PDA

View Full Version : Rob Powers video pitch of LW 11.5 for Non LW users (Video)



robertoortiz
08-16-2012, 11:03 AM
Note: This video was produced by Roberto Ortiz, as an independent entity. Ballistic Media, CGSociety or my employeer is not repnsible in any way for its content. This video does not mean an endoerment of any of parties mentioned before.

I had the chance in SIGGRAPH 2012 to spend 10 minutes with Rob Powers.
I asked him to do a pitch specifically oriented for Non LW users .

Note the video has audio issues, since my Lavalier Mike went on the fritz before the interview.

Thus the 10 seconds of silence at the beginning ( I am leaving for a trip so I can't edit it right now).
I had to turn it off, so keep in mind that there is a ton of ambient noise on the video.


I would like to thank Chuck Baker, and Kelly Dove for their support.
And in all honest I want to thank Mr. Powers for his incredible patience with me that day.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaHkE6Dx3gQ&feature=youtu.be


-Roberto

khan973
08-16-2012, 11:32 AM
Great video!
too bad the focus is on the door, I guess there was not so much time to test everything.
But everything is clear, just one part missing to my opinion is the fact that we can render on 999 nodes with one license, this is a real deal as it allows to save lots of money!

Ryan Roye
08-16-2012, 11:36 AM
Rob pretty much hits the nail on the head when he mentions the bit about a complex production pipeline NOT being mandatory to effectively use the software in a meaningful capacity. I love that Lightwave scales so well from small to large. Us little guys gotta produce content too, you know :)

DrStrik9
08-16-2012, 11:55 AM
Nice video! Man can that guy TALK! :+)

Fsoto
08-16-2012, 12:37 PM
Good video; thanks for sharing

rcallicotte
08-16-2012, 12:53 PM
Thanks for sharing this.

Philbert
08-16-2012, 02:45 PM
Re-shared on Google+

COBRASoft
08-16-2012, 03:22 PM
Nice one...

Any1 seen this video? http://youtu.be/I7f34ZHNnH0

Darksuit
08-16-2012, 03:42 PM
Nice Video Roberto

SaturnX
08-16-2012, 03:53 PM
For those of us not being able to make it to Siggraph, that one angle of Autodesk and Lightwave3D sitting opposite one another at the front entrance... spoke volumes about the direction Lightwave is going. :thumbsup:

erikals
08-16-2012, 04:13 PM
yep :]

one thing though, at the end of the video it could say lightwave3d.com

SplineGod
08-16-2012, 04:29 PM
Nice job Roberto. :)
What I would like to see NT do since they have gotten their marketing act together is professinally produce a video aimed at non 11.5 users and show/demonstrate the things Robs talking about. Show clearly the common sort of problems people run into and how LW solves those issues etc etc. It would be nice to have such a thing to point interested parties to.

data3d
08-16-2012, 04:33 PM
Nicely done on the interview, Roberto. Rob did a great summarization of the advantages of LW3D, and it also shows how focused he has been on earning back the legitimacy of owning and using Lightwave. This can be a great tool to bring new users into the fold, or at least start the conversation.

Paul_Boland
08-16-2012, 05:41 PM
If this is a promo video for Lightwave for non-Lightwave users, shouldn't it show something of Lightwave 11.5 in action, some eye-candy to make non-Lightwave users go "Ooh WOW!! I want that!!"?

robertoortiz
08-16-2012, 06:15 PM
This isomething I produced(it is on the disclaimer), to prove that there is indeed a market for people looking to crossover.

BTW Chuck can attest I had set this up BEFORE the announcement of LW 11.5.

I am glad you guys liked it, I plan to do more videos like this one in the future.

Paul_Boland
08-16-2012, 06:39 PM
This isomething I produced(it is on the disclaimer), to prove that there is indeed a market for people looking to crossover.

Sorry, can I just clarify that I was NOT putting the video down. An interview with the man in charge is always good to see. I was just saying that since it is a pitch of Lightwave 11.5 for non-Lightwave user, wouldn't it be better to show some of Lightwave 11.5. But again, I was NOT putting down the video. Sorry if that how my comment above came across.

robertoortiz
08-16-2012, 06:50 PM
No problem...
:)

To be honest I produced it because I am sick and tired of all the mis information going around LW from non users.

DigitalSorcery8
08-16-2012, 06:52 PM
I thought it was a good video as well - pretty much a condensed version of what Rob was saying all throughout the other Siggraph videos. I have to say again... Rob's enthusiasm IS contagious and a much needed boost for LW.

Happy to see things apparently turning around and moving forward. :thumbsup:

fablefox
08-16-2012, 07:06 PM
Why AD logo in the upper left corner wasn't edited out? Most videos I saw (specially the making of on dvd) usually remove logos, even if it on actor shirt. (eg: actor wear his NIKE shirt to voice over recording, when sit for an interview, the NIKE will be blurred in the making of video).

just a question...

i know this video might fall under "documentary' category, but still... we are talking about marketing a competitive product here...

hrgiger
08-16-2012, 07:11 PM
A lot of the new interchange work that has been done on LightWave is great and I like the improved marketing that NT has been doing, but the one thing I don't understand is why they keep stressing that LightWave is complete out of the box solution, from beginning to end, like every other mature 3D app isn't or something.

erikals
08-16-2012, 07:33 PM
probably to get out to new customers, who are unaware of Lightwave's capabilities.

Celshader
08-16-2012, 07:37 PM
...the one thing I don't understand is why they keep stressing that LightWave is complete out of the box solution, from beginning to end, like every other mature 3D app isn't or something.

From what I've seen of other pipelines here in Los Angeles, no one uses 3DS Max or Maya alone. For example, a lot of Max/Maya houses render in VRay, which does not ship with Max or Maya. Sony Imageworks rendered its Maya stuff in Arnold, which also does not ship with Maya.

Max/Maya artists out here render in mental ray only when the studio can't afford VRay, Renderman, Arnold or LightWave.

Maya also does not work at its best out-of-the-box. From my experience, Maya works best when TDs mold it to fit a specific project using custom scripts.

In contrast, it is possible to get projects done with LightWave alone, without any custom tools, third-party software or programming. I saw this at Radical 3D on most of DOGFIGHTS and the space scenes they created for NASA. Most of the Radical 3D shots just required an artist, a copy of LightWave and a render farm. I guarantee that ILM did not use stock Maya for RED TAILS and the space scenes in the STAR WARS prequels.

hrgiger
08-16-2012, 08:12 PM
From what I've seen of other pipelines here in Los Angeles, no one uses 3DS Max or Maya alone. For example, a lot of Max/Maya houses render in VRay, which does not ship with Max or Maya. Sony Imageworks rendered its Maya stuff in Arnold, which also does not ship with Maya.

Max/Maya artists out here render in mental ray only when the studio can't afford VRay, Renderman, Arnold or LightWave.

Maya also does not work at its best out-of-the-box. From my experience, Maya works best when TDs mold it to fit a specific project using custom scripts.

In contrast, it is possible to get projects done with LightWave alone, without any custom tools, third-party software or programming. I saw this at Radical 3D on most of DOGFIGHTS and the space scenes they created for NASA. Most of the Radical 3D shots just required an artist, a copy of LightWave and a render farm. I guarantee that ILM did not use stock Maya for RED TAILS and the space scenes in the STAR WARS prequels.

I wasn't referring to stuidos necessarily, actually I wasn't even thinking of them at all. I was actually pointing to the references to the one man band as it were, and a lone artist using software to bring his own story to completion.

Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would use Maya anyway outside of professional studios since Maya is able to be completely customized and tailored to a pipeline with its open scripting. But for a single artist? Can't imagine...

One of my good friends uses XSI and finds it more then adequate for all intents and purposes, more then he ever found LightWave. Of course now he has come to use the Arnold renderer, just simply because its so damn fast, but then again, I think a lot of LightWave artists would use Arnold too if it was available to them. After all, a lot of artists really seem to like the Kray render engine.

robertoortiz
08-16-2012, 08:18 PM
And we agreed that pound for pound XSI is the best program out there.
BUT
Ask students between 16 - 20 if they have heard of it.
What AD is doing with XSI is a crime.
I did last SIGGRAPH, while hanging out with student volunteers.
It is scary how few of them have heard of XSI.


Anyway, getting back on topic, I do agree with the vision Rob Powers seems to have of LW.
It can be a tool that a one man studio can use, or it can fit right into a studio pipeline.

-R

Celshader
08-16-2012, 08:31 PM
Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would use Maya anyway outside of professional studios since Maya is able to be completely customized and tailored to a pipeline with its open scripting. But for a single artist? Can't imagine...

In Los Angeles, 90% of the VFX work uses Maya, and most of the artists out here work as specialists in Maya pipelines.

A software package that lets artists execute an idea from start-to-render could appeal to them.

robertoortiz
08-16-2012, 08:44 PM
A software package that lets artists execute an idea from start-to-render could appeal to them.

Agreed.
During SIGGRAPH I was in lecture by the team who did the Disney short film paperman.
One of the leads of the project was talking about his failed efforts into doing a one man project using Maya.
I bet his frustration is not unique.

GandB
08-16-2012, 08:45 PM
Thanks for taking the time to put this together Robert. It certainly helped me to solidify a few of the quandaries around here (especially putting to rest the "dongle or no dongle" issue). This has pushed me a little further to thinking about upgrading my LW in the near future, rather than purchasing a sidegrade to Modo. I will continue to watch what pops up here. ;)

Philbert
08-16-2012, 09:15 PM
Nice one...

Any1 seen this video? http://youtu.be/I7f34ZHNnH0

I had not seen that video but even though I can't stand Full Sail I sat here with my tablet and watched the whole thing. Sad how empty the chairs were by the end. I think at DAVE the seats would be full until the last minute.


Maya also does not work at its best out-of-the-box. From my experience, Maya works best when TDs mold it to fit a specific project using custom scripts.

This reminds me of a well known artist, not sure if he'd want his name mentioned, but he worked at Disney (and may still), he was talking about working on the movie Bolt and saying how you could see Maya in the making-of videos on the DVD. He made it very clear though, that maya was only used as a UI and that just about every tool they used for that film was specially made by Disney, the maya UI just gave the artists something familiar to work with.

Dexter2999
08-16-2012, 11:12 PM
In Los Angeles, 90% of the VFX work uses Maya, and most of the artists out here work as specialists in Maya pipelines.

Everybody uses it, because everybody uses it.

Schools teach it because studios use it.
Studios use it because it has the largest talent pool to pick from because schools teach it.

Well, that and I believe that early on studios used to like to brag about using Maya because it cost an arm and a leg. It was a status symbol to talk about having it in your pipeline. No studio wanted to be "one upped" so it was deemed a "must have".

And so Maya became ubiquitous.

erikals
08-16-2012, 11:18 PM
maybe it was a must-have...

was...

DigitalSorcery8
08-16-2012, 11:20 PM
maybe it was a must-have...

was...

I know nothing about the studio system, but I would say that it's still a "must have" for large studios - primarily because of the scalability of the Maya pipeline.

That and the number of trained users. :)

erikals
08-16-2012, 11:32 PM
... and the high(er) polygon handling :]

Philbert
08-16-2012, 11:33 PM
Well there's also the issue of the guys who pay the bills at some studios saying "that's what X movie used, so that's what we'll use".

fablefox
08-17-2012, 03:27 AM
People, people,

I know we are on LW forum here, but let face the fact. It was configurable, that was the selling point - and it just snowball from there. The number of plug ins available, talent pool, tutorials and training videos, training schools, too ingrained to change, etc only solidify the vicious circle.

And that is exactly what plague LW currently:
- lack of plug ins
- lack of tutorials / books
- lack of talent pool
- lack of school teaching it
- etc. etc.

But LW is heading to the right direction. Can't blame him for what previous head did, but Rob Powers is doing the right thing - for lightwave.

SplineGod
08-17-2012, 04:20 AM
People, people,

I know we are on LW forum here, but let face the fact. It was configurable, that was the selling point - and it just snowball from there. The number of plug ins available, talent pool, tutorials and training videos, training schools, too ingrained to change, etc only solidify the vicious circle.

And that is exactly what plague LW currently:
- lack of plug ins
- lack of tutorials / books
- lack of talent pool
- lack of school teaching it
- etc. etc.

But LW is heading to the right direction. Can't blame him for what previous head did, but Rob Powers is doing the right thing - for lightwave.

While true to a degree some might view that as an opportunity. :)

robertoortiz
08-17-2012, 05:52 AM
While true to a degree some might view that as an opportunity. :)

I agree 100%.
This is a chance to learn from the mistake others have have, and NewTek has made in the past.

hrgiger
08-17-2012, 06:39 AM
And that is why myself and others supported the CORE project. A unified application which had a completley open SDK which would not limit 3rd party creation in any way. Also complete nodal access so that artists could create their own tools with simple components if they chose to. Everything was animatable, the interface was customizable (it could have been better in this regard), polygon performance was much better, it had a modifier stack... The bottom line is it promised to be much more flexible then current LightWave and that's why Maya continues to dominate because it is flexible and allows studios to customize it to whatever they need and write whatever tools they need for the projects they are working on. Well that and the fact that it has earned a reputation and you cant swing a dead cat without having someone tell you if you want to work in the industry you need to learn Maya. It's going to take something really special to knock Maya out of that position and frankly LightWave is just not that software right now. Its not open or flexible enough. Actually I think FabricEngine (http://fabricengine.com/) is going to make some waves in the industry. Its being created by former developers of XSI. If there's a maya killer out there, its Fabricengine.

But back to LightWave as it stands now- I see some areas which I think have made great improvement over the last few years which I think will aid in keeping LightWave relevant. I think the interchange tools are extremely important- the more you can get LightWave to work with other software and fit into a pipeline, all the better. FBX, unity, Zbrush, After affects, etc... all good things. And while some of the new features that have been brought about in 11 are very useful, I would like to see more focus in future releases on both program performance and flexibility. Would be nice to see LightWave have an open architecture eventually.

lardbros
08-17-2012, 06:44 AM
Nice video! Man can that guy TALK! :+)

He certainly can... he was like this for the whole exhibition.

It's great to have such a good sales talk AND technical knowledge in a single neat Rob P package! :)

Went to the Autodesk stand to ask some questions regarding bugs (texture baker not utilising colour space settings) in 3dsMax, and had to ask the first guy I spoke to if he was technical or in sales... his answer was 'errrm, kind of both'...

He had no idea what I was on about, just said 'A friend was using that the other day, and it seemed fine'...

oh, great...!


Anyway, the Newtek stand it was easy to find techy people to ask questions and get some good info from. They were all more than happy to help.

AbnRanger
08-17-2012, 06:50 AM
From what I've seen of other pipelines here in Los Angeles, no one uses 3DS Max or Maya alone. For example, a lot of Max/Maya houses render in VRay, which does not ship with Max or Maya. Sony Imageworks rendered its Maya stuff in Arnold, which also does not ship with Maya.

Max/Maya artists out here render in mental ray only when the studio can't afford VRay, Renderman, Arnold or LightWave.

Maya also does not work at its best out-of-the-box. From my experience, Maya works best when TDs mold it to fit a specific project using custom scripts.

In contrast, it is possible to get projects done with LightWave alone, without any custom tools, third-party software or programming. I saw this at Radical 3D on most of DOGFIGHTS and the space scenes they created for NASA. Most of the Radical 3D shots just required an artist, a copy of LightWave and a render farm. I guarantee that ILM did not use stock Maya for RED TAILS and the space scenes in the STAR WARS prequels.Jen, do you think you could get someone there at Pixomondo to do a comparison demonstration of VRay RT & iRay vs VPR....focusing on the limitations of the former.

VRay RT actually operates outside the framework of 3ds Max, which is both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing in that it is not limited by 3ds Max's internal glitches, and is thus rock solid. However, the tradeoff there is that it is extremely limited in regards to shader/material/lighting support. It doesn't support post effects at all.

But Cebas' finalRender (a competing renderer for Max) takes the opposite approach. It's IPR is more internally integrated, and can even provide near realtime previews of volumetric effects (ala HyperVoxels)...much like VPR and FPrime.

However, that approach leaves it at the mercy of 3ds Max's internal problems and thus it's too crash prone to even be useful. I have asked Edwin, at Cebas, repeatedly to do something about this problem, and they consistently point to Autodesk's own admission that almost nothing can be done.

iRay is still rather limited as well. So, if nothing else, it would be good to exploit those limitations and sell the integrated nature of VPR with LW's native renderer...with real world examples.

GraphXs
08-17-2012, 06:52 AM
Nice one...

Any1 seen this video? http://youtu.be/I7f34ZHNnH0

Wow...wonder if full sail would ever teach LW.

erikals
08-17-2012, 07:40 AM
Any1 seen this video? http://youtu.be/I7f34ZHNnH0
Wow...wonder if full sail would ever teach LW.

nice. :]

rednova
08-17-2012, 07:53 AM
I enjoyed the video.

khan973
08-17-2012, 08:55 AM
If there's a maya killer out there, its Fabricengine.

Wow! I wasn't aware of that !!!
It makes a lot of sense to have a tool that allows you to code whatever you need.
It's like a game engine for game developpers!
Many big companies use Maya just like a plateform to display and interact with whatever they have designed!
Definitely a Maya killer for a big part of the indutry!

Celshader
08-17-2012, 09:01 AM
It's going to take something really special to knock Maya out of that position...

For feature film VFX, I'm betting on Houdini. BRAVE showed off Pixar's spiffy new Houdini-based VFX pipeline. Dreamworks bought a site license of Houdini. Houdni's already entrenched in the biggest Los Angeles VFX studios, since they need Houdini to create the impossible VFX that Maya cannot do.

If CORE had dragged on for much longer, Dave and I would definitely be Houdini artists by now. However, Rob's direction kept LightWave in the Los Angeles game, so we're still earning our living as LightWave artists.


Actually I think FabricEngine is going to make some waves in the industry. Its being created by former developers of XSI. If there's a maya killer out there, its Fabricengine.

Now I know I'm old and jaded. I glanced over the FabricEngine website and it reminded me of project:messiah back in 1999 -- a separate, faster character animation system with a realtime connection and realtime updating for the host package. project:messiah made headway into a lot of studios until Maya dropped its price from $30,000 to $2000. Then messiah disappeared from pipelines as studios replaced it with Maya.

I wish FabricEngine well, but you never know what'll happen out here.


Jen, do you think you could get someone there at Pixomondo to do a comparison demonstration of VRay RT & iRay vs VPR....focusing on the limitations of the former.

I'm not sure. I've seen VRay, mental ray and finalRender around here, but it looks like Max/Maya artists prefer VRay.

Dexter2999
08-17-2012, 09:22 AM
And that is why myself and others supported the CORE project. A unified application which had a completley open SDK which would not limit 3rd party creation in any way. Also complete nodal access so that artists could create their own tools with simple components if they chose to. Everything was animatable, the interface was customizable (it could have been better in this regard), polygon performance was much better, it had a modifier stack...

::sigh:: It was an idea that had some good points. In reality it had Maya navigation, Maya shortcuts, icons, almost two years over schedule...and it didn't actually DO anything except run Bullet simulations that had to be ported over to Layout. It wasn't integrated with Modeler and Layout. It was a unified application that didn't stand on it's own and made a two part application into a three part application. The basis of the whole interface was based on QT which was owned by Nokia and, (in my mind and hindsight) a questionable platform as Nokia had announced that they were going to cease development on it. (This was done around the time LW10 was released.) And they have now sold it off to a much smaller dev. group.

I'm not trying to start a flame war over this, but there is a reason CORE failed. Let's not romanticize it by only remembering the good parts, forgetting the bad, and lamenting "loves never meant to be."

EDIT: Perhaps I am being overly harsh. CORE could do some modeling. But I wouldn't know. I gave up testing when drawing a box would crash the software and dev. team seemed to ignore my complaints about not having LW shortcuts for like six months. How are your beta users supposed to test the software when you changed EVERYTHING? Did they intend to trash the entire existing userbase just to become a Maya clone and attract new users?
And I might be digging a hole for myself here but I got a bad feeling the very first time I read "ElectricImage".

robertoortiz
08-17-2012, 10:13 AM
Core served a purpouse, and frankly we are now reaping the benefits.
BTW I have been thinking a lot about the 3D market
Why does Autodesk, going towards medim to big studios?
Arent there more indie artists/ samll studios out there?

Ok how about going after the same market that Adobe goes for?
They seem to be squarely aim to independent artists to full studios.
And it has worked very well for them.

I am blown away how Autodesk seem to be aiming higher and higher in terms of the market they are looking for.

Dexter2999
08-17-2012, 10:34 AM
I absolutely agree we are seeing fruit from the CORE endeavor.

As for AD's market strategy, medium to big studios mean volume sales. In effect seeing the largest return with the least expense and effort. They charge what they do because they know they can get it. Dropping the price would give the impression of "de-valuing" their product. Also, a higher price point subsidizes and justifies the free EDU seats.

Even indie artists seem to get sucked into the "have to use Maya because that is what the big studios use" mentality. Either by doing whatever they have to just to buy a seat or by using illegal copies.

Adobe has only really ever had Corel as meaningful competition. And again, everybody uses it because everybody uses it. How many schools teach Corel? Number of jobs available? User base? Legal or warez? Adobe sits in a position nearly identical to AD.

khan973
08-17-2012, 10:49 AM
companies like that are trapped in their own game.
They don't innovate. They lead for the wrong reasons as you pointed out and once a game changer comes in the race, they can still buy it to kill it.
The key is innovation + Marketing.
How many people know that LW was the first to bet on Subdivision surfaces as a strandard or that it was the first to integrate Hdri, to have native GI, native VPR and so on?
All these efforts would have brought better returns, reward, incom with a better marketing.

I have a feeling that LihgtWave 3D Group is well aware of that issue and will change the game. They start to innovate again with innovative tools (PS Move, soon Kinect support, GENOMA...) + they communicate. They could communicate more but it's a really good start!
The website serves the purpose and Siggraph presentation too. Now the toughest part is coming: get in touch with schools, studios, artists and bigger facilities.

For the facilities and Studio, being in Burbank is great. They need to be present in other countries too.

hrgiger
08-17-2012, 10:51 AM
::sigh:: It was an idea that had some good points. In reality it had Maya navigation, Maya shortcuts, icons, almost two years over schedule...and it didn't actually DO anything except run Bullet simulations that had to be ported over to Layout. It wasn't integrated with Modeler and Layout. It was a unified application that didn't stand on it's own and made a two part application into a three part application. The basis of the whole interface was based on QT which was owned by Nokia and, (in my mind and hindsight) a questionable platform as Nokia had announced that they were going to cease development on it. (This was done around the time LW10 was released.) And they have now sold it off to a much smaller dev. group.

I'm not trying to start a flame war over this, but there is a reason CORE failed. Let's not romanticize it by only remembering the good parts, forgetting the bad, and lamenting "loves never meant to be."



There's really no effort to romanticize CORE. What I'm speaking about were the ideas behind the CORE project which consequently is what has made Maya such a centerpiece of the industry. The idea of having an open architecture, flexibility, and the ability for artists to make their own tools instead of waiting for someone else to write them. The ideas that were presented to us from the onset of CORE certainly did not show in its implementation which I'm not at all trying to defend.

This thread is about Rob speaking to those users who do not use LightWave and what might appeal to them to ever consider using the program. As I said, I think the interchange tools should be one key part of that effort. But I get the impression that NT feels the other key part of that is just features that sound real good in a marketing pitch. Why don't they talk more about how they're improving the flexibility, performance, or extensibility of LightWave(as well as integration)? Is it because they're not really doing it, or they don't think that seems interesting enough to discuss?

Dexter2999
08-17-2012, 11:20 AM
What I like most about the message Rob is trying to get out there is that, yes, LW can do screen ready visual effects end to end inside one package, but it isn't a standalone proprietary software hermit either. LW is ready and capable to jump in and work in existing pipelines.

I think they have made strides in 11.5 that speak to the masses rather than just the studios. Things like:
MASSES: Rigging is hard!
LW3DG: Here, let us make that easier. Here's Genoma.
MASSES: I wish that LW worked with my compositing program better.
LW3DG: Now it works better with After Effects.

The advanced 3D camera stuff in 10 was great for the "big boys" but vast majority of us won't use that stuff except to "play" with. I feel like 11 speaks more to the masses. Much like Nuke interaction would put LW into a studio pipeline, but AE interaction is more useful to the vast majority of users. (Although AELink was already a thing.)

It's a dance to keep the package relevant to both markets, but I think Rob and company are doing a great job of it.

DigitalSorcery8
08-17-2012, 01:49 PM
But back to LightWave as it stands now- I see some areas which I think have made great improvement over the last few years which I think will aid in keeping LightWave relevant. I think the interchange tools are extremely important- the more you can get LightWave to work with other software and fit into a pipeline, all the better. FBX, unity, Zbrush, After affects, etc... all good things. And while some of the new features that have been brought about in 11 are very useful, I would like to see more focus in future releases on both program performance and flexibility. Would be nice to see LightWave have an open architecture eventually.

Definitely! :thumbsup:

The under-the-hood optimizations are extremely important. Higher polygon handling is one; be able to have three characters rigged and animated without slowing down the system to a crawl is another. And there are LOTS of other areas where the behind-the-scenes items need serious updating. I would PAY for a full point upgrade that had major enhancements to the back-end program and no new features. It certainly woudn't be an extremely sexy release, but it would improve performance.

Darth Mole
08-17-2012, 02:57 PM
I'm sold! Now where's my 11.5?

AbnRanger
08-17-2012, 02:59 PM
...I'm not sure. I've seen VRay, mental ray and finalRender around here, but it looks like Max/Maya artists prefer VRay.I'm sure they do, and indeed VRay does a splendid job on renders (although finalRender is much faster on all the tests I've done with identical scenes), and it's RT feature is very, very nice....if it didn't have all those d_mn limitations I mentioned. Same thing with iRay.

VRay RT (Interactive Preview Render) doesn't support SSS. No post effects (volumetric/voxel shaders ala Hyper Voxels or Turbulence). Dielectric/glass shaders aren't accurate...the list goes on. With that in mind, I'm sure a stronger case could be made to use Lightwave more often there....no?

http://www.spot3d.com/vray/help/rt100/unsupported_features.htm#material

I've been a Max-head, myself, and it's largely because of these limitations that I've become more and more impressed with VPR.

erikals
08-18-2012, 05:33 AM
  
CORE should have focused on one area first >

replacing Modeler
or
replacing Layout

then expanded from there...

...wonder what they're doing with the technology now...
  

SplineGod
08-18-2012, 07:27 AM
Shoulda, woulda, coulda...:)
Im glad that whatever tech was done for Core is now in LW and continues to go into LW.
I greatly like what Ive seen so far especially the virtual studio tools. I dont think ppl yet realize just how that will change things dramatically in production work....very exciting times. This is way better then I thought it was going to be and along with VPR is a very impressive workflow. The rest is just icing. I foresee this opening up alot more doors for Lightwave. I think we see the Newtek that weve all wanted to see for years. This siggraph was impressive and something I easily would have sent people to see to get the proper impression of Lightwave. Marketing was excellent, Website cool and slick. Great job guys and very glad that NT hired Rob. If anyone knows what LW needs to fit into those pipelines he would and obviously does. :)

aidenvfx
08-18-2012, 11:59 AM
Nice job Roberto. :)
What I would like to see NT do since they have gotten their marketing act together is professinally produce a video aimed at non 11.5 users and show/demonstrate the things Robs talking about. Show clearly the common sort of problems people run into and how LW solves those issues etc etc. It would be nice to have such a thing to point interested parties to.

Agreed however I would love to see him present the material more how he does this presentation linked below He is more low key and less of a pitchman in this video then in most the LW presentations he has given. I would also think it would be useful to show LW from a aspect of problem solving and speed. Saying LW will do something and showing what it does are two different things.

This is not as a negative towards Rob just it was very interesting to see him present in a different fashion and one that I preferred.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7f34ZHNnH0

Dexter2999
08-18-2012, 12:49 PM
Agreed however I would love to see him present the material more how he does this presentation linked below He is more low key and less of a pitchman in this video then in most the LW presentations he has given. I would also think it would be useful to show LW from a aspect of problem solving and speed. Saying LW will do something and showing what it does are two different things.

This is not as a negative towards Rob just it was very interesting to see him present in a different fashion and one that I preferred.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7f34ZHNnH0

Well, "pitchman" could be because he isn't teaching a class at SIGGRAPH. He is doing a "SHOW". The idea is to be enthusiastic about something to create excitement in others. You also have to compete for attention from the other trade show boothes. If they tone it down then they run the risk of someone "upstaging them" with their Tony Little style presentation.

I also know there was at least one comment in the thread about the PixarSub D's where someone wasn't impressed by what they saw. The presenter was very calm and demonstrating the benefits in a straightforward manor. As a result the improvement appears to have been missed by the commenter. Now had the presenter had more a "pitch" and pointed out the feature and called for applause from the audience perhaps that might not have happend.

It is what it is.

MentalFish
08-18-2012, 12:52 PM
  
CORE should have focused on one area first >

replacing Modeler
or
replacing Layout

then expanded from there...

...wonder what they're doing with the technology now...
  

If they had announced it when it was a ready to use programmable/scriptable, GUI-less, procedurally driven render engine only, they wouldn't have face planted as hard as they did. Trying to make Houdini from scratch within a year is a recipe for failure and ridicule. If it replaced the Hub, pitched as the next-gen framework for LW, then it would do fine. Rendering only in v1, modeling in v2, riggin/animation in v3 and so on. But ye, shoulda, coulda, woulda...

I am super happy with the current direction though, and would like to see a 5 minute, feature and workflow driven sales pitch from he LW team, so I can plopp it in front of non-believers :lwicon: :thumbsup:

Also, I think a chill pill is needed once in a while when we see new improvements added to LW but the feature/areas you wanted yourself, isn't among them. One recent one is the performance in Modeler on high poly counts. I seriously doubt that the LW team is ignoring it, it's just not the easiest of things to fix. Heck, even the "child" of Modeler (modo) is sluggish when dealing with high poly models (when dealing directly with polygons).

aidenvfx
08-18-2012, 01:25 PM
Well, "pitchman" could be because he isn't teaching a class at SIGGRAPH. He is doing a "SHOW". The idea is to be enthusiastic about something to create excitement in others. You also have to compete for attention from the other trade show boothes. If they tone it down then they run the risk of someone "upstaging them" with their Tony Little style presentation.

I also know there was at least one comment in the thread about the PixarSub D's where someone wasn't impressed by what they saw. The presenter was very calm and demonstrating the benefits in a straightforward manor. As a result the improvement appears to have been missed by the commenter. Now had the presenter had more a "pitch" and pointed out the feature and called for applause from the audience perhaps that might not have happend.

It is what it is.

I don't think either way is wrong. What I found interesting was Rob's different presentation styles based on his audience or venue which ever you would like to select. This was the first video I saw Rob present in a different manor which I found both interesting and I personally preferred it better.

As for the subD presenter being lower key it also comes down to how good the presenter is and if the presentation is able to link concept to value and also relevance.

I would say the tech demos Newtek presented did this very well. The new edge select tools shown I can see a instant use and value for.

But don't get me wrong I think Rob Powers has done a fantastic job since he arrived. It has being his leadership and the work of the LW team to bring LW 11 to life that made me stay with LW instead of moving over to Modo which I could have done because of a old licence of modo I have for about the same price as the LW 11 upgrade cost. I am very happy that I bought into LW when I did and having played around with some other 3D programs since LW I have become even happier with my purchase. Now with the 360 degree turn Lightwave has made under the leadership of Rob I couldn't be happier with my decision to buy into Lightwave.

Philbert
08-18-2012, 05:03 PM
  
CORE should have focused on one area first >
  

That was the idea, in fact they said it had to focus on Modeling tools first because they needed to be animatable before they could start on animation.

MentalFish
08-18-2012, 05:06 PM
That was the idea, in fact they said it had to focus on Modeling tools first because they needed to be animatable before they could start on animation.

That's what they were saying, but not doing ;)

erikals
08-18-2012, 05:08 PM
yep, didn't seem quite like it...

ZE_COLMEIA
08-19-2012, 08:48 AM
Actually part of AD's marketing polytics is to give away complete licenses to educational centers (Colleges, Universitys, schools etc). so they guarantee a new user base every season and perpetuate their tools and dogmas and have minds to develop workflows for free (teachers and small teams inside the schools) and free visibility.

Cageman
08-19-2012, 09:52 AM
Actually part of AD's marketing polytics is to give away complete licenses to educational centers (Colleges, Universitys, schools etc). so they guarantee a new user base every season and perpetuate their tools and dogmas and have minds to develop workflows for free (teachers and small teams inside the schools) and free visibility.

Hmm... I was under the impression that PLE is the only edu-versions left for ADs products, and as such, they are allready free... ? Why would AD need to give those away? Or have I missed something now? :stumped:

EDIT: I would argue that NT needs to think about a PLE-version for LW... non-limited in terms of function, except for watermarks when using the renderengine and certain other limitations regarding exporting stuff out of LW (fbx, mdd, etc). Essentially making it fully working within LW itself, but limited regarding export/render. If a student really needs to get away from the limits regarding those things, they can get the edu-version for $150.

EDIT2: Back in the days when I purchased LW EDU version, I had to pay $495, so it is good to see NT has reduced the price for it! Especially since the pro-version has gone up in price! :)

ZE_COLMEIA
08-19-2012, 10:17 AM
A friend of mine give the info that AD sent licenses to the college he teaches, he just said "They gave to us", maybe it's the PLE, I will ask for more info.

Darksuit
08-19-2012, 10:23 AM
its not a PLE ...
PLE (Public Learning Edition) where as the other is a STU or EDU verision Below is the link to the info

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=14185424

ZE_COLMEIA
08-19-2012, 10:30 AM
My Fault.

AbnRanger
08-19-2012, 10:24 PM
Actually part of AD's marketing polytics is to give away complete licenses to educational centers (Colleges, Universitys, schools etc). so they guarantee a new user base every season and perpetuate their tools and dogmas and have minds to develop workflows for free (teachers and small teams inside the schools) and free visibility.That's true, but they've only been free the past few years. I remember having to pay about $700 just for 3ds Max EDU. Feel pretty stupid for spending that much as a student, just to learn an app. This is why I can't understand Maxon's still charging this much for C4D Studio. What student is going to pay that, when they can use the whole AD suite for free?

Philbert
08-19-2012, 10:34 PM
What's nice about the LW student edition is that even though you have to pay for it, your next upgrade gets you up to Pro level. And if you buy close to the next release, your upgrade is free. So you end up paying a very small price for Pro software.

kopperdrake
08-20-2012, 07:12 AM
I have a feeling that LihgtWave 3D Group is well aware of that issue and will change the game. They start to innovate again with innovative tools (PS Move, soon Kinect support, GENOMA...) + they communicate. They could communicate more but it's a really good start!
The website serves the purpose and Siggraph presentation too. Now the toughest part is coming: get in touch with schools, studios, artists and bigger facilities.

For the facilities and Studio, being in Burbank is great. They need to be present in other countries too.

Here's hoping that the LightWave Group does remain independent in the long term. I can't think of a worse ending than they become so sucessful that AD feels they need to buy them up.

lardbros
08-21-2012, 03:27 PM
I don't think either way is wrong. What I found interesting was Rob's different presentation styles based on his audience or venue which ever you would like to select. This was the first video I saw Rob present in a different manor which I found both interesting and I personally preferred it better.



I do agree, but I don't think Rob P is purposefully changing the way he presents. His words are the same... well thought out and smart with a hint of comedy.


I think the venue is what makes the difference... the Siggraph stand was VERY VERY noisy indeed, and everyone had to shout in order to be heard. Music from the right, showreels to the left, and Autodesk doing presentations 15 feet away... it was tough to hear a person stood next to you, so think it could sound more like a sales pitch as he had to talk louder. The venue in the video above was great, very quiet, and it made it seem more personal.

Either way, it's great to have very good sales pitches from someone who is also very technical... best of both worlds. His passion can be easily seen in everything he presents, and that's very important. :)

pixelranger
08-29-2012, 08:57 AM
IMO I think Rob did a great job with the non-LW-user pitch.

There are some key points that I think is more important than showing eye candy features and stuff like 'look, we created this robot in LW' when pitching to (serious) non-LW-users. Especially when thinking long term and striving to influence a shift in the industry.

As important as students, hobbyists and small studios are, the fact is that Newtek would benefit from more 2-way communication (and maybe even development) with larger studios demanding high performance, scalability and exactly the ability to use it in a complex production pipeline. Most of these studios have their own rnd departments that come up with clever stuff and are not afraid to provide specific requests/feedback to Newtek, making for dynamic and constructive development cycles with real life challenges in focus.
This has happened before (for instance with Embassy during the making of District 9 during the LW 9.5 (I think) dev period, and, I'm sure, during Rob Power's involvement in Avatar.

Pointing out, like chazriker said, that a complex production pipeline is NOT being mandatory to effectively use the software, is like saying "Use Photoshop! It's great for retouching photos". It's something everybody knows. Everyone is aware that LW is a good choice for a one man cg-army or a small studio that doesn't rely on having a pipeline of significant proportions.

What holds (or held) larger studios back from considering LW was the fact that it was very hard to integrate in any pipeline that was to be simultaneously flexible and rigid, mostly due to the lack of scriptability. With the implementation of python this has (or at least should, depending on how well and thoroughly it is implemented, with which I have no experience to say anything about it) by and large removed this as a reason not to consider LW.

What's better, is that it also (for tech savvy TDs or studios with resources enough to facilitate some form of rnd or pipeline technicians/artists) reduces the need for 3rd party plugins. With a comprehensive and well documented API anyone can write plugins and with so much open source code and publicly released white papers these days, there's no reason for any of the ones mentioned above to be complaining about any lack of plugins.

As for the rest of fablefox'es points:

Lack of tutorials/books:
Whaaat? There are tons. Always have been. Especially books for beginners. And with a bit of experience you know that doing something in one software isn't that different from doing it in another.

Lack of talent pool:
Judging from the forums (this included) I want to strongly disagree.

Lack of schools teaching it:
Like Dexter2999 said, Schools teaches whatever the studios use.
However, studios uses whatever gets the job done in a cost effective manner (It's about money). And "cost effective" means streamlining logistics, workflow and managing the flow of data, and that means being able to set up a pipeline.
Schools want money. They get money from students. Students want education that leads to them getting jobs at studios.
Hence, for a school to be able to brag about employment rates, they need to provide tuition in whatever leads their students to getting jobs. Which again, leads back to trying to get larger studios to consider, and actually adopt LW as a work horse in their tool arsenal (because like Celshader mentioned, there's no big studio that only uses one software). And again we're back to the necessity of being able to either insert the software into an existing pipeline, or revolve a pipeline around it.

Just my 2 cents...

Celshader
08-29-2012, 09:16 AM
What holds (or held) larger studios back from considering LW was the fact that it was very hard to integrate in any pipeline that was to be simultaneously flexible and rigid, mostly due to the lack of scriptability. With the implementation of python this has (or at least should, depending on how well and thoroughly it is implemented, with which I have no experience to say anything about it) by and large removed this as a reason not to consider LW.

For the record, I've been using Python in LW pipelines at mid-to-large sized studios since I first met Python in 2006. The text-based LWS file format makes it super-easy to write pipeline scripts for LightWave. I've also met artists who've hacked their LWS files with Notepad 10+ years ago.

The LW11 Python implementation is nice, but that text-based LWS file format has been a critical asset to studio production for years.


Everyone is aware that LW is a good choice for a one man cg-army or a small studio that doesn't rely on having a pipeline of significant proportions.

I'm skeptical that everyone is aware, because of my own ignorance of other software packages. Until a month ago I honestly thought 3DS Max was a specialist package like Maya. A Max artist with 23 years' experience told me last month that Max is a generalist package like LightWave, not a package that requires an army of TDs like Maya. So this makes Max another option for a one-man CG army or a small studio without an existing pipeline.

I'm sure there's non-LightWavers out there with similar misconceptions about what LightWave can do.

AbnRanger
08-29-2012, 04:53 PM
Regarding what is taught in schools...even 3ds Max gets the shaft. It consistently outsells Maya and Softimage combined, yet it's Maya's Hollywood roots/lineage that keeps it in the default position at most every institution that has an Animation program. Very odd when you consider the games industry dwarfs the movie industry.

lardbros
08-30-2012, 05:53 AM
:D 3dsMax is a generalist tool :D ... that's why I use both LW and 3dsMax. Sadly I've got to a point where I work quicker in 3dsMax now for modelling, lighting and even texturing (hate their surface editor). Sloooowly, the guys in my office are liking what they see from LW, but it's a hard slog on my part... but Siggraph and all the recent developments are helping!

We also don't need a team of 100 coders to enable us to do huge environments in CryEngine, or 8 minute long pre-rendered animations... just out of the box LW and 3dsMax, and a load of freebie tools for baking maps out and tweaking UVs... oh, and 3dCoat :)

ZE_COLMEIA
08-30-2012, 10:46 AM
Here we here replaced the whole sculpting / mesh painting thing with sculptris. Fast, intuitive, powerfull and free.

erikals
08-30-2012, 11:10 AM
agree, but it's not inside Modeler / Layout... wish it was so...

safetyman
08-30-2012, 01:12 PM
I think what Rob and the team has done so far is remarkable and I can't wait to see what's coming next. They have listened to the community and I believe they are headed in the right direction.

Off topic (sorry). Speaking of sculpting. If LW is going to implement something like that, they'd better do it soon. Blender is really making strides with its sculpting tools. They are just about to release an updated version with masking, remesh (their version of Dynamesh), and something called BMesh, which is sort of like ZSpheres -- using an armature to create a base mesh.

And if you think these are tools are just "tacked on" and don't work very well, check out this tutorial over at CGCookie: http://cgcookie.com/blender/2012/06/13/creating-realistic-head-blender/

These days, you can't rest on your laurels.

MentalFish
08-30-2012, 01:31 PM
Off topic followup: Hmmm... in app sculpting should be far down on the list for LW. ZBrush and 3DCoat is already available and production proven. I'd say focus on the framework of Layout (improvements on how to do selections, the undo system and so on) as well as upping the performance in Modeler. It would be nice with compositing and sculpting solutions inside LW, but for now I prefer separate apps for this, such as Nuke/AE and ZBrush/3DCoat.

In terms of the sales pitch video for non LightWave users, I think more specifics would be good. Less focus on "LightWave was used in..." and more "See how nicely it works with Unity and you can easily integrate LightWave as a 3rd party renderer in an existing pipeline like this:...".

AbnRanger
08-30-2012, 02:13 PM
Personally, with 3D Coat's development being shaped, from very early on, with the help of many from the LW community, it actually looks very much like another app within LW. Instead of trying to re-invent the wheel, perhaps some sort of limited arrangement can be made between LW Group and Andrew, to offer 3DC as a component application of either future versions or offered in a Suite of some sort.

This is what Autodesk does with Mudbox. It's bundled with every version of their Creation Suites. There is already an Applink for 3DC to LW, but if some sort of live connection via the Hub, could be made, it could be possible to paint on the model in one screen and see quick updates in VPR on another.

safetyman
08-30-2012, 03:58 PM
... in app sculpting should be far down on the list for LW. ZBrush and 3DCoat is already available and production proven.

I have to disagree with you on this. While the GoZ function is a welcome feature and ZBrush is the premier sculpting tool, it's much, much easier to have some sort of native sculpting features to touch up a few things here and there without having to lauch another program. Back before Core bit the dust, this was featured in the promos. ZBrush and 3DCoat are great, but also cost extra and not worth the money if you only use them for minor touch-ups here and there. I can't tell you how many times I've wished I could re-shape parts of a model without using the clunky magnet tool, or just smooth out some areas.

I could be wrong, but I don't think it would be difficult to implement at least a foundational thing, at least not as difficult as Genoma, FiberFX, etc. I'm not a programmer, so forgive me if I'm barking up the wrong tree.

hrgiger
08-30-2012, 05:20 PM
I have to disagree with you on this. While the GoZ function is a welcome feature and ZBrush is the premier sculpting tool, it's much, much easier to have some sort of native sculpting features to touch up a few things here and there without having to lauch another program.

I agree here. I don't think we need multi-level sculpting or the full range of Zbrush features but I would like to see some basic sculpting brushes which could aid in mesh editing, morph creation, or fiber sculpting.

Dexter2999
08-30-2012, 06:23 PM
Sculpting would be way down on my personal list of improvements. Lots and lots I'd rather see first. Speed in poly handling and bone computation, better deformations, deformation latices, history stack,... you get the idea.

There are tools that do sculpting just like there is a tool that does pass management. I don't see a need to go around stepping the toes of development partners (or 3rd parties if that phrasing is too strong) when there are other areas that need work.

I'm just jaded that every time I read "I want it native" in my mind it translates to "I want it for free."

hrgiger
08-30-2012, 06:42 PM
Sculpting would be way down on my personal list of improvements. Lots and lots I'd rather see first. Speed in poly handling and bone computation, better deformations, deformation latices, history stack,... you get the idea.

There are tools that do sculpting just like there is a tool that does pass management. I don't see a need to go around stepping the toes of development partners (or 3rd parties if that phrasing is too strong) when there are other areas that need work.

I'm just jaded that every time I read "I want it native" in my mind it translates to "I want it for free."

I think those that spend a majority of their time, or even an equal time, in Modeler as opposed to Layout are long overdue some improvments in the modeling arena wouldn't you say? And 11.5 is hopefully just the first step of that process. Of course there are other areas of LightWave that need imrpovment, performance being a key one... but that doesn't change the fact that modeler has been all but ignored for too long. Again, nobody (ok, most people) are not asking for a zbrush within LightWave so in no way are the simple sculpting tools that people are wanting to see in modeler going to step on the toes of the powerhouse sculpting apps like Zbrush, 3D Coat or Mudbox.

Sometimes there are uses for sculpting tools in the modeling process that aren't about sculpting in hi rez detail like Zbrush. Sometimes you just want to rough out the basic form of an object or refine the form of an object and brush tools are far more intuitive in that regard then the brute force push and pull tools in modeler. And with the popularity of the sculpting apps over the last few years, I suspect that more and more people will find everyday uses for sculpting tools so it only makes sense to echo some of the basic set of brushes inside of your main app. I already own Zbrush so I can say its not about making those tools native in LW so I can get them for free. Its about adding improvements and tools to modeler that are relevant to the way a lot of people work today. And like I said earlier, being able to sculpt FFX guides with sculpting tools would be so much better then the current methods.

Besides all that, there's no reason that performance, animation improvments and modeling improvments cant all be part of a major release. LightWave is due for a more well rounded release cycle instead of just focusing on Layout which has been true for the last three versions.

Dexter2999
08-30-2012, 07:02 PM
I'm not arguing that Modeler doesn't need love. (Bevel tool anyone?) That was actually what I meant when I said "speed in poly handling", and "memory stack". I think a projection camera or Layout camera modeler would be more useful. Fixing rounder would be more useful (to me).

I remember there used to be a tutorial about using endomorphs and the airbrush tool to simulate sculpting. (Was that a Splinegod tut?) Now, I know the natural response to this is "but that is alot of work", or "it needs to be simpler". But once they make it simpler and native, the next post on the forums (I'd bet $100) will be "yeah, but it should do <insert function here>", or "why didn't they make it do this?", or "it has sculpting why don't they just make it so I can do everything in LW?"

Sculpting in LW is the same path as native hair. No win, never ending dev. hell. Best avoid it all around. I feel the same way about native fluid simulation.

Part of me thinks it is a "no win" in any event. Give people sculpting (especially basic only functionality) and we will hear the same bitching we heard when they gave us VPR native. "Well I already had FPrime. This is worthless." only it will be "Well, I was already using Sculptris and it was free. Why should I pay for this in an upgrade? This should have been a point release."

Don't have it? People complain.
Give it to them with the paid upgrade? People complain.
Doesn't have full functionality? People complain.
The only way they don't complain is give them everything for free...and they will still probably complain because it doesn't do everything the package that costs $1000 does.

safetyman
08-30-2012, 08:57 PM
Really this is all about selling copies of LW. If you can put some camera tools in Modeler, good deal. If you can put some sculpting in there (which is the future of modeling IMO, and for most of the apps out there, even the free ones, the future is here now), great. But the point is to make LW attractive to potential buyers and keep the users you already have happy. Avoiding certain features just because people will complain no matter what is not a good reason to omit them. You're right Dex, people will always find something to complain about, but as a user of LW, I feel it's my duty to throw out there the features that I feel will help me the most, especially since I have to go elsewhere for those features at the moment.

robpowers3d
08-30-2012, 11:19 PM
I don't think either way is wrong. What I found interesting was Rob's different presentation styles based on his audience or venue which ever you would like to select. This was the first video I saw Rob present in a different manor which I found both interesting and I personally preferred it better.

As for the subD presenter being lower key it also comes down to how good the presenter is and if the presentation is able to link concept to value and also relevance.

I would say the tech demos Newtek presented did this very well. The new edge select tools shown I can see a instant use and value for.

But don't get me wrong I think Rob Powers has done a fantastic job since he arrived. It has being his leadership and the work of the LW team to bring LW 11 to life that made me stay with LW instead of moving over to Modo which I could have done because of a old licence of modo I have for about the same price as the LW 11 upgrade cost. I am very happy that I bought into LW when I did and having played around with some other 3D programs since LW I have become even happier with my purchase. Now with the 360 degree turn Lightwave has made under the leadership of Rob I couldn't be happier with my decision to buy into Lightwave.

Thanks for your input here and your kind words. As for the presentation styles it really does come down to an attempt to adjust the presentation for the audience. As others have mentioned here, trade shows are much more of a "show" than a speaking engagement for students at a school.

robpowers3d
08-30-2012, 11:22 PM
Here's hoping that the LightWave Group does remain independent in the long term. I can't think of a worse ending than they become so sucessful that AD feels they need to buy them up.

AD buying the LightWave 3D Group...you gave me a real chuckle there. I am strongly in favor of Freedom for development teams and creative ideas. That is all I will say. ;)

robpowers3d
08-30-2012, 11:23 PM
I do agree, but I don't think Rob P is purposefully changing the way he presents. His words are the same... well thought out and smart with a hint of comedy.


I think the venue is what makes the difference... the Siggraph stand was VERY VERY noisy indeed, and everyone had to shout in order to be heard. Music from the right, showreels to the left, and Autodesk doing presentations 15 feet away... it was tough to hear a person stood next to you, so think it could sound more like a sales pitch as he had to talk louder. The venue in the video above was great, very quiet, and it made it seem more personal.

Either way, it's great to have very good sales pitches from someone who is also very technical... best of both worlds. His passion can be easily seen in everything he presents, and that's very important. :)

Again, thanks for your kind words. You do have a point with the noise at the venue being a factor but I did also adjust the presentation for the audience as well.

robpowers3d
08-30-2012, 11:26 PM
For the record, I've been using Python in LW pipelines at mid-to-large sized studios since I first met Python in 2006. The text-based LWS file format makes it super-easy to write pipeline scripts for LightWave. I've also met artists who've hacked their LWS files with Notepad 10+ years ago.

The LW11 Python implementation is nice, but that text-based LWS file format has been a critical asset to studio production for years.



I'm skeptical that everyone is aware, because of my own ignorance of other software packages. Until a month ago I honestly thought 3DS Max was a specialist package like Maya. A Max artist with 23 years' experience told me last month that Max is a generalist package like LightWave, not a package that requires an army of TDs like Maya. So this makes Max another option for a one-man CG army or a small studio without an existing pipeline.

I'm sure there's non-LightWavers out there with similar misconceptions about what LightWave can do.

True but you would be hard pressed to find any professionals doing work in Max without the use of an external render engine. That alone is quite a difference from the LightWave workflow.

erikals
08-31-2012, 12:26 AM
 
a big difference i think is that Lightwave is in many ways easier to pick up, and cheaper.
there is little fighting with the app.

Modeling - straight forward (fast!)
Rendering - straight forward (damn simple)
Animation - straight forward (especially with Genoma)
Texturing - straight forward (great and easy nodes, VPR)

not to mention that Maya doesn't have metrics, and Max goes bananas when mixing metrics/units etc,
in Lightwave, no problemo.

Lightwave might not be perfect, like any app, but it's very powerful and affordable.

 

Philbert
08-31-2012, 12:31 AM
I don't know if I'd say nodes or rendering are simple and easy. Perhaps compared to other options they are.

erikals
08-31-2012, 12:46 AM
...and they will still probably complain because it doesn't do everything the package that costs $1000 does.

um,... that's more like $3500, plus maintenance.

erikals
08-31-2012, 12:50 AM
I don't know if I'd say nodes or rendering are simple and easy. Perhaps compared to other options they are.

yep, that's pretty much what i meant. but of course there are other apps that are better at this and that, but overall, Lightwave is a very good choice.

lardbros
08-31-2012, 05:32 AM
Again, thanks for your kind words. You do have a point with the noise at the venue being a factor but I did also adjust the presentation for the audience as well.

Ha, sorry... I completely disregarded the fact that you'd planned it. Guess you have to tailor the presentation to the audience... Siggraph is all about excitement being heard, a smaller presentation to an eager audience who are there to actually hear you, means you can put across a more personal account.

Anyway, hope you've managed to recover from Siggy... don't know how you kept up the pace all week... not just you, but the whole team. :D Know Matt was shattered by the Thursday :D

kopperdrake
08-31-2012, 05:58 PM
AD buying the LightWave 3D Group...you gave me a real chuckle there. I am strongly in favor of Freedom for development teams and creative ideas. That is all I will say. ;)

An intriguing wink and a capital F...hmm...