PDA

View Full Version : Catmull Clark in LW Next



gamedesign1
02-20-2017, 01:29 PM
I wonder if Catmull Clark will be improved in the new mesh engine. I have always liked the idea of the edge weights in CC but never felt tge tools were good enough. What do you guys think?

Reco
02-20-2017, 02:47 PM
I'm crossing my fingers for Open subD

Reco

Signal to Noise
02-20-2017, 02:55 PM
I'm crossing my fingers just for actually seeing "LW Next".

gamedesign1
02-20-2017, 03:04 PM
I'm crossing my fingers for Open subD

Reco

That would be even better :)

lwanmtr
02-20-2017, 03:15 PM
Hopefully they fix the UV smoothing on CC's..has been an issue since CC was introduced to LW, and there's been no fix.

gamedesign1
02-27-2017, 12:45 AM
Hopefully they fix the UV smoothing on CC's..has been an issue since CC was introduced to LW, and there's been no fix.

Yeah I hope they fix it so all the tools work with CC. I have been playing with CC in Blender over the past couple of days and it is so much better at handling CC and all the tools I have used so far work with it just fine and don't break the edge weights. What does everyone else think about Blender's CC capability? I would really like to use it for a short film I am working on for modelling some hard surface models.

bazsa73
02-27-2017, 06:44 AM
Yeah I hope they fix it so all the tools work with CC. I have been playing with CC in Blender over the past couple of days and it is so much better at handling CC and all the tools I have used so far work with it just fine and don't break the edge weights. What does everyone else think about Blender's CC capability? I would really like to use it for a short film I am working on for modelling some hard surface models.

Did you try Hard Ops for Blender? That's a really cool plugin only for 15 USD.

hrgiger
02-27-2017, 07:53 AM
why would the new mesh engine in layout mean that anything was done with problems with cc subdivision which is in modeler? i wouldnt get your hopes up.

erikals
02-27-2017, 08:57 AM
doubt CC will be fixed.

not much Modeler stuff will be fixed.   (afawk)

Reco
02-27-2017, 09:19 AM
Why continue to fix the old CC instead of implementing CC Open_SubDiv, were all your edge weights and creases are
compatible across all application that supports Open SubD?

http://graphics.pixar.com/opensubdiv/docs/intro.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-3L9BOTEtw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFckVSyvVy4


Reco

erikals
02-27-2017, 09:23 AM
good point,
but either way, Modeler improvements are needed.

Surrealist.
02-27-2017, 10:27 AM
they should be able to replace modeler CCs with open subdiv shouldn't they? No brainier to be able to do that in Layout. But since it originates in Modeler... anyway. Is this really a limitation of Modeler? Always wondered about that.

erikals
02-27-2017, 10:47 AM
not sure,

also to be asked > does Modeler need a new Geometry Engine ?

> probably.

Prince Charming
02-27-2017, 11:00 AM
The problem is that all modeler tools need to be rewritten/modified to take edge weighting into account.
It is just another example of a tool that should not have ever been released in a "professional" app, and then remained like that for ten years.
"New mesh engines" wont do much good if the quality control is at the same level as it has been for the last 10 years.
If they try to put out features like cc subs this time around they will be laughed out of the 3d industry.
With competition of such refined tools like Houdini and Modo... Crap shallow features will be spotted immediately and laughed at.
I hope NT take their good old time and produce something of value, because this is their last chance.

hrgiger
02-27-2017, 11:31 AM
Well there must be a distinction, not sure open subdivision is what you want for modeling. Open subdiv in Modo is gpu acceleration for mesh deforming where as they use psubs or pixar subDs for modeling.

Snosrap
02-27-2017, 12:32 PM
Well they are giving us a new .lwo format to go along with the new geo engine, so while Modeler may not be able to take advantage of any geo improvements at least those will be in place when Layout get modeling tools. (Assuming of course the new .lwo format actually corrects the issues in regards to CC subD's. Real dumb if they didn't fix it while creating the new .lwo. :))

Surrealist.
02-27-2017, 05:37 PM
Well there must be a distinction, not sure open subdivision is what you want for modeling. Open subdiv in Modo is gpu acceleration for mesh deforming where as they use psubs or pixar subDs for modeling.

I don't think that distinction in Modo is indicative of specific use of open siubdiv. Open sub div as I understand it is simply the latest version of the library that includes the ability to exploit the GPU rather than a separate use case. In Maya this is a global setting (https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/maya/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2016/ENU/Maya/files/GUID-909B2D5F-D031-4372-B2D7-7D8BCCBE3183-htm.html).

It is used for both modeling and rendering/display.


OpenSubdiv is an open-source subdivision method developed by Pixar that lets you work with a high-fidelity representation of your model with great accuracy and speed. As a professional standard in the animation industry, OpenSubdiv is implemented in a variety of software packages, improving interoperability by producing the same results when models are transferred between applications. In Maya, OpenSubdiv is the default subdivision method when you preview a smoothed mesh, smooth a mesh using Mesh > Smooth, or create a subdiv proxy.

OpenSubdiv is an improved alternative to the legacy Maya Catmull-Clark subdivision method. For example, OpenSubidv takes advantage of parallel GPU and CPU structures, improving viewport performance for meshes with high subdivision levels. Additionally, in the OpenSubdiv Catmull-Clark controls for Smooth Mesh attributes, you can turn on Show Displacements to visualize displacement maps interactively without the need to render.
You can select one of the OpenSubdiv subdivision methods:


OpenSubdiv Catmull-Clark Uniform: Applies a uniform refinement scheme to the faces of a mesh. The entire mesh receives the same level of subdivision.

OpenSubdiv Catmull-Clark Adaptive: Applies a progressive refinement scheme to irregular parts of your mesh. Adaptive subdivision only refines the mesh topology where additional detail is needed. The level of refinement is determined by the mesh topology and the camera view. For example, mesh topology that is close to the camera is more refined than topology on the same mesh that is far away. In its current implementation, Adaptive subdivision lets you increase the smoothness of your mesh without increasing its subdivision level. Set the Adaptive Tessellation Level in the OpenSubdiv Controls to a high value to see results without affecting your scene's performance.

Note: OpenSubdiv Catmull-Clark Adaptive is only supported by OpenGL 4 and DirectX11 compatible graphics cards.

jwiede
02-27-2017, 07:24 PM
Well there must be a distinction, not sure open subdivision is what you want for modeling. Open subdiv in Modo is gpu acceleration for mesh deforming where as they use psubs or pixar subDs for modeling.

Psubs are faster/more efficient for modeling, OpenSubDiv is more efficient for animated deformation, IIRC.

OpenSubDiv can be used as general CC subD implementation just like Psubs, but as MODO already had Psubs integrated, TF decided to just implement the small segments where OpenSubDiv differed and offered benefits over Psubs as a dynamic add-on atttribute/library for meshes, and thereby get benefits of both Psubs and OpenSubDiv.

I very highly doubt LW3DG has addressed CC subds at all, but who knows, hopefully we'll see soon enough.

Reco
02-28-2017, 03:48 AM
It’s all about making a complex objects using simple geometry.

That is possible in Lightwave today, but the limitation is that it will only work inside Lightwave. All the edge sharpness values will be lost during an export.

Pixars Open Subdiv is more like a standard. An Open Subdiv 3D model will have the same appearance in all applications that supports it.
No more needs for tons of support loops, which again are making a complex model even more complicated.

It’s a universal tool, and it is not a disadvantage to have universal tools in a production pipelines.
At last, Pixar developed it for a reason.

Another link:
https://vimeo.com/70600180

I will not fight for it, but I’m hoping for it.



Reco

Surrealist.
02-28-2017, 09:05 AM
The main issue for LW, is that CC implementation is broken. And has been for a number of years. There are some bugs in Layout with displacement for example. And if you are using UVs you can not smooth interpolate UV maps with CCs ; only with LightWave's internal sub D.

So the question is more a matter of would it not simply be better to implement Open SubD rather than fix the older implementation? Maybe this could have been also a licensing issue to get the latest build. Not sure what was up with that. But to my knowledge Modeler or LightWave never got any of the new improvements (builds) over the years. CCs moved forward and got new features LW never got. As far as I know.

As far as I recall, Open Subdiv is an effort to remove any licensing restrictions on use of the tech. It is the current latest version of the tech. That is all that it is. And it is moving forward with support for the GPU. Really that is the long and short of it.

So it would seem in theory that they could easily implement that into both Modeler and Layout.

But I have no idea. Just speculation.

Snosrap
03-01-2017, 03:28 PM
The main issue for LW, is that CC implementation is broken.

Just to clarify - it's broken when edge weighting is used - correct? Weight an edge and apply mirror equals disaster! :) I think I recall that the way LW Modeler is programmed, each modify/multiply tool needs to be programmed on their own to work with weighted edges. Same goes for why some tools don't respond to symmetry - each tool is an island unto itself and the effort to update those tools and keep them working between upgrades would be a nightmare. Hopefully the new geometry engine can correct those issues as well.

lwanmtr
03-01-2017, 03:30 PM
It breaks (for me) at the UV's....when you freeze an object the uv's arent smoothed at all.

Surrealist.
03-01-2017, 05:33 PM
Yeah CC Smooth Interpolation is broken. (Actually there is no smooth setting for CC is the reason, it is Subpatch) Basically rendering CC useless in any production scenario with UVs. I don't use edge weighing but I have heard that also has issues. I did run into issues with displacement though.

Snosrap
03-01-2017, 08:24 PM
Oh yeah that's right CC UV's are messed up.

tburbage
03-03-2017, 11:38 AM
I don't feel very optimistic that they will address those flaws in the upcoming release due to the magnitude of the other architectural changes, yet feel really strongly that this is a critical part of the LightWave success story as a scene rendering platform.

I know I wouldn't base any project workflow around the old Subpatch algorithm, and look on with envy at Modo's and Maya's SDS story. So CC Subdiv, either brought up to modern standard or replaced, seems critical path to a viable, modern LW. Let's just hope that the geometry engine update not only facilitated improvements to Subdiv, but made it a necessity.

Asticles
03-03-2017, 12:30 PM
Well, maybe for the next update. Step by step :)

Marander
03-03-2017, 12:34 PM
I don't feel very optimistic that they will address those flaws in the upcoming release due to the magnitude of the other architectural changes, yet feel really strongly that this is a critical part of the LightWave success story as a scene rendering platform.

Yes agree, this would be important for pipeline integration (maybe not so much for individual artists or hobbyists). I would expect this to be part of the new deformation stack. It should be switchable like in the C4D example.

136195

Snosrap
03-03-2017, 09:43 PM
I don't feel very optimistic that they will address those flaws in the upcoming release due to the magnitude of the other architectural changes, yet feel really strongly that this is a critical part of the LightWave success story as a scene rendering platform.

Seems like a missed opportunity if they don't fix it with the new .lwo format and new geo engine.

Reco
03-04-2017, 12:58 AM
They will miss an opportunity if they only fix it.


Reco

djwaterman
03-04-2017, 01:30 AM
I don't see how they can if they aren't doing anything new to Modeler where the models would be created. Perhaps Layout will be able to read open subdivision of models made in other software. Remember people, that modeler will never have the new geometry engine.

lwanmtr
03-04-2017, 02:38 AM
Where did they say Modeler would not be getting any work done on it?

gamedesign1
03-04-2017, 03:03 AM
They are making some changes to modeler, because they are adding that Camera view option that syncs with Layout. But not sure if anything else will be done.

gerry_g
03-04-2017, 03:30 AM
if that is the case and you still have a different engine in each thats dumb, can't use linear uv's with CC's ( well can but can't manipulate them and they do not exactly match the CC uv's Modo spits out there are corner issues even with linear corners on), and you can't use displacement with CC's so how you going to have ability to import psubs and expect to have full control.

MichaelT
03-04-2017, 03:59 AM
I don't see how they can if they aren't doing anything new to Modeler where the models would be created. Perhaps Layout will be able to read open subdivision of models made in other software. Remember people, that modeler will never have the new geometry engine.

Where on earth did you get the idea no work is being done on modeler? Given they said they unified the platform, with a new geo-engine, it clear they have. Even if that work may only be under the hood.

lwanmtr
03-04-2017, 04:13 AM
I recall at one point Rob Powers even stating that Modeler would be getting work done, so Im not sure where people are thinking that there is nothing being done.

erikals
03-04-2017, 04:54 AM
little work has been done to Modeler in the last 11 years so think Modeler will get next to no improvement kinda comes naturally.

pick a Modeler improvement >
http://forums.newtek.com/archive/index.php/t-139159

i stated the thread in 2013.

djwaterman
03-04-2017, 05:11 AM
Rob, Lino or both have stated that the geo engine is only for Layout and that the plan is to drop Modeler at some stage so there is no point spending any effort coding the geo engine into Modeler.

jwiede
03-04-2017, 05:23 AM
I recall at one point Rob Powers even stating that Modeler would be getting work done, so Im not sure where people are thinking that there is nothing being done.

Whatever is being done w.r.t. the new LWO format version will obviously require Modeler changes, as will adding "Layout view" to Modeler, and both were announced as coming in LW Next. Layout received a new geo engine, but there's no statement/indication any infrastructure work is being done in Modeler beyond the already-announced changes (neither of them imply major Modeler geo engine changes, unfortunately).

That said, the state of LW's CC subd's remaining as it has for so long is deeply unacceptable. If LW's CC subd's retain the same issues in LW Next as they have now, then IMO, LW3DG senior mgmt. must be held accountable for allowing such a fundamental, important element of LW's 3D infrastructure to remain in such a broken, dysfunctional state for so long.

MichaelT
03-04-2017, 05:40 AM
Rob, Lino or both have stated that the geo engine is only for Layout and that the plan is to drop Modeler at some stage so there is no point spending any effort coding the geo engine into Modeler.

Uh no? Because it wasn't that far back when Lino said the underlying platform is shared by both. Come to think of it.. that post might not be around anymore.. as it was mentioned before the crash.
And as far as I know.. he have never said they would drop modeler. Besides.. a LW 3d app without the ability to model? Don't make me laugh. The only thing that would happen is a merger.

Also: http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?148301-Lightwave-3D-BLOG-is-now-up-online!&p=1447735&viewfull=1#post1447735

Surrealist.
03-04-2017, 06:49 AM
I have followed all of the blog threads. And other threads. This has been discussed. Modeler is not getting a new engine. Some minor changes etc. Yes.

That I have always assumed to be a given since it was cleared up months ago.

The question is, can they implement Open Subdiv -which is now the current version of CC - into Modeler as a separate app? They have obviously sorted out already how to interface Modeler with the new mesh engine in Layout. So it isn't going to matter from a technical standpoint - in theory. However I don't really know what they might be up against there.

But seems to me they could implement Open Subdiv in both apps separately. Maybe not by the next release. But soon. I'd say it is fairly high priority to be able to use CCs in production.

MichaelT
03-04-2017, 07:09 AM
Well, if modeler isn't getting the new engine.. there will most definitely be complaints at launch. Of that I have very little doubt. That would be a very very big mistake on their part.

Surrealist.
03-04-2017, 07:19 AM
Well I see where you are going with that. I mean theoretically. It would be nice. But it was never promised. And I don't think anyone is expecting it.

This was brought up actually over a year ago now. They are moving in the direction of Layout, not Modeler. As nice as it would be I agree with you. Modelers performance is dismal.

I think we are up against man hours on revamping modeler with a new engine, then to turn around and simply trash it shortly thereafter. It is a short term downside. But I think it will work out in the long run.

MichaelT
03-04-2017, 08:58 AM
Hard to say.. it depends on how the modeler is made. I know how I would have set things up.. the part that does the actual rendering, have ideally nothing to do with any modeling tools. I have certainly seen tools where they draw directly within the editing tool itself. Which of course is really bad, as it makes the tool very rigid, and unmanageable. I would refactor any source doing that on the very first day. But like I said, it depends on how the code really looks. No way of knowing that without source code.

gamedesign1
03-04-2017, 09:16 AM
I wish they could just clarify what direction they are going in for this next release. Part of me thinks that they decided on one route when they started doing the blogs, but then maybe realized just how much each change was going to affect different things that they have decided to go in another direction. I remember at the beginning Rob used the Borg Queen analogy, to explain they are making a new LightWave that is going to be one app but at the same time trying and implement its new features into the existing Modeler/Layout that we have now, hence the Borg Queen analogy of bolting the new into the old. That's how I interpreted it anyway, I could be way off :)

hrgiger
03-04-2017, 09:53 AM
It has been discussed several times. The unified geo engine as it relates to lw next has nothing to do with modeler. It just means that now the geo engine in layout handles deformations but it is also now aware of points, polygons, and edges and has the ability to create new geometry. But as Rob went on to clarify, that doesn't mean you should expect any significant modeling ability in layout for the next version. They have shown the new synched camera view in modeler, a few new tools like live array and lattice, as well as some other tools that were on the toolbar but weren't shown in the blog post. If they've done anything else to modeler, we don't know about it. But the geo engine that was discussed is only in layout.

When I suggested that modelers fate lies within layout in one of the early threads for the blog, Rob corrected me to say he preferred the word future over fate. So from that I gather they are moving in the direction of modeling within the layout environment.

djwaterman
03-04-2017, 09:59 AM
Clarify? It's clear, read the blog posts. The only thing that makes it unclear is all the misinformation and rampant speculation on these threads, people assume that what gets said here has valid sources and they don't , that's why I only ever mention what has been officially announced. Now they could've gone further and done other stuff they're not talking about, but nobody knows that so it's not helpful to speculate without at least clarifying that you are just guessing and hoping.

Just to clarify, the new geometry engine is just for Layout, Modeler will be dropped at some future point and modeling tools will be built into Layout, and nothing has been said about open subdivisions yet.

hrgiger
03-04-2017, 10:03 AM
Well to be fair DJ, they never specifically said that modeler would be dropped. Even if modeling is added to layout, they might continue to offer modeler to those who like working that way, as much as that makes no sense to me.

gamedesign1
03-04-2017, 10:24 AM
Clarify? It's clear, read the blog posts. The only thing that makes it unclear is all the misinformation and rampant speculation on these threads, people assume that what gets said here has valid sources and they don't , that's why I only ever mention what has been officially announced. Now they could've gone further and done other stuff they're not talking about, but nobody knows that so it's not helpful to speculate without at least clarifying that you are just guessing and hoping.

Just to clarify, the new geometry engine is just for Layout, Modeler will be dropped at some future point and modeling tools will be built into Layout, and nothing has been said about open subdivisions yet.

Dj I have read the blog posts and there are some things that are unclear. I am not asking for all the new features and geo engine to be put into modeler as I know that is not the direction they are going, but I would like to know if they are going to fix the existing issues with modeler as I have paid for tools that don't work properly. I don't think that is unreasonable to ask.

MichaelT
03-04-2017, 11:59 AM
Just to be clear on my end. I'm not talking about having features from Layout in modeler. I am talking about the modeler communicating using the same data source as layout. If they don't they'd need an extra layer for translating information between modeler & layout. Which is actually much worse. I makes much more sense to use the same engine in both, even if on the surface, nothing have changed in the modeler.

Surrealist.
03-04-2017, 12:49 PM
Yeah I was thinking about the same thing. But given the fact that the two engines, Modeler and Layout, have always been fundamentally different, I don't think it is any more of an issue than it was before. But, of course. merely speculating. Would be interesting to hear from a developer on this.

But either way we need CCs working in both.

lwanmtr
03-04-2017, 02:35 PM
The blog really has little information other than new features (which look really cool)...It doesnt actually state any direction they are going, the posts are also spaced out by months. I would think posting some clear information on the blog would be a great thing for them to do, specially as it can be difficult to find information buried in the multitude of threads on the forum.

Really, though I do think there will need to be some things addressed in modeler to at minimum handle the new lwo format.

erikals
03-04-2017, 03:02 PM
Modeler / Layout communication will always be slow i think
Modeler using C, Layout using C++

Snosrap
03-04-2017, 11:01 PM
Really, though I do think there will need to be some things addressed in modeler to at minimum handle the new lwo format.

Exactly! If LW Next Modeler can't read or write to the new .lwo format well then it is effectively worthless. Imagine adding your surface attributes in Layout and then needing to make a geometry adjustment in Modeler and destroying your surface attributes. Yeah - work needs to be done to Modeler.

hrgiger
03-05-2017, 02:54 AM
Of course work needs to be done to modeler but I think its mostly maintenance. As much as the two programs are separate, they are connected. Changes made in layout can and do cause ripple effects to modeler. David Ikeda when he worked for NT said he would need to often fix bugs introduced to modeler when they made changes to Layout and obviously LW next layout is receiving quite a few changes introducing a new renderer and more. And adding a new lwo format. They are adding a few new tools to modeler but at the end of the day, its still fundamentally going to be the same modeler. Putting a new geometry engine in modeler would pretty much require a complete rewrite of all of modelers tools and if you're going off what has been said thus far from the blog and subsequent discussions, that's an awful lot of work and probably unnecessary work if they're indeed putting modeling inside of Layout.

MichaelT
03-05-2017, 06:33 AM
Layout by itself is gimped.. you need something to put models into it. That's where modeler comes in. You can't change one, without making sure the other follows. Unless of course you want to be dependent on 3rd party tools, but then there is also no need for LWO at all. And given how well tools like Maya can do the same thing already, there is by extension no need for Layout either. As much as some people here seem to hate modeler, and want it gone. They should also know that doing that will put the entire product on the chopping board.

lwanmtr
03-05-2017, 02:28 PM
Exactly. Regardless of future unification plans, Modeler will need to be kept up with Layout, at least until the final unified app can be completed. Otherwise if all you're producing is Layout, then its no more than Poser on steroids (bit of an exaggeration, but you get the idea). Relying on 3rd party objects will indeed kill off alot of users who don't have access or even use another app for modeling. I'm certain that Rob and the team have considered all this, or hope they have.

erikals
03-05-2017, 03:48 PM
quite curious to how they will go about it.

lwanmtr
03-05-2017, 03:54 PM
Yeah, would love some more information...a nice blog post or something where they outline the plan (as it stands at the moment, anyway)..and maybe more frequent posts. Been over a year since the last upgrade..and almost 4 months since the last blog post.

erikals
03-05-2017, 04:02 PM
word from LWG was that LW2017 will be out within 3 months.
just something someone from LWG wrote, not an "official" statement. (but close enough)

lwanmtr
03-05-2017, 04:04 PM
Oh cool. Where was that? I been trying to follow threads but since I slacked a but i fell behind...lol

erikals
03-05-2017, 04:07 PM
ah, found it... darn big internet.

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?151777-Come-on-LWG3D-show-us-some-nuggets!&p=1499075&viewfull=1#post1499075

lwanmtr
03-05-2017, 04:11 PM
Cool. looks like a facebook excerpt...dont like facebook...lol

Vong
03-05-2017, 04:15 PM
It is a Facebook excerpt.... Unfortunately, LWG seems to be more active on FB than here in the forums.

Could be that FB can be browsed anywhere, fairly easily from most devices. Have you tried reading these forums on a tablet or a phone? Major pain in the @$$!!!! :D

erikals
03-05-2017, 04:15 PM
yeah, me neither   :)
and it's almost like i'm being criminalized by the FB team by not becoming a member. :D

FaceTrack, that's the Real name.   ;)

---------


Have you tried reading these forums on a tablet or a phone? Major pain
true, could be easier. then again keeping track of .zip files / projects on a FB page is Major Pain as well... :)
such it is... :)

lwanmtr
03-05-2017, 04:19 PM
Im too poor to have a tablet (ok, my delorean is stealing all the money i'd use for toys)...lol

I guess I'll have to look on facebook..lol. You'd think they'd be active on the blog too.

erikals
03-05-2017, 04:22 PM
yeah. i'm finally used to that particular "policy" now. took some time, didn't seem quite logic.

in a way it's good, as i in time get used to not expecting.   :)