Adobe Substance 3D Collection vs. Rhino 3D

Big and mid-sized firms can really leverage the flexibility and value using the different tools all available at one place in the collection and also the integration with Adobe apps like photoshop, really makes it a seamless experience especially in fast paced production environments like advertising. For many film and game studios the whole collection might not be that much helpful as only painter will be of much use. For the small and indie studio it might be a costlier option and they can consider similar free or cheaper alternatives.

Incentivized

One of the main highlights of Rhino is the built-in visual programming system "Grasshopper". It is widely used for parametric architectural design, by a variety of world-class architectural offices. It is also very popular within architectural schools and universities. Its usefulness has increased a lot by having add-ins, plug-ins, scripts, and integrations with Revit and ARCHICAD for BIM workflows.

Incentivized

• Great performance
• Excellent Adobe support
• Fast and easy

• Parametric Modeling - Grasshopper allows for easy/rapid iterative process
• White box renders display - looks great as a quick diagram export with no post-production required.
• robust command prompts - rhino was originally made for industrial design and it flexes a lot of unique modeling commands that put it up there with SolidWorks

Incentivized

• The substance painter is easy to use but its interface could be improved to be a bit more user friendly.
• More assets can be added to stager, so visualize products better. Also AI workflow can be added for backplates.
• Substance designer learning curve is very tough. Many people not able to grab it. It could be simplified.

Incentivized

• Rhino has very limited sheet layout tools.
• Grasshopper could be better integrated into the main interface.
• Lack of backwards file compatibility can be frustrating.

Incentivized

The overall usability of substance stager and painter is quite easy. Many people will be able to use it without much prior experience. But designer is very complicated to learn and not many resources available for that. I think if they integrate the AI and provide better resources in the general interface, it could be a 10 on 10 in usability.

Incentivized

A majority of the support for Rhinoceros 3D does not come from the company itself, but from online forums and boards where other Rhinoceros 3D users outline their issues and solutions. The Rhinoceros 3D website does not offer much in-depth support and just outlines general how to's. At the same time, online forums allow for more specific issues to be addressed and solved by the Rhinoceros 3D community.

Incentivized

For texturing, Adobe Substance 3D is much better than the other options. In other fields, it's another story. I find it excellent for game engines and realistic renders, but it only solves textures. We, then, move to Blender because it has more compatibility with exports, and we can import them into our preferred render engine. We mostly use Unreal Engine, but also Blender3D to do the final rendering.

It's hard to compare Rhino to other modeling software as Rhino is in a niche of its own. No other software (to my knowledge) is as customizable/programmable and has such a large community and such a large amount of free, open-source addons. Rhino (and Grasshopper) can be intimidating at first but once you get familiar with it and grow your toolbox with your own scripts, so much time will be saved

Incentivized

• We saved time when texturing models
• With better looking assets, it's more money in the bank
• Less time testing, more time doing

• Right away Rhino3D is useful for simple and accurate 3D model import, repair and export all in a variety of formats.
• Rhino3D is easy to use and learn. The time to productivity is very short with this modeling tool.
• The price is low for the value received, a great investment.

Incentivized