PDA

View Full Version : Any news from PICTRIX?



JeffrySG
10-05-2011, 11:47 PM
Has anyone heard from PICTRIX at all? I'm just wondering if there are any plans to update some of the plugins (shareware and commercial) to be compatible with LW10.1? I've tried to email but have not heard back.

http://www.pictrix.jp/?page_id=78

Here's my plea for someone from NT to make an effort to contact him. His plugins are such a resource to the LW community it would be a shame to not have them be updated. I know Rob was out in Japan this past year - not sure if he ever met up with PICTRIX at any point.

PICTRIX if you're out there can you give us an update? Will there be any updates? I'm personally using many of your OSX plugins (some commercial and some free) and a few are not 10.x compatible now. :(

jwiede
10-06-2011, 02:42 PM
Has anyone heard from PICTRIX at all? I'm just wondering if there are any plans to update some of the plugins (shareware and commercial) to be compatible with LW10.1? I've tried to email but have not heard back.

http://www.pictrix.jp/?page_id=78

Here's my plea for someone from NT to make an effort to contact him. His plugins are such a resource to the LW community it would be a shame to not have them be updated. I know Rob was out in Japan this past year - not sure if he ever met up with PICTRIX at any point.

PICTRIX if you're out there can you give us an update? Will there be any updates? I'm personally using many of your OSX plugins (some commercial and some free) and a few are not 10.x compatible now. :(
Agreed, PICTRIX plugins not working with 10.x is another issue holding me back from moving past 9.6. I'd be very interested in knowing whether the commercial and freeware PICTRIX plugins will be updated for 10.x?

Sensei
10-06-2011, 04:27 PM
Maybe you're simply using 64 bit Modeler? Click Get Info and enable "32 bit mode", and then try adding plug-in..

JeffrySG
10-06-2011, 05:33 PM
Maybe you're simply using 64 bit Modeler? Click Get Info and enable "32 bit mode", and then try adding plug-in..

Unfortunately, it's not a 64bit issue. I always run modeler in 32bit mode already for greater compatibility. :( but it seems that many of the plugins are not set up for cocoa compatibility. (guessing)

Lucily your swiftedgeloop works for me because I wouldn't want to model without it.

I still have a copy of 9.6 handy in case I really need access to a plugin but it's a workflow killer.

jwiede
10-06-2011, 11:54 PM
Yep, though PxBezier seems to work, and C-Bend kinda does, they're the only ones that work in 10.1 here. All others give a status bar message about the plugin being unable to start. They all seem to work in 9.6.1, so the problem is most likely a simple version checking issue instead of anything Cocoa-related, since 9.6.1 and 10.x are both Cocoa-based. If it really is just a version-check issue, then it should be trivial to fix as well.

Lewis
10-07-2011, 02:28 AM
Hmm this must be MAC only issue then since I'm using lot of PictrixPlugins in windows LWM 10.x just fine.

JeffrySG
10-07-2011, 08:16 AM
Yep, I think the biggest issue is cocoa compatibility which would make it a Mac only issue.

jwiede
10-07-2011, 12:03 PM
9.6.1 is Cocoa-based as well, though, and they don't seem to have problems with 9.6.1 here. Are they having problems with 9.6.1 there, JeffrySG?

JeffrySG
10-07-2011, 03:28 PM
9.6.1 is Cocoa-based as well, though, and they don't seem to have problems with 9.6.1 here. Are they having problems with 9.6.1 there, JeffrySG?

I have 9.6 and 10.1 installed but I never installed 9.6.1 as I was in HC and had early access to 10. They work in 9.6 but not 10 or 10.1.

If they work in 9.6.1 I wonder if something happened in 10.x that broke them? Don't really want to instal 9.6.1 at this point, to test.

Pavlov
10-07-2011, 04:12 PM
isnt there something like "run as 32 bit" for PC ? i would love to install only ONE lightwave, instead of having both (64 for layout and 32 for modeler)

Paolo

Lewis
10-07-2011, 04:17 PM
isnt there something like "run as 32 bit" for PC ? i would love to install only ONE lightwave, instead of having both (64 for layout and 32 for modeler)

Paolo

Sadly but no such thing, you can run "compatibility mode" to run it on win7/Vista as older windows modes (XP/NT) but no 32bit emulator or so.

I thought we will end up once for all with 32bit issues (mainly 3rd party having 32bit only plugins) with CORE but now that dream is gone and we still have to use both LW versions on same machine for looong loong time ahead :(.

Sensei
10-07-2011, 07:51 PM
Are you kidding? Core as separate application would not change anything..

Lewis
10-08-2011, 03:47 AM
Are you kidding? Core as separate application would not change anything..

No I'm not kidding, you have to think little more broad. Of-course we would still have 32bit and 64bit plugins for CORE, BUT since it's year 2011 and barely ANY CPU you buy today IS 64bit there would be 99% less of 32bit only plugins ;). Almost anyone who works in 3D industry today has 64bit system so 64bit is only way to go further (and 128 when it arrives one day ;)). Fresh start with fresh stuff in mind would "dictate" and we would get rid of all legacy stuff/compatibility - it would have to be 64bit also while currently 90% of plugins i use in modeler are 32bit ONLY and will never get updated since authors long ago left developing for LW and NT didn't do anything to make similar feature so i can't replace those 3rd party ones with native solutions.

mav3rick
10-08-2011, 06:50 AM
imagine how long it took CD to be replaced with DVD... well looks like that much will take 32 bit to be dumped.

Lewis
10-08-2011, 08:23 AM
imagine how long it took CD to be replaced with DVD... well looks like that much will take 32 bit to be dumped.

It didn't take THAT long. WinXP 64bit was released 10 years ago (yeah on 2001) :). Also CD vs DVD is not great example since that's for much bigger/broader marked (like those small office machines who don't even need HDDs and work on network only) and yet 32bit nowdays is almost useless in 3D production or Compositing (AFX is most RAM hungry app I use). you really can do much with 2GB limit per process nowdays :(. Some got wacky solutions to allow around 4Gb through several processes but it's silly limitation nowdays when you can have few gigs of just textures and let alone rest of scene.

Pavlov
10-08-2011, 08:35 AM
i fully agree. Maybe we should make a "taskforce" to find coders and pay them to develop 64 bit replacements for tools we miss.
We should make a list and then ask directly NT. Mine are (not 100% sure all these are 32 bit only):
- KO_pontfit
- Clonez2
- A lot of pictrix's tools (PX_clone in first place, only decent and fully featured spray clone tool we have),
- Edge Relax
- PLG uv tools
- UV road (nothing come close to make UVs on bands)

Paolo

Sensei
10-08-2011, 09:05 AM
64 bit code is slower 10%+ than 32 bit code running on the same 64 bit machine..
This is the best visible in any rendering benchmarks, where the same scene is rendered in 32 bit mode and 64 bit mode.
You're never ever exceeding 2 GB memory limit in Modeler.

Pavlov
10-08-2011, 09:29 AM
hm this is true. But anyway, this forces us to have two program installed, and two versions of same plugin too. I.e. i have maxwell plugin 64 bit for layout, but i need also 32 bit because shader needs to be there if i import object in modeler.
We should brainstorm a little about this mess, maybe there are solutions to get a simpler software management nobody thought about yet.
PS - i'm curious to know if modeler (while it still exhist as entity) can become multithread. In this case, i wouldnt mind if 64 bit allows it to be 360 % faster (on a common quadcore) instead of a full 400% ;)

Paolo

Sensei
10-08-2011, 09:33 AM
NewTek rather won't provide custom made C/C++ compiler to build Windows 32/64 and Mac 32/64 bit executables at once..
Brainstorm what? If programmer doesn't have compiler to make 64 bit or Mac it won't make it. Simple as that. f.e. Denis didn't compile any 64 bit or Mac plug-in by himself..

3dworks
10-08-2011, 10:15 AM
some kind of 'brainstorming' about plugin compatibility issues is indeed really necessary, imo.

it has been suggested already a few times that the situation could be improved, if NT would provide some kind of compiling support for missing platform versions for developers working for the lightwave community. this kind of resource sharing would make sense, as LW is a highly plugin dependent application. at least, i don't know anyone actually woking with LW without using a myriad of third party scripts and plugins. currently a few developers (like mike wolf or marvin landis, for example) offer generously their free services to compile those versions, but what if one day they have no time to do this anymore?

unfortunately - as far as i can remember - we never got an official NT answer to this topic here on the forums - more presence and some interest in solving this problem from their part would be really welcome.

however, another problem is that some developers aren't happy to hand out the source code for their plugins - which is an understandable argument so far. over long, this situation will push more and more users away from lightwave to other, more platform compatible and in general, less plugin dependent solutions - which is negative for both, NT and all developers depending on LW.

Lewis
10-08-2011, 10:21 AM
You're never ever exceeding 2 GB memory limit in Modeler.

Speak for yourself, i have few models which are several million polys (close to 10) (usually nurbs convert/cleanup) without textures and i had to chop them in parts to be able to load in modeler. Let alone some buildings/city maps with lot of textures. THAT exceeds 2GB limit very easily :).

mav3rick
10-08-2011, 12:19 PM
we need lewis modeler.exe :) that guy eats memory/polygons like monster ;)

JeffrySG
10-08-2011, 03:52 PM
some kind of 'brainstorming' about plugin compatibility issues is indeed really necessary, imo.

it has been suggested already a few times that the situation could be improved, if NT would provide some kind of compiling support for missing platform versions for developers working for the lightwave community. this kind of resource sharing would make sense, as LW is a highly plugin dependent application. at least, i don't know anyone actually woking with LW without using a myriad of third party scripts and plugins. currently a few developers (like mike wolf or marvin landis, for example) offer generously their free services to compile those versions, but what if one day they have no time to do this anymore?

unfortunately - as far as i can remember - we never got an official NT answer to this topic here on the forums - more presence and some interest in solving this problem from their part would be really welcome.

however, another problem is that some developers aren't happy to hand out the source code for their plugins - which is an understandable argument so far. over long, this situation will push more and more users away from lightwave to other, more platform compatible and in general, less plugin dependent solutions - which is negative for both, NT and all developers depending on LW.


Totally agree with all of this! :agree::agree:

zarti
10-08-2011, 04:24 PM
some kind of 'brainstorming' about plugin compatibility issues is indeed really necessary, imo.

it has been suggested already a few times that the situation could be improved, if NT would provide some kind of compiling support for missing platform versions for developers working for the lightwave community. this kind of resource sharing would make sense, as LW is a highly plugin dependent application. at least, i don't know anyone actually woking with LW without using a myriad of third party scripts and plugins. currently a few developers (like mike wolf or marvin landis, for example) offer generously their free services to compile those versions, but what if one day they have no time to do this anymore?

unfortunately - as far as i can remember - we never got an official NT answer to this topic here on the forums - more presence and some interest in solving this problem from their part would be really welcome.

however, another problem is that some developers aren't happy to hand out the source code for their plugins - which is an understandable argument so far. over long, this situation will push more and more users away from lightwave to other, more platform compatible and in general, less plugin dependent solutions - which is negative for both, NT and all developers depending on LW.

imho ,

the best ' official answer ' nt wd give is ;

to build an app which wd never need again 24984! plugs and scripts ..

who ever wd able on this planet to manage those ( ? )

.. esp when they are highly host-app-sensitive ( ?!! )



.p.s: if spreading butter over the bread is a script's function , actually .. modeler has 14 ways of doing it .

Pavlov
10-08-2011, 05:57 PM
Brainstorm what? If programmer doesn't have compiler to make 64 bit or Mac it won't make it. Simple as that. f.e. Denis didn't compile any 64 bit or Mac plug-in by himself..


eheh.. this is an Uroboro's game, as you put it ;)
Let's start from facts: current situation is a mess. Can we change it in a snap ? No. That's the point where brainstorming is needed: finding previously unseed ways to get to desired point. Things around us improve just this way ;)
I.e a small idea, not so brilliant but maybe viable to solve this issue *up to now*, would be collecting most-needed plugins people want in 64 bit flavour, pay original developers to update them or to develop brand new ones with similar and improved functions. I guess we could easily get to a decent number of people to make this possible with a little effort for each one.

bye
Paolo

jwiede
10-08-2011, 08:38 PM
If they work in 9.6.1 I wonder if something happened in 10.x that broke them?
I'd say the most likely explanation is that they're unhappy when they get a "non-9" version back from LW, and won't init because of that. I've not had time to test them thoroughly in 9.6.1, but I'm not seeing any major problems with them so far. Whether a minor or major update is moot, though, if Pictrix won't update them.

I tried sending email to Pictrix, but it bounced (that's been a pretty common situation in past as well, though). If anyone's heard from him recently, and has an updated contact email, they might want to email him asking for an update, or mention this thread.

Cryonic
10-08-2011, 09:21 PM
NewTek rather won't provide custom made C/C++ compiler to build Windows 32/64 and Mac 32/64 bit executables at once..
Brainstorm what? If programmer doesn't have compiler to make 64 bit or Mac it won't make it. Simple as that. f.e. Denis didn't compile any 64 bit or Mac plug-in by himself..

Well, that would be problematic for Newtek as they are using MS Visual Studio for Windows side of things, or so it appears based on the extras that CORE installed on my machine.
Similar for Apple. You need their development kit to develop apps for Mac. I think I was able to download it for free from their site, but it only runs under OSX.
Or you can go to yet another party and get 64-bit compilers from Intel or AMD if you're willing to pay for them.
If you want free, then check out GCC or MingW.