PDA

View Full Version : Modeller & Layout integration in LW8??



3d user
10-16-2003, 12:48 PM
I just got yet another offer to upgrade to LW 8. New features are OK but what happened to Layout & Modeller integration? I recall seeing it on a poll but can't locate it now.

Matt
10-16-2003, 01:02 PM
Not a chance in a million years for v8, waaaay too much work to do!!!

3d user
10-16-2003, 03:10 PM
I take it's not going to happen then. I'm afraid that if that task is postponed it will be even harder to do.

pauland
10-16-2003, 04:16 PM
I guess those of us that like the split, won't lose any sleep..

EyesClosed
10-16-2003, 06:34 PM
LightWave will never be one. Newtek will have to rewrite everything from the ground up to ever accomplish this--just like Luxology is doing.

Valter
10-16-2003, 08:17 PM
Luxology?? Are luxology alive???

microchip
10-17-2003, 11:52 PM
Seems Luxology is alive to me, just saw their site at: http://www.luxology.net.

You know I think for the most part the separtion of Lightwave into Modeler and Layout is kind of nice since you focus on specific parts of production one piece at a time. There would be one thing that would be nice though, to be able to have some sort of control over modeling tools available in modeler in Layout so that I could create an animated boolean for instance. Technically it can be done now but you'd have to write a plugin or script of sorts to achieve each modeling operation in an animated sense. Allowing some of these operations to be animated through some sort of sharing like this would be interesting, but I guess theres always workarounds :)

prospector
10-18-2003, 12:12 AM
Already out there.
Flay I think

Exper
10-18-2003, 04:39 AM
Originally posted by microchip
There would be one thing that would be nice though, to be able to have some sort of control over modeling tools available in modeler in Layout so that I could create an animated boolean for instance.My 2 cents.

NT should merge Modeler/Layout in this way:
1) Merge Modeler and Layout in a single application
2) Create 3 configurations: Modeler, Layout and AllInOne
3) Let the user switch from Modeler to Layout to AllInOne
4) Modeler config with high precision display, Layout config with low precision display, AllInOne config with selectable display's precision!

Benefits: all tools available at the same time, no more redundant/doubled pulgins, no more fearful "HUB", every user can set the whole things in a project by project basis! ;)

Bye.

hrgiger
10-18-2003, 05:28 AM
Originally posted by EyesClosed
LightWave will never be one. Newtek will have to rewrite everything from the ground up to ever accomplish this--just like Luxology is doing.


That's hardly a comparison. Luxology isn't starting established software from the ground up, they're starting a whole new company and a whole new product. Which means they have no destablished user base and no established history of selling a product. Lightwave does. The only thing that Luxology has proved so far is that they can abandon a product. Good for them.
And I don't see how you would possibly know anything about Newtek's agenda or LIghtwave's future.

EyesClosed
10-18-2003, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by hrgiger
That's hardly a comparison. Luxology isn't starting established software from the ground up, they're starting a whole new company and a whole new product. Which means they have no destablished user base and no established history of selling a product. Lightwave does. The only thing that Luxology has proved so far is that they can abandon a product. Good for them.
And I don't see how you would possibly know anything about Newtek's agenda or LIghtwave's future.

Are you forgetting that most at Luxology are the ones who ran Newtek and actually created and maintained LightWave for years? Their user base will be LightWave users looking for the next-gen LightWave. They didn't abandon LightWave, they left so they can develop LightWave correctly, meaning totally rewrite it, since Newtek was too stubborn to do so.

Nemoid
10-19-2003, 02:47 AM
Really, the fact that Luxology is supposed writing a new app, don't disturbs me, and I think it can't disturb any 3D artist.
they are probably working to a new generation product, inspired from Lw but going further and beyond, solving many problems bugs we can see in Lw since years, and strongly competing with other app.
this can't disturb me, because Pc world is a world in wich there is not one app to do the complete job. you use dfferent apps, with different characteristics to get the job done, even if there is some prob with import export.

Newtek too is working quite hard for improving Lw, with this new release, and I'm happy with this, I really respect them and I have a positive feeling .

but the true job would be to solve all true Lw problems at the base, wich surely involve a rewrite. some things can't be done without this.
this also will allow an easier implementation and growing of the app for the future.

I think they can do the same as Lux if they really want.

a good idea would be enhance the current version, but start to work to an integrated version as well, inspired from Lw, but beyond it.
there are also many ways to make the process very smooth, from a interface POV to not get the current user shocked.

hrgiger
10-19-2003, 04:38 AM
Originally posted by EyesClosed
Are you forgetting that most at Luxology are the ones who ran Newtek and actually created and maintained LightWave for years? Their user base will be LightWave users looking for the next-gen LightWave. They didn't abandon LightWave, they left so they can develop LightWave correctly, meaning totally rewrite it, since Newtek was too stubborn to do so.

No, I haven't forgotten. Have you forgotten that Allen and Stuart created Lightwave and modeler? If they entered into some contract with Newtek where they lost the ability to maintain Lightwave as they saw fit, well then that's their own fault and perhaps it shows they're not very good at business. If they're counting on Lightwave users to be their whole base, well they're probably going to be disappointed. It has been a transition but Newtek is doing just fine at developing the next generation of Lightwave. I'm not sure why you always feel the need to speak of things you have no clue about such as the stubborness of Newtek to do a rewrite of Lightwave. I don't recall a rewrite or an integration ever being in the works when Stuart and Allen were still at Newtek.
Nemoid, no there is nothing wrong with a new app coming to the market, it's always nice to have options. And we don't really know what is in the works for Lightwave and don't know what's happening behind the scenes. Perhaps a rewrite is in the works, perhaps not but I see Lightwave moving ahead and that's good enough for me right now, especially considering that Newtek itself is practically a new company as well with a lot of new talent. We'll see about Lux when they actually bring a product to market, but I think that the whole appeal of Lightwave is all the tools you need out of the box. Modo looks nice but it's only a modeler at this point and well, I already have a modeler. Who knows when and if they'll have animation or rendering capabilities? How do we know they're not writing a seperate app for that too? So, perhaps we can talk about that in another few years when they finally get around to doing that.

Nemoid
10-19-2003, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by hrgiger
Nemoid, no there is nothing wrong with a new app coming to the market, it's always nice to have options. And we don't really know what is in the works for Lightwave and don't know what's happening behind the scenes. Perhaps a rewrite is in the works, perhaps not but I see Lightwave moving ahead and that's good enough for me right now, especially considering that Newtek itself is practically a new company as well with a lot of new talent. We'll see about Lux when they actually bring a product to market, but I think that the whole appeal of Lightwave is all the tools you need out of the box. Modo looks nice but it's only a modeler at this point and well, I already have a modeler. Who knows when and if they'll have animation or rendering capabilities? How do we know they're not writing a seperate app for that too? So, perhaps we can talk about that in another few years when they finally get around to doing that.

I quite agree with you currently. I really think that Nt is working good with enhancing the current structure of Lw. release [8]will be a good step further enhancing Lw to allow us to do CA and rigging as well as dinamics and other in a better way.

the real problem is that from a programming POV, the current Lw structure is quite old. actually they still are 2 apps working together(via Hub wich is another prog as well) to get the job done.
there are probs like Plugs not communicating well with the core, as well as differerent bugs we still have now since years, problems with lscript for plugin creators still now and other issues.
these probs exist because Lw wasn't born to be a complete app. there were two separate app, and they have been put to work together in some way.then other things were addrd as pieces on this structure

I understand clearly that a rewrite involves alot of time and hard work indeed. that's why I said that enhancing the current Lw with the current structure is clever.surely I will use the tools I'll find in it and I'm very happy they are putting them in the new release.
but going further, its more clever, if in the meantime they start rewriting it.

when I write these things is also to make Nt know that such a thing is required. if they are not currently working in that direction, at least maybe they get the idea.

about Lux, for now I can agree with you, because we only know about only another subpatch modeler ( with great characteristics though). we have no great news from them. certainly, only a product like Modo is not enough even if it can enter well in every pipeline wich is a good thing indeed right now.
from the people they hired and the contacts they are supposed to have, at Lux they seem not preparing only a modeler, but a new app probably made from different modules.

however, since I understand that talking of a product wich is not out yet (and in Nt forums !!) is not a good behaviour towards Nt, I'll stop here to talk about Lux.

the comparison I made, was to make better understand the possibilities wich Lw has just now that can be developed with a clever rewrite.

its not about copying tools from other apps. its more working towards animators and artists.
I think that Lw can find its own way to "explode" with its potential to the maximum level.

hrgiger
10-19-2003, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by Nemoid

when I write these things is also to make Nt know that such a thing is required. if they are not currently working in that direction, at least maybe they get the idea.



Trust me, Newtek is VERY well aware that certain users feel this way. This has been a very frequent request for the few years that I've been using the boards. I think that indeed if Newtek with it's new developers is on the right track, they'll determine when and if the software has reached a brick wall where only a rewrite will allow them to sidestep it. Give it time. I think there's still a lot of good things to come with the current implementation of Lightwave.

Nemoid
10-20-2003, 02:26 AM
IMHO this rewrite would be good at the time of 7.0 release,
since just now quite all 3D softwares are one app.
this is also what many noobs of 3D can think when seeing Lw the first time, or also when coming from other packages.

this being said, I agree with you and give 'em time.
I'm not asking this thing for tomorrow :)
I also have to say that I like how Nt is currently enhancing Lw
and I am sincere when I say this.

actually I appreciate so much many things in Lw, that I enjoy working with my 7.5a release still now. :D

Exper
10-20-2003, 04:15 AM
Originally posted by Nemoid
IMHO this rewrite would be good at the time of 7.0 release,
since just now quite all 3D softwares are one app.
this is also what many noobs of 3D can think when seeing Lw the first time, or also when coming from other packages.True and undeniable!
Many people don't use and they'll never give a chance to LW as long as it mantain actual separation between Modeler and Layout.

NT has finally overcomed the bad Luxology affair and the new developer team is working in a very good direction!
Hoping they'll evaluate the rewrite/merge as soon as possible!

A good configs-manager should be the solution for everyone who needs separate apps: a fast switch between 3 different configs should be able to move in a blaze the user from Modeler to Layout to AllInOne application without the need of HUB, doubled plugins and many many other bad things... actually known!
World-wide Happiness! :D

Bye.

Nemoid
10-20-2003, 05:01 AM
In fact its like that.



Wrote it many times, but again: a good UI with separate tabs for modelling animating and maybe other, would give the possibility of having the current mod/layout interfaces, but with common tools.
as you can see, no prob for old users wich say they have to focus in one part of the process nor for new ones, wich are used to other apps or simply want more flexibility.

mantaining the possibility to save geometry of objects separately, like now, would be great as well. :)

it can be an out of the box default UI setting, with the possibility to customize things at an high level, for example visualizing timeline in modeler, using modeler's tools in layout for manupulating elements,and minor but important things like, colors in buttons, fonts in buttons and many more, and save these layouts so that you can set different versions of them with your scene, and use them to your needs.

another thing would be enhancing keyboard shortcuts with introduction of different combinations of them, and expanding the use of contextual menus with RMB

hrgiger
10-20-2003, 07:19 AM
Well, if there's any reasons for integration, one of them should NOT be because everyone else is doing it....

Exper
10-20-2003, 09:54 AM
hrgiger...
this isn't the major argumentation, I agree, but NT should benefit of more sales if they can give to potential customers an app which has a more conventional working-mode!
More sales = better app!

Ok... the major benefit will certainly be no more redundant stuffs, all tools working the same and at the same time, more modern architecture... we can go on and on!
We'd have, at this point, a second major benefit: more users and more potential customers!

I'm speaking about personal experiences...
so many times I saw LW abandoned for 3dsMax or Maya simple cos they are integrated apps!
SAD... REALLY SAD THING! :(

I think NT deserve every penny for LW but note we are already LW fans... potential customer doesn't feel the way we feel, he simply need to buy and work with a 3D app!

NT surerly is here in business, not for fun!
Confiding!

Bye.

3d user
10-20-2003, 10:31 AM
From a newbie point of view I too consider using two apps awkward. The first impression is important. How many new users find it great to use the "Hub"? It's just a pain in the butt! I allways run with the -o option with Layout and Modeller.

How do those who are pondering which 3d app to buy consider LW non-integration an asset rather than a disadvantage? Newtek may loose a lot of sales there.

Many say that NT should not "do like the rest" and be "different". I'm sure the developers at other 3d companies are not fools. I haven't seen anyone converting to two-app style lately. Just the opposite. Why is this?

I often model stuff by this way:
- put some stuff together, render, How does it look rendered?
- make some tweaks, assign surface properties, render, look?
In LW I have to save, refresh Hub, curse Hub, swear at Hub and then finally see a result and start over.

Nemoid
10-20-2003, 04:26 PM
Integration in Lw, wich involve a rewrite, Its not a matter of look,or only eliminating double tools or other. nor a simple matter of organization of the app.

actually the fact of many noobs seeing Lw for the first time being in some way scared is a minor thing.

a programmer would explaine better than me what's really painful with the current structure and code of Lw.
lets think to unlimited undos. Nt is introducing them, but i think not for all things, because Layout was not written with an original possibility of unlimited undos.
actually to get all things really undoable in a deep way,(like in mod, wich is different) this involve a rewrite.

however, 2 other good examples are plugins often interfering each other (and its not a problem of how they are written, but a core problem )

and the hub, wich for example isn't the best and rapid way to connect two apps to work together.

but the list may be very long.

so, on one side we have a structure and original code problem, because Allen & Ferguson worked separately to 2 ,
,apps with different codes and concept and they were put together afterwards.(but not merged)
on the other side, we have pieces added to this structure not always cleverly and completely working.

so, as time passes the structure and core probs remains, and pieces here and there are added.

however, I don't want in any way to attack anyone, nor Nt. most of these problems were just there when Allen And Ferguson were in Nt.

now the team is new, and I think they are going in the right direction, at least in enhancing what we have now.( wich still is however a good app right now, even if not so flexible).

I hope my statements are not seen as attacks, because its not the feeling I have when I'm writing them.my only intention is to make people aware of the app they use and its inner probs wich, if solved will assure to Lw a more than brilliant future indeed. :)

infact I believe that in Nt they are great and therefore able to do this job, maybe even better than other huge companies. money not always have ideas. I like very much Lw community as well.
that's why I want to keep on using Lw. :)

hrgiger
10-20-2003, 04:45 PM
You mistake me if you think I'm arguing against integration. Would it really matter that it was two apps if there were no imcompatibilities between modeler and layout? If plug-ins could read both programs? If workflow was improved to the point of not jumping back and forth between modeler and Layout? All I'm saying is, I think before you'll see a re-write, you'll see further steps in bringing the two programs as close as can be done and I think 8 is a good step in that direction.
I'm all for a re-write but right now, I'm happy to see the progress...

Nemoid
10-21-2003, 02:46 AM
OK with this, I totally agree. :D
we are saying the same things in different ways.

Exper
10-21-2003, 03:21 AM
Agree! ;)

As said before by Nemoid, NT should internally start a complete rewrite of LW taking in count a modern software architecture, integration between Modeler and Layout and a completely open SDK which let third-party developers in accessing every part of the app!

NT can do it as the second aim at now!

We all know this is an impossible effort for LW[8.0b] but for an LW[9] or also [10] it should be the primary aim, IMHO!

Bye.

Nemoid
10-21-2003, 07:20 AM
That's right. [9] would be the best choice for this.
or also, maybe a situation similar to classic Softimage (app)
and XSI. (so Nt could sell 2 Lws!!!:D:D )

P.S. maybe in the near future I'll find some time, to put together
a good and complete list of how I and some friend would like to see a future Lw, if this could be useful and the community is interested.

Exper
10-21-2003, 07:38 AM
Originally posted by Nemoid
maybe a situation similar to classic Softimage (app)
and XSI.Nemoid... I was thinking about Softimage and SoftimageXSI during lunch time! ;)

Bye.

Nemoid
10-21-2003, 11:09 AM
heheheheh think to these
things the whole day??U need some distraction.
kidding :)

I am counting down the days for [8] though. :D

Exper
10-21-2003, 11:24 AM
Yep... some distraction needed right now...
better with fingers on [8]! :D

Bye.

Nemoid
10-22-2003, 02:23 AM
Yap I'm really crosing my fingers.:D
Hey Exper! do you know Lightwave 3D italian mailing list??

there are great users right there. maybe they could in the future compile a good project about a rewritten Lw[9]. this, if Nt hears and give a little feedback.
right now they seem to be worried about Lw comparing it to Maya,but I think they are waiting too for Lw[8] they are little worried for the mailing list itself and thinking to build a forum or smth.


( hey, but why I'm writing in english to an Italian? boh!! maybe to make me understandable... :D)

Exper
10-22-2003, 04:38 AM
Nemoid... ciao! ;)
Non sono a conoscenza della mailing list italiana! :(
Mandami l'indirizzo via PM o mail!
Solitamente preferisco i Forum; già così sono bombardato da mailing lists che spesso non ho il tempo di leggere, nei forum invece sì può facilmente decidere cosa seguire e cosa no! ;)

May the [8] be with you!

Bye.

Nemoid
10-22-2003, 07:11 AM
Ok "chekka" il PM

Jockomo
10-23-2003, 12:57 AM
My guess is that most people who are wanting layout and modeler merged, have yet to run both at the same time on dual monitors.
If you don't Lightwave on dual monitors, you don't know what your missing.

Nemoid
10-23-2003, 01:34 AM
Hey working this way would be kick a%% for sure! :D

actually I would like to work with Lw at 1600X 1200 on dual monitor!!but reality is another thing. for now, at least.

P.S. do you know that fonts in button at this resolution are too small and you can't decide to make em greater?? Lw best resolution its in fact 1280X1024...Nt let use decide the fonts and dimension pls!!

however, as you read before, the issue of merging is more, more complex...

Exper
10-23-2003, 05:24 AM
Consistency shuold be one of the major aims!

LW suffer of some "similar but different" features between Modeler and Layout and this behaviour expecially discourage new and potential users/customers!

The only solution is a complete rewrite which should include the integration between Modeler and Layout and a new and modern architecture (remove doubled stuffs, better memory managment, completely opened SDK... go on and on)!

(Crossposted from
About the time line in LW8
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12704)

Bye.

Lightwolf
10-23-2003, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by Jockomo
My guess is that most people who are wanting layout and modeler merged, have yet to run both at the same time on dual monitors.
If you don't Lightwave on dual monitors, you don't know what your missing.
What would stop you from running two views of one app on a dual monitor set-up?
A good merge of both app wouldn't compromise anything the current set-up has, but include more possibilites and be a bit easier on the ressources (no more double loading of textures).
Cheers,
Mike

Exception
10-23-2003, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by hrgiger
I think there's still a lot of good things to come with the current implementation of Lightwave.

Hear hear!

I for one will not say anything about the luxology/newtek bit because I dont know what happened, and who's doing what. I hope everyone is happy over there, they deserve it. I use lightwave, and im still happy with it. Thats all that matters.

I would just like to add that I like the Layout / modeler split, and it just needs a bit of tweaking to be perfect for me (like allowing 1 modeler instance to communicate with 2 layouts etcetera). I am afraid LW will become like PS or MAx, where the app is so bi, just starting it up takes away a lot of mem, and you can only open one instance of the program. I like having 3 layouts open with a different scene loaded in each, and still have quick response.

mattbolton
10-23-2003, 07:42 AM
Being fairly new to LW, but not to 3D apps in general, I really like the seperation of Modeler and Layout. This is a small part of what attracted me to LW in the first place. Now perhaps my opinion will change as I get some more experience with LW, but right now, it really helps me focus on one task at a time without getting distracted by wanting to do a test render every couple minutes.

Nemoid
10-23-2003, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by mattbolton
Being fairly new to LW, but not to 3D apps in general, I really like the seperation of Modeler and Layout. This is a small part of what attracted me to LW in the first place. Now perhaps my opinion will change as I get some more experience with LW, but right now, it really helps me focus on one task at a time without getting distracted by wanting to do a test render every couple minutes.

I can understand the feeling you have working with Lw for certain tasks;especially modelling is very good in Lw. try the rigging with 7.5 and you will see some prob. fortunately Nt is working to fix the rigging process and finally put the right tools in Layout for this task, in [8]

the reasons why Lw should be integrated do not depend from the fact you want to see one modeler UI or a layout UI at a time. you could see the app like this, even if its integrated. so you could focus in the modeling or animating however with no prob at all, but with other possibilities.

integration wuold eliminate double unuseful tools, the need of an HUB app, other problems given from the codes of the two apps being different, and give more flexibility and therefore better possibilities to the final artist.

about the integrated app loaded in more time, it maybe just be
organized like in a module structure, and if you want you could load only a modeler, or an animation module, but with the possibility to load also "all in one " app if you want to. this appears to be more flexible than other apps.

i'm wondering if Lux is working in this direction , too.

don't worry, though, and enjoy the current Lw release wich is very good however for many many things. :)

hrgiger
10-23-2003, 08:47 AM
I've always liked that modeler and Layout have been seperate. I think I'm just used to and enjoy having two seperate environtments, one for modeling and one for animating. However, I do see the inherent problems in having two seperate programs. I guess you can speculate about the benefits and the problems but I think we should only talk about those that have affected us personally so maybe we should all throw those things out (and be specific, don't say, I want my plug-ins to work together....OK, which plug-ins?)

The personal problems that I have found to be troublesome with a seperate modeler and layout.


Motion Designer does not see weight maps. This has always been a big one for me. Softbodies could be drastically improved if we could have precise control over a single surface. Hopefully, we'll see that corrected in 8.
No bones in modeler. Joint morphs would be so much easier if I could rotate a bone in modeler and correct my joint deformation. I'm well aware there are workarounds but they are time consuming and the workflow is awful.
Having to open layout simply to render an object so I can see if a surface crease is going to show up in the render. This isn't a biggie but it would be nice to do a simple render on an object before sending it to layout.


I'm sure there are more but those are the ones that I remember right at the moment. There would have been a few more I would have added but I see a few of them are being addressed in Lightwave 8 like selectable points in Layout for example.

3d user
10-23-2003, 08:58 AM
If Layout and Modeller are combined in some future version (but not 8 :() those you prefer running two apps can do so!
Just open LW 9 (?) two times and be happy!

With a separateness in mind here's a joke on how you can run faster: when running carry a heavy rock. If you want to run faster just drop the rock!

Sorry about the lame old joke. I could not resist! No flames, please.

sannyasi
10-25-2003, 02:33 PM
Please don’t be scared off by the length of this post, It may be worth the read….I hope



My 2 cents.…… maybe more like 2 dollars

I’m also not opposed to a merger of the apps. But many of the reasons others give don’t seam to be valid reasons to me, for the merger of these two apps.
Among the top reasons given that I see are

THE HUB:

As I have read in the forums, I think I am one of the few to say “I do not, nor have I ever had a problem with the hub”. It always updates properly for me. And the saves have also been helpful for those rare occasions that Lw will crash on me. I think many people’s frustrations with Lw come from using it improperly. (I see this most with people coming from other packages). I also use Maya and am learning XSI (and yes I’ve even used Max, although I never want to again). And I do the same thing, trying to model in Maya, the way I do in Lw is so annoying, that I never model anything in it. OBJ export always works fine for me. Although all apps share similarities and its true that when you know one it gets easier to pick up another, It doesn’t mean they are the same animal. I like to use the word philosophy. It program works best under it’s own philosophy. Try using a different programs methods and your sure to get pissed off. As for the Hub, I’m assuming that most peoples difficulties come from the fact that Lw allows multiple instance to be open at once, so that modeler and layout aren’t communicating through the same hub.

If you have problems with the hub read on, else skip down to
NO HISTORY:

When I start Lw, I start the Hub… (not modeler, not layout..) then right click on the hub in the tray- launch- (app).. Alt tab works fine after this point. When I model I use the send obj to layout command. Or if I load a scene first I F12 into modeler and from the object list pull-down, select the object to work on. I make multiple edits within both programs, most of the time without saving, switching back and forth and never have difficulties.


NO HISTORY:
Many people want history, and I would agree. But like in XSI I would want a immediate mode (which disables history temporally) Since 99% of the time history is unneeded and slows down the app incredible amounts. Not to mention causes problems with the order in which you must work to avoid uncorrectable errors. This of course is user error but is still in many cases easily avoidable, if history didn’t get in the way.

UI:
This one is not a big deal to me personally but some here say that to make those happy with the two apps, feel comfortable in an all-in-one app have multiple UI sets you could switch between, Model, Layout, All-in-One. (which would basically be like Maya or XSI’s modules )I like the suggestion, but this solution assumes that all of us actually use the menus in Lw. Like I’ve said in previous posts, I have not seen the side menu in modeler since v6 – 6.5 . Using the menus is what makes other programs so painful for me to use, especially Max. Until there is a 204+ key keyboard this solution would not work entirely for me. If these multiple configs switch between keys as well things could get a little dirty and confusing. Not needing to use the menus is what makes Lw so quick for me. Go back to menus and it wouldn’t be much quicker than Maya. And I can’t just set similar hot keys and have the same work flow in Maya because the way Maya works really doesn’t allow it, (though the hot box is a nice feature)





There are more issues I could address but I’m not out to write a novel.
(sorry for the length, hope you can bear a bit more reading)

Most if not all the reasons I would list for merging the apps are things that I don’t think require an entire rewrite to accomplish.

Above all else I see the need for a MUCH improved expressions, scripting and plugin language as essential, and far more important than most of these simple features most would and have asked to be added ……
The way I see it most professional companies that use “high end” programs like Maya and SoftImage (ILM, Mill, DD, etc.. ) Have people on hand that can write insane scripts to alter areas of the software, sometimes to the point where it basically becomes a new piece of software. (Just read Cinefx) I am not a scripting or programming person but I understand the importance in this. Out of the box I personally think Lw is one of the most complete packages available, And quite possible the best modeler hands down. The ability to alter the program, into what you need is where Lw falls behind. If NT could add the ability for all parameters, to access all other parameters within an object/scene the way you can in Maya or XSI, through an improved expressions and scripting language, as well as access to the Lw core, like mentioned earlier in this thread. Then Lw would be capable of the high end usability like Maya.

Features that would be inherently enabled as a result of this would be:

WeightMaps in MD and other areas of Lw (I’m with you on this one hrgiger)

PerParticle expressions and controls (currently one of the only reasons I use
Maya)

Surfaces that could access far more inputs than what’s currently available

Surface layer instances that could access another’s transforms,(no need to go between channels to line up texture layers, and no nulls needed and expressions.)

New light and shading models perhaps, like listed on previous threads I’ve read

Object instances

Expression that can link to any parameter of any object…

The list goes on and on. If this could be implemented in [9] I could see Lw finding a much larger niche in the professional sector and gain some of the respect I feel it deservers from users of other packages, (which I have seen a great lack of)

All though It would not be an easy thing to implement, I don’t believe it would require an entire rewrite or necessarily integration of the two apps to accomplish. I know non of this is news to Newtek, and I know they listen to the threads, So like I said its just my $2.

Sorry for such a long post I didn't know I could write so much, but I hope some of you found it insightful and my carpal tunnel won’t be in vain. If not, and you’ve read all this for nothing feel free to curse, flame, insult, me , my family, or what ever else would make you feel better, I won’t take it personally
:)

Nemoid
10-26-2003, 03:26 AM
What a huge post!!!!:D

well I have to say that when I talk about integration, i'm NOT
thinking to apps like Maya. maybe XSI is more similar to my idea, but its not what I have in mind.

Lw must b integrated in its own way. :)

for example i'm thinking to :

1) a modular structure, wich allows you to visualize lw in a similar way like we have now, but with common tools (pls don't undervalue the possibility to have the mod tools in layout for animation and vice versa!!). a simple tab will make you switch betwen the 2 (or more) UIs so that you really have no great difference (but you have flexibility instead )the UIs can be independent,with their hotkeys too, but at the same time, tools are common.
plus,you will have different ways to visualize your app and work in it. so when separation is useful you use this sort of visualization, while when you want to work in a all in one, fashion you can.

2) I agree that Lw is easy to use, and currently is a good app out of the box. that's what I don't like of an app like Maya, wich is very deep and powerful, but not user friendly, especially for artists wich don't want to make scripts. a good app must be good out of the box indeed. then other features could be added with scripts but these have to be special features.
however, to work very efficiently with Lw you require several plugins, while I'd like to see more powerful tools out of the box and interactive. Ikeda tools and other great plugs like jettobevel and jettofillet, wrinkle, tickener, for example show the way to go.integrated in lw and made interactive they would be killer!!

3) history can make you waste a lot of memory, but allows flexibility. the possibility to choose is better that having no history at all.
also, can help greatly in animation, texturing and not only in modelling tasks.

4)all the issues wich make you go back and forth between the 2 apps will disappear immediately, and so, you will have more flexibility when animating and rigging.

5) Hub uses TCP/IP protocol, wich is not the best way to make 2 apps work together. don't have the worfd in english, but "memory calls" I think would be a faster way to communicate between the two?

these are a few. I could add many details, but i'm not Stephen King ,so I don't want to write a novel!!

have a nice day!!:D