PDA

View Full Version : how will buy Vray for lightwave?



Pages : [1] 2

papou
02-18-2012, 07:36 AM
sorry, i mean 'Who' not 'How'...so..

This is not another 'we need Vray' thread.

I though this is a very true status which need a poll:


A bigger question is whether enough LightWavers would purchase a $1000+ render engine plug-in for LightWave.


• suggested price of V-Ray 2.0 is: 970 Euro /1350 USD / 840 GBP
• approximative .5 upgrade price: 400 Euro/ 550 USD/ 340 GBP


Please, put a real answer.

archijam
02-18-2012, 08:56 AM
Since I use LW at work, and freelance, (difference licenses and uses) I have put two answers - (one positive, one neg) ..

BERSEKAEL
02-18-2012, 01:38 PM
Thanks for this kind of Pole thread papou.

I am interested in Vray+LW. I can afford easy $1000+ for that render engine plug-in. Is worths for my business.

Andy Meyer
02-19-2012, 07:14 AM
Thanks for this kind of Pole thread papou.

I am interested in Vray+LW. I can afford easy $1000+ for that render engine plug-in. Is worths for my business.

+1, me too

50one
02-19-2012, 10:33 AM
+1, me too

Same here, already got Vray at work, so if there would be a way to translate easily without exporting to different apps, I would pay for that.:thumbsup:

MUCUS
02-19-2012, 10:34 AM
Thank you for this Pole "papou", this should have been started years ago!
It's a bit pricy for me, but if we could have something integrated as well as
vray for 3ds (or maxwell for lw), I would buy it.

Hope it will show that the Lightwave community is a real market for Chaos Group and
that there is some serious cash to make for the developers of such a plugin!:thumbsup:

Philbert
02-19-2012, 04:01 PM
Are you really asking "who will buy it?" (implying it's coming) or "who would buy it" (if it ever did)? Personally I don't think we need it. If not the built in LW renderer, there's already Kray (http://kraytracing.com/).

Hieron
02-19-2012, 04:18 PM
imho our native renderer + Kray is not shabby at all, quite the contrary.
Yet I did vote for "The company I work for wants (and can) buy Vray", since we probably would.

Options aren't bad.. though in the case of LW, the native renderer seems important to the package
Personally, I'd prefer NT to have a kick *** native renderer that can sort of keep up and price LW accordingly.

battery555
02-19-2012, 05:25 PM
+1 for me. The render result should be on par with 3D MAX. Apparently the sketch up rendered images is not the same quality as the one in 3D MAX.

Paul_Boland
02-19-2012, 06:23 PM
I had VRay for Caligari's TrueSpace, cost me €150 if I recall. I would love to have it for Lightwave but as a home hobbyist I can't afford that price :(.

djwaterman
02-20-2012, 04:25 AM
I said I would buy it at that price but not now, meaning I'd have it on my list and work towards buying it when the money was there. I feel it's something we really gotta have. I'd rather have that than LW 11 even.

BERSEKAEL
02-21-2012, 01:03 PM
Same here, I am buying some Vray for Sketchup for now, instead of upgrading LW, who knows we could have Vray for LW one day.

rcallicotte
02-21-2012, 02:21 PM
Price point is important, of course, but I would try to access it as soon as it was available.

But, I've heard really good things about the LW 11 render engine, so I need to see that in action first.

Netvudu
02-21-2012, 04:27 PM
Iīm pretty happy to see that almost a third of the users so far, share my opinion on Lightwave doesnīt needing Vray for anything at all....

BERSEKAEL
02-21-2012, 05:18 PM
Well thats true, at least we know a third part of LW users don't need realistic/fast/and good AA renders at all, and sad at the same time.

I am still keeping my hope on Vray+LW one day (since LW 8), or at least better tools to export my LW models into some other packages to render, LW is for far the best modeler. However free Sketchup/Blender + Vray are good options for serious viz stills, and keep modeling in LW.

netstile123
02-21-2012, 09:30 PM
I think what we need is a fresh scene that we can all render with each program or (render Engine) I keep seeing how spectacular Vray is- I really have not gave much thought into other render programs. We should have an artist here chosen to create something that everyone will be able to load into layout and everyone get a chance to do what they can to come up with a render with that same scene so we can compaire. Lets lay something on the table or a RENDER CONTEST.............................

Andy Meyer
02-22-2012, 01:01 AM
Netvudu, 99% of all pc users dont need 3d apps at all :-)

geo_n
02-22-2012, 02:13 AM
Iīm pretty happy to see that almost a third of the users so far, share my opinion on Lightwave doesnīt needing Vray for anything at all....

Your post is always negative against vray. Did you lose a job to vray user some time back?
Its strange for people to ask not to have a certain feature they're not even interested in. Very strange backward logic.
I'm pretty happy more than two thirds say they would want vray if it was possible. Means the lw users pride that the lw renderer is the best is not the majority. This pride is also seen against kray when non kray users say I don't see what kray can do that lw can't. Lol! That's why you don't see many kray users post work here at newtek. They probably don't feel very welcome.

papou
02-22-2012, 02:33 AM
Please, do not do personal attack in this thread. And do not turn this thread to a LW vs Others. This is not what you want to do, but this is what it going to be.

Some people do not need Vray, because they are happy with Lw, Kray or maybe Maxwell.
Maybe they just don't think Vray is the messiah.
Maybe they have a good quality and a realism feeling with that renderers.
Maybe they want to write a personal taste and not the same as the everybody in architecture domain.
and maybe they are proud of that... Keep a good feeling.

Matt
02-22-2012, 03:58 AM
For me I see no reason why VRay for LW would ever be a bad thing, it's highly regarded, and gives people another reason to want to use LW, it's all about choice.

Having said that, not everyone _needs_ it like they can't use LW without it. Some people want it, some people don't.

And those that do, currently have to look elsewhere to get it.

As I've said a few times, VRay coming to LW is not really up to NT, it's down to the guys that write the software to _want_ to bring it to LW.

And I can say with absolute confidence, that if they choose to, we will be more than willing to aid them in their efforts. But is has to come from them, simple as that. As Chaosgroup have stated many times to our users who have contacted them, it's all about business and numbers.

If you really want VRay for LW, you need to contact them and express your desire for it. It's the only way.

djwaterman
02-22-2012, 04:15 AM
Thanks for the clarification. Yes Lightwave with a Vray option would be a killer combo, so let's start bugging Chaosgroup.

Andy Meyer
02-22-2012, 05:06 AM
...If you really want VRay for LW, you need to contact them and express your desire for it. It's the only way.

I did so, right now.

EDIT: i asked if there will be V-Ray for LW eventually. here is the answer:
...We refrain from giving any information about future products or releases before an official announcement is made...

Ryste3d
02-22-2012, 06:00 AM
Sometime I feel LW users are left out from all kind of third party applications and plug-in. Why is that? I understand its all about numbers as Matt pointed out, so is it because there only is a handful LW users out there compared to Auto..., XSI, SketchUp and Blender?

Does anyone know how many reg. users of LW 9 - 11 is out there or is it classified for the public?


Yes I would love to have Vray for Lightwave (who wouldn't)???

erikals
02-22-2012, 07:02 AM
...i asked if there will be V-Ray for LW eventually. here is the answer:
...We refrain from giving any information about future products or releases before an official announcement is made...

hm, interesting answer...
 

rcallicotte
02-22-2012, 07:18 AM
Comparison is a great idea.




I think what we need is a fresh scene that we can all render with each program or (render Engine) I keep seeing how spectacular Vray is- I really have not gave much thought into other render programs. We should have an artist here chosen to create something that everyone will be able to load into layout and everyone get a chance to do what they can to come up with a render with that same scene so we can compaire. Lets lay something on the table or a RENDER CONTEST.............................

geo_n
02-22-2012, 08:14 AM
Please, do not do personal attack in this thread. And do not turn this thread to a LW vs Others. This is not what you want to do, but this is what it going to be.


The previous post was just insulting. If people don't really have an interest in a feature like a vray renderer for lw, what's the point in posting against it over and over again in different threads where people say they do want vray because its a proven renderer. Just move along.
Kray is aiming to be similar to vray. Like vray, not like lw renderer.
So I guess kray like vray is not needed for anything in lw at all and kray users like me are just wasting time using it because its not needed for anything at all.

jasonwestmas
02-22-2012, 08:44 AM
I think it would be better for some, yes. But for me, the only reason I use Lightwave is for the render engine so that might be counter-intuitive unless Lightwave starts offering more features and workflows that are better (Speed-Quality ratio) than in other packages.

Price differences are starting to shrink too.

jasonwestmas
02-22-2012, 08:49 AM
Yes, let's bug ChaosGroup, would be interesting.

Done, did my deed for the day ;)

jasonwestmas
02-22-2012, 09:16 AM
Got my BS answer "Jason Westmas,

Our customer support team personnel has replied to your support request #568627

Thank you for your e-mail.
We refrain from giving any information about future products or releases before an official announcement is made.
Please regularly check our web site for any updates or news on the subject.

We hope this response has sufficiently answered your questions. If not, please do not send another email. Instead, reply to this email or login to your account for a complete archive of all your support request and responses."

LOL.

realgray
02-22-2012, 09:33 AM
I think maybe more of the forum needs to participate in the poll and the results sent to Chaosgroup with a happy note.

Ryste3d
02-22-2012, 09:37 AM
the previous post was just insulting. If people don't really have an interest in a feature like a vray renderer for lw, what's the point in posting against it over and over again in different threads where people say they do want vray because its a proven renderer. Just move along.
Kray is aiming to be similar to vray. like vray, not like lw renderer.
so i guess kray like vray is not needed for anything in lw at all and kray users like me are just wasting time using it because its not needed for anything at all.

+1

silviotoledo
02-22-2012, 09:51 AM
Maybe a better option is Newtek giving a better chance to K RAY. This software is also amazing and it seems Chaosgroup see Lightwave as out of the game.

http://www.kraytracing.com/joomla/gallery

I'm sure there should be a better collaboraboration in development that would bennefit both K Ray and LW. Sometimes K Ray is so killing as Vray and K Ray is easier to use.

And who want to use V ray will have to export FBX and use Max as a bridge.

jasonwestmas
02-22-2012, 09:54 AM
For me I see no reason why VRay for LW would ever be a bad thing, it's highly regarded, and gives people another reason to want to use LW, it's all about choice.

Having said that, not everyone _needs_ it like they can't use LW without it. Some people want it, some people don't.

And those that do, currently have to look elsewhere to get it.

As I've said a few times, VRay coming to LW is not really up to NT, it's down to the guys that write the software to _want_ to bring it to LW.

And I can say with absolute confidence, that if they choose to, we will be more than willing to aid them in their efforts. But is has to come from them, simple as that. As Chaosgroup have stated many times to our users who have contacted them, it's all about business and numbers.

If you really want VRay for LW, you need to contact them and express your desire for it. It's the only way.

I'm not so sure repeated emails being sent into them asking for the same thing would have any effect whatsoever. A poll is a good idea in this case. Now how to get them to notice the poll. In their forum?

silviotoledo
02-22-2012, 10:19 AM
I don't think a pool will change anything. This will not show people will be able to pay for it. K ray is cheapper and only a few people pays. I think an agreement from Newtek would be necessary.

I've been asking Chaosgroup for VRay for LW there's more than 5 years, but one licence would not pay the job.


This is the reason V Ray render is necessary:

http://youtu.be/PSGx4bBU9Qc <-- Amazing!

Lightwave native rendering don't do this.

And once V Ray will add more Lightwave users I think Newtek shoud try to start this, not only wait from Chaos. Or is it real that V Ray was originally designed for lightwave but Newtek refused ?

and I really hope K ray will be able for competition too. Maybe if Newtek work in collaboration with K ray it will be so complete as V Ray. Once K Ray is available for Lightwave only and it's too similar to V Ray, this should be easier.

I can't believe LW team still thinks LW render is the best. It's a good renderer but we need more alternatives and these are the reason there's another renderers.

erikals
02-22-2012, 11:05 AM
actually, that's not just Vray, the guy is doing tons of work in post.

here's how different a render could look if post techniques are used
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=125882
important, do note that the actual source render is so-so, hence the final result (exaggerated)

a good main render is vital, see what Gerardo can do...
http://imagic.ddgenvivo.tv/forums/Tumbler.jpg 

but again, Vray for Lightwave is welcome.

 

MDSPECIFIC
02-22-2012, 11:45 AM
This is the reason V Ray render is necessary:
http://youtu.be/PSGx4bBU9Qc <-- Amazing!
Lightwave native rendering don't do this.


Incorrect.

http://iainc.carbonmade.com/
http://www.except.nl/design/design.html
http://http://www.engram.it/ (http://www.engram.it/)
http://www.jasonallenlee.com/
http://www.bearfootfilms.com/
http://mono-motion.com/
http://www.ten24.info/
http://www.clockworkvfx.com/live/
... etc.


actually, that's not just Vray, the guy is doing tons of work in post.


Correct.



but again, Vray for Lightwave is welcome.


I agree. It's better to have more alternative then one or two.
Who needs it it will buy it and use it.

Andy Meyer
02-22-2012, 05:15 PM
I think maybe more of the forum needs to participate in the poll and the results sent to Chaosgroup with a happy note.

you would need thousands of users willing to buy or pre-buy a renderer that cost as much as LW. maybe LW market share is just too small and the native renderer is too good...

jasonwestmas
02-22-2012, 05:35 PM
you would need thousands of users willing to buy or pre-buy a renderer that cost as much as LW. maybe LW market share is just too small and the native renderer is too good...

I tend to agree with that but there is another side to that coin. The respect of the fact that if someone wanted to use Vray with a cheaper budget they can do so with Lightwave and have more FX and animation tools than Sketchup.

BERSEKAEL
02-22-2012, 06:11 PM
I am not a LW user cuz the price, but cuz its tools (and hope not the only one here)

If was a budged issue, there are some other FREE options like blender or sketchup, which have already Vray ... So if free apps already have Vray, why not LW?

Maybe some ppl in this pole is just afraid to learn new tools, Vray is not so friendly. Took me a while to get in, but after couple weeks training the results are far better than LW in render time, AA, realistic shadows/reflections/refractions/displacements etc.

realgray
02-22-2012, 07:18 PM
micro poly displacement is something I hope LW will have someday :(

jasonwestmas
02-22-2012, 08:37 PM
micro poly displacement is something I hope LW will have someday :(

Yeah, but in my case it's more the memory hogging factor of the mesh freezing and the slowness therein. If that got up to speed with the rest of the rendering, it would be far more competitive in this area when using pixels per poly. That said we do need a modern form of bucket rendering for displacements in lightwave.

Netvudu
02-23-2012, 06:33 AM
ok, this is hillarious.
So, I just comment on the option I chose at the poll. An option that was given by another user, and I get attacked for it? what gives?

I have the rights to think that Vray for Lightwave will give very little in the way of added functionality, and will damage other options (such as Kray) which in my personal opinion are as valid if not more (by the way, I donīt own Kray). I also think Vray is one of the reasons MAX users donīt care for their native renderer being a shame, and I donīt want LW to follow that route. I want a strong native renderer which "sees" anything that comes from my software. Also, I donīt want to have to pay another grand for something my software should have, which might happen if my native render engine gets less development because many users are so used to premade Vray materials with instant gratification that they donīt complain anymore about it.

Moreover,working in a CG school, I can tell the user support from Chaos Group and the licensing workflow is nothing short of embarrasing. Itīs the only company that does it almost as bad as Autodesk, and that is REALLY bad.

SO, no I have nothing personal against VRay. Professionaly? Well, let me see...I donīt like where it might lead Lightwave AND they work terribly as a company. So yes, professionaly I have many things against Vray.

Now, who was being agressive against who? It seems to me some people have such a mindless desire for Vray that they bark at anyone not wanting it.

Iīm eager to use the new flocking tools to simulate a horde of Vray fanatics.

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 07:27 AM
ok, this is hillarious.
So, I just comment on the option I chose at the poll. An option that was given by another user, and I get attacked for it? what gives?

I have the rights to think that Vray for Lightwave will give very little in the way of added functionality, and will damage other options (such as Kray) which in my personal opinion are as valid if not more (by the way, I donīt own Kray). I also think Vray is one of the reasons MAX users donīt care for their native renderer being a shame, and I donīt want LW to follow that route. I want a strong native renderer which "sees" anything that comes from my software. Also, I donīt want to have to pay another grand for something my software should have, which might happen if my native render engine gets less development because many users are so used to premade Vray materials with instant gratification that they donīt complain anymore about it.

Moreover,working in a CG school, I can tell the user support from Chaos Group and the licensing workflow is nothing short of embarrasing. Itīs the only company that does it almost as bad as Autodesk, and that is REALLY bad.

SO, no I have nothing personal against VRay. Professionaly? Well, let me see...I donīt like where it might lead Lightwave AND they work terribly as a company. So yes, professionaly I have many things against Vray.

Now, who was being agressive against who? It seems to me some people have such a mindless desire for Vray that they bark at anyone not wanting it.

Iīm eager to use the new flocking tools to simulate a horde of Vray fanatics.

It's nice to get a descriptive perspective that is different. I had many of these same thoughts when I first thought about Vray inside of Lightwave.

BERSEKAEL
02-23-2012, 10:40 AM
Interesting, feels like panic attack against some advance tools.

I believe having more options give a user freedom to choose, but closing options just close doors. hmm?

erikals
02-23-2012, 11:00 AM
 
sort of,
but a big problem is that too many of us just don't know how to use Lightwave's render engine properly. (including me)

and when thousands of people use Vray, it gives that people also learn faster.
how many Pro lighting /rendering tutorials are there for Lightwave ? > almost none.
Pro Lightwave tutorials for interior renders ? > none. (AFAIK)

 

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 11:07 AM

sort of,
but a big problem is that too many of us just don't know how to use Lightwave's render engine properly. (including me)

and when thousands of people use Vray, it gives that people also learn faster.
how many Pro lighting /rendering tutorials are there for Lightwave ? > almost none.



There are quite a few on CGMasters.

http://online.cg-masters.com/videos/software/12

erikals
02-23-2012, 11:15 AM
 
yes, but those are not the droids, uhm, tutorials i'm looking for.
while they might be alright as far as lighting / surfacing goes, they seem to lack in other areas.

they look good for a 101, 102 tutorial, but we need 103.
it also doesn't cover interior renders, unfortunately.
a good effort, but it doesn't reach the top.

 

Ryste3d
02-23-2012, 11:25 AM
http://www.evermotion.org/modelshop/show_product/the-archviz-training-dvd/6475/0/0/

http://www.evermotion.org/tutorials

http://vimeo.com/22280494/

http://www.evermotion.org/modelshop/show_product/the-secret-training-book/3649/0/0/

erikals
02-23-2012, 11:32 AM
http://www.wrestling-united.com/images/smilies/emoticon_cry.gif

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 11:43 AM
http://www.wrestling-united.com/images/smilies/emoticon_cry.gif

haha, is that a good sign?

Ryste3d
02-23-2012, 11:45 AM
When CG-Masters looks like this I will be happy :)

http://www.thegnomonworkshop.com/store/category.php?page=1

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 11:53 AM
oooo subscriptions are always good. You can go to school without talking to anyone ^.^.

erikals
02-23-2012, 11:55 AM
haha, is that a good sign?

no, i'm crying... :]

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 12:19 PM
no, i'm crying... :]

because you're happy?

BERSEKAEL
02-23-2012, 12:22 PM
those tutorials for light and materials in LW are nice, but it pops up the next:

-LW needs to improve its light calc (radiosity) to look less like rendered work and more like real.
-better transp, reflec and refrac in general... feels like getting accurate glass or realistic glossy surfaces (wood, ceramic, etc) is a challenge in LW.

Netvudu
02-23-2012, 12:41 PM
Interesting, feels like panic attack against some advance tools.

I believe having more options give a user freedom to choose, but closing options just close doors. hmm?

Youīre clearly not reading what I stated above about the inherent problems of "more options" as you call it, at least from my point of view. Sometimes "more options" close other doors.
I donīt know how long you have been into the LW community, or the CG community for that matter, but I canīt simply count the number of half-assed tools that have stopped the development of promising tools because of a number or marketing-related reasons that has nothing to do with quality of the product.

Do you know Lightwave HAD animation layers? It was a super smart implementation that didnīt clobber screen space at all, and it was childish-simple while retaining all useability. Our new dopetrack half-copied that tool, and in the process we lost a lot of functionality, such as...animation layers.

Do you know Shave&Haircut was a Lightwave exclusive plugin for hair? Yes, Softimageīs native hair tool and Mayaīs most popular hair solution was a Lightwave product. Which for purely marketing reasons was moved to other packages when Sas-lite was added to Lightwave.

All those situations and countless more came from marketing decisions that involved "giving us more tools"
So, as you see more sometimes means less.

And regarding the panic attack...mmm..ok, you got me there. Iīve been using Houdini on a daily basis for the last 6 years because of my multiple phobias from advanced tools :D

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 12:55 PM
Yeah I was wondering a lot about why Joe Alter stopped helping out Lightwave. Sad.

erikals
02-23-2012, 01:26 PM
Then again,
read some of the C4D users weren't too happy about the support from J.A haircut.
(can be found on google) there's always something... :/ :]

BERSEKAEL
02-23-2012, 01:40 PM
Lets say, I was one of the most excited ones when Lightwave was able to import Lightscape solutions as a new feature, and one of the most depressed once Discreet bought and disappear the tool... hard to count how long I've been around (just different nickname)... However before that I remember LW for Amiga and the fact animation was full morphs, before bones technology. But you right Netvudu I am not an animator, I am architect, so me point of view and tool needs are sighly diferent.

Guys here the reel of Vray for archiviz 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8-RreKDGMs

I am a LW lover and wish an upgrade in my renders (Vray sounds good)

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 01:51 PM
That's an excellent use of animation/rendering for all those who might not think animation tools are important for arch viz.

BERSEKAEL
02-23-2012, 02:08 PM
thats my point jasonwestmas, and thats why I am seeking for something else than sketchup+vray to render my LW projects... We might finish into SI at office, we will see.

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 02:09 PM
thats my point jasonwestmas, and thats why I am seeking for something else than sketchup+vray to render my LW projects... We might finish into SI at office, we will see.

sure why not give it a shot.

medzo
02-23-2012, 02:20 PM
the main problem i see with lw renderer is that it is slowww. compared to kray its super slow :). maybe i dont know how to set it up properly, but there no tutorials that would teach me how to render fast with lw renderer

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 02:20 PM
but there no tutorials that would teach me how to render fast with lw renderer

what!?:D Such extreme statements being made from all ovah.

Anywho, I doubt you'd say the same about LW11.

erikals
02-23-2012, 03:05 PM
so, in Lightwave 11,
samples settings, AA, and blurred reflections have been improved?

or are there changes to the GI as well...?

jasonwestmas
02-23-2012, 03:20 PM
so, in Lightwave 11,
samples settings, AA, and blurred reflections have been improved?

or are there changes to the GI as well...?

I'm not big on GI but the AA is at least twice as fast for the quality I get in my tests. But that was some heads I had. And the comments I made earlier about the sub-D freezing being slow turned out to be not a big deal in other scenes with more polygons. It's just the RAM usage I'm concerned with now.

erikals
02-23-2012, 03:22 PM
Exellente! :]

Netvudu
02-23-2012, 06:45 PM
Quoting his highness Matt Gorner "Unified Sampling in LW11 has make GI flickering much less apparent, it also now uses a fixed GI pattern between frames, which also helps."

BERSEKAEL
02-24-2012, 05:51 PM
Guys whats the deal with Vray? why people is afraid or negative to that option?

We have Maxwell already (more expensive, a little less quality/speed) why we can't have Vray?

jasonwestmas
02-24-2012, 07:23 PM
I think the deal is that when Vray is integrated into other apps it is done so in a much more complete way than Kray and other renderers are. So Vray is far more competative in that context. I don't think Kray is as popular as it could be if there was a way to integrate it better as an all around render engine for any kind of animation. I dunno for sure but most people don't seem to get too excited about learning Kray for anything other than interriors for arch viz.

I guess I should pick up Kray and find out if I can do anything unique with it other than nice GI lighting and tone mapping. I'm probably oversimplifying Kray but that seems to be the only reason to use it. Whereas Vray's charm is much more focused on all around effects and animation in general.

BERSEKAEL
02-24-2012, 08:26 PM
Well I try Kray demo in a project before, in general it had some issues like:
-Linear lights and IES broken
-slow render proces
And some more at the time I was rendering the same scene in Vray demo(into free sketcup up) to test them as a neutral point of view of a LW lover, and I found in Vray:

-color mapping and tone mapping as a nice improvement
-caustics, displacements and microdisplacements really easy to render (in LW/maxwell/kray makes an eternal render time)
-fresnel (physical) for ref and transp
-blury ref, instead of gloss
-fast sss/nice aa/great light calc.

So I start thinking about, why not Vray for Lw? maybe the answer is: a rejecting community... pointless... like pushing for a planet cubic/plane shape, center of universe generations ago

jasonwestmas
02-24-2012, 08:36 PM
Because as pointed out earlier, some people around here don't want the native render engine to get neglected because everyone is using Vray. Vray, if it's anything like the Vray in other animation packages would be able to bring Hair, Volumetrics, Bucket rendering with displacements, and has all around faster GI for animation etc. The fear is that all of a sudden Vray disappears or development goes to crap for whatever reason. Not that Chaos Group is that flaky as some developers have been about LW but I guess it's possible.

BERSEKAEL
02-24-2012, 08:55 PM
well, no1 said neglected, LW users can use the native render and dont get involve in Vray, however Vray should be an option for the other half of LW users, however could be a different reason, like "half voters are afraid Vray is better and reject to learn new tools"

In architecture when we build/improve a new area, all the time about a 40% will be against updates in urban areas due to collective memory or afraid of changes on life style due to new areas around... is a human reaction to say NO to innovations, and then is another human reaction to say "I didn't say I wont like it" when they already love it after facing that fear and trying those upgrades around.

In this particular case I wish I could have Vray as an option in LW... Who knows maybe some particular group dreams in Octane (which feels like the not so new Arion/Fry render system) and relies on hopes of future versions and upgrades... but as a real fact, Vray is there and its been there for some years, puting LW common renders in shame.

Paul_Boland
02-24-2012, 09:04 PM
Has anyone actually written to the developers of Vray and got their input on this matter? I would love to know if they are even considering this or is it just a dream with no drive behind it...?

jasonwestmas
02-24-2012, 09:10 PM
Has anyone actually written to the developers of Vray and got their input on this matter? I would love to know if they are even considering this or is it just a dream with no drive behind it...?

Yeah they told me they won't tell me squat. But they didn't say no we won! :D Of course I'm not Jim, or Rob or Chuck or Matt, Or Lino or Antti etc.

jasonwestmas
02-24-2012, 09:16 PM
well, no1 said neglected,
Then you missed what Netvudu said:

". . .problems of "more options" as you call it, at least from my point of view. Sometimes "more options" close other doors.
I donīt know how long you have been into the LW community, or the CG community for that matter, but I canīt simply count the number of half-assed tools that have stopped the development of promising tools because of a number or marketing-related reasons that has nothing to do with quality of the product."

He's saying just that, that when something opens up to people as big as Vray then other doors get closed. I said later that those thoughts have crossed my mind for Lightwave Render verses Vray. Not that we can prove any of this. Never the less the fear of that is in the minds of some.

BERSEKAEL
02-24-2012, 09:19 PM
From Chaos group:

Fri, Jan 13, 2012

Dear Sir or Madam,

Our customer support team personnel has replied to your support request #331042

There is no V-Ray version for LW currently available.Unfortunately we can not provide any further information at this point.
Please check our website regularly for any updates on the subject.In case V-Ray for LW is being developed it will be officially announced.

Thank you .

Paul_Boland
02-24-2012, 09:23 PM
It's funny that they didn't say, "No, there are currently no plans to bring Vray to Lightwave." It's funny that they said to keep watching the website incase there is an official announcement... Although I could be just grasping at straws there.

jasonwestmas
02-24-2012, 09:27 PM
It's funny that they didn't say, "No, there are currently no plans to bring Vray to Lightwave." It's funny that they said to keep watching the website incase there is an official announcement... Although I could be just grasping at straws there.

It's just a Generic Email. I got the same one. No one in the right mind would say no to an innocent question about opening up the gates to another customer. =)

BERSEKAEL
02-24-2012, 09:37 PM
well I ask at the same time to newtek, the generic email I got was :

Thank you for contacting NewTek Customer Support. This is only a confirmation that your inquiry has been recieved. An analyst will be providing a response to your message. Should you wish to provide additonal information please include your case number in the subject line of your email.

conclusion:
Chaos group:at least they cataloged my email and gave me an answer right the way.
Newtek: I am still waiting for an " analyst to provid a response" 2 weeks later...

djwaterman
02-24-2012, 09:52 PM
Vray is very expensive, so just the cost alone will keep many LW people using the native render engine, Newtek would be unlikely to stop trying to improve it.
For those willing to pay for Vray, even at the cost it would be worth the price for production use. Small companies and single operators would appreciate having that option.

I bought Kray and don't use it much, but I like having it there. I also hope that LW native gets faster and better and even rival Vray, but if I have to wait for that I'll buy Vray first, if it ever becomes available (my gut feeling is it won't but I have no inside information to base that on).

We can't assume anything, Autodesk could fold, Vray may be superseded, Lightwave may gain new users, Blender could eclipse everything, things change. Who knew that China would own the world and Europe and America would go broke? But for right here and now I really hate that there is no Vray for LW.

BERSEKAEL
02-24-2012, 10:29 PM
you really think so djwaterman? check at this site:

http://vray.us/vray_for_Standalone.shtml

Price:
1 V-Ray Standalone 2.0 License $490.00

10 V-Ray Standalone 2.0 Pack $1230.00
20 V-Ray Standalone 2.0 Pack $2340.00
30 V-Ray Standalone 2.0 Pack $3320.00
40 V-Ray Standalone 2.0 Pack $4150.00
50 V-Ray Standalone 2.0 Pack $4980.00


and Maxwell (wich is already for LW) $995

Really you think is a price issue?

jasonwestmas
02-24-2012, 10:35 PM
Plus the license is per Computer, not per CPU or Per Core like 3Delight is.

Dexter2999
02-24-2012, 11:55 PM
SO.... the standalone processes fbx scenes? Or somesuch independent of the application? Meaning if they don't make a version that supports LWS it falls to Newtek to make an export version that works with the Standalone?...If they haven't already?

What is the scene format required by Vray? Anyone?

Aside from that $500 per computer adds up especially when compared to the 999 nodes you get with LW, no?

djwaterman
02-25-2012, 12:03 AM
I didn't see the single license price, so it's pretty well affordable for any who want it, my mistake.

geo_n
02-25-2012, 12:24 AM
Because as pointed out earlier, some people around here don't want the native render engine to get neglected because everyone is using Vray.

There's no reason for the native lw renderer to be neglected just because vray is integrated into lw. Newtek can do the neglecting pretty well on their own. Can you count the number of posts for better modelling tools and environment? UV mapping tools has been neglected for years.
Its a flawed logic to blame third party.

BERSEKAEL
02-25-2012, 03:18 AM
well Dexter2999, Blender (which is free) has really well integrated Vray, and you just need standalone Vray to unlock the demo.

here you can download Blender for free + Vray already in as demo, after you get the single standalone you can get it full working:
https://github.com/bdancer/vb25/downloads

so once again, Why not Vray for LW?

jasonwestmas
02-25-2012, 08:13 AM
There's no reason for the native lw renderer to be neglected just because vray is integrated into lw. Newtek can do the neglecting pretty well on their own. Can you count the number of posts for better modelling tools and environment? UV mapping tools has been neglected for years.
Its a flawed logic to blame third party.

I tend to agree with you but you can't blame people for wondering based on what has happened with other 3rd party developers in the past either. I know what you're thinking, that no two situations are the same and you'd be right. =)

Andy Meyer
02-25-2012, 08:36 AM
SO.... the standalone processes fbx scenes? Or somesuch independent of the application? Meaning if they don't make a version that supports LWS it falls to Newtek to make an export version that works with the Standalone?...If they haven't already?

What is the scene format required by Vray? Anyone?

Aside from that $500 per computer adds up especially when compared to the 999 nodes you get with LW, no?

Dexter, have you ever looked at the V-Ray implementation of max or c4d? it is smoothly implemented into the app, like shader nodes in LW. just make vray surfaces and vray lights and use vray camera in max or c4d and select vray renderer.
standalone is no choice for me, makes workflow very unactractive for me.

by the way, vray comes with unlimited render nodes too. at least the max und c4d version of vray.

Pavlov
02-26-2012, 03:48 PM
Honestly, guys, i think someone is missing something.
I own a firm where we have pratically every engine Lw can hook to: Fprime, Kray, Maxwell, Fry, Octane - and others i cant even mention here. So, in theory i dont need Vray.
I voted for "We need it", because one thing which must be clear is that Industry Standards like Vray can really help LW grow much larger. Lw is cheap and if it become a Vray platform, it will sell quite a lot, which means more money for NT, and finally a better Lw for everyone.
So you *need* Vray just for the fact you are a LW user. You need it even if you wouldnt use it, even if you just model. Same applies for any other industry standard tool. I feel it's important to say this in case someone missed the concept. "Island mentality" is what brought LW down into the pit in past years.

Paolo

Ryste3d
02-27-2012, 02:33 PM
honestly, guys, i think someone is missing something.
I own a firm where we have pratically every engine lw can hook to: Fprime, kray, maxwell, fry, octane - and others i cant even mention here. So, in theory i dont need vray.
I voted for "we need it", because one thing which must be clear is that industry standards like vray can really help lw grow much larger. Lw is cheap and if it become a vray platform, it will sell quite a lot, which means more money for nt, and finally a better lw for everyone.
So you *need* vray just for the fact you are a lw user. You need it even if you wouldnt use it, even if you just model. Same applies for any other industry standard tool. I feel it's important to say this in case someone missed the concept. "island mentality" is what brought lw down into the pit in past years.

Paolo

+2

Philbert
02-27-2012, 03:39 PM
The question was who would buy it. Yes better connections to other popular softwares is very beneficial, but personally I have no need to buy it.

jasonwestmas
02-27-2012, 04:25 PM
The question was who would buy it. Yes better connections to other popular softwares is very beneficial, but personally I have no need to buy it.

The way I see it, who would use a Lightwave Vray package just to save a grand or 2. . . or because they absolutely love the other features of lightwave other than just the renderer. I think some would, not sure how many, it's all up in the air.

I think I can look beyond my own needs and give it the benefit of the doubt. . . I mean I use multiple applications anyway just to find work. And Vray in LW could mean more lightwave jobs would pop up. I don't think I ever got a LW exclusive job ever so just to build popularity of LW and keep competition up.

Andy Meyer
02-28-2012, 10:17 AM
not having V-Ray support makes LW look poor and outdated.
in the last 1 or 2 year i see a move from max to c4d for arch viz. at least in europe. why? V-Ray for c4d.

geo_n
03-02-2012, 07:31 PM
So i'm guessing there are more modo users to get a real feedback from Vlado. NT should beg chaos to look at lw 11 sdk.



Following user requests we spent several months experimenting with the Modo SDK; we made some progress, but unfortunately at this time the SDK does not allow us to integrate V-Ray to the extent that we would like for a fluid user experience. Hopefully things will improve in the future.

Best regards,
Vlado

jasonwestmas
03-03-2012, 07:34 AM
So i'm guessing there are more modo users to get a real feedback from Vlado. NT should beg chaos to look at lw 11 sdk.



Following user requests we spent several months experimenting with the Modo SDK; we made some progress, but unfortunately at this time the SDK does not allow us to integrate V-Ray to the extent that we would like for a fluid user experience. Hopefully things will improve in the future.

Best regards,
Vlado

mmhmm, that'd be a pretty good test for the LW SDK and advantage for NT in many ways, not just in a Vray context.

juanjgon
03-03-2012, 07:52 AM
I also think that Modo SDK is very limited at the moment to integrate external render engines. It is easy make a scene exporter, but full integration of a modern render engine (node support, real time interactive rendering, etc.) could be really hard inside Modo. LW SDK is a lot more advanced for this task.

-Juanjo

misko
03-13-2012, 03:46 PM
Hi guys I am new here. I was looking at Vray site and they are celebrating 10 years already, I didn't know that render tool was that old

http://www.chaosgroup.com/en/2/news.html

misko
03-22-2012, 08:12 PM
+2

1+

misko
03-22-2012, 08:13 PM
honestly, guys, i think someone is missing something.
I own a firm where we have pratically every engine lw can hook to: Fprime, kray, maxwell, fry, octane - and others i cant even mention here. So, in theory i dont need vray.
I voted for "we need it", because one thing which must be clear is that industry standards like vray can really help lw grow much larger. Lw is cheap and if it become a vray platform, it will sell quite a lot, which means more money for nt, and finally a better lw for everyone.
So you *need* vray just for the fact you are a lw user. You need it even if you wouldnt use it, even if you just model. Same applies for any other industry standard tool. I feel it's important to say this in case someone missed the concept. "island mentality" is what brought lw down into the pit in past years.

Paolo


1+

DigitalSorcery8
03-22-2012, 08:17 PM
Considering what Vray can do easily, having it available for LW would be a VERY good step forward. I have to admit, at first I was ambivalent about it, but after viewing how easily Vray can split lights into separate passes... I'm sold. I'd love to see this in LW!

Additionally, I would say that anyone who voted NOT to have Vray in LW - doesn't really know or understand what Vray can do. Check out Youtube videos. Incredible!

battery555
03-22-2012, 08:28 PM
What's the purpose of this poll? I'm for LW vray but will it make any difference?

jasonwestmas
03-22-2012, 08:40 PM
Well, I've learned some things about Vray. The more people are aware of what this render engine does, the more support this idea will have. Therefore spreads like wildfire. . .hopefully.

Netvudu
03-22-2012, 09:31 PM
Additionally, I would say that anyone who voted NOT to have Vray in LW - doesn't really know or understand what Vray can do.

Well, you would be wrong.
By the way, Houdiniīs Mantra can split passes for lights (called light exports) with one mouse click, yet I donīt need Mantra in Lightwave.
I do want Lightwaveīs native renderer to offer light pases.

battery555
03-22-2012, 09:45 PM
Well, I've learned some things about Vray. The more people are aware of what this render engine does, the more support this idea will have. Therefore spreads like wildfire. . .hopefully.
Exactly! I hope LW can broaden the user base with vray. But some felt that there's no need for it or other packages can do this and that which I can't understand??? What's there to loose to have Vray supported? I thing it will do NT more good than harm.

DigitalSorcery8
03-22-2012, 10:03 PM
Well, you would be wrong.
By the way, Houdiniīs Mantra can split passes for lights (called light exports) with one mouse click, yet I donīt need Mantra in Lightwave.
I do want Lightwaveīs native renderer to offer light pases.

Yeah... good reason NOT to have Vray in LW. :(

There are MANY things that you don't NEED in LW, that doesn't mean it wouldn't make things easier? Why would you NOT want things easier in LW... if Vray could do it easier for you? This is illogical thinking.

And you can wait for YEARS before the LW renderer can do what Vray already does - and does well - and all the while be wasting LOTS of time trying to get the same elements out of LW that Vray outputs simply.

WHY... would anyone NOT want Vray in LW? :bangwall:

DigitalSorcery8
03-22-2012, 10:05 PM
Exactly! I hope LW can broaden the user base with vray. But some felt that there's no need for it or other packages can do this and that which I can't understand??? What's there to loose to have Vray supported? I thing it will do NT more good than harm.

Nothing to lose at all - FAR more to gain with Vray support in LW! :thumbsup:

geo_n
03-22-2012, 10:23 PM
NT should stop working on the renderer for a few releases and put all efforts into the core system of layout and modeller to be unified. If majority thinks lw renderer is good enough then its time to update some of its other features that are way way behind.
Lw renderer isn't really winning the renderer pipeline battle anyway.

Pavlov
03-23-2012, 03:02 AM
(angy mode ON)
it's some time i dont look at this thread: 41 votes for "we dont need Vray".
Guys, let me say this, no offense meant: you, who voded in such a way, are missing something and are contributing to keep LW where it is: the tail of CG industry. Read more, study more, learn more. Please.
(angry mode OFF)

Paolo

Mitja
03-23-2012, 03:17 AM
(angy mode ON)
it's some time i dont look at this thread: 41 votes for "we dont need Vray".
Guys, let me say this, no offense meant: you, who voded in such a way, are missing something and are contributing to keep LW where it is: the tail of CG industry. Read more, study more, learn more. Please.
(angry mode OFF)

Paolo

Probably they are saying they wouldn't buy it, because this thread is more about buying vray than having it available for lw. I find this thread a bit misleading. I would like to see vray for lw, that's for sure, an option more is always welcome. But I'm not sure if I'd buy so soon...

Pavlov
03-23-2012, 04:39 AM
so one more option is needed in the poll:
- LW needs Vray, even if i wouldnt buy it soon.
Last option should be just for those who really think LW doesnt need Vray. At that point, i'd be quite curious to see how mane would vote that way.

Paolo

Hieron
03-23-2012, 05:05 AM
you, who voded in such a way, are missing something and are contributing to keep LW where it is: the tail of CG industry.
Paolo

Yeah right, that's the thing that keeps LW at the tail. Sure.
And no I did not vote that way. As if it would matter.

Pavlov
03-23-2012, 05:13 AM
Hieron, come on ;) I absolutely didnt say this, i hoped i was clearer. I'm just saying users with this kind of mindset tend to influence LW development in the wrong direction.

Paolo

Pavlov
03-23-2012, 08:41 AM
I agree, no crush. Having Vray would simply translate in a better LW for everyone in the mid/long term. Simply as that.

Paolo

jasonwestmas
03-23-2012, 09:03 AM
I think Lightwave is turning into a HUB for 3rd party-ware. I suppose it's always been that way though. I think that can be good and bad, but a least it's more affordable than Max plugins.

DigitalSorcery8
03-23-2012, 12:54 PM
so one more option is needed in the poll:
- LW needs Vray, even if i wouldnt buy it soon.
Last option should be just for those who really think LW doesnt need Vray. At that point, i'd be quite curious to see how mane would vote that way.

Paolo

My contention exactly! :thumbsup:

CruiserMori
03-23-2012, 02:54 PM
I voted for to have VRay in LW. We do mostly ArchViz and it would be nice to have VRay options, but event if this happen we need also models with materials like Evermotion team create for MAX and C4D users. Without this It wouldnīt be any win for us. Just imagine to modify all these models materials UV maps etc. :(

jasonwestmas
03-23-2012, 02:59 PM
I voted for to have VRay in LW. We do mostly ArchViz and it would be nice to have VRay options, but event if this happen we need also models with materials like Evermotion team create for MAX and C4D users. Without this It wouldnīt be any win for us. Just imagine to modify all these models materials UV maps etc. :(

Do Vray materials convert between applications, or no? I guess not because each Vray Material Translation/conversion is different.

misko
03-26-2012, 12:43 PM
I think we need Vray, for a single reason: good render plugin as an option (more options, more people).

Have you guys seen this video?
http://www.lumenrt.com/ShowYoutube.php?k=4JiJ44gbS8Q

Looks like in Sketchup is open mind to options

Greenlaw
03-26-2012, 01:35 PM
I think Lightwave is turning into a HUB for 3rd party-ware. I suppose it's always been that way though. I think that can be good and bad, but a least it's more affordable than Max plugins.
It's certainly been that way for me, especially in the last year with 10.x. I think all my 3D stuff, LW animated or otherwise, passes through Layout and Modeler for final rendering, the one possible exception being Vue renders. But at work, even our Vue scenes typically get run through Lightwave via xStream.

Short version: I think this is a good thing. :)

G.

jasonwestmas
03-26-2012, 01:45 PM
It's certainly been that way for me, especially in the last year with 10.x. I think all my 3D stuff, LW animated or otherwise, passes through Layout and Modeler for final rendering, the one possible exception being Vue renders. But at work, even our Vue scenes typically get run through Lightwave via xStream.

Short version: I think this is a good thing. :)

G.

Yeah, for me too. I try to get people onboard using point cache. I mean if you can get particles, object sequences and mesh deformations into lightwave and render it, why not try it at least. I think it's remarkably simple, if not a little time consuming to wire it up. I think I just need to learn some scripting to really speed up the point cache workflow.

abdelkarim
04-22-2012, 06:51 AM
haahhahah why u tolk about Vray we have Kray best and fast . and now we wait for Kray v3 awesome news feautures on it . Thnx To G . and Jure By the way ;P
and big thnx to big artiste use KRay its Janus B. awesome and incredible skilled this man :D

erikals
04-22-2012, 07:01 AM
ey, what's the v3 features?

archijam
04-23-2012, 06:52 AM
Just to add a ray of light on the horizon ..

I was just updating my details to download VRay from Rhino, and this is what I saw ... always nice to see the word Lightwave written on the Chaosgroup site, regardless of the context ...

"She knows my name!" :D

Bliz
04-23-2012, 04:46 PM
I was looking at the Blender -> VRay standalone pipeline a few weeks ago [but can't afford vray right now so settled back into LW9.6] and it seems that the vray exporter plugin for Blender is written and supported by an individual who isn't directly connected to Chaosgroup.

http://vray.cgdo.ru/

It seems to me that the LW market is ripe for a plugin developer to write a LW to vray exporter and charge a fair price for it.

The Blender exporter seems to consist mostly of python scripts so maybe a proficient plugin coder could follow what is going on in there and get some hints?

fatoldandbitter
04-23-2012, 10:10 PM
i would go for the ability to choose to render in vray, if i have the choice.

as in, its nice to have it in there. i think its a bit sad that it isnt. but then i also say the same for mental ray. and having worked a teeny bit in iray, i'll mention that too.

to say no, completely, to vray, i think would be a mistake.
i actually like most of how lightwave operates, and have done for..er..nearly two decades. my workflows actually combine lightwave, max [shock!], fprime, lw render, vray, mental ray and iray.
- most of the time i may model and texture in lightwave, test render/setup there, and then port it through to max for the -ability- to choose what renderer i want -in addition to- the current renders i have with lightwave.

(i've done a wee bit of testing in modo, lw/kray, maya/mental ray, but not on live projects, so i havent mentioned them)

flexibilty, adaptability, options, choice, etc i think all key to..well..surviving, if not thriving.

Andy Meyer
04-24-2012, 05:21 AM
i really see no advantage in NOT having Vray.
but the question is not do we need Vray? the question is Vray need LW?

maybe the real question is: is the LW SDK ready for a quality Vray integration?
LW SDK is in transition and i dont expect any major plugin before LW stands on a new ground.

btw, i dont want a vray export script. i want vray renderer, camera, lights and materials inside LW. and i want to use existing vray presets and material libraries (from max, c4d...).

juanjgon
04-24-2012, 06:00 AM
maybe the real question is: is the LW SDK ready for a quality Vray integration?



Yes, LW SDK could integrate any render engine with only minor issues, that could be solved by dev. team without problem. Both final render (F9/F10 and network render using Screamert) and interactive render could be integrated using current LW SDK.

Problem is not LW, believe me.

-Juanjo

Pavlov
04-24-2012, 08:24 AM
yes, we discussed this again. I find incredible Chaos *refuses* to give their sdk. Isnt it available somewhere ? Is it just on demand ? Is it formally forbidden to use it ? Couldnt we get SDK from a max license and use it to develop a LW port ? I mean, which are *real* walls to hit ?

Paolo

erikals
04-24-2012, 08:57 AM
well, if someone made a high quality Kray tutorial, it might help too...
right now there are none, which is kind of surprising...

and will many enough wavers cash out for Vray for Chaos to benefit from it,.. ?
probably not... :/

i'm afraid the answer you are seeking is not Vray, but something else...
Kray, Octane, (maybe an upcoming Worley CPU render, if any)

just can't see Vray happening...
this said though overall i've seen better Kray and Octane renders compared to Vray.
 
Kray / Octane for animation is a something else, but Vray animation quality is nothing spectacular i think.
from what i understand though Vray animation has less flicker, but not really all that much better quality.

Andy Meyer
04-24-2012, 09:07 AM
yes, we discussed this again. I find incredible Chaos *refuses* to give their sdk. Isnt it available somewhere ? Is it just on demand ? Is it formally forbidden to use it ? Couldnt we get SDK from a max license and use it to develop a LW port ? I mean, which are *real* walls to hit ?

Paolo

chaos group refuses to give their sdk to NT?
NT should be interested to connect their app to one of the most important industry standard renderer, no?

Pavlov
04-24-2012, 09:57 AM
andy - it really doesnt seem so, from what they say. The only word i read from NT were "it's not up to us" or something similar.
So, it's up to *us*, but afaik Chaos refuses to give SDK even if some coders could do it and would do it (Juanjo as example).
The whole thing is both offensive and grotesque.

Paolo

Andy Meyer
04-24-2012, 03:42 PM
"it's not up to us" is something politicians say instead of "we don't care".

if i would sell a 3d app i would be very interested that 3rd parties release great plugins for my app. i would say "it's up to me to make it happen".
max is number 1 coz of plugins imho.

Cageman
04-24-2012, 07:06 PM
Problem is not LW, believe me.

-Juanjo

Hehe! ;)

And yes... there are allready evidence about this; look at Next Limit and their integration of Maxwell for LW. Pretty solid stuff!

Cageman
04-24-2012, 07:19 PM
"it's not up to us" is something politicians say instead of "we don't care".

if i would sell a 3d app i would be very interested that 3rd parties release great plugins for my app. i would say "it's up to me to make it happen".
max is number 1 coz of plugins imho.

NewTek 3D-devteam has a shitload to do allready, and they can't be bothered with porting a f*cking engine over to LW when there are so much else to do in LW in order to move it forward as a platform. What they can do, and have done, is to make sure that LW is as robust as possible in order to make it possible for someone else to make their engine work in LightWave 3D, through the SDK.

They also have one of the best integrated renderengines in the business, and they sure should work on that one to make it even better (and I know they are).

So... ChaosGroup are the ones to poke, again and again, and again... If Next Limit can do it, so can they. But, I guess they aren't that interrested in LW as a platform?

jasonwestmas
04-24-2012, 07:31 PM
Next Limit is pretty cool in the way that they keep their stuff up to date and working with Lightwave.

geo_n
04-25-2012, 12:22 AM
But, I guess they aren't that interrested in LW as a platform?

No Chaos is probably not. Too few lw users. Mike Wolf did some math a while back(probably based on dbw sales) if ever chaos put the effort to port vray, they would need to sell a lot of license to recoup which in lw world is a lot lot. Many lw users can't afford vray license.
Lw has a good renderer, but even c4d, 3dmax have good default renderers but they still have vray. Ofcourse their userbase is huge and its worth it to port vray for chaos. Its big money.
And also any third party(like Chaos) not invested in lw at all will see posts from some lw users and think these people don't want xyz application for lw so lets not bother with lw. Pictrix couldn't be bothered to maintain status. Maybe poor lw plugin sales.
So yes lets keep developing the lw renderer further and further while modeller gets nothing.

DigitalSorcery8
04-25-2012, 12:33 AM
And also any third party(like Chaos) not invested in lw at all will see posts from some lw users and think these people don't want xyz application for lw so lets not bother with lw.
Which is REALLY too bad. Having seen more videos about Vray (thanks geo!) it would make compositing life SO MUCH easier. And setting up renderpasses is FAR easier than anything available for LW. If Vray were available right now, I'd have to circumvent the wife and use the credit card. :thumbsup:

Pavlov
04-25-2012, 05:01 AM
Geo-n, i think that math was too prudent (with all due respect to Mike ;)).
I think Vray for LW would sell many more licenses than said.


Paolo

archijam
04-25-2012, 05:39 AM
Pavlov .. agreed. Perhaps not so many hobbyists would jump on early, but anyone who earns a dollar rendering with LW (or already uses VRay to render on another package, and LW for other tasks) would be a real target.

erikals
04-25-2012, 06:55 AM
sorry to spill the coffee, but i think many of those people might go for Kray instead...

geo_n
04-25-2012, 06:57 AM
Well if you were chaos and you read very negative and very unwelcoming posts from lw users and seeing the vote on the poll plus the fact of the shrinking userbase of lw and people who opted to buy modo 601 instead(familiar faces at lux), would you think of porting to lw? If I was Vlad I wouldn't port vray to unwelcoming app, I'm already rich just with AD, c4d, sketchup, etc.

erikals
04-25-2012, 07:07 AM
hm, so i should stop writing my opinion on Vray?

jasonwestmas
04-25-2012, 09:24 AM
Just say yes and be positive. :D It's too easy to say no it won't happen.

erikals
04-25-2012, 09:26 AM
Yes http://erikalstad.com/backup/anims.php_files/icon_biggrin.gif Vray for Christmas...! :]

Netvudu
04-25-2012, 11:18 AM
Citizen, from now on, any Vray-related polls can only be voted positively. Either you vote "yes" or you donīt vote. Truth doesnīt really matter here.

Aaah, I love democracy.
Paraphrasing Terry Pratchett, One man, one vote...the question being..."whoīs gonna be the man?" :D

Andy Meyer
04-25-2012, 11:50 AM
every one should have the choice of LW+vray or vray+LW. it's their free will :-)

DigitalSorcery8
04-25-2012, 12:39 PM
Okay...

So to all of the anti/negative Vray posters and those for Kray... can you point me to the videos where Kray breaks out each item in the scene in a separate render pass without having to create a new scene? Is this possible in Kray? And can all of these passes be rendered at the same time? And can all of these passes have separate spec, reflectivity, diffuse, etc? If Kray can do that, then maybe you're right - we don't need Vray. I already have Kray but never saw this capability.

I'd like to see the vids. Please point me to them.

erikals
04-25-2012, 01:38 PM
good point, i have no idea,
i think i'd solve it by render 1 Kray render, and 1 LW render with passes...
(though personally i try to skip passes)

that might not optimal though...

DigitalSorcery8
04-25-2012, 01:50 PM
good point, i have no idea,
i think i'd solve it by render 1 Kray render, and 1 LW render with passes...
(though personally i try to skip passes)

that might not optimal though...

I guess that's the point then.

There are people here who have no need of the power of Vray - but to say we don't NEED Vray for LW is shortsighted. Perhaps one day you WILL need that kind of compositing power and ease of use. When that day comes, are you willing to bet NT will have the complete solution? I would certainly rather have the OPTION to use it or not.

For those who think that what we have is good enough... well, you're simply wrong. There is ALWAYS room for improvement and Newtek cannot do it ALL. That's why FPrime popped up and Kray as well. Vray for LW is just another tool that many of us would be using if we had it. To argue AGAINST it is totally irrational. To look up at the top of this page and see "We don't need Vray" in such a high number is very sad. To me it shows how shortsighted so many LW users are. There IS a reason why Vray is so popular and probably all major studios are using it. And I would bet that if Vray for LW were available, MANY studios who use LW would be buying it.

Pavlov
04-25-2012, 02:13 PM
Quoted. Exactly my point.



I guess that's the point then.

There are people here who have no need of the power of Vray - but to say we don't NEED Vray for LW is shortsighted. Perhaps one day you WILL need that kind of compositing power and ease of use. When that day comes, are you willing to bet NT will have the complete solution? I would certainly rather have the OPTION to use it or not.

For those who think that what we have is good enough... well, you're simply wrong. There is ALWAYS room for improvement and Newtek cannot do it ALL. That's why FPrime popped up and Kray as well. Vray for LW is just another tool that many of us would be using if we had it. To argue AGAINST it is totally irrational. To look up at the top of this page and see "We don't need Vray" in such a high number is very sad. To me it shows how shortsighted so many LW users are. There IS a reason why Vray is so popular and probably all major studios are using it. And I would bet that if Vray for LW were available, MANY studios who use LW would be buying it.

erikals
04-25-2012, 02:29 PM
what this forum really needs is

Kray vs Vray
Octane vs Vray
Lightwave vs Vray

feature for feature...
for example,

render passes?
O=no
L=yes
K=no
V=yes

tone mapping?
O=yes?
L=sorta
K=no idea
V=yes

etc etc etc...

DigitalSorcery8
04-25-2012, 02:50 PM
what this forum really needs is

Kray vs Vray
Octane vs Vray
Lightwave vs Vray

You really can't have a feature for feature comparison, since LW - while it does have renderpasses - does not implement it in the same way - ie. the ease of use and simplicity - that Vray does. Even when you add Janus into the mix, it does not offer the efficiency that Vray has.

You can't do a head-to-head comparison when these other packages do not have what Vray has. All you can do is list in detail how these packages differ - and even then it's doubtful that many LW users will comprehend the power behind Vray - especially if they currently have no use for it. From what I understand, Arnold has what Vray has in pass management as well. But I don't think Arnold will be ported to LW anytime soon either. :(

Netvudu
04-25-2012, 03:55 PM
Digitalsorcery8, seriously, I donīt care anymore about Vray, but please stop telling the rest of LW users that are "shortsighted" (twice in one reply, by the way) and that they donīt understand stuff. Several of them probably double or triple your experience in CGI, so its doubtful they donīt understand the concept. Still, you insist on it.

The only thing clear to me from this thread is that you canīt read english. All the points you claim have been explained by those of us who donīt need Vray at all (seriously, I donīt), and frankly I canīt be bothered to explain it to you once more. Just, reread my replies several pages above and you should understand my point.

Or in your own words:
"Maybe you are too shortsighted to get the meaning of words in English. I could try to list all the reasons again with simple words, and even then it's doubtful that you will comprehend the power behind english words."

DigitalSorcery8
04-25-2012, 04:37 PM
Netvudu...

You make me laugh. :)

As I just told someone else, it boggles my mind that some here are fighting AGAINST having another renderer in LW. You apparently do not care that others using LW would find it imcredibly useful - so you say NO, we don't want Vray. And guess what? You ARE shortsighted. Did you ever think that having Vray for LW might possibly add more users to the base? Did you ever think that people could use Vray RIGHT NOW and find its usefulness incredible? No, I guess not. You only want to see YOUR little world. Which is fine. Unfortunately people such as yourself don't help LW very much.

Perhaps it is you who should review WHY you don't want Vray for LW and WHY others really do. Limiting your options is not very wise, but then I'm sure you'll tell ME how shortsighted I am or how I am unable to comprehend English. That's okay. :)

And you're right, I would fully agree that there are MANY artists here who would be double or triple or quadruple my skills - or more. I've only been using LW since '96 - but haven't fully utilized all of the tools or workflows. Perhaps one of these days. But even if I were not to use Vray today, I can EASILY see the benefits of the workflow. If YOU really could, you would not be against having Vray in LW.

And since there are many artists here - who do FAR better work than I - understand and are proponents of Vray in LW... I think I'll remain in that camp.

:goodluck:

silviotoledo
04-25-2012, 05:05 PM
V Ray is beauty, powerfull, amazing. But the group that does it is a Chaos! So I don't care anymore.

I want Mental Ray for Lightwave :)

erikals
04-25-2012, 05:18 PM
hm, i thought Mental Ray was the reason Maya people choose to render in Lightwave...

jasonwestmas
04-25-2012, 05:25 PM
mental ray lol. Only if Newtek and Chaos Group exploded. Even then I'd be rendering in max with something other than mental ray. =)

erikals
04-25-2012, 06:03 PM
...maybe it was a joke :],... hehe! http://erikalstad.com/backup/anims.php_files/king.gif

jasonwestmas
04-25-2012, 06:13 PM
ohhh Silvio, you so funnnay! :D

Pavlov
04-26-2012, 01:44 AM
why do you guys have this opinion of MR ? we use it sometimes, latest implementation doesnt seem bad at all - at least for archviz.
This firm: http://www.deltatracing.com/ which is probably italian top-quality firm, uses MR. What do you fint it lacks, exactly ? Just out of curiosity, i dont use it directly so i really dont know.

Paolo

alexos
04-26-2012, 02:43 AM
Digitalsorcery8, seriously, I donīt care anymore about Vray, but please stop telling the rest of LW users that are "shortsighted" (twice in one reply, by the way) and that they donīt understand stuff. Several of them probably double or triple your experience in CGI, so its doubtful they donīt understand the concept. Still, you insist on it.

...But if we look at that poll only, he's not wrong. I mean - "we don't need Vray"? A different pronoun (if that's the word I want) might have been a better choice, but as it is it looks like quite a few users actually believe that Lightwave "does not need" the best rendering engine on the market. Which is... rather strange, to put it mildly. Of course it doesn't need it; but then, Max doesn't need it either. In fact no other software needs Vray, there's an alternative for each and every one of them; and yet...

I don't do CA. I don't sculpt. Far as I'm concerned, I could vote "we don't need better CA tools" or "we don't need better Zbrush integration and/or native sculpting tools" to some random poll, but that would be a rather, well... shortsighted view, don't you think?

ADP.

erikals
04-26-2012, 07:05 AM
i just remember it was a pain to get MR to render the objects correctly, the scene had to be prepared beyond anything i've seen. this was Maya 8 or 9 though... maybe things changed.

erikals
04-26-2012, 07:09 AM
"we don't need Vray"

this might have been read as >

"our company don't need Vray"
"i freelance and i don't need Vray"

this might explain it... cause who are "we" exactly...
----------

in one way i find it a bit ridiculous though, the discussion i mean, there's no real discussion on features, just "we should have it because it's an industry standard" (even though that actually IS a very good argument).

people here (all of us it seems) are not aware of the differences between the render engines.
so how can we possibly vote right?!
and whenever i try to dig up information (in other Vray threads too) about Vray features versus other Octane/LW/Kray features i get the feeling i get told to just drop it and say "Yes, we need Vray"

i think this is a somewhat bad grip on things...
we need to know the differences before we can express our opinions.

 

Lightwolf
04-26-2012, 07:26 AM
i think this is a somewhat bad grip on things...
we need to know the differences before we can express our opinions.

To make it worse... the answers don't even reflect the question and topic of the thread.
To take it further... "Yes, I will buy" is fairly useless given no price point or feature set (i.e. level of integration). And both are crucial.

Heck, I'd get it for US$99 if it was fully integrated... add another digit and that changes ;)

Cheers,
Mike

erikals
04-26-2012, 08:32 AM
exactly, we need to go more in depth...

once again, Kray vs Vray...
http://www.kraytracing.com/joomla/forum/index.php?p=14874&rb_v=viewtopic#p14874

 

Eagle66
04-26-2012, 09:29 AM
exactly, we need to go more in depth...

We need to go more in depth what we will render :hey:

The LW Render is fast, easy to use and brilliant for VFX with dark Textures, Indoor and Space Scenes (see IronSky) or easy CG-Shots but NOT for heavy, huge Daylight 100% realistic CG Shots for composite to Live Action Plate Integration!

Real Steel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XhekckNR9ZI#t=47s

The price: hm, the Blender Exporter for Vray Standalone cost ~$15 :)
Ps: Kray has ugly Renderpasses.....

alexos
04-26-2012, 09:39 AM
in one way i find it a bit ridiculous though, the discussion i mean, there's no real discussion on features, just "we should have it because it's an industry standard" (even though that actually IS a very good argument).


It is, isn't it?


i think this is a somewhat bad grip on things...
we need to know the differences before we can express our opinions.

Well - I think a quick visit to the respective websites could tell you everything you need to know about each engine's features; but that, too, would be still not enough, a simple feature list cannot tell you how and how well those features actually work. An engine could be sold as near-real-time fast, but then you might find that in production it's nearly useleless for a variety of reasons. Another could boast "hair and fur" and you might think aha, exactly what I need, but later discover (much to your horror) that hair and fur will crash the entire bloody thing nine times out of ten... And so on.

So in Vray's case and far as I'm concerned, regardless of the features it boils down to this: it's rock-solid, it can spit out insanely high-res images without breaking a sweat and the final results always look very, very good. Now I've got K-ray and love it, and I do hope the next upgrade will be as fabulous as it's being hinted, but right now it needs huge amounts of RAM to work properly and it still crashes every now and then; so, just on those three very basic points, one out of three. Course it might as well be Lightwave's fault and it could be argued that Vray would have exactly the same problems, but since we don't have it we cannot know, right? :)

ADP.

jasonwestmas
04-26-2012, 10:20 AM
So is $500. It costs $1350 for Maya.

DigitalSorcery8
04-26-2012, 05:46 PM
So is $500. It costs $1350 for Maya.

And only $1170 for SI. :D

jasonwestmas
04-26-2012, 06:09 PM
And only $1170 for SI. :D

No RT =)

erikals
04-26-2012, 06:10 PM
well, -1 for Kray for animation, stability issues, if Kray forum posts are true... :/

geo_n
04-26-2012, 10:44 PM
i think this is a somewhat bad grip on things...
we need to know the differences before we can express our opinions.

 

Problem is people are expressing opinions based on friends experience, featurelists, simple test projects. Doing real projects with xyz renderer is where you'll see the superior renderer. Don't need to say which one it is for now atleast. Until we try Arnold who knows. :D
I wouldn't underestimate mray especially for xsi and 3dmax. We used it before when we were evaluating renderers to move to together with Finalrender, Brazil, Vray. Its been used a lot in different types of renders and not just ships and. Most of the organic and deforming renders I see from lw are done in fprime anyway or with Backdrop radiosity.
Lw has a renderpass system with janus but even then its the old save object, scene variations to disks. Nothing like other renderpass systems but its a lightwave limitation so....won't be fixed with layout and mod separate. And this limitation extends to kray. It has buffers but no renderlayers. Kray is getting pretty good at animation and my constant whining at kray forum is moving it atleast in that direction even though most of the guys there are doing archiviz. But its got a loooong way to go to compete with vray in that area.

erikals
04-26-2012, 10:57 PM
true, sorry, i just had bad experience with Maya Mental Ray,
didn't really think of the XSI / Max part... :] ...my mistake.

yeah, after doing some reading i'm leaning a bit more towards Vray than before,
mainly because of the features missing related to animation-renders in LW / Octane / Kray.

Rock-solid, Great render and Industry standard are 3 very good points indeed.

 

jasonwestmas
04-27-2012, 08:59 AM
Mental Ray in SI is sooo slooww,. . .unless you have a PHD in it. I do not! :D

Plus it doesn't have a cool RT renderer like Vray does, little like VPR and the Modo Previewer.

Netvudu
04-27-2012, 11:02 AM
My co-workers are using Vray-RT on daily basis and it simply cannot compete with the interaction and fluid feeling when shading and lighting with VPR, not to mention specific problems here and there when compared to the final render.
To be fair, itīs not just Vrayīs fault. Iīve tried 3 or 4 different previewers which promised to do the same as VPR (including MR region), and they never reach the amount of interactivity you get in LW.

jasonwestmas
04-27-2012, 11:34 AM
I am impressed with the tumbling speed of VPR in 11.1. It doesn't pause anymore like it used to.

erikals
04-28-2012, 02:54 PM
Rock-solid, Great render and Industry standard are 3 very good points indeed.

well, just saw some threads on Vray render problems, so that will be rock-solid > minus 1.
still, seems pretty stable...

 

jasonwestmas
04-28-2012, 03:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl7B4u_aZPk

Pavlov
05-02-2012, 04:33 AM
..and not to push the thing more, but this maxwell-like quality (in a fraction of the time) makes me wonder, and wonder, and wonder.

http://www.ando-studio.co.il/ando/27/

Paolo

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 12:36 PM
Wonder about what? About how it's unbelievable?

Pavlov
05-02-2012, 04:02 PM
It was more a rethorical post, jason. I just find these pictures of an extreme quality.
About what i "wonder", i rephrase one of the smartest things i've read about the whole Vray - LW issue. Time ago an italian friend (Alexos) wrote here a very significant question: it's not a matter of how many licenses Vray for LW will sell. Real question is: is it safe LW stands as the *only* software with no access to Vray ?
In other words, it could be surprising to know the number of people which abandoned (or not chosen) LW just because the lack of access to Vray. And how many will go from now on.

Paolo

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 04:10 PM
Just call me curious then. ^.^ I guess we're just back to square 1 again with that kind of wonderment though. For me the Lightwave UI and features aren't special enough to really keep me stuck to it, I'd just use another app. if I really wanted to use Vray.

Personally I'd just use Lightwave to use lightwave out the box. Unless of course I needed something extremely high end, then I'm not so sure I'd go out and buy a bunch of lightwave plugins just to keep up with the joneses.

silviotoledo
05-02-2012, 06:38 PM
V Ray is fast and amazing!

Unforgive if Newtek do not work to get a plugin at Chaosgroup.


http://youtu.be/FSzAINbxDCQ
http://youtu.be/0nQM8fIGXaw
http://youtu.be/Hl7B4u_aZPk
http://youtu.be/VpMsw4nNVKI
http://youtu.be/mHWfK9-gwLc

DigitalSorcery8
05-02-2012, 06:48 PM
V Ray is fast and amazing!

Unforgive if Newtek do not work to get a plugin at Chaosgroup.


http://youtu.be/FSzAINbxDCQ
http://youtu.be/0nQM8fIGXaw
http://youtu.be/Hl7B4u_aZPk
http://youtu.be/VpMsw4nNVKI
http://youtu.be/mHWfK9-gwLc

Well, Chaos Group has some say in it too. :)

But then... look at the poll numbers at the top of the page. Unbelievable! :bangwall:

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 07:14 PM
152 votes out of how many lightwave users? Never fear. ;) Plus things and opinions change when things actually become a reality and not usually before they become a reality.

DigitalSorcery8
05-02-2012, 07:26 PM
152 votes out of how many lightwave users? Never fear. ;) Plus things and opinions change when things actually become a reality and not usually before they become a reality.

Of course that's true, but if *I* were from Chaos Group and I saw How "important" this was to LW users, I would not be encouraged.
Especially when you see the oftentimes strong opinions here against it.

Celshader
05-02-2012, 07:27 PM
Personally I'd just use Lightwave to use lightwave out the box. Unless of course I needed something extremely high end, then I'm not so sure I'd go out and buy a bunch of lightwave plugins just to keep up with the joneses.

If you need the "extremely high end," start learning a scripting language like Python. Top studios are not using anything out-of-the-box.

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 07:32 PM
If you need the "extremely high end," start learning a scripting language like Python. Top studios are not using anything out-of-the-box.

I think I would too if someone asked me to use lightwave instead of max and maya for something extremely detailed animation wise.

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 07:38 PM
Of course that's true, but if *I* were from Chaos Group and I saw How "important" this was to LW users, I would not be encouraged.
Especially when you see the oftentimes strong opinions here against it.

52 people against? Common.

DigitalSorcery8
05-02-2012, 08:11 PM
52 people against? Common.

Only 51. Please don't add MORE. :)

You COULD take that as a cross-section of LW users though.

Either way... not GOOD for LW users. :devil:

I just hope that Newtek is SMART and works with Chaos Group to get VRay into LW. THAT would certainly be a nice present from NT.

Celshader
05-02-2012, 08:14 PM
I just hope that Newtek is SMART and works with Chaos Group to get VRay into LW. THAT would certainly be a nice present from NT.

What if Chaos Group refuses to work with NewTek?

100+ LightWavers voting "yes" on an internet poll may not be enough to convince Chaos Group that there's a market for VRay among LightWave users. :devil:

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 08:22 PM
maybe 250 votes against would be enough to kill our vray LW hopes. =) Certainly not 100.

DigitalSorcery8
05-02-2012, 09:13 PM
What if Chaos Group refuses to work with NewTek?
That's always a possibility. And I'm sure it's ALLOT of work. I guess if I were Chaos Group I would wait and see what LW12 brings and how things (hopefully) improve. And a look at the LW sdk to see how accessible it is would probably be in order. Then again, I don't have high hopes for the sdk to be very accessible at all. So THAT would be another reason for CG to sit back and use the "wait and see" approach.


100+ LightWavers voting "yes" on an internet poll may not be enough to convince Chaos Group that there's a market for VRay among LightWave users. :devil:

Very true. And seeing the votes that are actually AGAINST it are certainly not a big help either. The more options that LW has, the better off we are.


maybe 250 votes against would be enough to kill our vray LW hopes. =) Certainly not 100.

From your lips to a black hole.... :D

Perhaps we should delete this thread and start another poll - one where there is a selection that states "We don't need VRay" but every time you vote there it goes to the "We need VRay" column. :thumbsup:

jasonwestmas
05-02-2012, 09:33 PM
Reverse Psychology always works . . .sometimes. . . never. :D

Actually the poll says that 72 want it and 51 don't, 29 say maybe if I can afford it.

geo_n
05-02-2012, 10:07 PM
Reverse Psychology always works . . .sometimes. . . never. :D

Actually the poll says that 72 want it and 51 don't, 29 say maybe if I can afford it.

Reverse my vote then. :D
Who needs an expensive plugin that's just for rendering and almost the same price as lw, and kray is half the price of what Chaos offers. Can't model on it, animate on it, hmm...you can render on it, count on it, but still too expensive for most lw users and you make rendering so easy and boring its lowering the prestige of being cg artists. So Chaosgroup don't come over here we lwvers have one of the best if not THE BEST renderer in the biz. We don't need you one bit.:newtek:

erikals
05-03-2012, 03:58 AM
 
seen Indigo ?
http://youtu.be/PccWJ-zxlQw

http://www.indigorenderer.com/

 

ben martin
05-03-2012, 07:29 AM
Every time I notice Lightwave was used integrating a major studio workflow most of the time it comes to render time or pre-viz.

To use Vray instead, Lightwave will loose most of the propose to be maintained around in any workflow, why should it?
Modeler? Nhaaa.... not millions of polys able.
Dynamics... errr... maybe... with a lot of faith!
Fluids?... not core present. Sorry!
CA?... ha...well... you know.
Collisions?...only if bullet is now considered.
FFX?... recent and not very fine tuned.
Hypervoxels?... why should I say something about this one?
So why is Lightwave good for in a big production... humm...

Does Lightwave needs Vray?
Yes, it would be fantastic and also a "TOY STORY" button and also a native Motion Builder built in CA engine... and also.. UV paint (Body-paint like)... and why not sculpting native tools, even something modest like Blender digital sculpting tools...oh...oh...oh... and MODO millions of poly capable engine... wow... yeah... i just died and went to some kind of heaven... that also would be awesome! Yeah!

So, my true opinion?
Would I buy Vray for Lightwave?
Nah... Lightwave is pretty much a render engine at this point... take that away from it and you'll just kill it dead!

jasonwestmas
05-03-2012, 07:54 AM
Ben, you raise a lot of the points I have but you really think Newtek would stop developing their render engine if Vray was available? No matter what LW render will still be more affordable for people.

ben martin
05-03-2012, 09:51 AM
Ben, you raise a lot of the points I have but you really think Newtek would stop developing their render engine if Vray was available? No matter what LW render will still be more affordable for people.

You are absolutely right.
Vray to Lightwave integration only would be a pricy render choice but does that makes any sense?

To some yes, but then we would fall into weird situations like... ok, why bother about ask to NT to develop a better CA tools to Lightwave?
Just trow money at it and buy MB. (I get this kind of argues every day, believe me, it is annoying).

Following this path one can also ask, why bother about Lightwave modeler, just get MODO and you are done... ok... why bother about Liquid or Hypervoxels in Lightwave, just get Realflow and Turbulence and you are done... are you following me in this line?

This is the danger of full integration with any other software.
It works for both sides, it can be magnificent and it can be a problem only solved by trowing more money at the equation to external solutions.

So why bother at all?
Lightwave could be turned in a "kind-of" 3D-OS (like Windows or MAC OS are to software) and be used to link external 3D software, all problems gone!

The point here is always the same.
From where I see it, this approach would make NT to rethink about developing new effort to bring Lightwave into a valuable ALL IN ONE out of the box AFFORDABLE solution.

If we start relaying and pointing too much external option to link Lightwave with, I bet my two cents that NT will loose interest perusing better tools to Lightwave to certain areas.

About the users that believe that trowing money to the problems is a great solution, well, without hurting susceptibilities I dare to suggest other 3D millionaire 3D software solutions already working as a farm out there (and working very well, let me add).

Lightwave stands in the fog because it keeps being like a swiss-knife 3D tool and it should keep being pressed to evolute in that direction building up its own strengths day-by-day version-by-version while maintaining a very competitive price.

My opinion all resumes on this.
Open all doors to use Lightwave as a base platform to everything else out there, will end working as a pricy final solution.

NOTE:
I do not oppose Vray guys (makers) to offer as a pricy render alternative integrated into Lightwave, however, I do oppose that NT spend valuable resources doing such integration when such resources should be used to power up Lightwave in other "in-house" tool development.

(Nice for some that I do not command NT) :)

My two cents.

jasonwestmas
05-03-2012, 12:26 PM
right, I agree with what you are saying in a manner of speaking. It is one thing to buy a few really advanced plugins for specialized/highend fx. . . that are fully integrated too. It is quite another thing to have to buy these plugins because what LW offers requires a huge amount of work in order to get nice results. In which case I would rather go out and buy an app. that does offer these X features and they are already used in movies and such and without the need to go purchasing additional plugins. Such features also have nice tutorials to support such features.

In Lightwave Render's case, I don't believe that it is so weak that it would get ignored by NT if Vray was make fully integrated and even worked with hair and other volumetric fx.

However, NT does need to put a lot of spit and polish on what they have already going on, no doubt about it and not to add new feature SETS just because App. X has feature A and B.

DigitalSorcery8
05-03-2012, 04:28 PM
Ha... now up to 53 against. I love it.

Yup, shortsighted. I guess if I were Chaos Group I'd probably be saying "LW doesn't deserve to have VRay."

The little island of Lightwave....

Oh well...

Netvudu
05-03-2012, 04:33 PM
Yup. Everytime you say "shortsighted" it goes up...makes one think...

DigitalSorcery8
05-03-2012, 04:41 PM
Yup. Everytime you say "shortsighted" it goes up...makes one think...

Yeah, just HOW shortsighted some are. :)

Oops... there goes another one.

Edit. Funny thing is... there are many LW users who don't do ANYTHING with character animation, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find ANY of them who would argue AGAINST having better CA tools in LW. Seems to me that anyone who would be against VRay in LW would also be against Maxwell or Kray or ANY other renderer in LW.

Edit2. Oh, and we don't need UberCam (from Liberty 3D) because that will stop Newtek from implementing any other camera types in LW.

-or-

RHiggit Pro since NOW Newtek won't develop their own BETTER rigging system. Nope... we don[t need ANY stinkin' better stuff for LW.

Ryste3d
05-03-2012, 05:09 PM
Lightwave is for hobbyist and previz. Thats why we don't need Vray.

I think people saying no to Vray don't even know how to set up a render in Lightwave. To All of you that don't need Vray, show me your best LW render and I will tell you why you need Vray

Dexter2999
05-03-2012, 06:05 PM
Lightwave stands in the fog because it keeps being like a swiss-knife 3D tool and it should keep being pressed to evolute in that direction building up its own strengths day-by-day version-by-version while maintaining a very competitive price.

I can go along with that statement. But look at the Swiss-knife (or Leatherman for US readers) A great all-in-one tool. It is inexpensive and to many indispensable for what they do. But go to a garage or fabrication shop and see how many people are using them? For big jobs, having the right tools for the right job costs money.

Now to get back to LW and end the analogy, I like working in LW but if I had a big job come up that needed specific things I like knowing I can acquire them as needed. Meaning cost is incurred when the utility is needed. I'm not forced to pay upfront for tools that I may never use.

I also don't see benefit in taking every great third party tool and making it native. I keep seeing people ask for this stuff over and over on the forums. How long do you think that type of behavior can be maintained before developers get tired of having their toes "stepped on" and stop developing for LW? And I could be wrong about this but I think most people who complain about things being native are very often just complaining that they don't want to pay more.

People are already complaining about the paid upgrade structure. They are looking at individual features and deciding if it is worth it or not. People discount VPR because they already purchased FPrime. I purchased Messiah, does that mean I get to look down my nose should LW improve native CA? Well, it doesn't do me any good. So it's worthless right? Wrong.

V-Ray for LW doesn't hurt. It helps the image of LW when people see it is included at the Chaos site. I think omission at the site strikes people that LW is irrelevant...and THAT DOES HURT. At least it hurts LW image/reputation in the professional circles.

GraphXs
05-03-2012, 06:19 PM
I use VRay at work with Max, and it is fast! I did say No, but I wouldn't mind VRay for LW, but for personal use I would never use it, to expensive! The Lightwave render get's me to a great result faster during a production sample then Max and Vray does! If ChaosG did make Vray for LW maybe NT would kick it in gear to advanced the LW render engine and it's missing features. (better render buffer system, states, proxies, faster cleaner gi for character work)

I hope ChaosG does eventually look into LW as an option, but I also hope NT continues to improve LW Renderer and looking forward to if Worly is cooking up something!

Paul_Boland
05-03-2012, 06:26 PM
VRay for Caligari's TrueSpace was US$199. As a home hobbyist that is around the price point I would like to see VRay for Lightwave.

ben martin
05-04-2012, 03:53 AM
Hum... maybe I am wrong by I noticed some specific "point fingers" to people that does not need to use or pay for "Vray".

I guess people must get real about some points related to this discussion.

Lightwave is indeed an affordable 3D solution wish gained a huge parcel of the freelancer 3D market, just because... well, it is affordable and able to deliver a fantastic render that meets the market standards.

Could it be better? Yes! Mainly regarding streams elements for composition.

So, back to the point, Chaos may add Lightwave to its list?
Sure, nobody is stopping them, I surly don't going to ask them for.
Does that makes me a shortsighted person?

Lightwave render is one of the fastest/cheapest and in that sense one of the best in its league.
It delivers very well reaching the industry standards for the market it was designed for.

The main problem about this issue is that, some keep believing that Lightwave can... well not surpass... maybe replace Maya, Houdini or AD integrated solutions in the big game picture.
People, you guys just need to wake up!
That's another league with a different price range.
If you need a tool to play in that yard, just invest time and money on it.

Can one use Lightwave to make some pretty amazing works in that upper league, damn yes!
Do you need Vray to do it? Damn, no!
Zoic studios and other small studios have proven this many times but keep in mind that those are a bunch of few examples in a huge giant industry.

If Vray was present in Lightwave do you guys really believe that it would make any difference to big-studio-contractors when they ask "what software you are proficient with?"

It would make any difference, simply because these people are asking for talent, not tools.
So, what defines you as an artist is your tool and it capabilities?
Yeah... I thought so.

So, Vray for Lightwave won't chance any paradigm about Lightwave itself.
Users trying to use Lightwave to invade or be successful in Maya or AD crowded market are just playing the wrong bet.

We must be real, Lightwave is very well worth for what it defines it:
A cheap tool able to deliver high-standards if in the right hands, crippled here and there, yes, but very capable of what is does... and RENDER is the strongest feature of what it does fastest and better out of the box.

I personally have some few reasons to keep Lightwave as my main tool but the render and the speed it delivers, well this is a unique feature in this price range, so I will keep it!

Do you really need Vray, ok... I could argue about your skills, light and render settings but I won't, I am just going to say something that "SOME SHORTSIGHTED" users tend to say in many other occasions (not that I agree with such statements but it fits perfectly here): Get Maya, Cinema4D or MAX and you are done and ready to the big leagues.

rcallicotte
05-04-2012, 06:35 AM
A bit off topic, but about Indigo -

Hi Rob,
We would like to support Lightwave, but we don't have any concrete plans or a timeline to do so, sorry.

Thanks,
Nick C.

Nicholas Chapman

Managing Director,
Glare Technologies Limited

Ryste3d
05-04-2012, 06:57 AM
A bit off topic, but about Indigo -

Hi Rob,
We would like to support Lightwave, but we don't have any concrete plans or a timeline to do so, sorry.

Thanks,
Nick C.

Nicholas Chapman

Managing Director,
Glare Technologies Limited



It is not a bit off topic, its spot on.

jasonwestmas
05-04-2012, 09:18 AM
The main problem about this issue is that, some keep believing that Lightwave can... well not surpass... maybe replace Maya, Houdini or AD integrated solutions in the big game picture.
People, you guys just need to wake up!
That's another league with a different price range.
If you need a tool to play in that yard, just invest time and money on it.



yeah that pretty much sums it up for me. Vray in lightwave isn't going to change they ballpark LW was designed for, especially not in a context of dynamics and animation. And of course still images are something different that require less specialization.

DigitalSorcery8
05-04-2012, 12:34 PM
Could it be better? Yes! Mainly regarding streams elements for composition.
Which VRay has in spades. It would make compositing THAT much easier.

So, back to the point, Chaos may add Lightwave to its list?
Sure, nobody is stopping them, I surly don't going to ask them for.
Does that makes me a shortsighted person?
How many people here who use Kray now NEED Kray? Did LW NEED Kray? No. It was fine as it was. But now Kray exists and LOTS of people use it. The same for Maxwell and RHiggit Pro and Sasquatch and... you name it, LW did not NEED it, but we are FAR better off with it. Anyone who says we can't use these tools IS shortsighted. LW is better WITH them than not.

The main problem about this issue is that, some keep believing that Lightwave can... well not surpass... maybe replace Maya, Houdini or AD integrated solutions in the big game picture.
People, you guys just need to wake up!
That's another league with a different price range.
If you need a tool to play in that yard, just invest time and money on it.
I agree, but why would ANYONE argue against having more and better tools with LW? Why would any sane person do that? Why would anyone here say that? It boggles my mind that people would turn their back on another potentially great tool that we could use with LW.


Can one use Lightwave to make some pretty amazing works in that upper league, damn yes!
Do you need Vray to do it? Damn, no!
And you don't NEED Kray or Maxwell or RHiggit Pro or Sasquatch or anything else either - but we DO have them and they make LW better.


If Vray was present in Lightwave do you guys really believe that it would make any difference to big-studio-contractors when they ask "what software you are proficient with?"
That I cannot answer, so I would leave that up to the studios to answer who use LW and VRay with other apps in their pipeline. But for those of us who do NOT know the answer, it is rather odd that people are so very much against having this great "plugin" for LW.

All of the other great plugins we use, LW did not NEED, but they certainly - and without a doubt - make life much easier. As I see it, those against a VRay in LW are those who have no use for it. THAT... is what is shortsighted, because you could find just a little bit later that having those VRay features in LW will ultimately make working far more effiicient.

Do you really need Vray, ok... I could argue about your skills, light and render settings but I won't, I am just going to say something that "SOME SHORTSIGHTED" users tend to say in many other occasions (not that I agree with such statements but it fits perfectly here): Get Maya, Cinema4D or MAX and you are done and ready to the big leagues.[/QUOTE]

silviotoledo
05-04-2012, 12:52 PM
Advantages of having a VRay plugin for lightwave:

- Photorreal rendering in low time and less effort
- Industry standard quality
- Increase the amount of LW users worldwide
- Turn Lightwave more popular and go more inside competition


Blender, Max, Maya, Xsi, C4D, Rhino, Sketchup,... All these 3D softwares wanted.

Why LW community don't?


:( Crazy World!

erikals
05-04-2012, 05:30 PM
Lightwave is for hobbyist and previz. Thats why we don't need Vray.

I think people saying no to Vray don't even know how to set up a render in Lightwave. To All of you that don't need Vray, show me your best LW render and I will tell you why you need Vray

it's not quite that simple, as there are alternatives, such as Kray.
(didn't you use Kray btw...?)

the problem i think is that there is no real good comparisons,
few LW render professionals versus an army of Vray professionals.
this of course makes Vray look like a Christmas present...
...but is it... ?

since you seem to know about Kray and Vray, what's your opinion?
we need facts, not just "Vray rocks!" remarks...

Kray > http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=126386
the one thing i note though is that Vray seems to be quite stronger than other solutions
(including Kray) when it comes down to animation...

is Vray superb for stills?... not so sure, as far as quality goes Kray is just as good, maybe even better.
So goes for Octane and Indigo.

...for animation however things might be different.

 

Celshader
05-04-2012, 05:49 PM
Lightwave is for hobbyist and previz. Thats why we don't need Vray.

You forgot Emmy awards. LightWave artists keep winning Emmy awards.

ben martin
05-04-2012, 06:54 PM
.

ben martin
05-04-2012, 06:55 PM
...As I see it, those against a VRay in LW are those who have no use for it. THAT... is what is shortsighted, because you could find just a little bit later that having those VRay features in LW will ultimately make working far more effiicient...

Humm... ok, we are not in the same page here.

I am not against Vray to Lightwave.
I said for some times now, that I have nothing against the developers doing a LW version.

What I said is that I won't buy it nor feel the need to make a request for it.
For me, Lightwave render pretty much delivers all what I need.

I suggest that you guys should start by asking to Vray developers how open are they to bring Vray to Lw instead of doing pools (like rcallicotte did about Indigo).

If they make that dependable on votes (I really doubt about it), then I have not a problem to vote in favor, not that I need it or request it, like I keep saying.

What worries me about this is that NT will have to waist time and resources developing the integration of it, bugs squash and so on on top of all the "in-house" LW features and problems we already have.

I'll sign it for you Vrays guys but I do not plan to buy, use, need it what so ever.

DigitalSorcery8
05-04-2012, 07:05 PM
What worries me about this is that NT will have to waist time and resources developing the integration of it, bugs squash and so on on top of all the "in-house" LW features and problems we already have.
I think that it stands to reason that any bugs NT would be squashing in order to properly implement VRay, would be the same bugs/obstacles that other renderers like Kray and Maxwell have problems with as well. I am not a coder, nor do I pretend to be one, but something that prevents Kray from accessing certain LW parameters would probably be the same obstacle to VRay. So unless people are against NT working to better the integration of these other renderers too, there is no reason why NT shouldn't address these problems.

Celshader
05-04-2012, 07:23 PM
So unless people are against NT working to better the integration of these other renderers too, there is no reason why NT shouldn't address these problems.

NT can address all the problems it wants, but if Chaos Group doesn't want to build VRay for LightWave, we will never see VRay for LightWave.

I see the ball in Chaos Group's court right now, not NewTek's.

DigitalSorcery8
05-04-2012, 08:05 PM
NT can address all the problems it wants, but if Chaos Group doesn't want to build VRay for LightWave, we will never see VRay for LightWave.

I see the ball in Chaos Group's court right now, not NewTek's.

I couldn't agree with you more.

Unfortunately with the results of polls like this one, it really isn't conducive to Chaos Group to really WANT to bring VRay to LW. It's probably too late for this thread to be deleted as the damage is most likely already done. Though hopefully CG ends up realizing that there are MANY more professional LW users who would want to have the option of VRay.

geo_n
05-04-2012, 10:15 PM
it's not quite that simple, as there are alternatives, such as Kray.

the problem i think is that there is no real good comparisons,
few LW render professionals versus an army of Vray professionals.
this of course makes Vray look like a Christmas present...
...but is it... ?

is Vray superb for stills?... not so sure, as far as quality goes Kray is just as good, maybe even better.
So goes for Octane and Indigo.

...for animation however things might be different.

 

I think you forget that there are studios(including ours) using lw/fprime renderer that switched to a different renderer. Some went for modo renderer, some mray, some vray. You don't need comparisons made from simple tests. Studios that switched are not going to waste time and money on inferior software. That will be a step back if the other renderers they switched to was inferior. They will use what's currently the fastest, easiest in production.
Kray is still in its infancy, no exr, no robust buffers, not so good bruteforce rendering, etc.
Octane and indigo? Unbiased renderers are limited.
Octane rendering sucks exporting out obj sequence to render and its dead afaik.
Indigo isn't mainstream to survive long term. Lux renderer might be a better and free option for an unbiased renderer.
For deeply entrenched lw users and who are content with lw renderer its ok, vray is not for them and newtek provides a cheap and good well rounded renderer. Vray is too pricey for most lw users in reality and most lw users now are frugal to spend over 500usd for a renderer.
You don't see Turbulence and Kray selling like hotcakes in the price range they're in right now.

Pavlov
05-05-2012, 05:46 AM
ok, let's start another poll: how may users on this forums are PROs ?
I know dozen pros which never come here. My suspect (not derived fro mVray poll, btw) is that real ratio between pro and hobbyist users is not represented in this forum.
At same time, i know for sure most LW pros would buy Vray at any price around 1000€, which is pretty reasonable.
I cant quote Celshader about python: most user need top quality AND industry standards. As i said before, my office has 5 people (6 soon) and latest 2 guys are MAX+Vray. Next will be Max+Vray too. Soon we'll be a Max+Vray office, i guess.
Why ? Because i can find easily Vray operators, Vray stuff, Vray tuts, Vray items, And Vray has top quality. Kray has nearly same quality, but has not the rest.
If LW had Vray, i would have bought other 2 LW seats instead, ant tought them just modeling (LW+LWcad is much better than max at modeling). At same time, i dont find any LW+Kray user around here. Why ? Because guys which start in 3d dont chose a niche tool like LW - and they are true - but guess what, *an *industry standard* tool.
Now, why LW is not *ID* ? because it is an island and being an island is due manily to thing like not having access to tools which everyone use and for which you find ton of stuff and users around, like Vray.
So, the path to success or unsuccess for a software, nowadays, is in large part tied to how much it can be an ID. For LW, the strongest step toward ID is Vray, no doubt on this.
I dont want to be arrogant or offend anyone, but i guess i've a precise idea of how market is shaping at least here in EU.... sorry for those who keep not understanding that LW *does*need* vray.

bye
Paolo

silviotoledo
05-05-2012, 06:08 AM
https://www.facebook.com/chaosgroup

Please step at facebook VRay page and resquest a V Ray plugin for lightwave.

43 Freelancers and 29 companies that are interested. If we fire a feature request at facebook this will make a difference.

also send e-mail to: [email protected]

jwiede
05-05-2012, 07:15 AM
Which VRay has in spades. It would make compositing THAT much easier.

How many people here who use Kray now NEED Kray? Did LW NEED Kray? No. It was fine as it was.
Sorry, but that's not really accurate. Once upon a time, LW did "need" Kray, (and FPrime) because the native GI solution was pretty subpar (esp. w.r.t. performance). Then, in LW9, Newtek did a lot of work on the render engine, and resolved many of the performance problems bringing the native engine to a point where it was much more competitive. The addition of native nodes also significantly boosted the quality possible in certain types of render, where before users needed Kray or FPrime.

However, before that point, it was fair to say that Kray and FPrime were necessary solutions if you needed to get work done in reasonable timeframes, esp. when using certain types of surfacing and reflections.

erikals
05-05-2012, 07:58 AM
too much focus in this thread is at the 50 people that don't need Vray...
focus on the 100 people that do instead.

open a thread at Chaosgroup, where the 100 people in this thread can login and say...
Hey, I need Vray...!

100 Lightwavers telling they want Vray should count for something...

 

ben martin
05-05-2012, 08:56 AM
Unfortunately with the results of polls like this one, it really isn't conducive to Chaos Group to really WANT to bring VRay to LW. It's probably too late for this thread to be deleted as the damage is most likely already done

I absolutely don't agree with you on this.

Forums like this are for users to debate their ideas and “point of views” internally.
Sure people outside can came and read what happens here, but most of the time, this is not interesting to outsiders.
Lightwave does not have that giant, active and communicative user base you may believe it has.

Regarding this issue, I just did what "silviotoledo" suggested.
Went to Chaos Group facebook page and requested for Vray so you guy don't cry and point fingers.
I even sent an email. From me, it does not hurt asking for something I don't plan to use.

Now, if you are so interested in Vray, I suggest you do exactly the same, you and all the other PROS in this group.

Jezz, there are more people than I realized before, in this forum, that believe they are the best and need the best tools for keep being the best.
PRO vs Amateus POOL?
Really?
Did those guys already born PRO?
Did those guys ever worked on any real feature film?
I already did, and keep doing... so, does that make my opinions stronger?... WTF?

Give a full equipped painting studio to someone and you'll be surprise how confused he will be around on it, now give a white sheet of paper and a charcoal to an artist and he'll show you heaven.

Summing it up:
Fortunately ART is not relaying on tools, instead, on the capacity of one to dream a translate such dreams in signs that others can relate with and understand.

Have a nice weekend.

ben martin
05-05-2012, 09:05 AM
-- Ticket reply --

To our valuable user,

A request for support has been created and assigned ticket #507430.
A representative will be contacting you within 1-3 business days.
You can view this ticket's progress online here: http://support.chaosgroup.com/[email protected]&t=507430.
If you need to add more information to the ticket simply reply to this email or login using the link above and update the ticket.

Technical Support Department
Chaos Group
tel: +359 2 422 422 1
tel: +359 2 489 44 86
fax: +1 818 4751567
www.chaosgroup.com
----------------------

Your request:

This is a request for Chaos Group to bring Vray for Lightwave.
Many thanks for your time.

Ben

jasonwestmas
05-05-2012, 09:18 AM
ok, let's start another poll: how may users on this forums are PROs ?
I know dozen pros which never come here. My suspect (not derived fro mVray poll, btw) is that real ratio between pro and hobbyist users is not represented in this forum.
At same time, i know for sure most LW pros would buy Vray at any price around 1000€, which is pretty reasonable.
I cant quote Celshader about python: most user need top quality AND industry standards. As i said before, my office has 5 people (6 soon) and latest 2 guys are MAX+Vray. Next will be Max+Vray too. Soon we'll be a Max+Vray office, i guess.
Why ? Because i can find easily Vray operators, Vray stuff, Vray tuts, Vray items, And Vray has top quality. Kray has nearly same quality, but has not the rest.
If LW had Vray, i would have bought other 2 LW seats instead, ant tought them just modeling (LW+LWcad is much better than max at modeling). At same time, i dont find any LW+Kray user around here. Why ? Because guys which start in 3d dont chose a niche tool like LW - and they are true - but guess what, *an *industry standard* tool.
Now, why LW is not *ID* ? because it is an island and being an island is due manily to thing like not having access to tools which everyone use and for which you find ton of stuff and users around, like Vray.
So, the path to success or unsuccess for a software, nowadays, is in large part tied to how much it can be an ID. For LW, the strongest step toward ID is Vray, no doubt on this.
I dont want to be arrogant or offend anyone, but i guess i've a precise idea of how market is shaping at least here in EU.... sorry for those who keep not understanding that LW *does*need* vray.

bye
Paolo

I'm pretty much in the same boat but as a subcontractor who knows certain groups of people that work together. They are all Max, Maya, Modo, Mudbox and Zbrush guys. No lightwave except me. I use both max and maya together now for realtime animation because of this and mostly we create content for unity; also training videos for various companies and the government. I still use LW cad for some mechanical modeling but Modo is kinda stealing the show now for character and equipment modeling.

After doing a lot of hardware rendering and setup in Unity and Unreal, I am persuing more software rendering for cinematics and trailers for games and I feel that vray is a really good fit for this and has a proven track record for such. Lightwave not so much if you need cloth, hair and complex collisions imo.

Looking forward for Lightwave's future, if it is to ever compete with the "AAA apps", meaning, get non-LW people to look at Lightwave (we are the minority ok, that's the sober minded truth.) I think getting Vray inside of Lightwave now is a good idea, even if some of us wouldn't use it right this minute.

This is not to say that Vray alone will bring bigger projects to LW, it'll take more things like having a solid and native render buffer system in place and having some wicked dynamics for characters going on. (and not to mention a lot more modeling functions and deformer capabilities inside of layout) None of this convoluted work around stuff that I see now in LW11. I just hope NT is up to really refining the new animation and dynamics they already have implemented. Rob said they are "just getting started" and I believe him. I hope that means what I hope it means. I would like to see more people give the 'other' smaller companies more of a chance in more than just a few industry fields.

jasonwestmas
05-05-2012, 09:57 AM
Give a full equipped painting studio to someone and you'll be surprise how confused he will be around on it, now give a white sheet of paper and a charcoal to an artist and he'll show you heaven.

Summing it up:
Fortunately ART is not relaying on tools, instead, on the capacity of one to dream a translate such dreams in signs that others can relate with and understand.


I'm really glad that you and others are interested in debating about this, I take a lot interest and joy in it.

I'm not totally disagreeing with you Ben but I hope what some lightwave users understand is that there are great differences between being a modeler texture artist, an animator/rigger and a dynamics fx guy. Sometimes the "primary colors" of dynamics or deformation tools are flat out missing the most basic of capabilities when it comes to characters. In which case, no workaround is going to make things happen in a reasonable amount of time. Since Lightwave is supposed to be about speed and efficiency then I think the software is therefore inefficient and not up to competing with other software.

I realize there is not a lot of toolsets out there that don't require some manual scripting especially when it comes to IK/FK rigging with dynamics built into the setup but even then, one has to measure the amount of work involved with such practices between the apps.

geo_n
05-05-2012, 10:18 AM
industry standards. As i said before, my office has 5 people (6 soon) and latest 2 guys are MAX+Vray. Next will be Max+Vray too. Soon we'll be a Max+Vray office, i guess.
Why ? Because i can find easily Vray operators, Vray stuff, Vray tuts, Vray items, And Vray has top quality.
Now, why LW is not *ID* ? because it is an island and being an island is due manily to thing like not having access to tools which everyone use and for which you find ton of stuff and users around, like Vray.
So, the path to success or unsuccess for a software, nowadays, is in large part tied to how much it can be an ID

bye
Paolo

Yep about industry standards, very important. Somewhat related even in AD realm is the industry standard is maya and max. Softimage is going to get butchered and might be given less importance as part of the "content creation suite" of AD starring maya and max. Feel a bit sad since I'm a fan of Squaresoft, Konami, etc that use softimage extensively.
Being hesitent towards mainstream or industry standard or being called the red headed step child of 3D is not a good thing just for the purpose of being different, unique, special and all that. Always not getting third party attention is not cool.

ben martin
05-05-2012, 10:35 AM
I'm really glad that you and others are interested in debating about this, I take a lot interest and joy in it.

...Sometimes the "primary colors" of dynamics or deformation tools are flat out missing the most basic of capabilities when it comes to characters. In which case, no workaround is going to make things happen in a reasonable amount of time...

I realize there is not a lot of tool-sets out there that don't require some manual scripting especially when it comes to IK/FK rigging with dynamics built into the setup but even then, one has to measure the amount of work involved with such practices.

I am 200% with you on this.

That is why I complain and still complaining about Lightwave CA and other areas but bringing Vray to the equation does not solve anything.
Before that, NT must be able to create a dynamic and productive environment regarding CA, FX, Dynamics and so on.

I’m not selfish or blind to request the same tools other millionaire software offers in the market from NT/Lightwave since it is an affordadble serious option to freelancers and small studios.

But at least NT needs to deliver a solid and consistent work-flow with robust tools-set (even if not assembled with a zillion of settings like other brands offer) and such tools need to be productive/fast and consistent.

This demands a lot of work, a lot of commitment from NT before Vray or any other "excel" add-on could be added to Lightwave's world.

I dunno, if I can make myself clear enough about this since English is not my primary idiom. Maybe the next sentence can help:

Before you get a pretty and shiny outside building, one needs a robust a solid inside structure or all the shinny stuff becomes irrelevant since the building can collapse at any time.

That's why Vray is not important right now, from my point of view.
There are so many thing to be done before that and, besides, I believe that Lightwave Render is very misunderstood and as a lot to offer in its price range.

geo_n
05-05-2012, 10:44 AM
That's why Vray is not important right now

Yeah not the most. Unification is the most important to me now. Unify or bust! Absolute deal breaker on next lw versions.
But I'm not going to say we don't need vray at all though. Speed, power and ease of use is always welcome.

jasonwestmas
05-05-2012, 10:54 AM
hehe, I understand you perfectly Ben. . . I think we agree 200% in a matter of speaking about Vray. The animation tools capabilities do in fact dominate over the desire of having one of the most popular rendering engines available inside of LW. Assuming somebody cannot get the desired CA effects, Why would somebody go through the trouble of importing animation from Maya into LW just to render with Vray. Yeah I get that. If Vray is to come to LW, I do agree that LW does need to stand on it's own with CA without the need of Maya or Messiah etc.

I am of the mind that if a package is used frequently for complex CA deformations and dynamics DESPITE the fact that there is for sure, more work out there that does NOT need fancy CA. . .that this doesn't matter to the bigshots with the funding. They go with the apps. that provide the most flexibility and the options to go the AAA CA route if they need it. They will choose the app. with the high end CA capabilities because that proves the capabilities for a longer term software investment for the future as CGI gets more and more efficient and affordable in general.

This is the main reason why I think Lightwave development should start to focus in on specialized and innovative solutions and maybe stop playing catch-up as a generalized solution in a few areas. It's the only real way to stand out imo and to eliminate the "watered down" impression that it leaves in people's minds.

However, I don't see how it would really hurt and actually might help if LW users became familiar with Vray in a lightwave context now. I mean, just because some of us work with characters 50-100% of the time doesn't mean other people can't benefit from learning more 3rd party solutions.

ben martin
05-05-2012, 11:11 AM
I support your line of thought about NT and Lightwave orientation/development because it has been the "dead-horse" I've been beating on for years, now.
About Vray, we are done. :)

jasonwestmas
05-05-2012, 11:17 AM
Well I'm not done, but fair enough ;)

Pavlov
05-05-2012, 12:07 PM
I'm pretty much in the same boat but as a subcontractor who knows certain groups of people that work together. They are all Max, Maya, Modo, Mudbox and Zbrush guys. No lightwave except me.

Looking forward for Lightwave's future, if it is to ever compete with the "AAA apps", meaning, get non-LW people to look at Lightwave (we are the minority ok, that's the sober minded truth.) I think getting Vray inside of Lightwave now is a good idea, even if some of us wouldn't use it right this minute.

This is not to say that Vray alone will bring bigger projects to LW, it'll take more things like having a solid and native render buffer system in place and having some wicked dynamics for characters going on. (and not to mention a lot more modeling functions and deformer capabilities inside of layout) None of this convoluted work around stuff that I see now in LW11. I just hope NT is up to really refining the new animation and dynamics they already have implemented. Rob said they are "just getting started" and I believe him. I hope that means what I hope it means. I would like to see more people give the 'other' smaller companies more of a chance in more than just a few industry fields.

It's also down to *keep actual users*. What if all pros, sooner or later, will go ? I'm forced to get Max+Vray users now, if this is the trend, it's not unlikely we'll become a Max+Vray firm in the future. I'l always use LW btw, but market drives us in a precise direction. So, i stress this: how important could be Vray for LW, *considering the fact LW is the only app who has not Vray* ? imho, the importance is huge.

Then, i dont disagree with some who say LW itself has mre important things like unification and such, but while these are on NT side, Vray port is not necessarily on NT side, so things dont overlap. While i think it could be NT's task (and interest) to get in touch with chaos and give this thing a shape, there are plenty of 3rd part developers here who could do the job.

Paolo

DigitalSorcery8
05-05-2012, 12:13 PM
Sorry, but that's not really accurate. Once upon a time, LW did "need" Kray, (and FPrime) because the native GI solution was pretty subpar (esp. w.r.t. performance). Then, in LW9, Newtek did a lot of work on the render engine, and resolved many of the performance problems bringing the native engine to a point where it was much more competitive. The addition of native nodes also significantly boosted the quality possible in certain types of render, where before users needed Kray or FPrime.

However, before that point, it was fair to say that Kray and FPrime were necessary solutions if you needed to get work done in reasonable timeframes, esp. when using certain types of surfacing and reflections.

At this point, I'm not even talking about SPEED or better GI, I'm talking about superior buffer support which allows every possible type of render pass out of VRay. NONE of the solutions you mentioned have anything close to VRay - Kray, FPrime, LW native - not to mention the others like Octane, Fryrender, Maxwell, etc. Just because we have THESE renderers does not mean that VRay can't be BETTER. I think Pavlov pretty much already stated as such.

jasonwestmas
05-05-2012, 12:26 PM
Right, in all of these forms of context, it's never an either/or B&W 2-dimensional situation. Newtek must consider all sides of the fence. . . and the fence is tall, circular and 3 dimensional. ;)

I don't think the main points should be:

-) Do we aim our market towards non-LW users or current users?

-) Do we ask for Vray now or do we ask for it later when LW animation tools have matured even more?

-) Do we strive for better animation tools or do we alienate higher profile CA and dynamics people.

-) Do we aim to please TV studios or Cinematics FX studios

-) Do we wish to please the casual users or the CG lifers. (Lifers are full timers)

-) Is this a Chaos Group issue or a Newtek issue?

Obviously all these market groups and industrial fields need to be considered equally and I don't think that just because I or a few others wouldn't use VRay in Lightwave YET, necessarily justifies the disconnect between chaos group (also other 3rd party developers) and Newtek. Unfortunately the impression I get from LW development is rather 2dimensional and a little shallow. Maybe that is just because we are in the dark now and I expect too much. Rob said, they are just getting started, ok not sure what that means yet.

I believe the key is of course to focus on more specialized tools based on already existing technology concerning animation especially. Nobody is going to respect a package that doesn't respect higher end animators.

DigitalSorcery8
05-05-2012, 12:27 PM
too much focus in this thread is at the 50 people that don't need Vray...
focus on the 100 people that do instead.

open a thread at Chaosgroup, where the 100 people in this thread can login and say...
Hey, I need Vray...!

100 Lightwavers telling they want Vray should count for something...

 

:agree: Good idea!


I absolutely don't agree with you on this.

Forums like this are for users to debate their ideas and “point of views” internally.
Sure people outside can came and read what happens here, but most of the time, this is not interesting to outsiders.
Lightwave does not have that giant, active and communicative user base you may believe it has.
I believe that CG already knows about this thread - I think someone mentioned it quite a ways back. If *I* were part of CG and was considering porting to LW, *I* would want to know the sentiments of users - a wide cross-section or not. I recall quite a few potential vendors who have come here to these forums. To think we're "hidden" would not be accurate.

Regarding this issue, I just did what "silviotoledo" suggested.
Went to Chaos Group facebook page and requested for Vray so you guy don't cry and point fingers.
I even sent an email. From me, it does not hurt asking for something I don't plan to use.

Now, if you are so interested in Vray, I suggest you do exactly the same, you and all the other PROS in this group.
Why would you even think that I have not? OF COURSE I have submitted the request to port VRay to LW. Sheesh.

Jezz, there are more people than I realized before, in this forum, that believe they are the best and need the best tools for keep being the best.
PRO vs Amateus POOL?
Really?
Did those guys already born PRO?
Did those guys ever worked on any real feature film?
I already did, and keep doing... so, does that make my opinions stronger?... WTF?
If there is a tool available that CAN be ported that would make my compositing life so much easier, WHY would anyone NOT want that available? If I work on a small animated show and a competitor for the same slot does, I would certainly want the tools that can make me more productive. In this case it may not be as much about ART as it is about how fast we can get the best product "out the door." I think that if someone knows MORE about VRay and how it can help the user community, then THEIR opinion should carry FAR more weight than someone who 1. has no use for VRay, 2. wouldn't use it anyway and 3. doesn't even know WHY it would be better.

Give a full equipped painting studio to someone and you'll be surprise how confused he will be around on it, now give a white sheet of paper and a charcoal to an artist and he'll show you heaven.

Summing it up:
Fortunately ART is not relaying on tools, instead, on the capacity of one to dream a translate such dreams in signs that others can relate with and understand.

Have a nice weekend.
And give an artist the tools he KNOWS how to use and add a better workflow... and you may not have a better artist, but that art may be completed more quickly. And in the world of TIME = MONEY... THAT is a good thing.

silviotoledo
05-05-2012, 06:38 PM
I've pubished a feature request here:

"Some artists from Lightwave Community also want a V ray plugin that works with Lightwave 3D. Lightwave have been on CG market for decades and was reborn after version 10 and 11. Please give us a V ray plugin too."

https://www.facebook.com/chaosgroup but Chaosgroup deleted it :).

Will write again :)

silviotoledo
05-05-2012, 06:44 PM
Deleted!

They're so fast :)

erikals
05-05-2012, 07:53 PM
Facebook is more for events / published art, not features / requests.

you need to go to the forums... (!)

 

geo_n
05-05-2012, 07:55 PM
Nobody is going to respect a package that doesn't respect higher end animators.

Modo has been getting more and more users and its been just a modeller and renderer for many years.
There are more people doing asset creation, design and visualization than there are doing animations. Most animators have left lw anyway.
Lightwave doesn't need to get the best animation tools before it gets vray. Vray will be useful even in lw's current state.

jasonwestmas
05-05-2012, 08:24 PM
Modo has been getting more and more users and its been just a modeller and renderer for many years.
There are more people doing asset creation, design and visualization than there are doing animations. Most animators have left lw anyway.
Lightwave doesn't need to get the best animation tools before it gets vray. Vray will be useful even in lw's current state.

Well I and the people I work with won't be using Lightwave at all any time soon if that attitude towards animation continues as the general norm, that's all I know. The animation tools outside of lightwave are just too good to pass up. My point being, I wouldn't take the time to import animation into LW if I wanted to use Vray. I'd by Vray for my animation package of choice.

As for others who don't do much CA at all or never, sure, I don't debate that it would be useful to some degree.

geo_n
05-05-2012, 08:40 PM
Well I and the people I work with won't be using Lightwave at all any time soon if that attitude towards animation continues as the general norm, that's all I know. The animation tools outside of lightwave are just too good to pass up. My point being, I wouldn't take the time to import animation into LW if I wanted to use Vray. I'd by Vray for my animation package of choice.

Good choice I think. Animation is very complex and besides the programming involved to improve animation in lw there's the workflow. Its going to take lw several years to improve the animation but hopefully after unification because switching from modeller to layout back to back for weight painting, adjusting morph, etc, tedious.

A renderer plugin vray, kray, etc, must be simpler to implement for lw than an animation overhaul. Definitely simpler to implement than something like motionbuilder or character studio within lw.

silviotoledo
05-06-2012, 02:15 AM
There are only foruns for Vray to Max, Vray to Maya, Vray to Rhino,Vray to Xsi...

No general discussion foruns and my permission at subscribe is only to view.

If only a little people take the support ticket by e-mail, they will continue to send the same commercial answer they do for years.

There's almost 5 years I ask Chaosgroup for a VRay plugin for lightwave and during these period they have announced but never done.

Need to check if VRay standalone is still on and if does it import FBX and Collada then. If not I will need Max or Maya to access VRay.

Pavlov
05-06-2012, 10:43 AM
Silvio, i know.
That's why i think NT can have a role here: if they write them officially to investigate feasibility or precise needs, i dont think Chaos will answer with a "demo" email.

Paolo

ben martin
05-07-2012, 10:10 AM
Hi Ben,

Thank you for your interest in V-Ray.
However at the moment we refrain from providing any information about our plans for future developments.

We hope this response has sufficiently answered your questions. If not, please do not send another email. Instead, reply to this email or login to your account for a complete archive of all your support request and responses.

http://support.chaosgroup.com/[email protected]&t=507430

Marta Kruneva
Technical Support Department
Chaos Group
tel: +359 2 422 422 1
tel: +359 2 489 44 86
fax: +1 818 4751567
www.chaosgroup.com

Eagle66
05-07-2012, 01:02 PM
However at the moment we refrain from providing any information about our plans for future developments.


Now, this Thread can be closed in 3-2-1 :thumbsup: