My LW 2023 Speculation / wishlist Thread....lol

[Rayek]

Switching between poly, point, and edge mode goes by far easier with a spacebar action than doing the same in blender

Of course, in B there is no need to switch between the three at all if the user turns all three selection modes on at the same time. Saves a lot of time having to push keys (or the spacebar)

And there is no need to activate any transformation tool either because all three transformation gizmos can be active at the same time as well. No keyboard use required either.

Definitely something to improve on in Modeler.

The issue for me is that I am fixed on the lightwave Quick model focus workflow, while in blender you have to be aware of the scene, object, and edit mode while constructing the model, I just feel more comfortable to do simpler things, fast in lightwave modeler with a focus that doesn´t need me to be aware of it´s context in the same way as in blender, constantly need to be aware of where the mouse cursor is to zoom in, same with selections..feels more easier to get to the point in Lightwave modeler, selecting points, copy and paste in to layers, not collections..which I am not a fan of, though they probably hold some advantages.

That could be chalked down to familiarity with the software, but also the core difference between LightWave and any other DCC out there. LightWave is a split app. The others are unified. It remains LightWave's Achilles' Heel, no matter how it is looked at.

The advantages of a unified app heavily outweigh any perceived complexity of the use thereof compared to Modeler or Layout as single running apps.

Besides, if simplicity of GUI is required, it is possible to create a dedicated custom workspaces in most DCCs and filter out unwanted functionality. On top of that all DCCs feature an isolation mode to focus on 1 or more objects while editing those - something not directly or conveniently possible in Modeler without workarounds.

I agree Modeler is "simpler". In my opinion that is more a case of lack of functionality and due to the split of M and L:

- it lacks non-destructive modeling options
- it lacks object awareness
- it lacks a sculpt mode/sculpting tools
- it lacks options to combine simulation tools to model things For example, cloth sim, or just drop things in a sim. Or add particles/hair and convert to geo. It lacks integration of all these things. (FiberFX is a separate dialog and has its own viewport!!! Why?!) )
- it lacks geometry nodes
- it lacks basic 3d painting tools
- it lacks camera-based and scene-based modeling. It lacks cameras.
- it lacks volume modeling tools
- it lacks lights so it is not possible to directly model around a light setup and preview the result in (semi)real time
- it lacks the option to edit geometry based on animation and vice versa
- it lacks VPR or a similar viewport-based (semi) real time rendering to model while previewing the full result (yes this is quite handy sometimes!)
- and other known interoperability modeling workflow issues that pop up regularly in the LW community
- and more. A Grease Pencil, for example.

Now, some of these things have workarounds and indirect solutions in LightWave. Many do not or require external apps to solve them. Or plugins that add non-destructive modeling, but only to Layout.

The core difference in a unified app like B, C4D, or Houdini is that when the user works on models and scenes, they have the option to seamlessly switch between all these things in the modeling process. Obviously with such a broad range of tools available to the user to create (parts of) models, it adds extra levels of complexity. And yes: if the built-in tools do not suffice to reach the wanted quality, external tools will still be important.

But in return it adds SO much more scope and variety in modeling workflow and approach. Modeler feels incredibly outdated compared. Often we REQUIRE that seamless workflow awareness of scene and model.

But if that perceived simplicity of UX is required, it is still possible to vastly reduce an unified DCC's modeling UX by introducing a dedicated workspace. Cinema 4D is a good example of that: a workspace can be customized to create a Modeler look-alike. Houdini is very configurable in this sense as well. Blender is almost there, but is in dire need of custom tool filtering and the option to split the property panels (or hide selected ones at the very least).

The new LightWave team is working on integrating geometry nodes in Layout. But once again there is that disconnect with Modeler: how will it work seamlessly with Modeler? Answer: it cannot (probably). Ideally those geo nodes should be available in BOTH Modeler and Layout for a seamless workflow.

But that will never happen, I predict. Two different code bases, of which even the viewports are still not consolidated. The split between M and L in LightWave will continue to hamper its development --its proverbial ball and chains-- as long as it exists.

So my wish would be a unified LightWave. And it's not in the cards for a long long while.

 

[prometheus]

Of course, in B there is no need to switch between the three at all if the user turns all three selection modes on at the same time. Saves a lot of time having to push keys (or the spacebar)

And there is no need to activate any transformation tool either because all three transformation gizmos can be active at the same time as well. No keyboard use required either.

Definitely something to improve on in Modeler.



That could be chalked down to familiarity with the software, but also the core difference between LightWave and any other DCC out there. LightWave is a split app. The others are unified. It remains LightWave's Achilles' Heel, no matter how it is looked at.

The advantages of a unified app heavily outweigh any perceived complexity of the use thereof compared to Modeler or Layout as single running apps.

Besides, if simplicity of GUI is required, it is possible to create a dedicated custom workspaces in most DCCs and filter out unwanted functionality. On top of that all DCCs feature an isolation mode to focus on 1 or more objects while editing those - something not directly or conveniently possible in Modeler without workarounds.

I agree Modeler is "simpler". In my opinion that is more a case of lack of functionality and due to the split of M and L:

- it lacks non-destructive modeling options
- it lacks object awareness
- it lacks a sculpt mode/sculpting tools
- it lacks options to combine simulation tools to model things For example, cloth sim, or just drop things in a sim. Or add particles/hair and convert to geo. It lacks integration of all these things. (FiberFX is a separate dialog and has its own viewport!!! Why?!) )
- it lacks geometry nodes
- it lacks basic 3d painting tools
- it lacks camera-based and scene-based modeling. It lacks cameras.
- it lacks volume modeling tools
- it lacks lights so it is not possible to directly model around a light setup and preview the result in (semi)real time
- it lacks the option to edit geometry based on animation and vice versa
- it lacks VPR or a similar viewport-based (semi) real time rendering to model while previewing the full result (yes this is quite handy sometimes!)
- and other known interoperability modeling workflow issues that pop up regularly in the LW community
- and more. A Grease Pencil, for example.

Now, some of these things have workarounds and indirect solutions in LightWave. Many do not or require external apps to solve them. Or plugins that add non-destructive modeling, but only to Layout.

The core difference in a unified app like B, C4D, or Houdini is that when the user works on models and scenes, they have the option to seamlessly switch between all these things in the modeling process. Obviously with such a broad range of tools available to the user to create (parts of) models, it adds extra levels of complexity. And yes: if the built-in tools do not suffice to reach the wanted quality, external tools will still be important.

But in return it adds SO much more scope and variety in modeling workflow and approach. Modeler feels incredibly outdated compared. Often we REQUIRE that seamless workflow awareness of scene and model.

But if that perceived simplicity of UX is required, it is still possible to vastly reduce an unified DCC's modeling UX by introducing a dedicated workspace. Cinema 4D is a good example of that: a workspace can be customized to create a Modeler look-alike. Houdini is very configurable in this sense as well. Blender is almost there, but is in dire need of custom tool filtering and the option to split the property panels (or hide selected ones at the very least).

The new LightWave team is working on integrating geometry nodes in Layout. But once again there is that disconnect with Modeler: how will it work seamlessly with Modeler? Answer: it cannot (probably). Ideally those geo nodes should be available in BOTH Modeler and Layout for a seamless workflow.

But that will never happen, I predict. Two different code bases, of which even the viewports are still not consolidated. The split between M and L in LightWave will continue to hamper its development --its proverbial ball and chains-- as long as it exists.

So my wish would be a unified LightWave. And it's not in the cards for a long long while.

that isn´t working for me, I can´t be in All selection mode when I need to select only point, or edges, or polys at once.
The all selection mode is only workable if you do segmented editing, and sure..that is good enought, but I often need to switch between the various mode for selections specificly by edge, point, or face mode.

As for the rest, that is becomin a more of a blender vs lightwave in general description, which I am not keen on entering now..especially when time is running out in these forums.

My current wishlist right now for lightwave though.. since I was just sitting and doing some moonlight and cloud setups, that would be the multi editing function of volumes, blender has it´s volumetric material that can be linked, so each and same vdb or volume item is based on one and the same material, when I move around volume items and want´s to change it´s density, shading, texture..I have to do so individually for each cloud item, or at least copy the prefered one and then paste replacement to the others, that is a pain in the.

 

[Rayek]

that isn´t working for me, I can´t be in All selection mode when I need to select only point, or edges, or polys at once.

I work with it all the time - unless I really need to focus on specific polygon flow. It's also easy to select between the three in B (the trick is to always display the center point of polygons in this mode which serves as predictable context when it is not quite clear what to click). The face center point and vertex point size I changed size to differentiate between the two.



It saves time having to switch continuously between selection modes. Of course, Modeler doesn't even provide this option, so it is difficult for LightWave users to appreciate how useful it actually is.

I'd certainly want Modeler to have similar options. Another wish!

 

[Rayek]

As for the rest, that is becomin a more of a blender vs lightwave in general description, which I am not keen on entering now..especially when time is running out in these forums.

To me it all boils down to one thing: unification of Modeler and LightWave. It's not about LightWave versus a specific DCC, but LightWave versus ANY other DCC.

On Discord quite a few LW users and ex-users wish for that to happen (eventually).

As I see it they are perhaps intending to slowly introduce more and more modeling tools in Layout with each new release. Perhaps in a decade we'll have a unified LightWave. I do hope so.

 

[prometheus]

To me it all boils down to one thing: unification of Modeler and LightWave. It's not about LightWave versus a specific DCC, but LightWave versus ANY other DCC.

On Discord quite a few LW users and ex-users wish for that to happen (eventually).

As I see it they are perhaps intending to slowly introduce more and more modeling tools in Layout with each new release. Perhaps in a decade we'll have a unified LightWave. I do hope so.

The edit and object mode is a bit frustrating to me.
How lightwave is going to handle it remains to be seen.

I find it strange that when you choose modeling workspace in blender, you are still presented with cameras and lights, sure at some times you may want that of course, but still, a mode where you simply turn that off would be nice to hav, if your focus is on specific model design without a need of the camera or a light, those are just distracting.
But sure, I think I could make my own themes and setups for that.

 

[SSLightwave]

It wouldn't be frustrating if you didn't bring your familiarity with LightWave into Blender. Its just different, but with those differences comes a lot of advantages. Lightwave has its strengths but modeler is not one of them. Its been ignored for twenty years and offers no modern methods of working.

And its clear from what they've said on the discord that they have no real plans to merge modeler and Layout- modeler is always going to be a separate app. They may add weight painting and some modeling into Layout to reduce some of the back and forth but they'll never replace modeler so LW is always going to be 2 apps no matter how you slice it. And that's always going to hold LightWave back.

 

[prometheus]

It wouldn't be frustrating if you didn't bring your familiarity with LightWave into Blender. Its just different, but with those differences comes a lot of advantages. Lightwave has its strengths but modeler is not one of them. Its been ignored for twenty years and offers no modern methods of working.

And its clear from what they've said on the discord that they have no real plans to merge modeler and Layout- modeler is always going to be a separate app. They may add weight painting and some modeling into Layout to reduce some of the back and forth but they'll never replace modeler so LW is always going to be 2 apps no matter how you slice it. And that's always going to hold LightWave back.

That doesn´t make sense to me..and I hear it constantly, don´t expect it to work like that etc.
So...there is no incitament really to expect Lightwave to work unified with modeler and layout then or to have sculpting tools, or to have a better UI cusomization.
As for any predictions on wether or not it will bu separate always or not, I leave that to the future.

As for modeler strengths, no I do not agree with you..it has it charms, just as blender has it´s charms..but it´s modeling tools are also lacking stuff in blender, which lightwave actually have.

Currently I love blenders nishita skymodel though, and global scattering, even though I can do a lot with lightwave on that part, it goes so much faster in blender and better looking, ( cloud layers exluded, like lightwaves volume item)
In Lightwave I would need a much better nishita model, dpont´s is currently too darn slow, and not as nice looking.

We´ve been generalizing too often though.

 

[Rayek]

a mode where you simply turn that off would be nice to hav, if your focus is on specific model design without a need of the camera or a light, those are just distracting.

Isolate the object(s) with [numpad /] (or use the menu option). No cameras, no lights, no distractions in the viewport. C4D also offers that option. I think Max does too, but I would have to check.

Houdini's nodal approach isolates a node if required.

 

[BakuryuOh]

That´s blender dreams, this thread was supposed to be a Lightwave wish list

 

[prometheus]

Nevermind, I need to go to sleep ..all well, wrote something wrong.

 

[prometheus]

Isolate the object(s) with [numpad /] (or use the menu option). No cameras, no lights, no distractions in the viewport. C4D also offers that option. I think Max does too, but I would have to check.

Houdini's nodal approach isolates a node if required.

That shortcut does nothing for me?
I just wanted to choose modeling workspace, and with that, you shouldn´t have camera or light visible, and you shouldn´t have to deactivate by any means, well..for my ideal workspace

Edit..ah, had my cursor not in the viewport, now I see what it does, well..not only that I wanted to get rid off, but I wanted a clean scene outliner without camera or light´s presented in the outlliner.

But sure, that shortcut is helpful anyway.. thanks.

the filtering option in outliner of course helps, not sure ...but maybe I just could start with the modelling theme workspace, filter out camera and light and save to my own model workspace, got to try that.

Edit..yeah, that worked, just remembering to save a default file so it doesn´t get lost.

 

[prometheus]

messing around with basic displacement and fractals, here again lightwave fractals rules for quick landscapes, while Ivé been using the Ant landscape tool in blender, it´s so darn slow and once commited, it´s destructive.

That is one thing, the other is that I am not sure if the sculpting tools are allowing good enough sculpting on top of displacement modifiers, what I have discovered is that lightwave metamorpic actually seem to do a good thing here (not sure)
Unfortunately you can´t sculpt on denser meshes, so you have to sculpt the main peaks with lower subdivision, then increase it for the displacement map to follow that deform better.

Now..pure displacements only may be a very old way for terrain generation, but I kind of like to mess around with it, it can´t bring in any erosions..so that is of course the downside, unless exporting/baking a heightmap of it and add erosions in Gaea or worldmachin on top of that fractal based map.

But..a faster sculpt at denser mesh would be nice, but maintain the option as metamorphic has it, to sculpt on top of displacement, and some other year, add erosion and thermal weathering, sediment etc
The question I ask myself, since I can´t get the same sculpting work on top of the blender displacement modifiers.