PDA

View Full Version : Maya quad view like in Modeler?



MarcusM
11-14-2014, 03:01 AM
Hi guys,

I cant fing how to link quad view in Maya to be depend like in Modeler?
Hope it's possible ;]

Skonk
11-14-2014, 03:57 AM
Press the Space key.

EDIT: also you would be better off posting on the Autodesk forums for help with their products.

MarcusM
11-14-2014, 04:02 AM
I know this forum is not perfect but im am not Maya user. It can looks strange but many of you using Maya for sure :]

I used word "link". I mean dependent four views (zoom, move). Thanks.

Surrealist.
11-14-2014, 11:02 AM
Oh see what you mean. How in Modeler you can have this linked. I see why asking that here is relevant because a lot of Maya users have probably never seen that. Explaining that would be a challenge. The situation in Maya is that these views are actually cameras. So they are objects in the scene, just like any other object in the scene. And since they are all individual cameras they have their own individual attribute nodes and of course translation channels via the channel box. Additionally the Ortho views have a section in the attribute node that controls the zoom in and out "Orthographic Width". All these attributes are keyable of course. And they are linked to navigation input from the keyboard and whatever input device you are using.

So off the top of my head I am not even sure it is then possible - out of the box - in Maya. There would probably have to be a script that allowed you to constrain 3 camera's translation as well as ortho attributes and have that based on which view your cursor was in. Seems to me it would be fairly complex.

Obviously, this is where LightWave modeler - as a modeler - has an advantage if this is the kind of thing you want.

Arned with this information, perhaps go to the Maya forums and ask if anyone has made a script for this.

MarcusM
11-15-2014, 03:01 AM
Thank you for reply. I realize that this is a problem in Maya. One my friend, long time Maya user, when i asked him for this, he was supprised and never saw this type of navigation ;p Another guy asked me "but for what?". I can't imagine modeling without this... there must be some script.
Ok LW Modeler winning in this case:)

erikals
11-15-2014, 04:10 AM
"but for what?"
i got that a lot when using Maya http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

many of them seem to not mind Maya limitations, unlike LW people, who complain about LightWave's several missing features.

get used to the "but for what?"... or better... don't ask... http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/047.gif

or maybe i just had a tough crowd...

http://erikalstad.com/emoti/sim2.jpg

Dodgy
11-15-2014, 04:39 AM
When I last used maya (which was a while ago, I'll admit, so some things could be fixed by now) I got so frustrated that simple things weren't implemented well (when it's been rewritten completely from the Alias Wavefront days) that I had to make a list to vent.

For example, if you hide polys in one view, they aren't hidden in any other view, so if you start painting in the view, it paints on these hidden polys, because they're visible in other views. If you do a 'frame selected' in the graph editor it frames curves up to the next keyframe, which could be miles away from the selected keyframes.

Basically loads of little things like that, which Maya goes 'Oh yeah, it does that' then go on to rip the mickey out of Lightwave for things which have been like that from the start and will need a rewrite to change. They forgive Maya's problems even though it's been rewritten, and so theoretically shouldn't have such stupidities in, but don't forgive LW's problems which need a rewrite to fix. Very annoying. Maya has a lot of strengths, sure, but it also has a fair share of weaknesses.

Surrealist.
11-15-2014, 10:31 AM
I find this not to be true at all. I find a very large number of Maya users are frustrated with Maya's limitations. And you can not fault artists who have never been exposed to a feature and used it, to ask why you'd want something. It happens here all the time. How many artists here to have it explained again and again why a unified app is better? And why they would not loose things they think they are going to loose by having one. The reason is many artists here have never used one. So they too ask "but why?"

Every app is different in its approach to workflow. Every app has disadvantages and advantages.

Overall there are more disadvantages still in LightWave modeling over the advantages it has when compared to any other unified app in my opinion. Which is why I as a modeler, my primary job it seems these days, have not returned to LightWave in over 6 years. Still waiting for it to get the very basic things it has never had for decades. Things I actually found it missing and needed on my own after using it for a number of years. Thankfully, I found all of those things already implemented in Blender, so I switched. And yep, I missed some of the modeler tools. But the trade off for me was worth it.

Other artists prefer to model in LightWave and do other tasks in apps like Maya. Everyone has a preference. But for me, I'll take the many advantages to modeling in Blender, Maya or XSI over the head banging roadblocks to the very simplest things in Modeler/Layout as it is now.

@Dogy-

not sure how long ago that painting issue existed. But it is not the case now as far as I know. I have done quite a bit of painting in Maya.

Overall the Maya developers are aware of the fact that Maya modeling has suffered these last years and they have made some great strides in the last two releases. Finally implementing some much needed simple features that XSI had, Maya was simply missing. There is also a very nice feature request website these days. The developers are in constant interaction with users, that is something I appreciate over the complete disconnect I feel around here most of the time.

@ MarcusM

If this feature is important to you, and you are going to be using Maya for modeling, there are sites where people who do development for Maya hang out. Just like LightWave there are a lot of people making free plugins and scripts to make up for things that are missing or needed.

You can try searching here and getting involved in the community here to ask about this feature:

http://www.creativecrash.com/maya/downloads/scripts-plugins/c/

The feature request site is here:

http://mayafeedback.autodesk.com/forums/160514-ideas-for-maya-forum

In general. One of the features even Rob seems to acknowledge as being important is modeling from a camera view. This is something that Maya and other apps do natively. It does have a draw back, of course, in this case as far as this feature is concerned.

For me, frankly I forgot about this feature entirely until you brought it up. I don't miss it at all. It is nice but, well, I have never felt the need to have it. nor have I felt as if my modeling experience suffered as a result. That's me. Everyone has a preference. Good luck with it and I hope the links help.

MarcusM
11-15-2014, 11:03 AM
Thanks for links.

I do a lot of modeling. Very often using background images as a reference. Now i see that Maya can slow me down in modeling, even if will have better tools. What about Max in quad view? There is also the same situation? I just must have nice quad view.
I had not nerves to Blender interface in past...maybe try one more time. It's nice to listen experienced users in other 3d software, especially modeler.
Why I even start asking. I plan to try something new in free time, play with other modeling tools, looking on job market, don't want lost time on bad decision. Try to connect adventages LW and something else. (I am LW user from long time and always be:) )

My friend, Maya user, also was supprised how fast i doing UV mapping with PLG(together with Modeler layers system) ;]

erikals
11-15-2014, 12:07 PM
I find this not to be true at all.
i'm repeating what i was told and how i see it.
maybe things are better these days, but it wasn't back then.


Everyone has a preference
yep, and by all means, i'm not saying, don't touch Maya,
just don't always follow the "but why" crowd.

listen to them, but research other 3Dapps and make up your own mind.

also remember that LightWaver's are mostly generalists, and compete with an army of Maya users,
many who only work on certain areas, such as SFX / animation, and excel at it.

Surrealist.
11-15-2014, 01:17 PM
Sure, like I said a lot of people use LW for modeling and then other apps for everything else. Part of this reasoning is the investment of time.

And therein lies the catch. You have to spend a great deal of time in any application covering the basics and learning it inside out and actually working with it for months on actual paying projects to then have a realistic idea of what you are missing and what you can and can not live without. It takes a commitment.

Just starting in on an application and testing it, as well as making comparisons right away will frustrate you and is not the correct approach in my opinion.

Myself I came to Maya after years of research and working for a living in other packages. When I came to Maya even though I could model quite efficiently in both Blender and XSI, I started from scratch in Maya. It took months. And eventually after I had my head around it I forced myself to start using it on paying work to further hone in my skills in using it. The payoff for me was familiarity with other aspects of the program that learning modeling help me get familiar with. Also I was eventually able - after a long time - to find how to do most of the things I could do other places. And the urge to port something over to Blender for example, just for one feature started to get replaced with my new found knowledge in Maya and how to do it there.

After learning how it all worked in Maya, it was fast and efficient. Just as it was in LW Modeler after years of practice. But with the other advantages I was looking for. And a host of things I miss when modeling in Blender which I also do from time to time. And then there is my laundry list of things I wish other apps had that Blender has.

In my opinion you can not get an objective view of the difference in modeling speed between two apps as well as relevant trade-offs unless you have equal experience between the two.

Surrealist.
11-15-2014, 01:29 PM
also remember that LightWaver's are mostly generalists, and compete with an army of Maya users,
many who only work on certain areas, such as SFX / animation, and excel at it.

This may have been exclusively true at one time. And certainly in a large studio environment - more or less.

But today the average user of Maya is much like myself. Very much a generalist. And in fact this is one of Maya's great strengths. It is one of if not the best generalist tool available out there out of the box when you consider the broad range of tools available. It is not any more difficult to learn and do these various things than it is in LightWave. In fact probably easier. And Maya has quite a large library of preset scenes for everything even special effects and hair that get you up and running very quickly for low budget gigs. I used the ocean scene for one job. Really literally, all I did was study the effects section of the manual and loaded up the scene. I used the physical sun preset and with a small amount of adjustments I was off and running. This was the one job that convinced me that this myth about Maya was completely false. It is extremely user friendly. And nDynamics... another story. The all around, easiest and most artist-friendly dynamics tool I have used. I am not saying the best dynamics tool. But for a generalist out of the box getting quick effects. The best I have used.

Markc
11-15-2014, 04:17 PM
Oops....I think I must have gone to the 'Autod...' forums accidentally :lightwave

Surrealist.
11-15-2014, 05:28 PM
No. What happened is this. It happens all the time here. What happened is someone asked a legitimate question top ask on the LW forums because of the nature of LW Modeler view ports which is unique to pretty much most apps. It was answered as objectively as possible. Without a slant against LightWave or any hint of bias toward Maya. And the person was armed with the information to sort it out from a person (me) who is familiar with both apps. It is all to familiar here. Many of us are.

It could have, should have been left at that if there was nothing else to contribute to the OP.

But no. Alas this is a LW forum and people can not seem to resist the opportunity to flame Maya and other apps by AD and even Blender.

So, this is all good except that usually and I'd say 95 percent of what is said is not true at all, or at best extremely biased. And because there are people here actually familiar with Maya, Blender etc. people can not get away with it. Because people like me will say something in response to set the record straight.

So I have said this on numerous occasions. If you don't want people coming on these boards and talking up other programs (almost always in response to incorrect information) then don't say things about programs that are not true. It is pretty simple.

And if you are not using it everyday or have not been using it for a real long time and are very intimately familiar with a program there is an overwhelming chance that the things you say are not true.

Stick to the things you know. I say.

This is as true for Blender and Maya etc...

As it is for LightWave...

jasonwestmas
11-15-2014, 10:00 PM
I don't see brand names anymore, I just see cool tools spread all over the place. :)

Dexter2999
11-16-2014, 12:45 PM
@Surrealist- I think the idea of the Maya user base being almost solely specialists is a legacy. As AD products have nearly sole ownership in educational facilities it was inevitable that all users will be learning Maya (or Max) by default. From there, some go on to be specialists, others will remain generalists. The starting point for them, in school, is still AD.

erikals
11-16-2014, 12:56 PM
Maya user base being almost solely specialists is a legacy
i didn't say this though, just saying that there are tons of more Maya specialists than LightWave specialists,

and therefore, more impressive Maya art.

i know it's just a tool, but i think you know what i mean.

actually, i'm surprised by the awesome LightWave art we see these days,
and hope more high quality LightWave character animation work is around the corner.

https://www.lightwave3d.com/community/gallery
https://vimeo.com/groups/lightwave/videos

Surrealist.
11-16-2014, 02:15 PM
Yeah the Maya users in the industry has not as much to do with the universities as it is the other way around. The unis want to teach what is the preferred software in the industry. This however does turn out more individual artists who start out in Maya or Max that never make it into a studio or large production house. Based on what I see in the job market, it still seems very much a specialist-centric hiring compared to the fewer jobs that are generalists.

The myth I am referring to is the opinion that Maya is so complex and deep in features that it is too difficult of a tool for a generalist. And so, people specialize because that is all they can afford - realistically - to accomplish. And I think that is not so. I don't think that it has ever been true. I don't find it any harder to learn and understand than my first time through the entire LightWave manual.

It is however true that there is more ground to cover.

But, I think that each area of 3D takes an extremely long time to get good at. And specialize in. So, I'd say it has more to do with that than the choice of software. XSI is in fact a tad more deep when you consider ICE which is something you could spend a great deal of time exploring. But you don't hear many people calling XSI users specialists. That may be because the studios never quite adopted it over Maya - by and large.

jasonwestmas
11-16-2014, 05:43 PM
I wouldn't get too hung up on the whole specialist verses generalist terminology. TBH I don't think I've ever met someone who is a true generalist, maybe someone who wears 4-6 hats. I'm sure they exist but it's pretty rare thing. Point being that a really good character modeler also understands some things about character rigging and animation but I wouldn't say that makes them a generalist necessarily. Each area does take a really long time to get good at, so everyone in this biz is most likely a specialist at something if they take this kind of work seriously.

Surrealist.
11-16-2014, 06:59 PM
I would agree. But I would also never expect a generalist to be someone who is a specialist at everything. But a person to whom which you can hand a job to and he does it from start to finish. Freelancers often do this. This pretty much describes me. I don't consider myself at the level of a master rigger. These guys blow my mind. But if a job comes in that have to rig and paint weights I can do it. And for that reason I might opt for the trade-offs of an auto-rigging system rather than my own limited ability in that area. That means I never get hired to be "the rigger" in a studio. But I understand the basics enough to get around most things. Same goes for texturing and rendering. It is something I have gotten better at over time. But since learning LW I have always been a generalist, because I had to learn all of the aspects of the program to get things done. Under this definition I find there are many many generalists, that of course I never meet personally, but who I have come to know over the various boards over the years.

lightscape
11-17-2014, 01:40 AM
The quality of work between a specialist and a generalist is night and day.
Jack of all trade artists have good work which is suited for small studios with minimal support. A specialist produces the best in class work and more suited for high end studios working in a team. You want to create amazing character animation, hire an animation expert. A concept artist will produce exceptional designs than a generalist and its well worth the money to hire that person.
In the same way, someone who uses a lot of apps(knows some of maya, max, modo, lightwave, nuke, ae) will not reach the level of someone who is an expert and focused in fewer apps, given they have the same aptitude and experience.

MarcusM
11-17-2014, 01:47 AM
Back to the theme, today i heard that quad viewport navigation (like in Modeler) is "not needed". ;] Propably that is why i persolnally saw few models with holes and ugly geometry from Maya..

erikals
11-17-2014, 03:54 AM
The quality of work between a specialist and a generalist is night and day.
that's a very general claim i think, which belongs to "back in the days"

though yes, for character animation LightWave generalists still have a way to go,
but like i said, i'm sure that is about to change.

cartoon animation however is an art form of it's own,
but if we exclude that one thing only, i don't see why we can't get many more generalists in the future.

i guess a "Generalist" is a very wide term, so maybe there should be a better title, or perhaps grades.

1st generation Generalist
pro modeling, texturing, rendering, post, and basic animation and vfx
- for example guys who work at local TV stations

2nd generation Generalist
pro modeling, texturing, rendering, post, and pro animation and vfx
- for example Professional Freelancers

pro cartoon animation, again, is a field of it's own.



Back to the theme, today i heard that quad viewport navigation (like in Modeler) is "not needed". ;]
Probably that is why i personally saw few models with holes and ugly geometry from Maya..
told you http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

Surrealist.
11-17-2014, 11:56 AM
Back to the theme, today i heard that quad viewport navigation (like in Modeler) is "not needed". ;] Propably that is why i persolnally saw few models with holes and ugly geometry from Maya..

Sorry I don't fully understand here. Are you saying there are issues with modeling in Modeler that require linking viewports?

For the record, I think it has nothing to do with this. But it is certainly a useful feature.

And "not needed"?

Yeah like I was saying. Just like people here coming up with "Unification is not needed". It is just an empty statement that really means nothing.

If you really want this in Maya, I think you are going to have to work fairly hard to demonstrate it's use in LightWave first, before you expect anyone to get it.

Surrealist.
11-17-2014, 12:21 PM
The quality of work between a specialist and a generalist is night and day.
Jack of all trade artists have good work which is suited for small studios with minimal support. A specialist produces the best in class work and more suited for high end studios working in a team. You want to create amazing character animation, hire an animation expert. A concept artist will produce exceptional designs than a generalist and its well worth the money to hire that person.
In the same way, someone who uses a lot of apps(knows some of maya, max, modo, lightwave, nuke, ae) will not reach the level of someone who is an expert and focused in fewer apps, given they have the same aptitude and experience.

Actually I think this is still true today. With very few exceptions. There are some individual dudes who can do quite a lot. But to pull off a large production with efficiency and a high level of quality, it does require a team of specialists.

That said, there is room for people like me. For example I have absolutely no interest in specializing. That would be to me a nightmare. If I woke up one day and realized I was the "fill in the blank" I would really feel as if I had failed myself. One place people like me fit well into is a management roll of artists who specialize. The breadth of knowledge that I have gained over the years qualifies me to manage a small team. And not only can I jump from app to app and have a good understanding of what is going on, I can jump from task to task and oversee production. Even with my knowledge I still find it an extremely demanding position. Much more than I had ever expected it would be.

Another role that generalist personalities are attracted to is the role of filmmaker. And for me that was actually what I was trained in and was doing before I even got into 3D. So for me the attraction was being able to craft a unique and individual work of art as a film. And not having to dilute that across a team is very attractive. It is limiting. But a lot of artists opt for this route and make films all themselves. It allows for a level of creativity that a studio environment seems to kill.

Here is probably one of the best examples:

http://vimeo.com/31894179

There are other examples probably of varying degrees of quality.

But when you start to assemble a team it becomes more efficient and sensible to specialize. Even with a small team of people who can cross over, you do have a tendency to start sending certain kind of work over to one guy, and it certainly makes sense. But keeping within budgets and time schedules I have found it also is vital that artists and cross over as needed to fill gaps.

Dodgy
11-17-2014, 07:45 PM
No. What happened is this. It happens all the time here. What happened is someone asked a legitimate question top ask on the LW forums because of the nature of LW Modeler view ports which is unique to pretty much most apps. It was answered as objectively as possible. Without a slant against LightWave or any hint of bias toward Maya. And the person was armed with the information to sort it out from a person (me) who is familiar with both apps. It is all to familiar here. Many of us are.
But no. Alas this is a LW forum and people can not seem to resist the opportunity to flame Maya and other apps by AD and even Blender.
So, this is all good except that usually and I'd say 95 percent of what is said is not true at all, or at best extremely biased. And because there are people here actually familiar with Maya, Blender etc. people can not get away with it. Because people like me will say something in response to set the record straight.

I feel some of this was aimed at me so I'm going to reply, much as I felt I should just let it lie.

Yes, I made it all up to make Maya users look like horrible people. I just do that because I'm a biased LW user.

Umm, no, I think I have a pretty well balanced view of a lot of packages, and like you state, I feel there's a lot of good stuff in them and there's stuff in Maya I would love to have in LW. I've also experienced first hand a lot of Maya bias by some of its users. I've literally heard "I'm sure I could do this in in 5 mins in Maya but Lightwave, you can't do it" a whole bunch of times, then gone on myself to show them how it's done, even going so far as to show them how it couldn't be done in Maya in 5 mins like they say, and in one case, at all, and the guy himself admitted when he tried it in Maya he couldn't achieve the result. It's this attitude that irks me somewhat. I worked regularly with maya up till 2007, so I do know it fairly well to that point. I have heard its modelling has come on since then but haven't tried it out for myself. I did admire it's animation side, but again there are problems. My boss regularly complained about the customer service for it as well as features, so I've seen that side as well. I was just stating some of the attitude I've seen, as I felt the OP got some of that. I just feel there are places where Maya does (or did) fall down in its redesign and this attitude isn't really warranted. All packages fall over in some areas, some just have more areas they fall down in. Lightwave, I feel, is lagging behind, but it is a lot more capable than a lot of people seem to think.

Surrealist.
11-17-2014, 08:27 PM
I only commented on the one thing you said which was not true. I never said you did not have a balanced view. I don't even know you. But you have done well to change some of that. I now see that you have quite a lot of experience with Maya and therefore have an opinion. And I have no issue with that at all.

I think an open communication about software is good. The more specific the better. I do not do very well with general negative comments. But it is not my place to tell people what to say and not say.

What I do have an issue with is when people come in after the fact and see a conversation that starts to lead toward promoting (and usually correcting incorrect information) other software, after other LightWave users have attempted to knock it down.

That really irks me. The rest of it to me is open game and I enjoy an interchange as it helps me learn and it helps people who are reading get a fair discussion about software from two sides.

Dodgy
11-17-2014, 08:47 PM
But no. Alas this is a LW forum and people can not seem to resist the opportunity to flame Maya and other apps by AD and even Blender.

So, this is all good except that usually and I'd say 95 percent of what is said is not true at all, or at best extremely biased.

Since I and Erik were the only ones other than the OP to post up to this point, I can't help but feel this was directed at us. I know Erik fairly well, and he's a good helpful bloke. Neither of us deserved this, I thought, and sought to correct you in this matter as regards to me, seeing as Erik can speak for himself.

I hope this is sufficient to put this misunderstanding behind us.

Surrealist.
11-17-2014, 10:02 PM
But set what straight? I don't think anything was misunderstood. You said something that was not true, continued with more biased comments, that were generalities. I already l commented on what I thought about those when they happened. The untrue statement and the generalities.

The same stuff you were saying about Maya and the Maya community is true here on these forums about LightWave and the LightWave community.

If anything needs to be set straight. That is it right there. Then leave it alone.

My comments come from things that have happened beyond just this thread. So don't feel so singled out. It happens all the time.

erikals
11-18-2014, 12:16 AM
I find this not to be true at all. I find a very large number of Maya users are frustrated with Maya's limitations.

You said something that was not true,...
it's just wrong to say this, what do you want me to do, quote the things they have said, with signature?

but alright, maybe things have changed, i will have to trust you on this, since you seem to hold the answer.

jasonwestmas
11-18-2014, 07:07 AM
Software is a moving target as I've heard quite a few people say over the years.

willin
11-18-2014, 10:31 AM
I figure a good forum to go to if i wanted to know anything about Maya is the AD Maya forum but since i am really not interested in Maya at all i don't go there. For a guy that hasn't use lightwave in 6 years and is now using blender i often wonder how it is that someone finds so much time to spend on these forum mostly promoting Maya or preaching on the things that need to be done to lightwave to make it more Maya like. Hell I have been using lighwave since 1994 video toaster on the amiga and i have never had a period of time where i found the time to be in this forum nearly every day preaching mostly the same thing, Maya. It seems to me that you want lightwave to become Maya but at a lightwave price. Why don't you just keep using the free Blender modeler and the most likely free version of Maya that you have for animation and since you stop using lightwave 6 years ago go preach Maya at the Modo forum.

Surrealist.
11-18-2014, 10:58 AM
I figure a good forum to go to if i wanted to know anything about Maya is the AD Maya forum but since i am really not interested in Maya at all i don't go there. For a guy that hasn't use lightwave in 6 years and is now using blender i often wonder how it is that someone finds so much time to spend on these forum mostly promoting Maya or preaching on the things that need to be done to lightwave to make it more Maya like. Hell I have been using lighwave since 1994 video toaster on the amiga and i have never had a period of time where i found the time to be in this forum nearly every day preaching mostly the same thing, Maya. It seems to me that you want lightwave to become Maya but at a lightwave price. Why don't you just keep using the free Blender modeler and the most likely free version of Maya that you have for animation and since you stop using lightwave 6 years ago go preach Maya at the Modo forum.

I think it is better to be specific rather than general. And get to know the place people and the situation you write about before you come around and make assumptions. Also, read the thread first from the beginning.

First blood in these cases is pretty much always other users of this forum. Prior to that nothing was said bias in one way or the other. It was just an attempt to help the OP.

By the way the worst forum to go to is the AD forum. CG Talk is much more live. Some of the AD developers are there.

And by the by I already posted the best places to get an answer to this specific request. Additionally I pointed out in my first post that this made sense to ask it here. As LightWave modeler user, I can understand that this feature is unique to Modeler and would be hard to comprehend for a user or Maya, let alone any other app.

Surrealist.
11-18-2014, 11:08 AM
it's just wrong to say this, what do you want me to do, quote the things they have said, with signature?

but alright, maybe things have changed, i will have to trust you on this, since you seem to hold the answer.

Eric those two quotes were on different pages. For one I was not referencing what you quoted earlier. I was referencing the painting issue Dogy had mentioned.

Other than that, basically summing up the "help" here on this thread which was based on experiences that are true and real, a given. But they were general comments "here say" that are biased against Maya.

Every single app has these comments. And it is for this reason I don't go to the Blender or Maya forums and say well "sure go on over to the LW forums if you like and try to get them to see the point of... (fill in the blank) and they won't listen to you because they are all set in thier ways or they just wont see it.

That would just make me look like a guy biased against LW and it would not be real helpful. The better response is to simply point to a place where he could be heard or educate him as to why it might be hard for a LW guy to see it.

Again, you see, yet another guy coming here and trying to paint me as a guy who is promoting Maya when in fact all I did was defend it against what I found were a) a statement which was not true (now) about the painting and general comments and generalities that are true with every software and user. And therefore are nothing more than weak jabs, for the sake of spite, against Maya.

erikals
11-18-2014, 11:39 AM
well, without dragging this out further, we'll just have to rest onto different opinions in the end i think

http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

Surrealist.
11-18-2014, 11:47 AM
Yeah sure that is fine with me. As I said before I can respect that. And I can take some responsibility for coming back after that one "this is an autodesk thread" post and making derogatory remarks against both you and Dogy indirectly, even though it was also fueld by things I have seen before here. I don't think that was really productive either. So my apology.

erikals
11-18-2014, 11:56 AM
no problem, and hey, i'm sure we'll hear about app x versus app y quite soon anyway, these discussions never go away

http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/047.gif

Surrealist.
11-18-2014, 01:27 PM
Sure, and they are always fun and informative.

erikals
11-18-2014, 01:31 PM
sometimes http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

jburford
11-18-2014, 02:11 PM
I only commented on the one thing you said which was not true. I never said you did not have a balanced view. I don't even know you. But you have done well to change some of that. I now see that you have quite a lot of experience with Maya and therefore have an opinion. And I have no issue with that at all.

I think an open communication about software is good. The more specific the better. I do not do very well with general negative comments. But it is not my place to tell people what to say and not say.

What I do have an issue with is when people come in after the fact and see a conversation that starts to lead toward promoting (and usually correcting incorrect information) other software, after other LightWave users have attempted to knock it down.

That really irks me. The rest of it to me is open game and I enjoy an interchange as it helps me learn and it helps people who are reading get a fair discussion about software from two sides.


I must say I really love your style of communicating as well as bringing points across in your postings, very neutral, very balanced, and professional! Thanks for your contribution here and to the Industry as well as our love of 3D. And also, the other posters in their engaging and conversation points.

Thanks!

Surrealist.
11-18-2014, 03:24 PM
You are quite welcome. Thanks for the comments.:)

Cageman
11-18-2014, 03:55 PM
I've met far more Maya "fanboys" in my line of work compared to LW "fanboys". While a Maya-user would utter "What... is LW still around!?" a typical seasoned LW-user would say "Oh.. I used Maya for x and then transfered it to LW to do y", and you can really feel and hear the passion!

Since most, if not all, seasoned LW-users these days are software agnostic, I find them (those LW-users) a lot more fun to talk to and evolve around, compared to the Maya fanclub types of people that I've encountered (and had to spend a lot of times proving that LW is capable when used for its strengths). But even then, they were like... "Well... I can probably write a script to solve that, or I can develop a shader that does the same... etc, etc..." In many cases, the time it would take them to do that "one off" thing, we would allready be done with the rendering in LW, including the "oh so cumbersome" data-pipeline step that involves a couple of mouseclicks in order to have the data from Maya inside of LW (this was 4-5 years ago, way before Alembic). :)

I just whish that schools teaching 3D were not owned by AD these days. Knowing and using several apps in the workflow, when you understand how to deal with the data-flow between them, is probably the fastest way to get to good results without spending too much time dealing with one app and, when doing so, fighting the bad parts of that app.

Many Maya users who only have used Maya, are very protective about it. And those are the kind of people I had to deal with for some time. They are elitist (or they think they are and have an attitude that is just not productive).

That said, I've seen some LW-users being the same way towards users of other apps. But those are, usually, the LW-users who have used only LW for years and never ventured outside of it. It's kind of natural for humans to be like that. The best way forward is to open up, and the mixed pipeline that we've used at Massive Cinematics, made it possible for us to do a lot more, compared to constraining ourselves to just use Max or Maya, or Modo, or LightWave.

Oh well. :)

Surrealist.
11-18-2014, 09:42 PM
Well spoken. I think there are also a lot of factors a play here as well, that well, will just fuel this debate more than needed. The main point is, in any software you are going to run into the types of people who will shoot down your ideas, be elitist (yep we have them here in LW as well) etc. As Eric pointed out, don't stop with the "but why" guys. And as I have encouraged the OP to do, to make a video and demonstrate this it it is really something worth having in Maya.

Dodgy
11-19-2014, 04:32 PM
But set what straight? I don't think anything was misunderstood. You said something that was not true, continued with more biased comments, that were generalities. I already l commented on what I thought about those when they happened. The untrue statement and the generalities.


Actually what I said was perfectly true. I said my experience was from a while ago, and that things might have been fixed, and indeed they were, which is good. I've also experienced this sort of anti-LW bias, and that is true also. I certainly wouldn't believe it of all Maya users, or even the vast majority (I know a lot of users, and that would be an insane generalisation), but it happened enough that I felt for the OP who was a LW guy now working with Maya. I accept I could have phrased it better, and I'll consider my words more carefully in future. Certainly "which Maya goes 'Oh yeah, it does that'" should have been made clear is was only some Maya users. Anyway, I think I've spouted off enough in this, so I'm going to shut up now.

Surrealist.
11-19-2014, 07:55 PM
lol... no worries. Another case of forum pedantics on my part, my apology for that. Should have left it alone. I think what it is, is simply, it is very hard to have a thread - on any forum for that matter - and when a competing software mention is made, there is always some comment along these lines. I just get tired of it. I mean I use Blender. On the Blender forums I get flack if I support Maya. On the very same forums if someone is trashing Blender I get flack if I come out and support Blender and I am told that Blender will never be Maya. It is insanity.

On the LightWave forums, if I support Blender in a discussion I am a Blenderhead. On the Maya forums if I support Blender I am just a stupid amateur who does not understand how it all works in the big studios. And the strange thing is none of these people bother to stop and ask questions. They just spout off. I don't dare mention LightWave on the CGTalk forums, then I am just a looser, old fart. Lost in some kind of fantasy that LightWave will come back to its prime like it was in the 90s. Or some other such generality. And around here there is such a deep and entrenched hatred for Autodesk that you can not even have a thread about things they are doing without darts flying.

I use 4 out of the 5-6 major packages out there. It is really hard to get my head around this kind of talk. It makes no sense to me.

And when I hear it, weather it is deserved or not, I have been known to lash out.

But alas, I am a dreamer. It is always going to be this way. People settle into their divisions. It will never change.

There are lots of tools out there that are completely awesome. I just wish people would see that. Open up the mind to it, accept things at face value without prejudice.

And this thread, well. Was it not about just how to link the viewports in Maya?

As far as I know LightWave is the only app that does this. I could be wrong though.

Dodgy
11-19-2014, 08:21 PM
It was a feature I missed when working in Maya myself. I think with most other packages working in one view is more the norm, hence this isn't really considered, but I always liked the linked 4 view format. You can of course unlink them in modeler too, but it's nice to have the option.

I did try to download the trial of Maya 2015 from the AD website to update my frame of reference, but that was a hilarious pain in the derriere. First it told me that Firefox can often cause problems with the download, and that I should try a different browser. I tried anyway and got a connection error when I tried to run the 10 meg downloader I'd just downloaded. So I tried with IE, and low and behold it says IE can often cause problems with the download and I should try a different browser. That's where I began to think I was cursed by AD for having this discussion with you. Anyway, I tried it again, and another connection error. I thought it might be because of a corporate firewall, so I tried again at home, with both browsers. No luck.

What do I have to do to get a trial going? <sob>

I completely understand, you must get it in the ear from all sides. Not pleasant. Me for myself, I like Maya out of the current crop for it's all round power and UI simplicity. Max has a lot of great tools, but ever since it came out I found it's UI too clicky, so not a big fan. XSI all my animator mates loved, but that looks like it's got a short life now. C4d has a nice interface, but I don't like the surfacing, and hair in it I've not seen good renders of hair (the styling tools are great though), especially from my own tinkering. Modo is looking nice, good price for its feature set, and it's all in one, but lacking in construction history which I think is a big no-no for a relatively new package, and the surfacing is weird to me, though renders are nice, and the hair renders quick and well. Never used Houdini, which is bizarre since I love nodes and you can get the cheap versions now for playing around in, so I really should give that a go. Blender, again not a big fan of the UI, but I still dig it up to play with the fluids, which I'd dearly love in LW. But hey, you can import those into LW with plugins, so there you go.

As for LW, it does most of what I need, renders well, nodes in most areas for what I want. Scene referencing, render layers, and fluids would make it a lot better, the rest I can fake or work around, and I don't even mind our ancient modeler, though that could do with a big speed up, and construction history if a rewrite is on the cards.

spherical
11-19-2014, 08:34 PM
What do I have to do to get a trial going? <sob>

Try adding a downloader plugin to FF. I use Free Download Manager. Got pointed to it by RebelHill when I was experiencing much the same behavior when getting his stuff. Multi-connects, resumes, stores write locations. It's great and fast.

Surrealist.
11-19-2014, 10:15 PM
Yeah I think I use that one too.

@Dodgy, cool to hear more of your other software views/experience. Hope you can get the Maya dl working.

As for Maya, I am pretty sure this could be done with a mel script. I was actually a little surprised. I thought there was a link button, but maybe that was XSI, or not. Not in front of the computer that has my suite installed. I'll look at it again tomorrow.

I am also looking forward to have a play with Houdini.

jeric_synergy
11-20-2014, 12:51 AM
I remember Stuart Ferguson (sp?) asking a room full of beta testers "WHY?????" we wanted some Modeler feature, and just not understanding the answer.

Sometimes it's hard to communicate why. "WE JUST WANT IT. Implement it, and you'll understand."

MarcusM
11-20-2014, 02:37 AM
Few words more about viewport. Some time ago i start thread about rotation in perspective window, in Modeler. It should be like in Layout in my opinion. I no comment why so long there is no possibility to change this. For sure many LW users all the time clicking on rotation icon. Minimum three buttons in mouse and all the same.
But there is a solution ;] My AutoHotkey script. If want use, just change position in pixels, position of rotation icon on your desktp. It working with LeftALT+LeftWindows. Cursor also going back on previous position :) Please try and comment guys!

jeric_synergy
11-20-2014, 09:01 AM
Ermmmm, I always use the implemented ALT+DRAG method of LWM Persp. vuport rotation. -???

I don't understand how Layout and Modeler differ here.

MarcusM
11-20-2014, 11:05 AM
In your Modeler, perspective window rotation with Alt+LMB working the same way like in Layout? Have you LW 12? ;]

jeric_synergy
11-20-2014, 11:20 AM
I checked b4 I posted, and it seemed to, and TMK always has. But perhaps you're referring to some subtlety of operation that doesn't jump out at me.

Basically, ALT+LMB rotates the perspective, and ALT+SHFT+LBM moves the rotation point/drags the camera. I seem to recall this conversation , and it boiled down to some small difference that I don't regard as important, but to some people is The Most Important Thing Evahhh.

At least we don't use the MMB: I h8 that workflow, as IMO the MMB, when it's a wheel, is a terrible BUTTON.

BTW, iirc erikals made an AHC script that turns the mouse wheel into a 'zoomer' in LWM. Very nice, when I remember it. To that end, on reboot my AHC posts a little reminder of all the AHC conveniences on my machine.

MarcusM
11-20-2014, 11:50 AM
Hmm maybe you not uderstand me exactly. In your Modeler, when you use Alt+LMB and when you use button to rotate in top right corner, you ahve the same type of rotation? In my opinion, no.
For example in Zbrush you can choose ZYX or only in Y, only in Z. Loooking on that, in Modeler you have XYZ, in Layout is Y.
Check in free time my upper script for AHC.

jeric_synergy
11-20-2014, 11:54 AM
Oh, you're saying ALT+LMB versus the icon/button results in different rotation, got it.

#aflw, but I seem to recall you're right-- but I never use the button/icon, so I never experience this.

AHC scripts are awesome, they really give one a lot of UI control over one's apps.