PDA

View Full Version : Is Lightwave only for previz



Ryste3d
04-20-2010, 03:44 PM
After all the fuss about Avatar that is unfortunately where we are heeding. Lightwave is for previz. Maybe I am wrong. But after a searched for Lightwave animations on YouTube (and the rest of the web) I must say that I am very confused. Nothing. And the stuff on YouTube:) Is that the best stuff made with this great program. Look at 3ds max and Maya and you will be blown away.

I started using Lightwave 10 years ago and you could find many great things made with this great program on the web - not to mention tutorials - but now I am very disappointed.
So please prove me wrong - show us what Lightwave can do.

I have just putt together a channel on vimeo and I hope all of you that knows you way around Lightwave will showcase your best stuff, and please no test renders - you can find those on YouTube.

This is all new and there is noting to look at yet - except for one video I have putt together just for this site.

So please guys. Show us your work:thumbsup:

http://vimeo.com/channels/101103

Titus
04-20-2010, 04:16 PM
Actually NewTek has a call for works to be compiled in a demoreel.

Silkrooster
04-20-2010, 10:30 PM
Check out this page of accomplishments. Excellent list of what movies/tv shows/games/etc have used lightwave.

http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/projects.php

monovich
04-20-2010, 10:38 PM
I use Lightwave all the time to make pro stuff that goes on TV or on the silver screen, but I don't go and put it on youtube when I'm done.

I doubt most people using it in studios post on youtube either.
Consider the source I guess.

Ryste3d
04-21-2010, 12:45 AM
I have seen the list - it is about 20 years old - but I don't know what Lightwave was used for in those movies/tv shows/games/etc. Was it for previz, rendering or modeling. Why make a list like that without a any kind of information about the job it was used for.

I understand you don't necessary post all of your professional work at YouTube - but where is all the creative professionals that makes great animations on there free time

Like this to guys using 3ds max:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHD8Xf5Rnvo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSGx4bBU9Qc


I personally think Lightwave users needs a portals to show of there work. I love lightwave and I know great stuff is made with this program - but were is it? And all over this forum I here people saying they are ready to change to 3ds max or Maya. Why is that? So why not give them a reson to stay. Show them all Lightwave can do.


Great After Effects work:
http://vimeo.com/channels/aework/page:8

Great Lightwave work:
http://vimeo.com/channels/101103

biliousfrog
04-21-2010, 01:08 AM
perhaps that's the difference, Lightwave users are too busy working ;)

Ryste3d
04-21-2010, 02:52 AM
I am sorry if I offended you by making a suggestion to show of your work. I actually thought it would be a great idea. I know I would very interested in having a look at work don by other Lightwave users. Well properly just me then.

StereoMike
04-21-2010, 02:54 AM
If you have ten years experience with LW, you should have produced one or the other gem in the meantime. Please show us, what Lightwave can do.

edit: If the stuff on your page is LW, then why do you ask for proof? You are quite capable of showing what LW can do.
And by naming the vimeo group 'Is Lightwave only for previz' you tell everyone, that the general view seems to be like that (and thus manifest the cliché, not destroy it).

I like the idea of spreading the word, but I think it would be better, to begin the presentation without a defensive position.

Mr Rid
04-21-2010, 04:05 AM
I mostly see examples in LW's strong suit, modeling and rendering, but very little good, finished animation. There's that Passenger short and... *crickets softly chirping* 'LW is for cars and spaceships' as a longtime LW friend generalizes. Yes, there are a few good examples here and there, but are definitely far more amazing animations done in the other apps.

LW isnt used for animation in studio movies, for just reason. So far the only examples we've come up with are the Penguins and Squirrels that Pixel Magic did, but we also got away with brief shots and moblur. The squirrels wouldnt hold a candle to the ones in Chocolate Factory.

Samus
04-21-2010, 04:23 AM
Lightwave Can do Great C.A...people just need to now how to animate.
Although it's true Lightwave had lacked of abilities to keep up with industrie standard packages. if you can create great poses and inbetweens
fighting those gimbal locks...then you have no PB with Character animation. Animation is not One-clic-get-it-all.

Cheers people

Ryste3d
04-21-2010, 04:31 AM
I totally agree with you. And yes may it is the wrong way to approached it. The name on vimeo "Is Lightwave only for previz" is not the issue here. Post some work and the title will be meaningless and we will change it. Give me a good name for the site and I will change it.

And yes I have 10 years experience with Lightwave, but my Lightwave skill is properly nothing compared to many of you guys.

The main idea is to show cast lightwave work - nothing else. Not my work - that would to depressing. But your work.

This is what I can do with Lightwave:
www.ryste3d.com

But I would like to learn more then just creating still images (and flythrough).


Please post somthing to get it started:
http://vimeo.com/channels/101103

Cageman
04-21-2010, 04:35 AM
The Transformers train is quite nice, and if I may do some shameless self promotion, the Codfish I rigged and animated in LW9.5 is pretty complex and yelds good results (the rig is part of LW9.6 downloadable content btw).

The HUGE difference is the number of hours put into the animation. Usually, LightWave is used for fast paced stuff, and going beyond that is more involving, but can be done. In feature film (I mean big blockbusters) compared to TV-work or commercials are worlds apart when it comes to the number of hours you are allowed to put into finetuning animation. For exampe, a compositor who is freelancing here with us (who worked on Prince of Persia among many other blockbuster movies), spent 4 weeks on just one 2 second shot, and this is just the compositing. You just never have to rush things out the door, compared to working with TV-effects.

Ryste3d
04-21-2010, 04:50 AM
Mr. Rid. That is exactly what I mean - Your demo reel looks great. And that is just from one person. Think about watt people have stored on there hard drive. Lets se it.

sampei
04-21-2010, 06:04 AM
you may not be aware that newtek's 3d marketing specialist is already onto this, as the reel submissions (as well as the entries for the new gallery) have officially been opened a few days ago :)
also try and going on spinquad and having a look in the gallery over there, there's some pretty incredible stuff.

sampei
04-21-2010, 06:10 AM
ah re-read it, in practice you're looking for animated shorts ?

oobievision
04-21-2010, 06:13 AM
Lightwave work is always under the blanket. a good kept secret I would say, most artist dont post there work on youtube most should. theres allot of impressive work. sometimes u cant see it or notice the difference. one great example is that commercial with the Fish dog that was pretty sweet.

cresshead
04-21-2010, 06:14 AM
After all the fuss about Avatar that is unfortunately where we are heeding. Lightwave is for previz. Maybe I am wrong. But after a searched for Lightwave animations on YouTube (and the rest of the web) I must say that I am very confused. Nothing. And the stuff on YouTube:) Is that the best stuff made with this great program. Look at 3ds max and Maya and you will be blown away.

I started using Lightwave 10 years ago and you could find many great things made with this great program on the web - not to mention tutorials - but now I am very disappointed.
So please prove me wrong - show us what Lightwave can do.

I have just putt together a channel on vimeo and I hope all of you that knows you way around Lightwave will showcase your best stuff, and please no test renders - you can find those on YouTube.

This is all new and there is noting to look at yet - except for one video I have putt together just for this site.

So please guys. Show us your work:thumbsup:

http://vimeo.com/channels/101103

lightwave does 3d well and can be found all over the place from film, tv, arch tec design, product design, scientific etc.

sampei
04-21-2010, 06:17 AM
Lightwave work is always under the blanket. a good kept secret I would say, most artist dont post there work on youtube most should. theres allot of impressive work. sometimes u cant see it or notice the difference. one great example is that commercial with the Fish dog that was pretty sweet.

I love that commercial.
If I'm not mistaken it was done by a team led by Mauro Corveloni, an outstanding LW artist.

MacDoggie
04-21-2010, 08:33 AM
I totally agree with you. And yes may it is the wrong way to approached it. The name on vimeo "Is Lightwave only for previz" is not the issue here. Post some work and the title will be meaningless and we will change it. Give me a good name for the site and I will change it.

And yes I have 10 years experience with Lightwave, but my Lightwave skill is properly nothing compared to many of you guys.

The main idea is to show cast lightwave work - nothing else. Not my work - that would to depressing. But your work.

This is what I can do with Lightwave:
www.ryste3d.com

But I would like to learn more then just creating still images (and flythrough).


Please post somthing to get it started:
http://vimeo.com/channels/101103

Nice work by the way. Newtek should definitely consider your work for examples of Arch Vis (if they don't already). I wouldn't be so quick to downplay yourself...

Cheers.....

Mr Rid
04-21-2010, 09:09 PM
Lightwave Can do Great C.A...people just need to now how to animate.
Although it's true Lightwave had lacked of abilities to keep up with industrie standard packages. if you can create great poses and inbetweens
fighting those gimbal locks...then you have no PB with Character animation. Animation is not One-clic-get-it-all.

Cheers people


Sorry folks, but any experienced animator should well know that LW is not up to snuff for advanced CA. Rigging is clunky and limited and relatively few people have the patience to wrestle with it's cantankerousness long enough to get a decent result. Getting meshes to deform acceptably is one thing, but complex characters usually require hair/fur/feathers, clothes/costumes, muscles, jiggle & dynamics where LW really falls short, and even more so on a heavy pipeline with a large team of developers and animators.

One example was about a year ago when faced with needing a photoreal bird that would stand up to extreme closeup which made me very nervous to consider the usual LW jury rigging for. LW is more often used in faster turnaround situations like TV where the bar is lower than in film FX, and we are never sure just how picky the clients may be so the rig/dynamics have to be easily changeable. In researching it, my jaw dropped at bird rigs I found done in Max and XSI. We talked to Vaughan about FiberFX, and to Albee about feathers, and to some other LW character gurus, but it was apparent LW was just not capable. We also spoke to an NT rep who seemed as indifferent as usual about helping us make it work in LW (I will never understand this about NT). We did some tests, but to my great relief, the shot wound up being handed over to someone who knocked it out easily in Maya and Shave & Haircut. When a long time LW house, like DNA, MeniThings, Cafe, Pixel Magic is suddenly faced with heavy duty CA, they switch to Maya for good reason.

People offer up these big studio film credits that LW grazed in some way, but you really have to look at how it was specifically used (often just some poly modeling). Very little of what is on my demo would pass on a studio film. The shots go by quickly at video res, but the cheats and rough edges start to show up when projected on a large screen. I usually barely wrangle LW to do something complicated like the Red Cliff army shots or the tree burst. And I am always dreading the client asking for just one more change, because the fragile setup is like a precariously balanced house of cards on the verge of collapse. 'Thats great, now can you just make the ground more uneven that the army is running over?' ... uuuh, NO. Or we try to make it happen and the stack comes tumbling down and I cant get the dynamics to do the same thing that was working before, then must resort to odd compositing trickery or some other app.

Too often I am just narrowly squeaking by in LW, and sometimes the client barely accepts it due partially to time constraints. But I know we had to do too many iterations to get there, and even though a client may say 'good job' its sometimes apparent they're not really too impressed and then we never hear from them again. After 13 years, I am intimately aware of LW's low ceiling due to all the bruises on my cranium.

Its easy to make neat little tests in any app when just experimenting, but it is a completely different animal in production.

Ryste3d
04-22-2010, 01:49 AM
Yes exactly - animated shorts made with Lightwave.

Think of all the people out there trying to decide for Maya, Lightwave, 3ds max, Blender etc. But where is the show reel from Lightwave. Is it those 5 images that has been showing
in the v9 Gallery for the last 3 or 4 years. And where is the animations. Is it not called Lightwave 3D animations packed.

And where is CORE I signed up for 1 1/2 ago, and the T-Shirt, and all the free stuff as they call it (at 399 pr/year) All I find is a website with a lot of fancy words. Well don't get me started.

For me it seam that we have to take action and promote the Lightwave 3D community our self. Or this will very soon be a very small group of people asking etch another how to
make a Logo spin. I honestly believe that at this point, it is Blender vs. Lightwave.

Just have a look at the Blender gallery.

http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/movies/

http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/gallery/art-gallery/

How is this possible with freeware - Let me tell you - because they have a community.


http://vimeo.com/channels/101103

Eugeny
04-22-2010, 01:47 PM
Absolutely agree with Mr.Rid.
Anyway here is my example

Anyway here is my example of CA (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101321) not the best in the world but hey, it's done in 7 days!

Direct link to animation (http://www.lightwave3d.ru/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=15685)

rapscallion
04-22-2010, 04:37 PM
I know it isn't the common belief that Character Animation can be handled in Lightwave, but with a proper rig, there really isn't much that an artist can do in Maya or Max that can't be done with the Newtek tools.

I've been in production as producer/director/rigger for approximately 2 years on a feature film being created almost entirely with Lightwave; all the rigs are standard IK or FK set-ups, with face expression and lipsync being managed through standard endomorphs. Sure, there are slicker control set-ups out there on other programs, but frankly, with a little bit of time, those slick set-ups can be mimicked very closely inside Layout. You want Non-Linear morphs? No problem, just use SMARTMORPH. You want joystick type controllers? No problem, just use SMARTMORPH or any of the other tools that provide that functionality. You want IK/FK switching? Lots of options out there for that at this point. You want Pole Vectors? We have it. Muscles? We have it? And so on and so on and so on.

Sometimes when these arguments come up about CA in LWave, it makes me wonder how much effort people are putting in to actually creating rigs/controllers to satisfy their desire for what they are seeing and craving in other apps. Of course, some of the guys on here condemning LWave's character tools are much more skilled than me, so I'm sure they have a long and strong list of reasons for why they don't like it...but I've been blown away by the quality of what we've been able to achieve with Lightwave on our project - and I think many of you will be, too.

Additionally, we converted more than one Maya artist over to Lightwave for this project - and all of them ended up saying, "Oh...this really isn't much different from Maya once you get used to it..." and from that point forward they worked happily and without complaint to crank out cool looking animations.

I would say that the biggest visible drawback for Lightwave's character animation is interface speed when working with heavy rigs. That is true 100%. But there are solutions to speed things up, so it doesn't really stop us from moving forward and creating the animation.

Though I'm not quite free to show any of what we've been working on over the past 2+ years, I can say that - YES - we are using it for Character Animation, and - NO - it isn't nearly as 'bad' to work with as many would have the world believe.

Now...for those who want to vehemently disagree with everything I've said...LET THE BASHING BEGIN!!!!!

Andyjaggy
04-22-2010, 04:56 PM
Its easy to make neat little tests in any app when just experimenting, but it is a completely different animal in production.

Quoted for agreement. I think your post nailed exactly how I feel about LW.

erikals
04-22-2010, 06:08 PM
Its easy to make neat little tests in any app when just experimenting, but it is a completely different animal in production.


Quoted for agreement. I think your post nailed exactly how I feel about LW.

i think this is about to change, the last two years i've seen quite a lot of renders, features and tests done with LW (yes, i know, tests, still) that without a doubt lifts LW to a new level. The only basic that will be missing is muscle simulation, still working on a solution.

this takes too long to explain here,
but if people keep using LW i'm 100% sure that we will see a very high boost as far as LW quality renders goes.

strong words, i know.
but this year it will be the artist it depends upon, not LW.
(please do note that i'm talking in general terms! and that specific X-feature you asked for still might be missing)

meanwhile, take a look at,
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=36DAD32935586C03

GraphXs
04-22-2010, 07:34 PM
I did a short a few years back using LW. It was a lot of fun and did pretty good in the Film Festivals. It's more cartoony and I would have done things differently or better in v9. But it turned out good and allowed me to get the poses I wanted with out fighting the rig.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rsdYzRkAOc

Andyjaggy
04-23-2010, 08:27 AM
If people keep using LW. I like that statement. :)

Mr. Rid nailed it for me. Yes you can do the same stuff usually. BUT, you usually have to come up with such a convoluted workaround that if the client wants anything changed.............. your screwed.

If your just doing your own film, and you only have to please yourself. Fine. Great. But if your clients even remotely resemble mine, you will be constantly making changes for weeks on end. Having the flexibility and power to quickly and easily change things is something I've found in other software, and something I never felt Lightwave offered.

erikals
04-23-2010, 08:48 AM
or...

...having the flexibility and power to quickly and easily change things is something I never felt Application X offered...

i've done enough 3D to see that all packages have their pitfalls, their Achilles heel...

jasonwestmas
04-23-2010, 09:23 AM
Ah, the power of lightwave. One thing is for sure, when making changes, things do tend to break in this app. I wouldn't go as far to say that what you build in it is a house of cards. That's kind of a preposterous statement. Faster turnouts are nice though and it is something Newtek should keep harping on. But Hyper-real Movie FX!? EEEK why? Get real people. Obviously I wouldn't go to NT for the hyper-real.

erikals
04-23-2010, 10:00 AM
LW is know to be one of the best packages to render out realistic animation,
but in terms of realistic CA, sure, could be, though i never saw anyone actually try...

Andyjaggy
04-23-2010, 10:12 AM
True.

I switched to Max about 18 months ago for my day job. It was rough at first but at this point I don't regret it one bit. However the one thing I do miss in LW is how easy it is to get great looking renders. I always feel like I am fighting with Mental Ray, but in Lightwave it just works, and always looks great.

erikals
04-23-2010, 10:21 AM
why can't it just be this easy? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O_h6N2Qms4

geo_n
04-23-2010, 10:23 AM
Well since I use 3dmax I have to say that its not that easy doing changes in 3dmax as well depending on what the client needs. Its case by case and sometimes its easy to change stuff in lw or max.
Today I changed a freelancers work in 3dmax using vray that rendered 20min and was not acceptable rendertime. I had to change all lights and materials to scanline to make it render in less than 10mins. Converting 500 lights and hundred of materals is not fun.
Probably in lightwave that would be simpler since people mostly use lw materials and lights.

jasonwestmas
04-23-2010, 10:34 AM
LW is know to be one of the best packages to render out realistic animation,
but in terms of realistic CA, sure, could be, though i never saw anyone actually try...

Rendering, sure. I'm not talking about "Realistic" though I'm talking about in your face hyper-realism that is seamless with hyper-real video. There's a difference.

pooby
04-23-2010, 10:35 AM
Things get very confused when talking about animation.

As regards to the moving of things in a realistic manner. OF COURSE Lightwave can do that.
There is NO reason why Lightwave's bones can't be moved in a manner which looks like a person walking along.
You can import Mocap, so its hardly going to say ' OH I'm in lightwave now.. I'd better look rubbish'

The actual act of animating and posing is NOT the issue. (although the tools for this task are basic)

The reason we dont see that much good animation is because professional animators tend to animate on a production in a package where that animation drives a complex deformation rig.

THAT is what lightwave cannot do well.
You dont see many fleshy squashy beautfully deforming characters in lightwave, because its just really not designed to be able to do that.

You WILL see a lot of moving hard-surface-looking dolls.

I tried making my IMP in lightwave. It is a shame I dont have any tests from it. I did loads and worked on rigging him for months.
I know how hard it was and I wasn't getting anywhere near the results I wanted.

I did the same thing in XSI in a fraction of the time it looked just how I wanted and it was straightforward and fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVv0F1mPntQ

jasonwestmas
04-23-2010, 10:47 AM
For sure Pooby. Every app does its "thing".

Mike_RB
04-23-2010, 10:50 AM
Things get very confused when talking about animation.

It's not just complex deformations, it's also complex hard body stuff as well. Anything that needs loads of relative animation links (set driven key), and using motion clips and layered animation, mocap retargeting...

Bascially LW is missing so many tools to do this properly. We made the switch during Iron Man and haven't looked back. I'm hoping core being a fresh start will come will the right tools in the toolbox to make using it for animation viable again.

erikals
04-23-2010, 11:55 AM
relative animation links, do you mean stuff like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm0I0YU-VKI&feature=PlayList&p=D495DCA5001810EB&playnext_from=PL&index=55

hrgiger
04-23-2010, 01:19 PM
You can import Mocap, so its hardly going to say ' OH I'm in lightwave now.. I'd better look rubbish'



Lol.

GCastro
04-24-2010, 01:05 AM
Pooby, were you IMP's rendered in lw? Good stuff. I'd like to see higher quality link if you have it.

-George

jasonwestmas
04-24-2010, 08:46 AM
Pooby, were you IMP's rendered in lw? Good stuff. I'd like to see higher quality link if you have it.

-George

he uses Fprime a lot.

TeZzy
04-24-2010, 11:01 AM
Character animation and character rigging are different things. I think some have got that mixed.

jasonwestmas
04-24-2010, 11:10 AM
Character animation and character rigging are different things. I think some have got that mixed.

One determines ease of use and time saving techniques, the other is the final result of the user regardless of the amount of time involved and overall frustration. aight?

That fish on the bus passenger flick is a good example of a lot of time and frustration with excellent results.

TeZzy
04-24-2010, 11:21 AM
in a way. though a great rig can turn out poor animation and good animation can be done with a bad rig. Really depends on the determination, patience and morale of the user.

The passenger was an awesome short. I can only imagine the amount of times he banged his head on the table though.

jasonwestmas
04-24-2010, 12:47 PM
in a way. though a great rig can turn out poor animation and good animation can be done with a bad rig. Really depends on the determination, patience and morale of the user.

The passenger was an awesome short. I can only imagine the amount of times he banged his head on the table though.

Right! Ease of use doesn't guarantee good animation and vice versa.

pooby
04-24-2010, 03:55 PM
tezzy You are missing the connection between rigging and the lack of good lw animation.

The fact that lightwave's rigging is poor IS a strong reason why there isn't much good animation Done in lw.
Mainly because professional animators in general animate in packages where their animation is on good rigs with good deformation.

erikals
04-24-2010, 08:37 PM
did you try Maestro?
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1012067#post1012067

jasonwestmas
04-24-2010, 09:12 PM
did you try Maestro?
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1012067#post1012067

Yeah he did actually lol.

"Maestro balances powerful control of the character with an easy to use interface. It also has the best 'auto' default rig I've seen in Lightwave - Each body section and the control of it, has been well thought out with the animator in mind."

-Paul Smith (Pooby)"

If you want to stay in lightwave it probably is the way to go for big scenes.

pooby
04-25-2010, 03:37 AM
Maestro is a good solution within lw's rather limited world.

Maestro can't add extra rigging capabilities to lw however. It can just set things up with what is there.
There are fundimental things missing in lw that are needed for high end rigging.
No plugin could fix that as one of the underlying problems is the fact that plugins can't communicate properly in lw.

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 05:03 AM
Rigging limitations in lightwave definitely mean less good animation done with it. Completely agree with that.

This is probably more a problem with lightwave as a whole more than rigging in lightwave.....but just loading the same rig in the scene makes me cross my fingers all the time. Managing multiple rigs in a scene is painful. I know because I had rigged a feather(yes, a very simple feather but simple became complicated very quickly).....I then had to animate literally over one hundred feathers in the same scene, no instancing as they had to be unique. Importing that many version of the same rig got really messy.

Mr Rid
04-25-2010, 06:40 PM
...I wouldn't go as far to say that what you build in it is a house of cards. That's kind of a preposterous statement.
Yet everyone I work with agrees with my assessment. Am just conveying how it is. If it sounds farfetched perhaps you are not used to dealing with complex scenes in LW. Just one day I would love to have an NT dev person sitting right next to me, any normal LW day of the week.

That brief zoom-in, closeup on the Old Dogs penguins was the hardest shot I ever had to deal with in LW due to how much time went into getting such a brief, straightforward shot to work.

The Tree Burst scene was another example. I setup the overall scene in just one day... but the devil is in the details. SubD objects could not be baked as the points would just jumble after scene reload. FiberFX for grass would not cover the chunks properly. Replace object broke on the layered tree (as happens a lot for some reason), and I had to keep replacing each layer (14) individually, dozens of times as the tree was updated. 3 or more groups get glitchy in complex scenes and some mysteriously wont work at all. Groups sometimes wont update after a change in the scene unless you re-enable all the effectors and collisions again. Instead I had to keep some winds, collisions and emitters disabled while running part of a sim, then switch them on and others off to sim another part which is a tedious mess. When I reload a scene, disabled winds will mysteriously affect as though they are enabled until you go thru and enable and disable each one again, each time I opened a scene in a series of dynamics setups.

An emitter can not pass thru a collision object set to bounce (tree branch coming up thru ground), and child emitters often require undesirably high birth rates to emit continuously- Ex: http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=949671&postcount=23 Bounce particles and Hard FX pieces would not come to a stop on a ground collision, so I had to just end the sim in mid shot to freeze them. Clearing motion on a child emitter with a baked parent (after scene save and load) will usually crash LW- you have to first clear parent, clear child, (and clear 'baby' if 3 or more deep in hiearchy) reload parent motions, everytime you want to change a child... a real pain with dozens of emitters. Clearing motion also changes the Max Particles to ' particles used' for some stupid reason and you have to keep changing it back. To get around HardFX pieces endlessly hopping around (a ridiculous problem), I had to push values in a direction that ruined other aspects that were working. Then I had to run the sim around 50 times (in a series of scenes that contribute one to the next) that take 5 to 15 minutes each, before I got just one sim where pieces happened to wind up with acceptable motions and resting positions. After a few weeks, *phew* stand back, no one breath, the cards are standing.

Then the client speaks those dreaded words, 'Great... um, can you just speed up/slow down/ move slightly...?' And the cards tumble down. The director wanted to make a minor change in the speed at which the ground settles which totally hosed all the layers of clothFX, hardFX and PFX. Back to square one, running dozens of more sims for a few days (and playing the re-enable/disable effectors game). Now, you can see in the shot that the trunk does not appear to be colliding with the ground, and chunks laying on the ground all slide sideways near the end in a way I could do nothing about, but hope no one noticed. Other chunks were doing weird things that had to be hidden in comp. I never got the ground and chunks to look as good as they did before.


But Hyper-real Movie FX!? EEEK why? Get real people. Obviously I wouldn't go to NT for the hyper-real.

Sounds like an argument for why LW is 'only for previz.' The renderer can be nudged into photorealism for much of the kind of thing I do with adding elements into a plate that is moving, brief, dark, at a distance, mixed with real elements, is lower-budget or fast turnaround. Its harder when the render is all CG, or where the camera is lingering in bright day light with nowhere to hide.


One determines ease of use and time saving techniques, the other is the final result of the user regardless of the amount of time involved and overall frustration. aight?
That fish on the bus passenger flick is a good example of a lot of time and frustration with excellent results.

I get a lot of compliments on my LW fire examples, but you'll notice that all of them are those little isolated tests like the ones I warn people not to view from any app as examples of what that app is capable of. Its always easier when you are just amusing yourself. Its very different when having to meet specific, real world production situations where LW lacks advanced control to appease a demanding client. LW worked fine when extensively used on Sin City for mostly set extensions and rendering (we got away with a lot in the shadowy black and white aspect that would have been more difficult in color), but it was preferable to use Max and maya for FX and character work. I can barely stranglehold LW into some simple, ok fire FX with the help of a heavy makeover in Fusion (I recently failed at a more complex fireball effect for a client), but just because I might be able to jury rig a house out of duct tap and paper clips doesnt mean it is the best way to go about it.

erikals
04-25-2010, 06:59 PM
i can only say it again Mr Rid, in your profession (CG VFX) i would never only use LW.
that Dynamics in LW suck have been known for quite some time, so i'm surprised you did this.

i know you said no the other day, but i say, add a second package (please!)
you can't rely on LW alone for that type of work...!

(well you can, but you see what happened)

erikals
04-25-2010, 07:05 PM
as far as hyper-real renders,
i think the embassy has done a quite good job at showing what LW is capable of.

Mr Rid
04-25-2010, 07:08 PM
i can only say it again Mr Rid, in your profession (CG VFX) i would never only use LW....

...
you can't rely on LW alone for that type of work...!



Right. LW is better suited for simpler CG tasks and previz. As Jin once put it, yes you could cut down a tree with a steak knife, but there are more efficient tools out there. And yes, they cost more, but you get the results and opportunities that you pay for.

erikals
04-25-2010, 07:09 PM
having said this,
there's btw LOTS of advanced stuff that LW can do that e.g. Maya can't do.

find your additional 3D package, don't rely on LW only,
if i was using Maya i know for sure i wouldn't rely on it for everything.

Mr Rid
04-25-2010, 07:12 PM
having said this,
there's btw LOTS of advanced stuff that LW can do that e.g. Maya can't do.

I only know of small examples. Like in what LOTS of significant ways?

Mike_RB
04-25-2010, 07:13 PM
having said this,
there's btw LOTS of advanced stuff that LW can do that e.g. Maya can't do.

find your additional 3D package, don't rely on LW only,
if i was using Maya i know for sure i wouldn't rely on it for everything.

Mr rid is totally right. Examples please

erikals
04-25-2010, 07:14 PM
one sec, i wrote it down somewhere...

beware that alot of them are 3D plugins...

erikals
04-25-2010, 07:33 PM
some points,
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?p=919636#post919636

+Maya's horrible lack of backface culling that works
+inability to animate UV maps in a way that is efficient (the MEL method sucks)
+lack of Prismatic Caustics

note this was Maya 8-9, hope things changed, but i doubt it

how Maya Fluids will compare to Turbulence.LW -not sure
there's MUCH more LW is better at, it just takes too long to write it.

(DO NOTE, i'm not saying i'm right on ALL areas, but this above was my final conclusion)

erikals
04-25-2010, 08:40 PM
see post #62

erikals
04-25-2010, 08:45 PM
+how on earth could i forget endomorphs

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 08:49 PM
endomorphs are great to a certain extent

erikals
04-25-2010, 09:14 PM
they are great imo

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 09:35 PM
ok

erikals
04-25-2010, 09:44 PM
the thing is, i'm looking for positive and negative things, and certainly endomorphs is a positive feature.

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 09:48 PM
it is a good feature. I just figured there is no point saying what the disadvantage is because it is a personal preference thing.

erikals
04-25-2010, 10:00 PM
all features have their pitfalls, that doesn't mean they should be abandoned.

usually when a post like this is made one gets to hear what doesn't work.

you never get to hear...

"oh, yeah, that's right"
"gosh, i had forgotten about that feature, that's SO true"

instead you get to hear,
"ey, that feature number 32 down the line, i disagree, that's totally wrong"

while that might be true, it just drags the attention away from the real reason of the post
(unless like 50% of the statements are wrong)

so if i have made Major wrong statements, then my cause is lost.
(and i'd like to hear it if this is so, and i won't take it as a complaint)

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 10:06 PM
er...what? all I said was that there is disadvantages but mostly due to my personal preference. Unless I am misunderstanding your post and that it isn't directed at me

erikals
04-25-2010, 10:16 PM
sorry, maybe i'm bad at explaining, maybe a language barrier.
to put it in other words, what i was asked to clarify was my statement that LW+plugins has lots of good advanced features.

(so when you say endomorphs has pitfalls, that doesn't really mean much, in that regard, i think)

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 10:19 PM
all good, no need to be sorry.

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 10:20 PM
try having heaps and heaps of morphs of the same object and not being able to view them all at once and then having to use the pull down menu.

EDIT: Oh, that is also it's advantage because it compacts it all into the pull down menu and keeps it clean.

Mike_RB
04-25-2010, 10:26 PM
Basically what mr rid described about the house of cards is totally true. All of us having put in time using lw in production are painfully aware of the lw comfort zone.

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 10:30 PM
You're right, a personal preference thing. I don't know how many morphs is "heaps and heaps," but I don't see it as a problem when using the vertex maps drop-down menu. If you got that many morphs, how can any application show them all at once without a drop-down menu or something similar?

how many morphs have you had?

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 10:40 PM
well, I did say it was also an advantage with it being compacted into a pull down menu....it means it is a lot cleaner than having 100 hundred floating heads(when you create blendshapes in maya)

Again, it is a personal preference.

TeZzy
04-25-2010, 10:48 PM
well, so far the only way I know of and the only way others have showed me is to...let's say you want 10 different morphs....you would clone/duplicate the head 10 times. Tweak each one to the shape you want then select the targets and lastly the base and go to the menu and click create blendshape. Please note that I haven't used it in like a year or so, so maybe the steps are out of order.

EDIT: whoops, forgot to mention why there would be floating heads. Well maya's way doesn't store it internally in the object. I think LW use to do it the same way didn't it?

MentalFish
04-25-2010, 10:54 PM
In my book, Lightwave is really great at the start and end of the CG spectrum. Polygonal modeling, top notch, rendering top notch, it's the bits in between that could use some help.

<offtopic mode="on">
Right now I feel its better to script particles in Unity to achieve the desired end result than than having to struggle with HyperVoxels to get it to look as I want. I am a total HV noob, but still, when game engine particles wins over a rendered particles solution in both ease of use and visual results, then, something is wrong (most likely the error is between keyboard and chair).

In terms of IK animation, IKBoost should have been hammered until it could absolutely not go any further, even if it would require two fulltime English<->Japanese translators. I.e. userdefinable shortcuts?

HDInstance exists and Denis P. is working on his own version of a volumetric instancing solution, so NT could/should do something in that department too. If not, hire/buy out existing tech. I just bought HD Instance, so I am covered, but would be a seller for sure to new users.

Rigid body and soft body simulation could just as well be calculated outside of LightWave so no need to be limited by SDK or legacy code. Get a solution that can write out LWS/MDD/PFX and have LW open and render it.

I think it was Pooby that pointed out, its not that when something enters LW it goes "oh, now I have to look bad", on the contrary, LW can make even the most basic setup look awesome due to its rendering capabilities.

I have had a local friend and LW basher tell me "ok I admit, the renderer is good. They (NT) should actually make it available as a third party renderer for us 3ds/maya/softimage users".

Modeler and Layout as nodes inside Houdini? Heck yeah! :D Let Houdini do the in-between, particles, fluid sims, rigid body sims, and let LW do the start and end.
</offtopic>

Now back to LScripting.

Cageman
04-26-2010, 01:55 AM
Mr rid is totally right. Examples please

Everything related to what you can achive in Nodal displacements + Node Item Motion are still hard to do in Maya. I do have a bunch of such examples, but they are work related and as such are under NDA. But it is related to massive ammounts of grass being animated AND interacted with from characters as well as water-related techniques.

zarti
04-26-2010, 04:10 AM
let's hope ...

erikals
04-26-2010, 08:32 AM
http://erikalstad.com/backup/anims.php_files/smile.gif "examples in action"... hehe, no Sir, that's way too much work.
(at least i write down the pros/cons features) http://erikalstad.com/backup/anims.php_files/wink.gif

erikals
04-26-2010, 08:36 AM
See, the stuff you post is mostly single features... and most of the evil softwares have either built-in features or free/commercial plugins by now that match your LW darlings.
no, they don't, Maya for example lacks Tons of LW-plugin features.

erikals
04-26-2010, 08:44 AM
i'm preparing some tests/work which i'll probably launch this year, which will show the benefits of LW.
(and no, they are not flying spaceships)

but like i said, for God's sake add a second 3D package if you animate or do VFX.
don't burn yourself out on projects that LW cannot do.

nads
04-26-2010, 09:19 AM
You can check my films here..
http://shootingpeople.org/cards/AdamSharp

All done with lightwave.

In the work and credits section...animations not amazing but thats probably more down to me than lightwave.

Sekhar
04-26-2010, 09:48 AM
You can check my films here..
http://shootingpeople.org/cards/AdamSharp

All done with lightwave.

In the work and credits section...animations not amazing but thats probably more down to me than lightwave.

I liked "It Came From Over There!" Very engaging and even technically (which I guess is what we're discussing here) pretty cool IMO. If the expressions were a bit more animated, it'd be a big winner.

GandB
04-26-2010, 09:55 AM
Some real good work there, Adam! :thumbsup:

-Keith

Nicolas Jordan
04-26-2010, 10:05 AM
Character animation and character rigging are different things. I think some have got that mixed.

:agree: They are two very different disciplines that in the end rely on each other to work. All any traditional animator needs is an FK rig to do good animation.

erikals
04-26-2010, 12:23 PM
Don't tell me what to do, ok? Thanks

i wasn't really aiming that at you, it was more of a general advice.
what you feel is the best obviously depends on your work, workflow and other factors.

bottom line, it's not my intention to pres way anyone, it's meant as advice.

MacDoggie
04-28-2010, 06:29 PM
i wasn't really aiming that at you, it was more of a general advice.
what you feel is the best obviously depends on your work, workflow and other factors.

bottom line, it's not my intention to pres way anyone, it's meant as advice.

Actually sounds like good advice...:thumbsup:

opmeyer
11-20-2011, 08:42 AM
I thought I was the only one that keeps wrestling with lightwave. Even lw 10.1 demo has crashed on me every day. Every time I engage I need to sit though tutorials, study the manual and then I think I know what to do but I just end up crashing it and finding a work arond. Now I can send in about 5 crash reports, who do I send them to? But its been the same since lw 5 .. I get excited about the next version.. Maybe it wont crash any more... Or that annoying feature has been improved..hopefully better undo capabilities..or better morphing.. But sigh.. Always more problems..

I love the texturing, volumetrics, camera and rendering, and animation tools .. But then I get stuck in a crashing scene , get glued to the computer, and barely scrape by...

jasonwestmas
11-20-2011, 09:47 AM
I thought I was the only one that keeps wrestling with lightwave. Even lw 10.1 demo has crashed on me every day. Every time I engage I need to sit though tutorials, study the manual and then I think I know what to do but I just end up crashing it and finding a work arond. Now I can send in about 5 crash reports, who do I send them to? But its been the same since lw 5 .. I get excited about the next version.. Maybe it wont crash any more... Or that annoying feature has been improved..hopefully better undo capabilities..or better morphing.. But sigh.. Always more problems..

I love the texturing, volumetrics, camera and rendering, and animation tools .. But then I get stuck in a crashing scene , get glued to the computer, and barely scrape by...

Something is wrong with your install or config files if it keeps crashing frequently.

dwburman
11-20-2011, 10:55 AM
Now I can send in about 5 crash reports, who do I send them to?

You can send bug reports to [email protected]

Danner
11-20-2011, 12:11 PM
@ opmeyer
Lightwave is not unstable, (at least in Windows, dunno much about the mac side) it will crash if you do certain things, but once you avoid them it's quite solid.

Things I use carefully are third party nodes and Fprime (in 10 + VPR).
I get the occational crash on large scenes if I don't save in modeler before going to Layout. And that is about it. LW Crashes less than Max and Softimage in my experience.

erikals
11-20-2011, 05:00 PM
Now I can send in about 5 crash reports, who do I send them to?

http://forums.newtek.com/showpost.php?p=1178150&postcount=126

opmeyer
11-21-2011, 07:10 AM
Thanks guys. one of the crashes I can reproduce is when I save a pfx file from the object properties dynamics tab> fx-emitter file tab : save motion. Every time I press save motion 10.1 crashes. It only happensmin trial mode. In discovery mode the pfx will save ok, but of course I can't save the scene in that mode.

opmeyer
11-21-2011, 07:17 AM
I don't think trial users have the privileges to use the above link there erikals, but I used the email address above. I can't really continue to evaluate the particle effects possibilities now due to this crash. At least I had the opportunity to report a bug

Dexter2999
11-21-2011, 07:18 AM
Don't tell me what to do, ok? Thanks. :)


He says the same thing when people say "Have a nice day!"

Dexter2999
11-21-2011, 08:37 AM
Hehe.... made me smile. :)

And here I thought only beer and free software updates could do that.

jasonwestmas
11-21-2011, 08:46 AM
I COMMAND you in the name of __________. . .Have a nice day.

beverins
11-21-2011, 09:40 AM
@ opmeyer
LW Crashes less than Max and Softimage in my experience.

LW crashes way less than Maya 2011 or 2012.... as an example... Maya 2012, when it came out, had a crash bug in NAVIGATING MENUS. Took them till hotfix 4 to address that one. It was essentially crashing on "set project" - think about that one.

beverins
11-21-2011, 09:56 AM
AS for Lightwave being just for previz - not at all. That's like saying Softimage is only good for programming ICE nodes for particles, 3DSMax is only good for Arch-Viz and Maya is only good for animation. We can continue on by saying Blender's UI is "unusable" and Poser is only for 3D porn. And remember, Macs are "better at graphics", so you'd better be running all these on a Mac (oops, not 3DSMax... oh but that just does Architectural CAD anyway, right?) Basically, stereotyping is bad, even in this niche environment.. ;-D

That other software packages have passed by Newtek's slow development of Lightwave is no secret. However, all software packages are like that.. and with Rob at the helm, I know that Newtek knows how far behind they are. A long, hard race.

Some general examples - Maya's Viewport 2 is nowhere near as nice as Nitrous. Softimage calls Maya and 3DSmax's sheer OpenGL display capability into question. Lightwave's VPR works so much better than Maya's IPR, even with Vray (note - its the IPR iterative rendering ease of use I'm talking about here). Maya 2012 only just got animation keys visible on the motionpath.. other packages have had that for decades... however, Lightwave's graph editor compared to Maya's isn't anywhere as graceful.

As for examples - well, granted I don't have much in the way of modern stuff - only one recently I can mention is that Abiogenesis is brilliant. Remember the shot where R2D2 in Phantom Menace reveals he has leg rockets that let him fly... the ENTIRE SHOT WAS modeled, animated and rendered out of Lightwave on a macbook Pro from start to finish. He presented it to Lucas, and Lucas included it on the spot - presumably re-rendered at 4K res on their renderfarm - 999 free rendernodes!