PDA

View Full Version : Is Lightwave more of a "Left Brain" or "Right Brain" program?



robertoortiz
12-16-2013, 10:06 AM
Since Lightwave is an app directed towards Independent users and small studios,
I wondered. Is Lightwave more of an Left Brain(LOGIC) or RIGHT Brain(CREATIVE) program?
Some might say that a 3d Program that favors Right brain user based might have a bigger marker.

But First some background of what the heck I am talking about.

The right brain-left brain theory originated in the work of Roger W. Sperry, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1981. According to the theory of left-brain or right-brain dominance, each side of the brain controls different types of thinking. Additionally, people are said to prefer one type of thinking over the other. For example, a person who is "left-brained" is often said to be more logical, analytical, and objective, while a person who is "right-brained" is said to be more intuitive, thoughtful, and subjective.

Engineering, Accounting, Comp Science & Law are Left brain type of careers
Design, Teaching and Illustration are Right Brain type of careers

And here is the crux of the question I had in mind.

COMPUTER ANIMATION favors both approaches.

So for a CG animation you would use

Left Brain (LOGIC BASED)
The love Abstract based interfaces. Boy they love Nodes.
They favor :
Rigging
Simulations
Hard Surface Modeling



RIGHT Brain (Creative BASED)
The love WYSIWYG interfaces
They favor :
Animation
Shading Modeling
3D Sculpting
-People who LOVE Genoma


The problem is that , because of the complexity of 3D animation, most 3D apps in the market is they tend to favor abstraction a lot. But the irony is that the market for Creative apps (Right brain) apps is bigger. Just ask Adobe.

So what do you guys think?

Is Lightwave a Left Brain (LOGIC BASED) or a RIGHT Brain (Creative BASED) program?

What direction should it take for its future?

I am looking forward to your comments.

-R
Source: http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/a/left-brain-right-brain.htm

RebelHill
12-16-2013, 10:13 AM
Well, any 3D app would be both...

If the whole left/right brain idea weren't nonsense to begin with... http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0071275

jeric_synergy
12-16-2013, 10:17 AM
I think their roots in CAD make/relegate most 3D software to left brain status.

My tiny exposure to SILO makes me think it's one of the few that would qualify for "right brain" status.

raymondtrace
12-16-2013, 11:22 AM
Yes, left/right brain is proven nonsense.

Indeed, ask Adobe. Hang out on the Adobe forums and see the large number of users who claim that software is too difficult and don't want to bother learning anything new. Search for keywords like "intuitive" or "easy". "Why can't I do this with a click of a button?" They blame their unwillingness to learn the tools of their craft (or their craft in general) on a dominance/deficit of one side of their brain.

https://www.google.com/search?q=left-brain+right-brain+site%3Aforums.adobe.com

There is a certain level of insult to imply that one is either logical or creative. Both are required in any task, whether in 3D design or in general everyday life.

Making a distinction of left/right brain dominance is as reckless as saying a certain race is better at driving a car.

Sculptris may be a good example of accessibility for the generally untrained individual who wants to call them-self an artist. But any competent 3D artist is going to creatively build a model with more logical structure in another program.

robertoortiz
12-16-2013, 01:29 PM
Ok fair enough.
Why should programs not be there to help the user?
I thought we developed computers in the first place to make tasks easier.


And in the case of a creative field like computer animation, why not make things easier?
After all a program like Lightwave is designed for smaller studios in mind.
So why not let it “help”?


And besides I don’t like the idea of forcing people to learn arcane skillsets that have a short term shelf life. (AKA the latest fad in abstract languages)

But first some background, to see if I can help my point..

I am a Computer Scientist by degree (With a program with A HEAVY empashis in system design and Advanced Math).

I have been coding since I was 12, and I have been drawing since I was 5.
I graduated from a good college with a advances Comp Science degree, (I was a course short of a minor in Math)
When I joined the workface it took me at least 15 years at work to get any good at it as a developer.

For example I can read HTML code and make sense of it with no problem.
My LOGICAL side can understand most code (C#, Python etc) and read it with no problem.
But I acknowledge that the skills to be able to be any good at it took time to develop.


And I hated IT with a passion, so I decided to become a professional designer/animator.


Now have been a professional Artist and designer for the past 10 years. It took me decades to develop the creative skills to be able to do any decent piece of art or design. Hell I am constantly taking drawing, design color theory, anatomy courses to make up for lost time.

The thing is that I also have learned NOT to underestimate the amount of time that it takes to develop creative skills.
So I don’t assume that all people who will be developing pages for the web should know how to code the later flavor in abstraction.
Why?

So I don’t see a problem with a program that helps people who favor the creative side, be well, more creative.

RebelHill
12-16-2013, 01:57 PM
And in the case of a creative field like computer animation, why not make things easier?
After all a program like Lightwave is designed for smaller studios in mind.
So why not let it “help”?

So I don’t see a problem with a program that helps people who favor the creative side, be well, more creative.

This discussion has been had MANY times... and though any number of people are all for the idea... the same glaring question NEVER gets answered...

How?

Unless you have a preset or custom tool to handle every possible, conceivable task or effect that a user may wish to create... how?

3D apps offer all these nodal interfaces, and scripting access and other "technical" access to allow users to (as much as they can) create and control every aspect of every little thing that they can imagine so as to create the EXACT effect they're after. How do you propose to automate that... to make it more "artist friendly"? Are you going to have a preset for every possible combination/look/style? Cos thats an INFINITE possible number.

And even if you did have some app that had some gargantuan (though obv not infinite) set of preset tools to allow folks to just whip up any which effect or colour or pose they were after... wouldn't that be a bit "paint by number"? Don't you think that the vast majority of work would start to just become a homogenous "blob" as users increasingly just became "preset pushers"??

Where exactly would the "artistic" creativity and freedom be in that? Imo, its like asking for a block of marble that chisels itself because its just too hard for a poor artist to do it for themselves by hand.

So here's what I think LW should try to do/be... An app that puts the greatest amount of creative possibility at the disposal of it users via whatever method/workflow gives the greatest range of versatility and freedom to have "hands on" creative input, and direction over artistic choices. And if the result of that needs to be an app that's too technical for some folk to get on with... so be it. There's always poser.

hrgiger
12-16-2013, 02:04 PM
Well I know sometimes I get frustrated with LW to the point where I think have to be out of my RIGHT mind to be using it. But I suppose that's not what we're talking about. Then I take a step back and breathe and everything's cool again.

robertoortiz
12-16-2013, 02:08 PM
RebelHill you got a point, and I will admit that you have developed a ton of tools to make the work in LW more seamless.
But on the other hand there is such a thing as too much abstraction
(Shot of Houdini)

For me GENOMA amd Chrono Sculpt are the kind of development I like in LW.
Things that I can see and "Touch"


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0odsBH6Us04/TbchW5HpkQI/AAAAAAAAABk/9upTdDvcGBA/s1600/02_ShadowMatte.jpg

jeric_synergy
12-16-2013, 02:27 PM
It's a subtle thing: I >NEVER< got comfortable with Painter, but my computer phobic artist friend took to it like a duck to water-- they certainly did SOMETHING right in their interface (but what?). This same person struggled with Photoshop.

Right now I'm deciding that whoever chooses the menu labels in C4D is a Bad Bad Person, because his/her choice make no sense to me and I am constantly trying to remember which is VIEW and which is DISPLAY and which is CAMERA. We are not 'simpatico'.

It'll be nice when it's all straightened out and the best tool floats to the top of the market. I give it eighty years.

pinkmouse
12-16-2013, 04:56 PM
Indeed. I look at Rob's screenshot above, relate that to LW, and think how much more obvious and simple node networks are for surfacing, (and indeed lots of other stuff), than the old layer stacking method. Gosh that confused me!

jeric_synergy
12-16-2013, 05:36 PM
And that prove's RH's point: HOW? I know that nodes are more powerful and flexible than layering, but the layering CONCEPTS are much simpler for me to understand, esp. w/a background in Photoshop and AE. Nodes still confuse me.

Takeaway: One Size Does NOT Fit All Users.

chikega
12-16-2013, 05:59 PM
This is just a very simple expample ... you can take one image node and connect it to several different channels like the diffuse channel, the specularity channel, etc... you could then add another node in between to tone down the effect to one of the channels. In the layer method, you would have to add the same image to each channel separately.

jeric_synergy
12-16-2013, 06:46 PM
Oh I understand the basics, but the more involved stuff is beyond my math knowledge: eg once you get into calculating vectors, it's all over for me.

It doesn't help that IMO the Node Editor ( "neditor", "noditor" ) UI could still use some work, specifically in how it presets the raw catalog, but in many other areas too.

TMK none of the Surface Presets yet use any nodes (re my 11.6 install). This is a huge handicap for those of us who learn by tweeking existing Surface to our own needs. Lava? Right there in the presets, but only in Layer versions.

Surely there's a couple of 'folders' of nodal Surfaces laying about that LW3DG could be flogging as an Xmas goodie? (Maybe they already have.)

Anyway, my point was that different approaches work for different users. And blithely assuming a certain level of mathematical and trigonometric familiarity is not going to endear any 3D application to your standard art school grads.

Davewriter
12-16-2013, 08:25 PM
I was rather hoping for a no brain option.
Then I'd at least have a chance.

spherical
12-16-2013, 11:36 PM
Whether the L/R Brain concept has been disproved or not (who cares? And there's another study just around the corner that says it is valid.) there are generally three types: Artistic, Logical, Logitistic. I'm the latter. I use both—all the time. However, as regards the question asked in this topic, we use LightWave most often as an Artistic medium. We design products in it for the way that they look, first. Once the design is near to complete (they're never really done...) we go back in and extract the metric data to obtain the dimensions of everything and begin manufacturing from that dataset. We know that the parts will all fit and the results will look as we intended at the start.

That, to me, is cool.

raymondtrace
12-17-2013, 08:53 AM
Ok fair enough.
Why should programs not be there to help the user?
I thought we developed computers in the first place to make tasks easier.

And in the case of a creative field like computer animation, why not make things easier?...

Things are much easier. We probably share the same perspective but I have you beat by a couple years. I was eschewing outdoor play and coding at ~10 years old. When I started, I had to define the location of every pixel via a letter/number code and I was limited to 16 colors. So there is nothing in today's technology that can be thrown at me that does not seem easier.

Animation/3D design is difficult. It is not an issue with the tools. It is just the nature of the medium.

Maybe more explanation is needed about the first post. What makes you believe Adobe's apps are more "creative" and therefore more popular? I always thought it was due to patents and business practices.

raymondtrace
12-17-2013, 09:02 AM
Whether the L/R Brain concept has been disproved or not (who cares? And there's another study just around the corner that says it is valid.) there are generally three types: Artistic, Logical, Logitistic.

Any kind of distinction (R/L-brain, artistic/logical/logistic) is reckless. Are musicians not artistic because they statistically do well in logical math and science disciplines? We really need to reduce people to the only two categories that really matter: Christian vs. savage heathen

robertoortiz
12-17-2013, 10:14 AM
Any kind of distinction (R/L-brain, artistic/logical/logistic) is reckless. Are musicians not artistic because they statistically do well in logical math and science disciplines? We really need to reduce people to the only two categories that really matter: Christian vs. savage heathen

Actually music is heavily influenced by math.
Of course who says that you have to ONLY pick one side (LOGICAL) or (CREATIVE).
You got apps like Softimage or ZBRUSH are VERY artist friendly.
Having said that. I feel STRONGLY that that the workflows we are in 3d "get in the way" since we use workflows developed in the AutoCAD days, by Engineers, for slower machines with Spartan workflows that were definitely NOT artist friendly.
I do agree strongly that things have gotten better. And like you I can use ANY program, after all I learned to do graphics at a pixel level.

But what got my attention is finding out how little I knew in terms of the knowledge needed from the creative side.
Things like Color Theory, Cinematography Rules, Compostion Theory, Design theory, Timing Theory, Anatomy etc
Things that a person interested more in the Creative needed to develop and things that a person interested in mostly abstract thinking might find of little value.

The irony is that the Abstract thinkers are the developer of Tools for the Creatives.

But look at a program like Maya in terms of its workflow. How it is reaching a point of diminishing returns in terms of the evolution of its workflow.

In my view being an (CREATIVE) friendly app is NOT a bad thing. It means re thinking from the ground up how things are done.
That why I have fallen in love with ChronoSculpt and Genoma.

For me an ideal 3D app would take inspirations of the strengths of things like Stop Motion and hand Drawn animation.

raymondtrace
12-17-2013, 11:01 AM
Actually music is heavily influenced by math.

Indeed. So we agree that your original posit (logic vs. creative) was a bit groundless.


Of course who says that you have to ONLY pick one side (LOGICAL) or (CREATIVE).

Wasn't that you when, you asked which LW is? :)

ChronoSculpt and Genoma may appear "creative" now, but give them 20 years of feature creep/bloat and they'll be just as complex/convoluted as every other 3D app.

Danner
12-17-2013, 11:03 AM
... We really need to reduce people to the only two categories that really matter: Christian vs. savage heathen

"There are two kinds of people in the world: those who divide the world into two kinds of people, and those who don't" Robert Benchley

"There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't"

RebelHill
12-17-2013, 11:06 AM
There are 3 kinds of people in the world...

Those who can count, and those who can't.

robertoortiz
12-17-2013, 11:28 AM
There are 3 kinds of people in the world...

Those who can count, and those who can't.

Point made.
I am sorry if that I gave the impression I am trying to pigeon hole people.
But people do have to lean towards either
LOGIC or CREATIVE styles. We all have a bit of both.
It helps to see it as not ONE (LOGIC) or the OTHER (CREATIVE) more as a scale.
The point I am trying to make is an argument for "Creative" freindly workflows.

RebelHill
12-17-2013, 11:35 AM
The point I am trying to make is an argument for "Creative" freindly workflows.

And nobody would argue against that, but yet the problem remains...

How??

Unless there's some proposal for how such things would actually work... its just (imo) a white elephant. Restating the same "wouldnt it be nice if" daydream over and over doesnt achieve anything, no offence, Rob.

I still maintain that in order to provide the greatest level of flexibility, and enable folk to get the highest degree of customisation and art direction out of an app... its going to HAVE to have deeper, technical parts (somewhere) in order to give users access to the fundamental building blocks (meaining functions, math and abstract data linkages) used in the construction of those effects. As such... no matter how many "presets" you manage to stuff into an app, for every one you add, you will (by default) create the opportunity to add a further "technical access window", to allow those who can to go deeper. Which, by its very inclusion, will only regenerate the same ol "make it friendlier" request for that access level.

jeric_synergy
12-17-2013, 11:41 AM
RH, I think you mean "red herring", not "white elephant".

Good god man, they're not even the same phyla!!!


++++
That last paragraph sounds like a restatement of The Incompleteness Theorem.

(mangling math history since 2005!)

RebelHill
12-17-2013, 11:46 AM
RH, I think you mean "red herring", not "white elephant".

In that sentence, probably yes... I was already thinking ahead to the next chunk about the "going round in circles" bit... meaning the unmaintainability of such an idea in practice.

Oh bollocks, I know what I meant.

Sort of...

raymondtrace
12-17-2013, 12:36 PM
...But people do have to lean towards either LOGIC or CREATIVE styles.

Why do they have to?

What is your definition of "creative-friendly"? It has not yet been made apparent.

jeric_synergy
12-17-2013, 01:18 PM
FWIW, I don't think they HAVE to, but I do think they TEND to.

OTOH, that could be an artifact of our educational system: certainly back in the day artists had to be VERY technical, in that they had to manufacture their own paints, an onerous task of applied chemistry, or at least cooking. So, the mindsets are not inherently incompatible.

I blame the writers for constructing a mythos of "tortured, impractical artistes".

spherical
12-18-2013, 08:09 PM
Any kind of distinction (R/L-brain, artistic/logical/logistic) is reckless.

I guess you missed the concatenation.... I'm Logitistic (both). There is no distinction.

JonW
12-19-2013, 01:54 AM
All of your brain!