 03:38, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

To add to the above, I have removed the Overview page, which also had a link to the alternative 2.49 scripting tutorial.


 * Ldo (discuss • contribs) 04:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Replaced Another Page
I have taken out the page /What is a Mesh?/ and replaced with a new page “Meshes and Edit Mode”. There may still be some stuff worth salvaging from the old page, which is why I’m linking it here.


 * Ldo (discuss • contribs) 01:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Yafray Is Obsolete
Yafray has been replaced by Yafaray. On top of which, all the references to Yafray seem to date from many years ago, when it looks like it was commonly used to get around limitations in the Blender Internal renderer that have since been (mostly) rectified.

To this end, I am removing the pages discussing Yafray, Yafray Render Options and Realistic Water using Fluid Sim and Yafray, and just leaving links to them here. For the future, I think it is best to stick with the Blender Internal renderer for all lessons apart from the Game Engine, until we get to Advanced Rendering. If anybody wants to add information about Yafaray, put it in that section.


 * Ldo (discuss • contribs) 05:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Obsolete Curve Stuff
The page Curves In 3d is obsolete. I have included equivalent content in a prior page.
 * Ldo (discuss • contribs) 02:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Typographic consistency
Hello everyone

First, I must say I'm very impressed with what I've read so far. The attention to detail and overall level of polish are outstanding.

Being a pedant, I've noticed a couple of typographical inconsistencies. Dashes, for example, are not standardised – I've so far seen spaced em-dashes, spaced en-dashes and spaced hyphens used for the same purpose. For purposes such as parenthesis, the Wikipedia Manual of Style recommends either spaced en-dashes or unspaced em-dashes.

I'd like to tweak copy for this sort of stylistic consistency, if I may. In the case of dashes, I prefer the spaced en-dash to the unspaced em-dash, but I would be happy to go with whatever is agreed upon by the powers that be.

Thoughts?

Hidden Exit (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 26 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Spaced em dashes are far the easiest-to-read convention; as I recall, it was also the most popular convention on en.wp before WP:MOS took its bizarre position. How the WP:MOS folks ended up with that loony convention is beyond me, except that it illustrates the subtle disfunctionality of that system (not that WP:MOS doesn't get some things right, and not that any system doesn't have problems).  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 12:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

It's certainly a matter of style, but I believe the em-dash is usually used without word spaces. Because there are often no sidebearings around an em-dash, it can get uncomfortably close to surrounding characters, so hair spaces are commonly inserted for padding. In terms of personal preference, I think the spaced em-dash is too jarring a break, and it doesn't offer any significant readability benefits. But that's just my opinion; using a spaced em-dash certainly wouldn't rob me of any sleep. My main intention is to improve consistency. Hidden Exit (discuss • contribs) 13:28, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Video Tutorials
I create video tutorials for Blender Geek and was wondering if I, along with a few others, can create video tutorials for parts of the book that don't have videos. You can view my YouTube channel or website.

All the videos will be in the latest version of Blender, so many will probably be converted along the way.

This will also expose me to parts of Blender that I haven't learnt yet.

Thanks Ivan kahl BLENDER GEEK 41.122.28.108 (discuss) 08:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Translations
Hi. I read ur book. Now i know 3d) I want to help to translate this book to Russian language. How to do this? AlexeiKozlov (discuss • contribs) 09:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess you just start writing it in ru.wikibooks.org. Ldo (discuss • contribs) 05:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Merging Lighting Tutorials?
It seems rather superfluous to have two tutorials on basic lighting. Does anyone have any thoughts on merging Blender 3D: Noob to Pro/Lighting Suzanne: Introductory one lamp lighting and Blender 3D: Noob to Pro/Basic Lighting Rigs? The other option would be to move the Basic Lighting somewhere earlier than the Suzanne tutorial. Anarchistamy (discuss • contribs) 15:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

The PDF/ Collection generation system is broken
Blender 3D: Noob to Pro is an excellent book. But it's not currently very book-like. Neither can it be made book-like. By which I mean that the WikiBooks render server is broken. Despite trying 3 browsers and 2 operating systems over two different ISP's, the render process always seems to fail after reaching exactly 36.67 %, at which point, instead of collection-specific titles, the render line reads [Parsoid]. Is there a way to render this collection externally? Or collect it in book format some way or other? Salmonlawyer (discuss • contribs) 05:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

I rendered the wikibook externally. The PDF version linked on the main page of the book is now up to date again.--Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 15:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Question
Hi, i am looking for tutorial Books or DVD for absolute beginners in Blender 2.72b, literally step by step for Mac. My internet plan does not permit me to use online tuition. Anyone have any advise which & where I get these ? thanks HH
 * Just print the PDF version (may not be up-to-date). Ftiercel (discuss • contribs) 20:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I was able to generate an updated version of the PDF fileː



unfortunately there are some minor typographic issues that I currently don't have time to fix, so I do not favour using it as a replacement for the one linked on the main page of this book. I hope it is still useful. If someone wants to work on the typographic details I will happily provide him/her with the latex source code of the book. I generated the latex code as well as the provided pdf file with mediawiki2latex using the latest source from the git repository in with I just committed the disabling of threading particularly for this book. The command line was like that mediawiki2latex -u https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/User:Dirk_H%C3%BCnniger/blender -o dirk.pdf -i -c blender +RTS -K2000M Yours --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 19:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

I fixed most typographic issues and overwrote the pdf version linked on the main page of this book. So its up to date now. --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 15:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

PDF version update July 2016
Hi, I just updated the pdf version upon anonymous request on my talk page. If you need it to be updated again please contact me. Yours --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 15:47, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, in the pdf version there seem to be some small parts missing. Chapters 67-70 (about the Bezier curves) just show up as empty pages to me. Yours Squaraina (discuss • contribs) 08:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I will have some free time in two weeks and try to recompile the PDF then. I will to this with mediawiki2latex, which is open source. So if you need results faster you could try yourself. Yours --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 19:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I just uploaded a new version File:BlenderDocumentation3.pdf Yours --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 17:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I just uploaded a new version File:BlenderDocumentation4.pdf. This was necessary due to a missing double closing curly bracket, that was supposed to close a template and confused that parser. The bracket was missing due to vandalism and is now restored. Yours --Dirk Hünniger (discuss • contribs) 15:49, 4 May 2019 (UTC)