Stud.io V2 Instruction Maker - A Blueprint and LDD Killer?

[BennyT19]

By introducing this feature, Bricklink has changed the creative space for LEGO. With LDD not producing reasonable instructions and Stud.io's previous attempt an online only version, even with the third party Blueprint program you needed to import LDD's .LXF file in to produce something in PDF format or DOC. Now Stud.io has negated the need for LDD AND Blueprint in one sweep. If Stud.io has also updated the parts catalogue and fixed a lot of snap and collision issues (which from a quick test are majorly improved), it has just become THE dominant design software for digital LEGO creations.

Considering the new Anniversary program and LDD's waning lack of support from TLG, has TLG done a strategic move and outsourced ongoing software designs with Stud.io collaborations?

Keen to know the thoughts of the AFOL Community.

[Shroud]

So far it’s very impressive but still lacks the workflow and smoothness of LDD in terms of building. Making instructions in blueprint is easier so far but the quality and customisation of stud.io is better.  The images are a higher res, you can alter the view of the model in 3D and I think it even saves the layout of the final product. You have to keep regenerating the layout in blueprint.

Edited September 22, 2018 by Shroud

[JopieK]

Indeed for now I see it more as complementary, I use stud.io but still build the models in LDD.

[1963maniac]

Stud.io Instruction Maker may be better than Blueprint and LDD, but it is not the go to dominant design software for digital LEGO creations. It is definitely not a replacement for the LDRAW  group of software. I do a lot of Technic models and I don't see any advantages yet with Stud.io 2  except the Photo Realistic rendering which is absolutely fantastic.

[SylvainLS]

I wouldn’t say “LDD killer,” LDD is pretty much slowly commiting suicide.

[JopieK]

Why did they choose to focus so much on 'mouse' control? I haven't used a mouse in years (at least not for myself). I like the render mode too indeed, although the controls could be improved there too.

B.t.w. does anyone know why minifig textures do not seem to render (eyes / smile etc.).

[Philo]

1 hour ago, 1963maniac said:

Stud.io Instruction Maker may be better than Blueprint and LDD, but it is not the go to dominant design software for digital LEGO creations. It is definitely not a replacement for the LDRAW  group of software. I do a lot of Technic models and I don't see any advantages yet with Stud.io 2  except the Photo Realistic rendering which is absolutely fantastic.

I agree with you that (at least for for Technic models) Studio convenience is still far away behind LDCad. But rendering is very good, and instruction maker is outstanding. See a quick review of Studio I wrote on LDraw forum: https://forums.ldraw.org/thread-22940-post-29412.html#pid29412

[JopieK]

Thanks for that Philo!

[knotian]

I do nothing but technic and have no problems with Stud.io. The view direction being so important to the way movement tools work was confusing at start.

HOWEVER they arbitrarily changed the UI in 2.0 and I'm so glad I archived Beta. There must be a reason for all the emphasis people make about renders but I see this as a tool for documentation of an actual build, not to create "art" object that may or may not be built. 'Clutch, stability, collision checking' may interest some but a lot of my large builds do not become stable until completed and collision checking gets in the way of building curved walls big time. I usually leave it off.

Being paid for by BrickLink may get it the way of completing the product as a really good tool.

[SylvainLS]

Yes, problematic for axles and technic parts: When trying to put an axle pin (43093) into a brick with axlehole (32064), Stud.io kept turning the pin front to back   It looks as if the axlehole is oriented and Stud.io finds it easier to put the axle from the other side.

Edited September 22, 2018 by SylvainLS

[Shroud]

If they used hardware acceleration I think I’d be completely sold on it as I build huge Mocs...

[kokkie20]

I wish they will add the option to add page numbers automatic.

Haven't found that option yet, but the instruction making looks very promising!

[SylvainLS]

 

37 minutes ago, Shroud said:

If they used hardware acceleration I think I’d be completely sold on it as I build huge Mocs...

The editor part uses the game engine Unity.  Their renderer, Eyesight, is based on Blender’s Cycles and can use NVidia CUDA.

[Shroud]

4 minutes ago, SylvainLS said:

 

The editor part uses the game engine Unity.  Their renderer, Eyesight, is based on Blender’s Cycles and can use NVidia CUDA.

That’s interesting I didn’t realize that but it crashes when I try moving big Mocs.  I’m not sure if I tried V2.0 though I’ll give it a go

[1963maniac]

Folks, Its a nice program and I like it, but it needs many improvements.  I'm still looking for back page, the ability to change assembly scale, part anotations, rotation icon, the multi step layout is limited too. I do not like the look of the assembly images. Is there a way to change those outlines?. Coverting to callout is not working well. If you've found any of these, please speak up. The BOM uses too many pages. What about a back page with Lego disclaimers and copywrite? Instructions that I make using Stud.io turn out to have twice as many pages as LPUB3D.

It's very difficult to scroll through the parts to find what you want. How about some simple arrow up or arrow down buttons! I find this is hard to use for building.

Edited September 25, 2018 by 1963maniac
additions

[SylvainLS]

To reduce the number of pages and the BOM size, you can change the scale(s) and the layout(s) (columns & rows) on each page and callout.

Still some bugs though, such as with the callouts (though some glitches seem to disappear after having restarted the application).

[Anonknee Muss]

I never got into Stud.io, bugged my computer a little and I don’t like Bricklink’s categorisation of pieces. I might be willing to give it another chance when they’ve rolled out a couple of bug fix updates.

[Mylenium]

On 9/22/2018 at 4:00 AM, BennyT19 said:

Now Stud.io has negated the need for LDD AND Blueprint in one sweep.

Not really. Nor does it eliminate the need for using LDraw and LPub plus the gazillion of other tools build around them. Yes, it's nice to get an integrated solution, but it has a long way to go. Stud.io itself is rather clunky to use IMO and the automated layouts for the instructions need a lot of finetuning as does the 3D renderer. E.g. what's totally missing in the instruction builder is an understanding of what margins and whitespace mean for visual clarity and ways to control these things. Everything is bunched together and you keep fiddling forever with the cscaling settings to make it look reasonably okay.

Mylenium

[supertruper1988]

One thing that I did not see mentioned was that because Studio uses LDraw models, you can directly import Custom Ldraw parts.

On Windows the path is:
.\Program Files\Studio 2.0 Beta\ldraw\Custom Parts\parts (the space is required in the Custom Parts folder and if there are and sub-parts, the /s folder will need to be added as well. )

On Mac it is 
/applications/Studio 2.0 Beta/ldraw/Custom Parts/parts (the space is required in the Custom Parts folder and if there are and sub-parts, the /s folder will need to be added as well. )

I have found that unofficial parts cannot be added to the unofficial folder.

One trick that Philo helped me with recently, was that although Studio doesn't support flex parts, LDcad can be used to make them using the "generate a loose file" option and place the generated file in the Custom Parts folder. Custom parts will have no snapping data but that is not too hard to work around. This also allows the great render to work with flex and other custom parts.

Another tip is in the settings, you can assign brick movement to keys so that there is not the need to use the transform arrows. (I use WASD because I am comfortable with that from my gaming days)

[roland]

11 hours ago, supertruper1988 said:

One trick that Philo helped me with recently, was that although Studio doesn't support flex parts, LDcad can be used to make them using the "generate a loose file" option and place the generated file in the Custom Parts folder. Custom parts will have no snapping data but that is not too hard to work around. This also allows the great render to work with flex and other custom parts.

One thing though, some flexible parts will have generated subparts which will cause the 'loose' file to be an MPD. I'm not sure if stud.io supports that at the part level.

[Leewan]

On 9/23/2018 at 5:40 PM, 1963maniac said:

I do not like the look of the assembly images. Is there a way to change those outlines?

What I don't like with the assembly images is the way the parts are rendered. The light is too strong, and the shadows too dark sometimes. It would be better if the parts in the assembly images were rendered as they are in the parts list, or even better, with an uniform colour like in Lego sets' instructions.

Anyways, it does a pretty good job, and I find it easier to use than LPub, but also more limited. I'll keep using Mecabricks for building and rendering, though, with Studio for making instructions.

[supertruper1988]

2 hours ago, roland said:

One thing though, some flexible parts will have generated subparts which will cause the 'loose' file to be an MPD. I'm not sure if stud.io supports that at the part level.

Ahh, I was just doing some custom flex tubes so that is my limited experience. 

[Jason C. Hand]

I was never much into Stud.io myself..lagged my laptop to a crawl while opened.

On 9/22/2018 at 8:40 AM, SylvainLS said:

I wouldn’t say “LDD killer,” LDD is pretty much slowly commiting suicide.

Which is bit of a shame, considering the update from earlier this year. There's some new hair parts from the new Harry Potter sets I'd like to see added, as well as Friends figure body parts to complete the parts already in the program.

[Philo]

21 hours ago, roland said:

One thing though, some flexible parts will have generated subparts which will cause the 'loose' file to be an MPD. I'm not sure if stud.io supports that at the part level.

Indeed... MPD headers in parts are cheerfully ignored by Studio. You can make it work with manual inline of contents and placement of the needed files in appropriate folders, but it's becoming arcane!

[anothergol]

I've toyed with Stud.io's instruction maker for a few minutes, frankly I didn't understand how it works. I found Blueprint pretty straightforward, and I thought that was THE best way to generate instructions, and that Stud.io would follow the same scheme, but isn't it working backwards?
I opened one of my models, opened the generator, I was expecting something already kinda pre-generated & waiting for manual fixes, instead I got one gigantic step with everything in it, and any attempt at cutting it in parts failed. Even the tool that generates steps for selected parts, is only forking for a small amount of parts.

I assume it has to do with the fact that it's based on the "steps" in the editor itself, & thus it requires using these in the first place.. which of course my models, coming from the LDD, don't. And I don't understand the purpose of those editing steps in the first place. But hey, I'd love to love Stud.io, especially if the LDD is bound to die, I don't love Stud.io yet but it's still the best second choice I have left, other editors are just hell.