PDA

View Full Version : Lightwave Fix!! primitive consistency..now available:)



prometheus
04-25-2014, 08:35 PM
Well...donīt be scared now, I have had just to many crashes recently and layout becoming unresponsible with the final 11.6 build tests, and vpr keeping halting every now and then in many different situations.

So I thought I should do some advanced hacking myself, but donīt worry you guys at the lightwave dev team...I need to verify a couple of things with drivers and the installment of other versions before I start jumping and screaming about the final build not working..it could very well be my computer or something else I got going..we will see.

Anyway..I have never been able to reconcile with the naming of the primitives box and ball in modeler..which in layout is named cube and sphere.
now the box usually has an attribute to keep something, and a ball to bounce or something else related to balls:) so ..whatīs even weirder is that I have never bothered to do the advanced hacking, well ..now I have done my major course, and finally I can present a fix to this.

the first image presents the lightwave primitives cube and sphere, which is a geometric term more suitable for graphics and more common to what other software calls it, so when newbies or softimage jumpers arrives to ligthwave, they know what to look for:) and
the creation of these geometric types are now called the same in modeler as they are in layout..no land of confusion:)

The update is only available through me and trough you:) so free your mind..yes we can!

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=121619&d=1398479653

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=121620&d=1398479671

121619 121620

Michael

allabulle
04-26-2014, 12:24 AM
That's absolutely amazing! :)

I always found box and ball not so elegant either.

raw-m
04-26-2014, 02:37 AM
Makes sense to also add a Ground Plane to Modeler if you have it in Layout.

danielkaiser
04-26-2014, 03:44 AM
Yea if your going to have box & ball why not name toroid doughnut?

Oedo 808
04-26-2014, 06:22 AM
Yea if your going to have box & ball why not name toroid doughnut?

You heard the man, make it so!

prometheus
04-26-2014, 08:53 AM
Yeah...the toroid, letīs see what happens with that, first I think I want it to become "live" in the creation process ..so we can see it shape up before accepting it, as we do with the box..ehhm cube tool.
But then again, arenīt toroid the proper "geometric" name for a classification..where the doughnut has some properties to it...as having a huge fan in homer simpson or something?
Toroid is the more correct mathematical term, while doughnut might be easier to identify how it looks like for kids ...and homer simpson.


the groundplane, tried it..only functions in layout, it also gives triangulated polys, which we donīt want in modeler mostly :) I wonder why they havenīt managed to create primitives without triangulation in layout.
would have to script some more primitives maybe.

jeric_synergy
04-26-2014, 10:48 AM
Yea if your going to have box & ball why not name toroid doughnut?
*snort* --That WOULD be more consistent.


(I figured BOX and BALL were just quaint hangovers from Videoscape 3D.)

Markc
04-26-2014, 11:51 AM
Can I ask why your using LW32 when your sig shows windows 64?

prometheus
04-26-2014, 12:47 PM
Can I ask why your using LW32 when your sig shows windows 64?

Just because I can:)

my sig shows 64 bit, but that doesnīt mean I avoid using the 32 bit version, I usally install that before installing 64 bit versions, because I have some 32 bit plugins that arenīt available in lightwave 64 bit versions..I hope that clarifies it? itīs kind of un necessary to write 32 bit in my sign..since we all now 64 bit operating systems handles 32 bit as well:)

I often find myself..o no..thatīs only in 32 bit, then having to close down and open up 32 bit, and then in 32 bit..o noh, the scene is to heavy, I have to use 64 bit:) If I can that is.
thatīs the way things are.
I guess we are lucky 96 bit isnīt here yet:) I still have to install the 64 bit version...when I wrote the sig it was based on windows operating system 64 bit, and not which lightwave version I used...I do in fact have lw 10,11.0 installed as 64 bit..but not the latest final build.

Michael

Markc
04-26-2014, 02:27 PM
That's a fair point.
You must have some really old plugins, if there not updated to 64 bit.
The only plugins I have which I can't use are the Worley ones, but they havn't worked since 9.6 on Mac :grumpy:

Matt
04-26-2014, 03:54 PM
Makes sense to also add a Ground Plane to Modeler if you have it in Layout.

There is one under the "Unit Primitives" popup. Creates a 1m plane, it doesn't present any options mind.

prometheus
04-26-2014, 06:01 PM
If my mind suddenly transcends to another level of coding expertise, I would probably not bother about a ground plane in modeler though, and leave it at just using the Box/cube tool"

I would rather focus on getting more advanced model tools in layout...I think some of us has mentioned something about that:) what I really would like for a starter, that would be a ground plane with a checkbox of options to have itīs pivot on center object(well it is already, I ment the cube and sphere tools) or choose pivot at center of layout origin, next a groundplane that is quads not triangulated, next a groundplane that also has division settings, so I can give it dedicated divisions of my likings from scratch...further on we need these layout model tools to skip adding that extra unassigned surface, and perhaps allow these primitives to be alive in a shelf tool, where we can see them as presets and even save them, thus I could much more quickly select 100meter ground or 12 km ground depending on what I usally start with in my workflow.

I would also code fix a global slider or locker so I donīt have to write 12000 meters in to each and one axis three times, It should be enough with entering one value and lock it or some constrain button function to lock it to a global scale, itīs a waste of time inprinting it three times all over the place where you need the same scale.

You guys remembering this little plugin, from Daniele Fredrico..called DF_Primitive generator, it has some of the things I want in Layout modeling tools, namely icons, and quads and not triangulated geometry..then again it also has some things I donīt wanīt to see, that is the name box and ball:) and a percent value setting rather than meter or millimeter.
http://www.danielefederico.it/works.php?pag=script

http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=121624&d=1398556670

121624

jeric_synergy
04-26-2014, 08:19 PM
It says it's in "Lscript" -- if it's not compiled maybe you could hack it to your heart's content.

prometheus
04-26-2014, 08:29 PM
It says it's in "Lscript" -- if it's not compiled maybe you could hack it to your heart's content.

uhh..now you caught me:D havenīt ever scripted, all this ranting of me hacking is just a big hoaks...I might get around to it at my retirement around 17 years from know, I hope you guys can wait til then when I release it:)

The Df_primitives and his other tools are not any hoaks thou, problem is he seem to have bannished any further working on lw plugins, but now when softimage is about to go to sleep, maybe he could pick things up again.

Michael

jeric_synergy
04-27-2014, 12:50 AM
Well, replacing labels is within anyone's capabilities.

meatycheesyboy
04-27-2014, 01:24 AM
Years ago I submitted a feature/bug request regarding naming inconsistencies in Modeler and Matt kindly fixed it for me. Perhaps if enough people submit this one, it can also be addressed since I would guess changing labels must be a quick fix.

https://fogbugz.newtek.com/default.asp?13297_a2gngec5

gerry_g
04-27-2014, 03:51 AM
I would be considerably happier if inconsistencies in the behaviour of panels themselves were made more uniform and consistent in their behaviour than simply the scatological naming conventions of their intended use, every time you modify a numeric input in a panel it starts from zero not its previous value yet when you close a panel and reopen it, it has not reset to zero but retains the previous value and tool state, it's difficult to think of another 3D program that is so bizarre, classic example would be the 'Move' and the 'Drag' tool (both the same tool in reality) I don't know how many times someone has posted that the drag tool has stopped working because they have changed its state in use and next time they open the panel nothing is happening, NewTek please can we have a proper 3D program just like the ones every one else makes (only BETTER)

OnlineRender
04-27-2014, 04:05 AM
It says it's in "Lscript" -- if it's not compiled maybe you could hack it to your heart's content.

it's a Lscript but it has been compiled ...lsc

jeric_synergy
04-27-2014, 05:09 PM
compiled=dagnabit

Retaining numeric values: this behaviour I use to my benefit a LOT, so I don't want that changed. Never noticed the "to zero" deal....

prometheus
04-28-2014, 09:05 PM
Iīm Just throwing out some questions here and I am curious of what your thoughts might be about it? Itīs more consistency topics.

Modeler subpatch shortcut tab, and layout toggle of subpatch, thereīs no default mapping for it in layout, it is unassigned..is it worth having it mapped? and in such case should we try and keep modeler subpatch key which is the tab key? and then remove the tab shortcut for open and closing windows in layout... and instead remap that with another shortcut? or would it be better to change subpatch key to something else than the tab key?

Then we have f8 for surfaces in layout, I think by default It should have the same consistency and thus a mapping of the F8 key to modeler surface as well, vertex map panel could be something else I think, to me It never have made any sense why the lightwave team made it that way in the first place as default mappings, It must be confusing thinking surfaces wait...I am in modeler...then make the connection in the brain to what shortcut it is...and then over to layout..wait...I am in layout...and blah blah.

Next we have the delete key...which I have discussed before, but that one I met quite some resistance from animators feeling they needed delete when moving between keyframes, not sure about that one.

Michael

Snosrap
04-30-2014, 10:17 PM
Iīm Just throwing out some questions here and I am curious of what your thoughts might be about it? Itīs more consistency topics.

Modeler subpatch shortcut tab, and layout toggle of subpatch, thereīs no default mapping for it in layout, it is unassigned..is it worth having it mapped? and in such case should we try and keep modeler subpatch key which is the tab key? and then remove the tab shortcut for open and closing windows in layout... and instead remap that with another shortcut? or would it be better to change subpatch key to something else than the tab key?

Then we have f8 for surfaces in layout, I think by default It should have the same consistency and thus a mapping of the F8 key to modeler surface as well, vertex map panel could be something else I think, to me It never have made any sense why the lightwave team made it that way in the first place as default mappings, It must be confusing thinking surfaces wait...I am in modeler...then make the connection in the brain to what shortcut it is...and then over to layout..wait...I am in layout...and blah blah.

Next we have the delete key...which I have discussed before, but that one I met quite some resistance from animators feeling they needed delete when moving between keyframes, not sure about that one.

MichaelYep - LW is a mess. But I still like it and use it every day though. :)

jeric_synergy
05-01-2014, 12:49 AM
f8? Surely it's f5?? And it's the same in Layout and LWM.

It is here, and always has been.

prometheus
05-01-2014, 08:02 AM
f8? Surely it's f5?? And it's the same in Layout and LWM.

It is here, and always has been.


Sorry...my fault..I was mixing up preset shelf with that one.

Oedo 808
05-02-2014, 07:48 PM
I was thinking about this thread because of Max users referring to 'box' modelling, I'm tempted to ask them where they get the box from :D

I couldn't care less whether the primitives are Sphere, Cylinder and Cone or Balls, Shaft and Head over something like a more friendly .fbx exchange, I don't think anyone has told the LWG you can download Unity for free to test the joint exporting.

But I suppose these sorts of naming issues could be elevated because they are what you might call 'trial period' issues. It can be tough to jump ship to another package even when sometimes it feels like you're being pushed overboard, so these things can have a greater importance than may be immediately obvious.

prometheus
05-02-2014, 08:16 PM
Is it called bend or twist?

yes oedo 808, for some guys it is no bigger deal, for some others there are, but it is also a classification issue of everythings nature...a ball isnīt a box, etc ..it should be named properly upon itīs classification and not rely on what we are used to ...or if itīs no big deal or not.

box and ball is attributed with properties in terms of what they are used for, bouncing and storing...just donīt think it has itīs place in graphical creation terms, thus cube and sphere feels more natural as mathematical geometry classifications and naming conventions.

I wonder why so many other software creators thought like I do? and how was it set up now in modo:) probably box..those guys started it all:D

and who is responsible for the naming convention of the geometry types in layout? where the naming is cube and sphere and not box and ball...I am so confused now:D

prometheus
05-02-2014, 08:25 PM
I also wonder why it is whenever I create a ball in modeler, I never get the american football shape:D
Maybe the sphere tool should be named soccer ball?

jasonwestmas
05-02-2014, 08:29 PM
Where's my soccer ball prim. And what about slightly lopsided bubble.

Oedo 808
05-02-2014, 10:10 PM
Is it called bend or twist?

yes oedo 808, for some guys it is no bigger deal, for some others there are, but it is also a classification issue of everythings nature...a ball isnīt a box, etc ..it should be named properly upon itīs classification and not rely on what we are used to ...or if itīs no big deal or not.

And a cuboid isn't a cube, it's a hexahedron isn't it?

Like I say, if cube is the most natural form you wouldn't have the term box modelling, in fact I'd love to look through some tutorials in other packages and see if a cuboid made with the Cube tool is referred to as either of those or if it is referred to as a box, what do you reckon?

Honestly you could have changed it already and I likely wouldn't have even noticed, I didn't even notice the difference in Layout and I have been using it recently. I'm not sure why I am unimpressed by this thread, perhaps I think it's that there are so many more critical issues with LightWave I feel like this noise that is less helpful rather than more helpful because it's just a non-issue.

So yeah, change it, gets my vote, should be a quick fix, get it done, no more talk about it.


Where's my soccer ball prim. And what about slightly lopsided bubble.

Well a slightly lopsided bubble is neither a soccer ball nor a sphere, so I guess we're going to have to add the SlightlyLopsidedBubble tool to the mix as well. :ohmy:

prometheus
05-02-2014, 10:38 PM
And a cuboid isn't a cube, it's a hexahedron isn't it?

Like I say, if cube is the most natural form you wouldn't have the term box modelling, in fact I'd love to look through some tutorials in other packages and see if a cuboid made with the Cube tool is referred to as either of those or if it is referred to as a box, what do you reckon?

Honestly you could have changed it already and I likely wouldn't have even noticed, I didn't even notice the difference in Layout and I have been using it recently. I'm not sure why I am unimpressed by this thread, perhaps I think it's that there are so many more critical issues with LightWave I feel like this noise that is less helpful rather than more helpful because it's just a non-issue.

So yeah, change it, gets my vote, should be a quick fix, get it done, no more talk about it.



Well a slightly lopsided bubble is neither a soccer ball nor a sphere, so I guess we're going to have to add the SlightlyLopsidedBubble tool to the mix as well. :ohmy:

yeah I understand you, youré perfectly in your right to went your thoughts about this thread being less helpful, my opinion is the opposite however, I donīt think it is necessary to discuss that further.
You can maybe appreciate my other "bugfix" I think I fixed a bug in the gear tool for layout, check that thread, but it might as well be of no big deal for you if you simply create the gear before adding an emitter.

The whole thread was a little ironic, but at the same time I brought it up for consistency thoughts, I wouldnīt be surprised if we somehow get a actual change from the dev team itself, but thatīs just me speculating.

itīs no major issue, and other things might need attention too, but why should that exclude fixing of simple things?

Michael

prometheus
05-02-2014, 11:12 PM
Oedo 808 ...you are probably most right about cuboid vs cube, I think that might be an explanation to why they have used "box" a cube is equal in length,width,height and a cuboid is not and a box could be any size of course, so that is most likely it.

Michael

Oedo 808
05-03-2014, 12:15 AM
Don't mind me, I have a love/hate relationship with LightWave and right now I'm not in the love phase. This just felt a bit like my car blew a head gasket and when the mechanic came someone asked them to fix the cup holders.

I'm not sure this particular issue is going to appear on the radar of a newbie but if it would it is important, I would probably have left for Modo if I had a good first impression, but like I said it wasn't because it was bad but I didn't discover much wow-factor on my own and the trial limitation was (is?) moronic.

I think the argument could be made that using figurative language to represent objects is more artist friendly rather than scientifically accurate one, but perhaps standardization is important. I have to admit a splash screen with the more standardized shortcuts loader is something that I think is important.

It's good to see your input, it's more than I do, which is weird because I've given free time to test commercial games for a small company that consisted of a lot of detailed feedback, but with LightWave, nothing, even though it's success is more important to me.

prometheus
05-03-2014, 12:26 AM
...... but like I said it wasn't because it was bad but I didn't discover much wow-factor on my own and the trial limitation was (is?) moronic.



yeah...I have ranted about the trail limitation of modo in several threads here, I have commented on foundrys/modoīs videoshowcases and urged them to supply a longer trial version..why not 45 days maybe...watermarks fine, render limitation fine, and some export limitation just fine...I just canīt stand going through the route of being stressed up with such short time not able to evaluate it.....made some comments on their forums as well, Im sure they are thinking that is one obnoxius silly guy:)

I think the last modo trial I tested was 601, and at that time after installation I got so much else stuff to do that It expired without me able to test it properly...havenīt bothered installing any of their demos since then, I do however keep on jumping in to their forums to get some ideas or feedback on how it works etc..and just maybe I can get a head start on some stuff before ..If I ever install it that is.
at that time we got a pipeline working with lightwave and solidworks exported..so jumping in to modo needed evaluation time really, maybe if we had that and able to test
the solidworks importer in modo, it could have been purchased.

And yes, the argument of scientificly vs artistic friendly naming conventions is in itīs right, but it needs to be discussed..I think.

Michael

bazsa73
05-03-2014, 12:50 AM
I would say the most apt name would be "Rectangular Cuboid" :D because a Cube has equally long sides.

jasonwestmas
05-03-2014, 06:36 AM
Since we're talking about licensing and modo I'll combine the two. I made a snarky comment about The Foundry being the only company that makes me feel like a total newb. I installed my "license" file and saw that it was in the correct folder. Yet modo 801 still gave me the temporary license warning. So after trying to install my license 5 times and wondering why it wasn't working, I asked why that was and found out that I still have to wait for my license to be processed on the severs. . . I find that interesting hehe.