PDA

View Full Version : Why have you stuck with LW all this time!



tcoursey
09-06-2017, 08:44 AM
I have been using LW since 2001ish. I used 3D studio (not max) prior to that a little bit. I don't want this to be a bash or mass exit thread. Curious if others find the same things in the liking of LW as I do.

I kind of like the fact that it's two programs. Although we are a small studio it does allow for collaboration that isn't possible (I don't think) in other apps. Modelers can tweak models and animators, scene setups etc...can do their work.

I LOVE being able to so easily access points and polys. I do like some of Modo's methods in this area too (I play with a trial every time they come out with a new version). But it just doesn't feel the same in many ways.

Love the easy to develop textures/surfaces in LW. I use Octane now and it's implementation is very easy too.

We don't do a lot of animation per say, so instances and camera movement is about all we do in Layout. I love the instancing we have and how easy it is, but this too as far as I know is pretty robust in other packages.

We use LWCAD quite a bit, love the tools they have brought to modeler. Not sure what we would have done without it 5-6 years ago. Probably would have jumped ship back then...


Things I hope get better in NEXT, coming 2020 :)

Snapping native in modeler/layout
Interface that can be customized, similar to Modo. Expandable, movable tabs etc..etc..
We have moved to Octane, but would love an update to the native engine.
Not sure what else at the moment, we are easy to please, until we see something innovative that makes us go "huh!" :)

Love Lightwave!

Nicolas Jordan
09-06-2017, 09:36 AM
LWCAD is really the only reason I still use Lightwave. There is nothing else like LWCAD out there! If it wasn't for LWCAD I would have very few reasons to stick with Lightwave and would probably be using Modo. Lightwave is still very competent in the area of rendering so because of LWCAD I choose to model and render in Lightwave.

I'm hoping LW NEXT will give me more reasons to keep using Lightwave for Arch Viz work.

THIBAULT
09-06-2017, 09:55 AM
LWCAD is really the only reason I still use Lightwave. There is nothing else like LWCAD out there! If it wasn't for LWCAD I would have very few reasons to stick with Lightwave and would probably be using Modo. Lightwave is still very competent in the area of rendering so because of LWCAD I choose to model and render in Lightwave.

I'm hoping LW NEXT will give me more reasons to keep using Lightwave for Arch Viz work.

Yes, for me too ! LWCAD on ..... 3DS MAX ! :D

Danner
09-06-2017, 10:20 AM
Muscle memory. I am just way faster in LW than anytihng else. I know where everything is and I know where the land mines are.

Marander
09-06-2017, 10:31 AM
Yes, for me too ! LWCAD on ..... 3DS MAX ! :D

And LWCAD on C4D for me. LWCAD for modo would be intersting too. LWNext could be interesting for large meshes and heavy scenes.

hrgiger
09-06-2017, 10:32 AM
LWCAD would be the only reason I would ever open up modeler. I've since moved to Modo for modeling as it's just better in almost every imaginable way. It's also updated 3 times a year and the modeling environment is continually improving unlike modeler.

I would like to see LightWave survive and continue to improve. And my hope is that I will find the new renderer useful but honestly I've lost my patience with their silence. The only thing you can do is laugh or cry at this point.

CaptainMarlowe
09-06-2017, 10:45 AM
Modeler with LWCAD is still my main app, because I just have a good feeling and easy workflow with it, although I use more and more 3D-coat for UV-mapping, and substance suite for almost all texturing. Then, I use layout for every rendering and animation. I have started to test Marmoset Toolbag and plan to buy it to get real time PBR renders and turntables of my models, but it is not suitable for heavy scenes not even speaking of complex animation. I do put a lot of hope in Next PBR renderer to complete some animation projects I have and ease the use of my maps painted in substance painter. In other words, I'm used to LW, I had to add some other apps to extend my possibilities, but I certainly don't plan to change my main app in the foreseeable future.

bazsa73
09-06-2017, 10:59 AM
Lightwave is my best 3D friend along with Zbrush, Substance and Blender. I do all my renderings in LW and most of my animation works as well. Sculpting/painting/smoke and fire happens outside.

fablefox
09-06-2017, 11:00 AM
There is no other choice I guess.

After dropping the dongle, LW is the only closed (blender can't play nice with other tool/lib due to license) 3d app that is cheap and you can keep it (houdini don't count, neither is C4D) that still care about CA (modo, due to current critism, doesn't count).

jasonwestmas
09-06-2017, 11:12 AM
I create concept art, models and animation and the occasional 2D graphic design. Maya, Zbrush and Affinity has become the dynamic trio for me. I'm liking redshift for rendering just fine, very fast and interactive. I don't think I'll be needing Lightwave or Adobe soon, unless the job requires it. Then I'll just get a temp sub from Adobe.

erikals
09-06-2017, 12:33 PM
i like it for organic SubD modeling and simple HardSurface stuff.
also like the launch time, basically Zero.
IKBooster handles are great.
Endomorphs, nice.
lowcost Awesome plugins > RHiggit / Advanced Placement / Turbulence / Fluids / Syflex / 3rd
DPont
finally got LWcad, still have to learn it / test it.
LW > Octane
LightWavers sharing info. i wish i could share more, however.. > time.
no damn forced Subscription   http://www.uidownload.com/files/425/796/892/lock-locked-security-icon.png

biggest drawbacks >
missing workplane, non interactive tools, slow modeler, no paint option, no Modeler Love in long time, plugin dependent, Layout no modeling options, FiberFX.
++

Nicolas Jordan
09-06-2017, 01:08 PM
And LWCAD on C4D for me. LWCAD for modo would be intersting too. LWNext could be interesting for large meshes and heavy scenes.


Yes a port of LWCAD for Modo would be nice but I'm not holding my breath.

raw-m
09-06-2017, 01:24 PM
I'm a rare breed in that I do motion graphics in LW, so DP Kit is essential!

Other things that have kept me going: love the renderer, Instance Generator and Spline Control, the amount of time and effort spent learning it, LW CAD and host of others. Without the 3rd party stuff I'd be a C4D user by now (I hope LW3dg are taking notice, theres a lot riding on the next release for me).

Farhad_azer
09-06-2017, 01:39 PM
I enjoy modeling and the fact that it does lots of things by hitting one key without having to use menus with clunky settings.
Renderer is awesome.
Lots of animating and dynamics tools.
I lllllooooovvvvveeee instancer.
VPR is great.
Its interface is gorgeouse.
With a little proceduralism and better undo LW will be the number one 3d package.
Lightwave rocks.

tcoursey
09-06-2017, 01:50 PM
Very interesting mix of things here. Thanks for the feedback, I'm hoping LW3DG is watching from a far... :)

kopperdrake
09-06-2017, 01:51 PM
Honestly?

These days it's mainly because I know it and everything I have built up over the last 20-odd years is based around it. Having said that...

...without LWCAD I would've abandoned Modeler ages ago - LWCAD gave me tools that made me go 'aahhh', in a good way. That was a few years ago.

I've loved LW's renderer up til now, but jumping on the Octane train a few months ago I had yet another 'aaaahhh' moment, and now hate going back to surfacing in LW.

UVing wasn't something I *had* to bother with in LW - I used it occasionally, but Octane made me use it more, and so I picked up 3D Coat, and now I love UVing - yet another 'aaahhh' moment.

So the truth is, right this very minute, I model in LWCAD, render in Octane, UV and texture in 3D Coat.

What keeps me in LightWave is purely not really knowing how much the other packages are offering for the buck, or their workflow.

tcoursey
09-06-2017, 01:54 PM
Honestly?

These days it's mainly because I know it and everything I have built up over the last 20-odd years is based around it. Having said that...

...without LWCAD I would've abandoned Modeler ages ago - LWCAD gave me tools that made me go 'aahhh', in a good way. That was a few years ago.

I've loved LW's renderer up til now, but jumping on the Octane train a few months ago I had yet another 'aaaahhh' moment, and now hate going back to surfacing in LW.

UVing wasn't something I *had* to bother with in LW - I used it occasionally, but Octane made me use it more, and so I picked up 3D Coat, and now I love UVing - yet another 'aaahhh' moment.

So the truth is, right this very minute, I model in LWCAD, render in Octane, UV and texture in 3D Coat.

What keeps me in LightWave is purely not really knowing how much the other packages are offering for the buck, or their workflow.

Sounds very much like me. I should do more UV'ing so importing models into Unity is easier! But just habbit. Love LWCAD, OCTANE and LW's Camera manipulations!

SteveH
09-06-2017, 02:37 PM
I do 3D modeling and animation for an engineering company. For what I do - Lightwave works just fine (it could of course be better). I've used Lightwave for a long time so it's familiar - that's the biggest thing for me. It used to be, when I was younger, learning a new program was interesting and exciting. Now however, (now that I'm oooold) - I have so few active brain cells that learning something new requires something old to be forgotten. As much as LWG pisses me off in their horrible treatment of us users - I'm still not going to go to another program. So I guess we are just stuck with each other for the foreseeable future! I'm not sure who has the worse hand - me or LWG!

meatycheesyboy
09-06-2017, 02:51 PM
I do 3D modeling and animation for an engineering company. For what I do - Lightwave works just fine (it could of course be better). I've used Lightwave for a long time so it's familiar - that's the biggest thing for me. It used to be, when I was younger, learning a new program was interesting and exciting. Now however, (now that I'm oooold) - I have so few active brain cells that learning something new requires something old to be forgotten. As much as LWG pisses me off in their horrible treatment of us users - I'm still not going to go to another program. So I guess we are just stuck with each other for the foreseeable future! I'm not sure who has the worse hand - me or LWG!

Basically the same for me. Most of my 3D work these days is for corporate clients so my needs from a 3D software are not all that great. As such, I only use a fraction of Lightwave's capabilities so no need for me to move onto anything else at this point in time. Also, if I'm being honest, I'm pretty lazy and don't want to invest the time learning something new. ;)

I am investing the time to learn Zbrush though because it's more "fun" than other 3D programs.

JamesCurtis
09-06-2017, 03:17 PM
I'm 62 and am partly retired due to medical issues, but I can say I've been with Lightwave since it's inception. My client work never had any real demands and has been mainly industrial in nature. Too old to even want to learn a new app.

DrStrik9
09-06-2017, 06:00 PM
I'm 90% retired also: I became a pretty serious hobbyist, then became a pretty lazy hobbyist. I'm looking at Modo, and slowly learning Blender also. Blender is weird, but amazingly powerful. LW is simply familiar -- that's about it.

hrgiger
09-06-2017, 06:38 PM
Blender is weird, but amazingly powerful. LW is simply familiar -- that's about it.

Blender is incredibly weird but at the price and features, I keep thinking I need to get into it at some point but honestly it really puts me off. I just saw the features coming for next year and it looks like they will be adding workspaces which in my opinion are long overdue for that app. But for now, I'm pretty happy with Modo.

samurai_x
09-06-2017, 07:45 PM
In order of importance.
1. Price
2. Good renderer with unlimited render nodes
3. Familiarity

All three are now irrelevant.


1. Blender is free
2. Lightwave is not the only one with a good renderer with unlimited render nodes
3. Maya, max, modo, blender are equally familiar now. Lightwave becoming less familiar now since i haven't used it much in months and no Lwnext updates helps it become more irrelevant.

shrox
09-06-2017, 07:52 PM
Because it's great! I look at what it can do rather that constantly post about what it can't do...but only lazy people post that. There is always a way...

Gene1
09-06-2017, 09:03 PM
Loving Lightwave since LW 5.6. Lightwave does everything I have ever needed it to do - without exception. The render is great. Great Plugins are plentiful and the new python support is great. I like 2015 better than the 8's and 9's. I think the move toward Core was a stumble. I think they should have filled the High Schools schools with free copies. I dislike subscription software or cloud software - I hope we do neither. And if they do I will stick with the stand alone version. I love the dual screen to model and render. I love the way I can modify everything about the interface. I dislike Max because it is way over priced and I believe it is so prevalent because of dumping into the warez market place during the 90's. In the 90's 3D Max was in every HS kids computer who wanted to try 3D, they got it free and they became the next generation of game designers/animators. LW on the other hand was fairly expensive and the trial was very limited. - Just an old mans thoughts on a great program - Lightwave.

pbaroque20
09-06-2017, 09:12 PM
Modeling in LW is such a breeze; I work with interface hidden. Feels great that all my modeling is reduced to hotkeys and mouse-menus.

The rendering in LW is quite good and can't wait until the new PBR comes out. My first project turned out so good it convinced me LW has all the tools necessary to do nice illustrations. You can do things fast in the software and with practice you can get professional results that are Maya or Max level.

My only request is streamlining and modernizing its rigging/animation workflow. If it did, I would stick with LW 100%. Maybe when integration happens is the next logical step.

I keep on giving Blender a try but it's interface is so ugly I can't stay in it for more than ten minutes. Despite the fact that Blender has put out some impressive short films recently, for now LW is pretty good for me.

roboman
09-06-2017, 09:41 PM
I got started in the Amiga days, because it was the only thing that did what it did that a person could afford. When Amiga died I switched to 3dStudio Dos. When windows became the thing I tried every thing I could get my hands on and liked Lightwave best. I've stuck with it because I don't use it a great deal and haven't found any thing that was to taxing to do with it, that I had to do. I do keep looking at what else is out there, but am content to wait a bit longer for Lightwave next and work with what I have now. I am shocked at what Blender and Daz have put into their free software and do use both some.

Snosrap
09-06-2017, 10:27 PM
Why have I stuck with LW all this time? Everything seems pretty easy and straightforward. Modeler needs tons of attention, but it gets the job done - if rather awkwardly at times.

OlaHaldor
09-06-2017, 11:06 PM
I hop in now and then because of LWCAD and TFD. That's about it.

Norka
09-07-2017, 07:02 AM
I've been practically laughing my *** off with so many of you saying you love LW's render engine! That truly is hilarious. Clearly you have not spent enough (or any) time with Octane LW, or any physically-based render engines at all, for that matter. LightWave is honestly like a plugin for my LW Octane, which I have been using (every day, doing tons of commercial work) for 5 years now, and have used LW's engine twice in that time for a couple HV renders. Yeah, LW's engine is good if you want your renders to look like cg from a late 90's sci-fi show. If LW3DG would have taken my advice all those many months ago, and abandoned their engine, and made Octane the official engine of LW, we would not be in this effing mess. My guess is they are taking all this time because they are probably trying desperately to get their engine in the realm of Octane, VRay, Corona, RedShift, etc, etc... Hey LW3DG, that's a fool's errand, if there ever was one!

Had Octane for LW not arrived when it did five years ago, and also for Juanjo (Octane LightWave/Houdini plug dev god), I would have been gone ages ago.

I love the text-based interface. Let's not start that discussion yet again. Text is king. Faster. Better. Period.

I still love Modeler, even though it does need tons of love. I always have ZB for things that can't be done with LW and its plugs (3rdPwrs etc) and have Painter for texturing. I own 3DCoat but haven't dug in too deep because I manage pretty nicely with LW's UVs etc. But I do know I am doing myself a disservice by not switching my UV work to 3DCoat. Maybe after this gig...

In the end, I stick with LW because I am still finding myself able to earn a damn fine living using it. Layout is my camera/transform gizmo for Octane, and I do 80% of my modeling in Modeler.

Farhad_azer
09-07-2017, 08:29 AM
I think norka should spend a little time for thinking before writing such a funny statement. We are not comparing a full 3d package that does everyting from modeling to animation and rendering with a software which is perhaps more expensive than full package and the only thing it does is rendering.
Btw i trully doubt you can do better rendering with your tools than some of amazing works we have seen in the gallery.
Have you seen the Ed by Chris Jones? Share your amazing result with that 80s or 90s work.
I will be very intresred to see them even though u seem to be a very humbled artist hiding your masterpieces.

gar26lw
09-07-2017, 08:45 AM
Lwcad, pictrix, plg and dpont.

gamedesign1
09-07-2017, 08:46 AM
I personally like the minimalistic interface.
Its the first 3D software I bought and I have never had a project where I have needed to go and outlay a load more cash to move to another piece of software. Yes there are some better tools in other packages, but I am still able to accomplish everything I need to with LW. The next release will definitely be welcome though, just to make life easier :)

gar26lw
09-07-2017, 08:47 AM
In order of importance.
1. Price
2. Good renderer with unlimited render nodes
3. Familiarity

All three are now irrelevant.


1. Blender is free
2. Lightwave is not the only one with a good renderer with unlimited render nodes
3. Maya, max, modo, blender are equally familiar now. Lightwave becoming less familiar now since i haven't used it much in months and no Lwnext updates helps it become more irrelevant.

This. Please take note.

DrStrik9
09-07-2017, 10:29 AM
Blender is incredibly weird but at the price and features, I keep thinking I need to get into it at some point but honestly it really puts me off. I just saw the features coming for next year and it looks like they will be adding workspaces which in my opinion are long overdue for that app. But for now, I'm pretty happy with Modo.

Workspaces in Blender would be very welcome (if well-implemented). I really don't understand a lot of things about Blender, but I've followed some really good tutorials on YouTube, and asked a lot of basic questions on blender.stackexchange.com (keeping a growing folder of notes!), such as how to target, how to add and rotate HDR environments, etc., and see that it has decent fluids, fully-realized bullet, decent compositing, etc. -- but even following tutorials sometimes leaves me wondering how things were done (and I did them!) :p

The shape of the learning curve is a sideways "8". :D I've been seeing comparisons between Blender, Modo, etc. recently on YouTube, and how to make them work alike (to a degree). VERY helpful!

Modo looks awesome also.

Over
09-07-2017, 12:21 PM
Iīd would like to make clear first that Iīm all for a new LW release and that I support all of some people critisism here. LW needs to arrive to 2017 and beyond if they want to be relevant.

With that being said... Iīm sorry for making my opinion look absolute, but you will hardly find a faster modeling solution for solids than Modeler+LWCAD+wathever, and yes Steve:D, I know that some procedures are just impossible in Modeler, but you need to understand that some people donīt run into those issues always. (Steve calling stop, now for all:D) Thatīs what makes me keep LW as my main modeling tool for now. Modo, C4D, Max (Iīm sorry, I canīt afford more apps, money is not infinite), all have more steps to make the same things that LW do in one or two steps. I would not care less if the workflow is destructive or not, with LW I can redo as fast as you rearrange your procedural item in Modo.

Anyhow, my next project will be all Modo, I want to get as familiar with it as Iīm now with Max and LW.

Hope the wifey never found out how much I have spent.:D

jperk
09-07-2017, 01:26 PM
I was ready to upgrade to commercial LW version, but I've been informed by NewTek to wait for the next LW release. If I don't hear anything within next coming months regarding LW—I'll probably be looking into MODO via The Foundry's graduate discount or the MODO 10/MARI 3 indie bundle on Steam.

(EDIT)

Modo Indie 11 is apparently on it's way (http://community.foundry.com/discuss/post/1088917). However, that was posted June29th. Also, I've been informed that the indie versions are limited.

I'll probably just wait for LW Next. Newtek is rewarding 2015 users with a $295 upgrade.

Greenlaw
09-07-2017, 02:00 PM
I still use LightWave because:

1. I like it.

2. It gets the job done quickly.

3. It's very affordable.

4. All the studios where I've worked have it. Sure, we have other 3D programs available but I rely on LightWave for most of my 3D tasks because of items 1 & 2.

5. The artists I work with tend to also be LightWave people, and they're more fun to work with. :p

hrgiger
09-07-2017, 03:11 PM
With that being said... Iīm sorry for making my opinion look absolute, but you will hardly find a faster modeling solution for solids than Modeler+LWCAD+wathever, and yes Steve:D, I know that some procedures are just impossible in Modeler, but you need to understand that some people donīt run into those issues always. (Steve calling stop, now for all:D) Thatīs what makes me keep LW as my main modeling tool for now. Modo, C4D, Max (Iīm sorry, I canīt afford more apps, money is not infinite), all have more steps to make the same things that LW do in one or two steps. I would not care less if the workflow is destructive or not, with LW I can redo as fast as you rearrange your procedural item in Modo.



Well that's the problem with absolutes as opinion, they're all relative. If you say something is faster to do in Modeler than another app, who am I to argue the point? I'm sure for you that is absolutely the case. Or maybe its even definitively true in some cases. But then as you've already said, you're not familiar with Modo as well as you are with LW so why would that ever be the case that you would be faster in it? But in any event, absolutely there are some things that few could argue aren't quicker to do in Modeler than in another app but if that's the only thing you gauge as important to you, then absolutely I say stick with Modeler. But speed is not the only thing that is important to me. Function, workflow, flexibility... these things are equally if not more important to me than just raw speed. Again, not to drudge up old discussions but I could easily list dozens of things in Modo Modeling that are either a hacky workaround in Modeler or simply just not possible to do with Modeler. And that to me is far more relevant then simply how fast you can perform an operation. Does it mean that Modo is just better than Modeler? That's for everyone to decide on their own, for me, it is certainly the case. But its really just pretty simple to see when you have something that's been consistently improved for the last 13 years vs one that's been largely ignored for that amount of time, you tend to get a few advantages in those improvements. But again, all a matter of preference.

If you want to see how fast its possible to work with quality in Modo, I would suggest watching some of Tor Fricks modeling sessions on YouTube or Twitch

Snosrap
09-07-2017, 03:49 PM
Actually the fact that Modeler is still a relevant modeler after years of neglect is testament to its design.

hrgiger
09-07-2017, 03:57 PM
Well I don't know if I would say relevant. Working maybe....

shrox
09-07-2017, 07:27 PM
Well I don't know if I would say relevant. Working maybe....

While I was working as an art director, I heard "Max sucks" a lot. Since they didn't hear "Lightwave sucks" except when I was doing it wrong, I got lots of questions about why that was...
The stack in Max is fine, unless the person working on the scene before was sloppy and did lots of extraneous operations that bloated the stack. I'd spend a good part of a day figuring out what the heck their thought process was. Then a few hours hours streamlining it and fixing the dependencies the mashed together. Ugh!

Over
09-07-2017, 07:35 PM
you're not familiar with Modo as well as you are with LW

Iīm getting there...;)

137855

Also, I donīt think I need to spend one year with any app to be able to know how fast you can do things in it. Itīs obvious that practice is what makes anyone fast with any tool, but thereīre tools that are easier to use.

shrox
09-07-2017, 07:39 PM
Ok, those HV puffballs are the biggest pain for me in Lightwave...

kopperdrake
09-08-2017, 04:55 AM
Iīm getting there...;)

137855

Also, I donīt think I need to spend one year with any app to be able to know how fast you can do things in it. Itīs obvious that practice is what makes anyone fast with any tool, but thereīre tools that are easier to use.

Nice screen grab - is that for personal use or for a simulator?

TheLexx
09-08-2017, 05:54 AM
Iīm getting there...;)

137855

Also, I donīt think I need to spend one year with any app to be able to know how fast you can do things in it. Itīs obvious that practice is what makes anyone fast with any tool, but thereīre tools that are easier to use.That looks nice to me, but at the top of the gear stick, on the right, there is a polygon with triangles streaking from the corner which looks odd to my eye. Am I missing something there ?

hrgiger
09-08-2017, 06:07 AM
That looks nice to me, but at the top of the gear stick, on the right, there is a polygon with triangles streaking from the corner which looks odd to my eye. Am I missing something there ?

Can't really see the area you're referring to in detail but triangulation isn't necessarily a problem, especially when you can control your smoothing like you can in Modo.

gar26lw
09-08-2017, 07:25 AM
Actually the fact that Modeler is still a relevant modeler after years of neglect is testament to its design.

Yes. 100% in agreement

Wickedpup
09-08-2017, 07:50 AM
Iīm getting there...;)

137855

Also, I donīt think I need to spend one year with any app to be able to know how fast you can do things in it. Itīs obvious that practice is what makes anyone fast with any tool, but thereīre tools that are easier to use.
How many polys? Are you using any instances? Any Mesh Ops? Any sub-dīs? Rounded edge shader?

Ztreem
09-08-2017, 08:40 AM
I use LightWave because it works and I used it so long that I can do or find ways to solve almost everything I need to do. I should add that I almost don't use any plugins at all besides dp stuff.

Over
09-08-2017, 09:41 AM
How many polys? Are you using any instances? Any Mesh Ops? Any sub-dīs? Rounded edge shader?


Wow! ...

Photogram
09-08-2017, 10:03 AM
Muscle memory. I am just way faster in LW than anytihng else. I know where everything is and I know where the land mines are.

Exactly the same for me..

Over
09-08-2017, 10:13 AM
Ok, those HV puffballs are the biggest pain for me in Lightwave...

Do you mean the screws? if thatīs the case is like the place mesh tool in LW, but this time it works. Anyhow, you need a good deal of front view adjustemnts to space them realistically in both apps taking into account that instruments are not all the same size.

Over
09-08-2017, 10:15 AM
but at the top of the gear stick, on the right, ... Am I missing something there ?

I canīt understand which part you refer to.

gpdesigner
09-08-2017, 10:53 AM
Started with Inspire 3d in the late 90's... stuck with Lightwave because I am comfortable with it, like it's ease of use awesome layout, integrated render engine and... I'm too old to learn another program...
gp

shrox
09-08-2017, 11:29 AM
Do you mean the screws? if thatīs the case is like the place mesh tool in LW, but this time it works. Anyhow, you need a good deal of front view adjustemnts to space them realistically in both apps taking into account that instruments are not all the same size.

I mean the puffballness of Hypervoxels.

TheLexx
09-08-2017, 12:10 PM
I canīt understand which part you refer to.Hi Over, to my eye the model looks like some sort of cockpit. There appears to be a window with a curved frame. Just inside the curve of the frame are a couple of bits with triangles in them when all the rest appear rectangle. Was just curious really, the model looks good to me.

Wickedpup
09-08-2017, 12:14 PM
Wow! ...
What? Difficult questions to answer? Sorry, hard to tell from one single screenshot. But as an example, I see several places in that picture where it would be natural to use instances. So if you did not, and then so unequivocally say you can remodel something faster in Modeller, it is more a matter of you not utilizing Modos features and tools to its fullest (like hrgiger said).

Paul Goodrich
09-08-2017, 12:48 PM
For me, it’s familiarity also. I know Lightwave reasonably well. As a hobbyist I also dabble in other programs and to be honest I think they all kind of suck. Everyone that I’ve tried seems to find a way to frustrate me. I like Lghtwave and then run into stupid issues. The most recent one is audio support. I’m on a Mac and well… it sucks. I also wanted a UI picker for Character animation and without being able to script it, it doesn’t exist. Maya- powerful cluttered interface and steep learning curve. Modo- seems ok but it just doesn’t really click with me. Blender- Besides the weird interface (I’m trying Brett’s LW to Blender course). I also find stupid stuff in there as well. Add a sub D modifier on your object. Guess what? You can’t remove it or toggle it on and off, wtf? Z-Brush- Another weird interface. However, I actually like it even though if I don’t use it for a while I get to have to learn it all over again. 3D coat- I’ve really only used it for ReTopology and the mirroring doesn’t lock on the x axis. I have to go and fix it after importing in another program. Again, wtf? And the ability to interchange information between programs and continue to work on things after is a bit of joke. In my world (Audio post production) you can import and export OMF’s, AAF’s, EDL’s and edit information in and out of most programs. It’s not perfect but it sure is a lot better than most of the 3d world. My other problem is, as a hobby I don’t have a lot of time to dig into the programs as much as I’d like. My opinion only, YMMV.

hrgiger
09-08-2017, 01:50 PM
Hi Over, to my eye the model looks like some sort of cockpit. There appears to be a window with a curved frame. Just inside the curve of the frame are a couple of bits with triangles in them when all the rest appear rectangle. Was just curious really, the model looks good to me.

Likely he's attaching the curved part of the window frame and merging them down into triangles or triangle shaped quads to avoid a large ngon there. It shouldn't present any type of problem.

TheLexx
09-08-2017, 02:13 PM
Thanks hrgiger. :)

Over
09-08-2017, 05:00 PM
Hi Over, to my eye the model looks like some sort of cockpit. There appears to be a window with a curved frame. Just inside the curve of the frame are a couple of bits with triangles in them when all the rest appear rectangle. Was just curious really, the model looks good to me.


Likely he's attaching the curved part of the window frame and merging them down into triangles or triangle shaped quads to avoid a large ngon there. It shouldn't present any type of problem.

Is as he say. Is something like this:

137874

Over
09-08-2017, 05:16 PM
What? Difficult questions to answer? Sorry, hard to tell from one single screenshot. But as an example, I see several places in that picture where it would be natural to use instances. So if you did not, and then so unequivocally say you can remodel something faster in Modeller, it is more a matter of you not utilizing Modos features and tools to its fullest (like hrgiger said).

Dude, youīre guessing too much. Thereīs nothing difficult to answer, you just ask too many questions, hence "wow". Youīre focusing on only one side of the 3D creation spectrum.

Surrealist.
09-08-2017, 05:52 PM
That may be. However you enter into a discussion that is technical what are you expecting?

Sure there are preferences between software for personal reasons. But those are not professional considerarions. A professional discussion of software puts bias asside and talks specifics of tools workflows and of course faster more efficient and flexible ways to do things.

erikals
09-08-2017, 06:37 PM
still, hope this doesn't turn into a "versus" thread... we have plenty of those...

djwaterman
09-08-2017, 07:11 PM
For me, it’s familiarity also. I know Lightwave reasonably well. As a hobbyist I also dabble in other programs and to be honest I think they all kind of suck. Everyone that I’ve tried seems to find a way to frustrate me. I like Lghtwave and then run into stupid issues. The most recent one is audio support. I’m on a Mac and well… it sucks. I also wanted a UI picker for Character animation and without being able to script it, it doesn’t exist. Maya- powerful cluttered interface and steep learning curve. Modo- seems ok but it just doesn’t really click with me. Blender- Besides the weird interface (I’m trying Brett’s LW to Blender course). I also find stupid stuff in there as well. Add a sub D modifier on your object. Guess what? You can’t remove it or toggle it on and off, wtf? Z-Brush- Another weird interface. However, I actually like it even though if I don’t use it for a while I get to have to learn it all over again. 3D coat- I’ve really only used it for ReTopology and the mirroring doesn’t lock on the x axis. I have to go and fix it after importing in another program. Again, wtf? And the ability to interchange information between programs and continue to work on things after is a bit of joke. In my world (Audio post production) you can import and export OMF’s, AAF’s, EDL’s and edit information in and out of most programs. It’s not perfect but it sure is a lot better than most of the 3d world. My other problem is, as a hobby I don’t have a lot of time to dig into the programs as much as I’d like. My opinion only, YMMV.

For disabling Blender's modifier

137875

Over
09-08-2017, 08:21 PM
That may be. However you enter into a discussion that is technical what are you expecting?

Sure there are preferences between software for personal reasons. But those are not professional considerarions. A professional discussion of software puts bias asside and talks specifics of tools workflows and of course faster more efficient and flexible ways to do things.

And I have to say that youīre mostly right, but I already told that "to me" thereīs nothing faster than Modeler, I have always expressed it as "my opinion". Also, if I was the only one that found Wickedpup posts as somehow agressive, then I apologize.

Regarding a professional discussion of software, I found LW way to acces the mesh (vertex, edges, polys) way faster than anything else, I found Modeler faster in respect to aligning and adjusting, I also found boolean and drills operation faster, I found the layers approach (and always available layers) to be optimal for my type of work. I have always been a Max guy, but now I realize how painful is to model in Max when compared to LW or Modo for the matter, and again, you can call that an opinion, but that opinion is as valid as yours or anyone else. When I found LW and even without knowing too much of it I started a search for an awesome app to model, hence why I also got into C4D and Modo (paid a year subscription of both) and so far, for ME, LW Modeler+LWCAD pulled ahead of them, so, after knowing that, I think that the possibility of me being biased is kind of hard. Maybe after I use Modo for some time, that opinion may change, thatīs a possibility.

Greenlaw
09-08-2017, 09:06 PM
still, hope this doesn't turn into a "versus" thread... we have plenty of those...

Exactly. The OP simply asked why do you use LightWave? There are many other threads for discussing other products.

Surrealist.
09-08-2017, 09:54 PM
And I have to say that youīre mostly right, but I already told that "to me" thereīs nothing faster than Modeler, I have always expressed it as "my opinion". Also, if I was the only one that found Wickedpup posts as somehow agressive, then I apologize.

Regarding a professional discussion of software, I found LW way to acces the mesh (vertex, edges, polys) way faster than anything else, I found Modeler faster in respect to aligning and adjusting, I also found boolean and drills operation faster, I found the layers approach (and always available layers) to be optimal for my type of work. I have always been a Max guy, but now I realize how painful is to model in Max when compared to LW or Modo for the matter, and again, you can call that an opinion, but that opinion is as valid as yours or anyone else. When I found LW and even without knowing too much of it I started a search for an awesome app to model, hence why I also got into C4D and Modo (paid a year subscription of both) and so far, for ME, LW Modeler+LWCAD pulled ahead of them, so, after knowing that, I think that the possibility of me being biased is kind of hard. Maybe after I use Modo for some time, that opinion may change, thatīs a possibility.

Yeah. Agree. I was not really following all of the posts. I just kind of jumped in. I think the main point for me was that it seemed like someplace efficiency and use of tools came into the discussion.

I went the other way. I also have done a lot of cockpit kind of work and tons of hard surface stuff for simulation/games.

I can't even imagine doing that stuff in Modeler. A few basic reasons. But all of them purely practical. I modeled for years and years in Modeler. First thing I ever used. It is a great program. It works. It is fine.

But other workflows are just too advanced to go back to the stone age. An opinion yes. But backed by a few technical facts.

That is more or less what I was getting at. We all have opinions. But you can't debate facts. You either have instancing to work with in your modeling environment or you don't. Or you have work planes or you don't. A non destructive modeling stack or you don't. And so on.

The number of things I can do in Blender that are just so much easier and so much faster and so much more flexible and non destructive it is a hands down no brainer - never to model in LightWave again until it gets tools like this.

Maya pretty good too. But only for select things like retopo. Which debate or not, is still better than anything else. Opinion? Yes and no. But mine is based on what tools it has and how fast it is. Best tools for hand retopo. Hands down.

Modo I think is even better as a general modeler for most things - an opinon because I have not used it. But I see things I'd love to have access to. Things that would make things go faster. We did at my studio check out the retopo functions and it failed compared to Maya so we dropped it.

In my line of work it pays off to use tools and workflows that reduce work.

Modeler just requires too much work and has too much of a destructive workflow to survive a client-driven iteration-based workflow. And that is where it breaks down.

The phrase "work smarter not harder" is the motto here.

And while I could have the opinion I like Modeler better. That is great for me. All the way up to the point that the client asks for another path for the roller coaster to ride on which requires a new model for the tracks and a new animation path.

If it was LightWave, it would be, well, you have to be kidding right?

In Blender it is like. OK. Adjust the curve. Instant new animation path, instant new track, export, done.

And yes. This happened over the last 2 months. This exact thing. With a client who is paying, even for the iterations. An essential part of the workflow with them.

In LightWave while there would be certain workarounds to achieve some kind of similar iteration using Layout and modeler. Not nearly the same nor nearly as fast and efficient. Not an opinion. A fact. Based on tools it has and does not have.

So to the point of the thread. Why have you stuck with LightWave?

Do I have to answer that with a straight face when it comes to modeling and doing real work for real clients?

Rendering is now history as well.

But LightWave is a tool. I do use it from time to time. I like keeping my hands in because I want to have good access the tools that are coming and not be completely stale when that happens.

Recently I was using good old school texturing to bake some images to bring back into Blender. :)

Kryslin
09-08-2017, 11:22 PM
Been a Lightwave User since 2009 (9.6). I started with AutoCAD 11 (last Dos version), moved to POV and Moray, then Rhino, then Maya. For mechanical stuff, Rhino is still pretty good. Trying to model in Maya was not very intuitive, and yes, I had a copy of Blender at the time I switched over to Lightwave ( I still struggle with Blender's UI). Lightwave, to me, is a lot more intuitive to use than Maya, even with the split between Modeler and Layout. I can get the results I'm looking for quite quickly. Plus, if I don't have a tool to do something, I can either get a 3rd party plugin, or write my own (and write them, I have...). In the end, it's what gets the job done for me, whether it's furniture design visualization, character modeling and animation, or technical FX like hair and fur or dynamics... I can get presentable results within a reasonable amount of time.

Plus, Lightwave's a steal at the offered price.

Wickedpup
09-09-2017, 01:58 AM
But other workflows are just too advanced to go back to the stone age. An opinion yes. But backed by a few technical facts.

That is more or less what I was getting at. We all have opinions. But you can't debate facts. You either have instancing to work with in your modeling environment or you don't. Or you have work planes or you don't. A non destructive modeling stack or you don't. And so on.

The number of things I can do in Blender that are just so much easier and so much faster and so much more flexible and non destructive it is a hands down no brainer - never to model in LightWave again until it gets tools like this.

Maya pretty good too. But only for select things like retopo. Which debate or not, is still better than anything else. Opinion? Yes and no. But mine is based on what tools it has and how fast it is. Best tools for hand retopo. Hands down.

Modo I think is even better as a general modeler for most things - an opinon because I have not used it. But I see things I'd love to have access to. Things that would make things go faster. We did at my studio check out the retopo functions and it failed compared to Maya so we dropped it.

In my line of work it pays off to use tools and workflows that reduce work.

Modeler just requires too much work and has too much of a destructive workflow to survive a client-driven iteration-based workflow. And that is where it breaks down.


Over: Think this sums up my point. So when you go "I would not care less if the workflow is destructive or not, with LW I can redo as fast as you rearrange your procedural item in Modo." you are defying facts and simple logic. I could of course talk about Blender like Surrealist does or others but Modo is what was brought up so I kept it to that. You showed a WIP as an example of how well you know Modo after a year. But like I said, if you did not use instances (as an example) then you are not taking advantage of what you have available and your claim is a moot point. And then we havenīt even touched on what stuff like customization brings to the table. Nuff said.

Marander
09-09-2017, 03:15 AM
Modeler just requires too much work and has too much of a destructive workflow to survive a client-driven iteration-based workflow. And that is where it breaks down.

The phrase "work smarter not harder" is the motto here.


Completely agree!

- Of course one can work fast in Modeler, but this is no different in most other 3D applications.
- Maybe Maya is an exception (but it's built for large teams and collaboration, complex setups) as well as Houdini (because it's completely procedural and requires more initial effort)
- Create a primitive, use hotkey to switch between points, polys and edges, use hotkey to translate, bevel, extrude use hotkeys to navigate etc., same as in Modeler
- Yes, in non-destructive workflows you might hit one key more to convert to mesh but c'mon.
- Creating splines, loft, sweep, lathe, patch, modify the splines later, use them in animation or as guides - well here it already gets nasty with LW.
- When it gets more complex or you need to have design iterations, most other applications have huge advantages
- Many long-time LW users compare it with applications they don't know well and state things that are simply not true
- You can script and develop in every 3D application I know and use.
- LW requires plugins for basic functionality that don't even come close to native tools in other applications like sculpting (LWBrush), snapping (LWCAD) etc.
- For me it's about being efficient, using smart and up-to-date tools, but everybody should be happy with his solution

erikals
09-09-2017, 03:59 AM
- Yes, in non-destructive workflows you might hit one key more to convert to mesh but c'mon.
nope, not gonna C'mon on that one.

i see this is turning out to be another "versus" thread... that "unsubscribe" button is surely getting closer.

http://i.imgur.com/D67iaeD.png

Surrealist.
09-09-2017, 04:28 AM
I don't remember the title of the thread being "Those who only use LightWave exclusively, tell us why. Insiders club no others allowed" This is the LightWave forums in 2017. More than ever we are made up of people who use multiple software. So if you are prepared to make comments. Be prepared to have them challenged of they don't appear logical.

I think most of the reasons to stick with LightWave stated by most people are fairy sound. And really it is not too much my business. But if you are making decisions and you want to voice them, and those decisions are not really that sound or reasonable, do your really think it is in anyone's best interest that everyone else just nod and agree?

I don't. I don't think anyone wins that one.

With any luck a person should feel challenged to explore more. That would be a good thing. And then there are people wanting to explore things who read these threads.

Those who know better on certain subjects are just supposed to be quiet?

And other artists, looking to learn and expand, take nothing away but "Don't do anything. Don't explore. Don't try new software. All is well.

How is that any good?

I think people need to get out of their personal shite and look at these forums as a place for artists to share information, be challenged. Challenge others and grow artistically.

erikals
09-09-2017, 04:47 AM
just voicing the opinion that we have a gazillion "app X can do Y better than app Z" discussions in other threads.

it was just something i felt personally.

i think that X vs Z will make this thread derail quite fast, that's all.

then again, agree, i can see the use of it, until Team A knocks down Team B.

so, here we go... http://i.imgur.com/b3K03sk.gif

Marander
09-09-2017, 04:59 AM
Thanks Richard!

By the way I think I have a right for my opinion, I used LW alot, helped other users here in the forum and probably supported the LW 3rd party developers more than most, having purchased and used almost all LW 3rd party plugins like 3rd Powers, LWCAD, TFD, RhiggitPro, Advanced Placement, QuadPanels, and many many more as well as all RH and almost all KAT commercial tutorials.

And if LW gets relevant to me again I will of course use it again.

Surrealist.
09-09-2017, 05:10 AM
just voicing the opinion that we have a gazillion "app X can do Y better than app Z" discussions in other threads.

it was just something i felt personally.

i think that X vs Z will make this thread derail quite fast, that's all.

then again, agree, i can see the use of it, until Team A knocks down Team B.

so, here we go... http://i.imgur.com/b3K03sk.gif

lol yeah well. People will do that on any subject anyway right?

Here at least there is something useful to take away. Because it is something that can be applied. Being challenged on your software choices should not be such a sensitive thing for people. But it is. People take it so personally. I don't. If someone wants to question my reasons, have at it. It is a good thing. Maybe there is something I missed. This is exactly how I have learned software.

1) Study/ Book and tut
2) Practice
3) Interact with other artists

erikals
09-09-2017, 05:15 AM
lol yeah well. People will do that on any subject anyway right?
heh, :D yeah, too true... :)

anyway, wasn't trying to step on anyone's specific toes... just got in a "here we go again" mode.

Surrealist.
09-09-2017, 05:24 AM
yeah happens to me a lot too. I understand. :)

TheLexx
09-09-2017, 05:45 AM
Rather than a full-on software war, I think some of this is getting into tackling a question - What in 2017 should now be considered "the basics", to appreciate why eg Modo or 4D or Blender is so good ? For example, William V. seems to have exhausted LW Modeller for his character work and has switched to Modo because someone at his level has obviously exhausted "the basics". But someone like me might come across work made with Wings 3D which I couldn't currently replicate in either LW or Modo. I'm certainly for software making one's life easier but I can't help feeling there has to be some sort of considered baseline baptism of problem solving.

Incidentally, in terms of making one's life easier, and a bit off topic, has anyone seen the 3D Content Creator (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjZEWLX317w#t=57s)in the upcoming Sony XZ1 phone ? I believe it can export meshes to OBJ and looks pretty good to me.

Surrealist.
09-09-2017, 06:13 AM
I have often thought it would make a good tutorial series to explore 3D software as a more general subject. The reasoning behind choosing software, the basics one would be looking for and so on. I think it is a good question. And I don't think there is an easy fast answer. But your own exploration can guide you as well. Just know that you don't have to re-invent the wheel. If something is hard. Or something seems impossible. Chances are someone has solved it someplace. Either with a workflow or with software.

samurai_x
09-09-2017, 08:25 AM
nope, not gonna C'mon on that one.

i see this is turning out to be another "versus" thread... that "unsubscribe" button is surely getting closer.

http://i.imgur.com/D67iaeD.png


Back to topic?
People stick with lightwave because they're old. The other thread has more votes from people in their 40's and up. That age bracket doesn't want to learn new stuff and stick to their old ways. Newtek is in trouble :D:D:D

erikals
09-09-2017, 08:44 AM
nah, old people stick to LightWave because they are the only ones who know of its existence.

https://forum.davidicke.com/images/smilies/grandpa.gif

Chris S. (Fez)
09-09-2017, 11:53 AM
Meh. I usually prefer Lightwave Modeler with 3rd Powers + LWCad + True Art using purely hot keys over Modo and Max.

Procedural Modeling...yeah. Max + Edit Poly is incredibly powerful and overlooked. Modo is really coming along.

fablefox
09-09-2017, 03:30 PM
nah, old people stick to LightWave because they are the only ones who know of its existence.

https://forum.davidicke.com/images/smilies/grandpa.gif

This. To a certain extent. Is true.

If it wasn't for old cgi magazines, I wouldn't know that LW is there.

Magazines and plug-ins for quite a while covers only the big 5 (max, maya, softimage, houdini, c4d). AFAIK Blender mostly get covered after 2.5.

The only time 3D World cover LW was then to ask if it was too little too late and the general answer was yes. Even I think LW is mostly dead, until the LW 10 advert. If you don't actually go looking for LW, you wouldn't know it still there.

If there is something good coming out of AD killing SoftImage, it means one less AD software for magazine to cover, and it seems its place is taken for by Blender.

Norka
09-09-2017, 03:53 PM
Magazines?.. What are those?.. :-/ CGChannel, CGPress, (et al), have release info all the time for LW plugs, and I think every time LW3DG has popped their heads out of their hole and update blog etc. So there you go. LW does indeed get exposure. Not nearly as much as they could, if LW3DG were making any effort to work on their brand, and LW mindshare...

erikals
09-09-2017, 04:32 PM
i'm quite curious to how Maya / Blender will compete in the long run.

once Blender has its hiccups fixed, more people will start to use a free Blender, and not cashy AutoDesk with Subscription.

still, Love LightWave for smacking up stuff.   http://i.imgur.com/VDSZh5C.png

Surrealist.
09-09-2017, 04:38 PM
As I said before, I think people's reasoning for "sticking" with LightWave in general are reasonable. They make sense. And it shows more than anything, that there is no set standard on what everyone is going to want out of software. And even some students stumble on LightWave, and faced with the choices out there want to see if they too can get everything they need here. And the point to the thread I think, is that some people obviously can. Not everyone needs the same things. I think that is easy to see. The complete rampant growth of Blender should be proof of that. Blender is lacking a lot of things that could be considered "heavy lifting" that only Maya or Houdini can tackle. Yet some people will swear by Blender. Kids I am talking about here. Literally, underage people. As well as adults, 20s 30s and above. So what does age have to do with it? Nothing. It is all about simply people finding their personal niche in software. And increasingly, price is a factor as well with the subscription-only model at Autodesk.

Additionally there are those who use other software with LightWave. It is a mixed bag.

That is what there is to take away from a thread like this.

Personally I hate the fact that I have found myself in the situation where I have little time to explore two apps more. Houdini and Modo. Bucket list if you will. lol There is my age bracket. :)

Snosrap
09-09-2017, 09:25 PM
One area where procedural modeling is sorely needed in LW is with text handling. I can't believe that Newtek with all their video products couldn't use a 3D motion graphics product that slots into their current product line.

samurai_x
09-09-2017, 09:36 PM
i'm quite curious to how Maya / Blender will compete in the long run.

once Blender has its hiccups fixed, more people will start to use a free Blender, and not cashy AutoDesk with Subscription.

still, Love LightWave for smacking up stuff.   http://i.imgur.com/VDSZh5C.png


That's like comparing an iphone to a china phone. :D

erikals
09-09-2017, 10:25 PM
njet!  :D

paulk
09-10-2017, 12:02 AM
Is it all Peaches And Cream on the User forums for other 3D apps, or do they have their Doom And Gloom bitchfests also?

erikals
09-10-2017, 01:17 AM
not like this, no.

Surrealist.
09-10-2017, 02:26 AM
Yes they do. Always. Maya forums just a few years ago were rampant with the same negative people. Blender forums are infected with the same trolls since I have ever been there. In the mean time both Maya and Blender have gotten some serious updates. Maya modeling has gone into a complete overhaul. I would not say overall a better choice than Blender or Modo. But for retopo it is still the sheat.

LightWave in fact, if you are counting, has had significant updates consistently through to 2015.3 And this entire time, even during the updates, nothing but the same negativity from the same people.

So now, nearing a 2 year hiatus where they are busy working on... ah... get this... exactly what we have been asking and demanding that they work on... new updated technology. And exactly, precisely what LightWave needs. It is taking longer. There are some bumps in the road. But they are doing exactly what they should be doing. Sticking to it to the finish. From all accounts.

And yet this is the all time worst of times. Oh wow. LightWave's existence could not be in a worst state. Woes me... oh boy. Somebody get a nail. I have the coffin, Anyone with a hammer? Just one nail left. Who will do the honors?

samurai_x
09-10-2017, 03:49 AM
Is it all Peaches And Cream on the User forums for other 3D apps, or do they have their Doom And Gloom bitchfests also?

Nope. Not at this level

hrgiger
09-10-2017, 05:11 AM
Is it all Peaches And Cream on the User forums for other 3D apps, or do they have their Doom And Gloom bitchfests also?

Not like here because the other 3d apps dont go 3 years without a release and the amount of silence that lw3dg delivers.

Wickedpup
09-10-2017, 07:05 AM
Yup. What hrgiger said.

erikals
09-10-2017, 08:47 AM
http://i.imgur.com/VQVoW26.png

jeric_synergy
09-10-2017, 10:05 AM
I'm pretty sure C4D dwarfs Modo and LW combined.

One thing NewTek (not LWG) could do is package a free copy of LW with every damn TriCaster they sell. Why not? There's virtually zero production cost, and at least it might stir some interest out there among a group that is probably under-using 3d. Include templates to make it easy-peasy to alter/customize the material that comes w/the TriCaster. WALLAUGH! Promotion. (Heck, maybe they do already.)

TheLexx
09-10-2017, 02:26 PM
That should be the only distribution route, forcing everyone to buy a TriCaster as well. :D

roboman
09-10-2017, 04:09 PM
I got my first copy of Lightwave with the Toaster. I didn't get it from Newtek. The guy I got it from got it bundled, but mostly never used it. He went out of business and I bought a couple of worn out tape decks, that had been rebuilt several times, a camera that was about shot and a well used Amiga with a Toaster and almost unused copy of Lightwave installed. At the time there was a lot of talk on Amiga bbs's about the Toaster and Lightwave, computer Mags were holding up Toaster and Lightwave as the new unimaginable thing that computers could do and there was Babalon5 doing the impossible. That and just a large number of people wanting to show what they could do with the new toys. Amiga, Toaster and even Lightwave all seemed to be toys that were built by people who looked around and thought they could make something no one else could, something that was as much magic as tech. 3d Studio had a bit of that feel when it was dos, but Max lost it. When I was around 4 or 5 I started drawing pictures in the corners of books to make animations when you flipped through the pages. It was magic, the little stick figures came to life. CAD/CAM/CNC and Lightwave still feel like the toys that let you bring little ideas in the back of your head to life more then other 'tools'. Most of the other animation programs feel more like an office tool then a toy that helps you magically bring an idea to life.

To define it, I guess I would say, it feels like something cobbled together by people who wanted to use it, give it to their friends and provide the things customers want. Most of the other programs feel like something written to sell to a purchising agent or business man. I guess that is why it makes me feel sad when it stutters and stalls. When many programs go away and close up it's just a business that didn't keep up. With Lightwave it feels like a bit of magic dieing. I think that is a part of why so many people get emotional about Lightwave falling behind and why they stick around. Or maybe it's just me liking the first good animation software I used to much....

jwiede
09-10-2017, 04:43 PM
I'm pretty sure C4D dwarfs Modo and LW combined.

One thing NewTek (not LWG) could do is package a free copy of LW with every damn TriCaster they sell. Why not? There's virtually zero production cost, and at least it might stir some interest out there among a group that is probably under-using 3d. Include templates to make it easy-peasy to alter/customize the material that comes w/the TriCaster. WALLAUGH! Promotion. (Heck, maybe they do already.)

The problem with that is then they've pulled the Tricaster into any customer satisfaction or quality issues those customers encounter with Lightwave. Tricaster could help Lightwave, but that also means Lightwave could hurt Tricaster.

Lightwave used to have a more prominent role w.r.t. Tricaster, for generating virtual sets, etc. Over time, however, Newtek have reduced and excised Lightwave visibility to Tricaster customers, to the point now where there's minimal connection at all.

djwaterman
09-10-2017, 07:41 PM
Except in these forums, which must mystify the Tricaster folks. I think it's time for LW3DG to kill the LW forums and hand it over to Tricaster customers exclusively. The doom and gloom has gotten toxic and outweighs any positives.

Surrealist.
09-10-2017, 08:57 PM
I got my first copy of Lightwave with the Toaster. I didn't get it from Newtek. The guy I got it from got it bundled, but mostly never used it. He went out of business and I bought a couple of worn out tape decks, that had been rebuilt several times, a camera that was about shot and a well used Amiga with a Toaster and almost unused copy of Lightwave installed. At the time there was a lot of talk on Amiga bbs's about the Toaster and Lightwave, computer Mags were holding up Toaster and Lightwave as the new unimaginable thing that computers could do and there was Babalon5 doing the impossible. That and just a large number of people wanting to show what they could do with the new toys. Amiga, Toaster and even Lightwave all seemed to be toys that were built by people who looked around and thought they could make something no one else could, something that was as much magic as tech. 3d Studio had a bit of that feel when it was dos, but Max lost it. When I was around 4 or 5 I started drawing pictures in the corners of books to make animations when you flipped through the pages. It was magic, the little stick figures came to life. CAD/CAM/CNC and Lightwave still feel like the toys that let you bring little ideas in the back of your head to life more then other 'tools'. Most of the other animation programs feel more like an office tool then a toy that helps you magically bring an idea to life.

To define it, I guess I would say, it feels like something cobbled together by people who wanted to use it, give it to their friends and provide the things customers want. Most of the other programs feel like something written to sell to a purchising agent or business man. I guess that is why it makes me feel sad when it stutters and stalls. When many programs go away and close up it's just a business that didn't keep up. With Lightwave it feels like a bit of magic dieing. I think that is a part of why so many people get emotional about Lightwave falling behind and why they stick around. Or maybe it's just me liking the first good animation software I used to much....

Those where indeed magical times in a way.

But here is where the road forks - if you will -for me. And that is, this wonder never stopped. The apps you are referring to, I can only guess, 3D Max and/or Maya don't seem at all sterile or business like to me at all. I don't use Max. I have it. I own it, open it from time to time and export from there as needed. But I don't really use it. But one of the best artists ever at my studio used it exclusively. And he was amazing. That is just an aside. But I can speak for Maya. When I first started learning it, I had the same sense of wonder I did when I started learning LightWave 20 years before. And it seemed like such a great artist tool. And still does. Feels like a tool built by and for artists. I was just loving diving into it and finding all of the gems it had. And to this day I can honestly say, all things considered as far as the things I use, I can not think of a more artist-friendly tool for character work. From rigging to character dynamics. Even for special effects which is its weakness. It is still quite artist friendly. Supper easy to use, visual oriented interface feedback in all of the parameter tools, even advanced settings with graphical colorful feedback for curves and other settings. Makes hair dynamics and cloth dynamics actually a pleasure to use. Fluids and other tools on a par. And hate to be the odd man out on this forum. But I am a huge fan of icons. Once you know what they are, images transfer to the mind a zillion times faster than words ever can. This is an artist-oriented concept. Lists of words and menus are great and necessary. But there are many times when an icon communicates common functions must faster.

Blender feels like a tool designed by an engineer with an uncanny ability to understand what it is like to work for hours on end modeling and other tasks. I have not found a more ergonomic tool for working in 3D anywhere. This tool was designed with the working the artist in mind.

So while I also share the same wonder. I see the tools we have today as tools that have taken up where LightWave left off. Literally with Modo - which is in fact the new LightWave, not LightWave as it is now. Modo has continued to innovate by the original innovators of LightWave and I have to say I am little bit proud of it because of that. Had it developed faster and more fully in the character area I would have chosen it over Maya. But it didn't and still hasn't.

Then we have Houdini. Talk about hitting it out of the park. What a wonderful tool.

LightWave still has that old world charm. Those things we are familiar with and can use easily and quickly. And I fully understand people sticking with it.

Just me. I never stopped feeling the sense of exploration I did in the beginning. I just kept going.

Marander
09-11-2017, 02:10 AM
...And hate to be the odd man out on this forum. But I am a huge fan of icons. Once you know what they are, images transfer to the mind a zillion times faster than words ever can. This is an artist-oriented concept. Lists of words and menus are great and necessary. But there are many times when an icon communicates common functions must faster.

Agree. While it's easier to learn with having text buttons in the beginning, of course after a while the eyes and brain can pickup icons much better.

And icons require much less space too.

I mean you don't look at an icon and try to interpret what it means, you just know by the rough color and shape.

With text buttons, you don't actually read the text buttons but your brain is picking up the position and rough picture of the text field (but makes it harder and slower to differentiate compared to good icons). OK maybe some users really read the buttons and have limited abilities to memorize things.

Best is the have both available and configurable as it should be in a modern UI. And then there are menus too of course, hopefully context-sensitive. And shortcuts of course, which should be the way to work for experienced users.

erikals
09-11-2017, 02:22 AM
i'm so-so about icons. i think Core had some.

might make my own using AHK, once i get the time...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzf_TCQgHuQ

TheLexx
09-11-2017, 03:03 AM
Blender feels like a tool designed by an engineer with an uncanny ability to understand what it is like to work for hours on end modeling and other tasks.Good post on the various softwares. Blender does look increasingly un-ignorable, but the bigger and better it gets, the harder it seems to check it out. I once heard Blender had a decent built-in video editor so I decided to be the great maverick and edit on it, but couldn't even find that screen in the menu. A recent attempt to load the latest version rejected my video card outright and it wouldn't open. It's probably just me. :)

The Maya hair and cloth comment was interesting. I do look very forward to the new hair material in LW Next, but I think there are people still quietly using older tools without fuss. In the last few days someone finally bought the Taming Sasquatch DVD from Amazon after it being listed for months.

kopperdrake
09-11-2017, 05:18 AM
Back to topic?
People stick with lightwave because they're old. The other thread has more votes from people in their 40's and up. That age bracket doesn't want to learn new stuff and stick to their old ways. Newtek is in trouble :D:D:D

Yeah, I saw the smilies so I assume you're joking. I'm in 'that age' category, but this past year I've introduced 3D Coat, Syntheyes and Octane Render into my pipeline, becoming more aware of LightWave's limitations. I imagine, like most people in 'that age' category, it's not that we don't *want* to learn new stuff - after all, an inquisitive mind is generally something most 3D artists and artists in general have in common, it's more likely to having less time and different priorities. I do think though, that anyone of any age should regularly assess where they are in their professional life and ask themselves "Am I happy doing this for my living, or would I rather be doing X, Y or Z?". If the answer is the 3D road then you owe it to yourself to keep up, otherwise you'll go the way of the watercolour and airbrush artists many of us stole the jobs from when we were young whippersnappers :thumbsup:

Paul Goodrich
09-11-2017, 07:02 AM
I just saw in 3D Artist Magazine that LWCAD has now been ported to 3D Max and CD4. The line in the mag said it was due to the shrinking Lightwave market share or something along those lines.

50one
09-11-2017, 07:06 AM
That's a shocker!

Norka
09-11-2017, 07:21 AM
Can't effing believe we are debating text vs icons, yet again... Text was, is, and will always be superior to icons in every way. Period. The very minute LW3DG switches to icons, I am gone. There would be no compelling reason at that point to not switch to C4D... And this is officially my last post on this matter.

Surrealist.
09-11-2017, 07:32 AM
Can't effing believe we are debating text vs icons, yet again... Text was, is, and will always be superior to icons in every way. Period. The very minute LW3DG switches to icons, I am gone. There would be no compelling reason at that point to not switch to C4D... And this is officially my last post on this matter.

lol....:D

Deep wound. Sorry. But you are wrong. :D :D

Just kidding. But in Maya you can turn icons off. You never have to use them. Same would be the case in Lightwave. ;)

But hey if that little thing is all it would take to get you to move to another app, what are you waiting for?

Marander
09-11-2017, 07:50 AM
lol....:D

Deep wound. Sorry. But you are wrong. :D :D

Just kidding. But in Maya you can turn icons off. You never have to use them. Same would be the case in Lightwave. ;)

But hey if that little thing is all it would take to get you to move to another app, what are you waiting for?

Yes same in C4D, Text, Text & Icons or Icons only, configurable for each part of the UI individually with various sizes and arrangements.

And I stick to my opinion based on my vast experience in applications in various flavors as architect, developer and end user the last 25 years, that (good) icons are superior.

Marander
09-11-2017, 07:56 AM
...There would be no compelling reason at that point to not switch to C4D...

There is really no serious reason not to switch at the moment besides time and money.

Surrealist.
09-11-2017, 08:37 AM
I can see this as a heated debate. But the icon hate thing is pretty silly. Honestly. When I first heard someone say they hated them I thought they must be joking. Really. But then again some people hate key board shortcuts. Nice thing about most UI designs is you can configure them to work just as slowly as you want. No one is ever forced to work faster. Isn't it nice?

ianr
09-11-2017, 09:34 AM
I just saw in 3D Artist Magazine that LWCAD has now been ported to 3D Max and CD4. The line in the mag said it was due to the shrinking Lightwave market share or something along those lines.

Thank you from confirming what Posted Last week

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?154456-New-Blog-Post-Peebler-s-Back!/page3


I wonder if some one should scan in that article on LW CAD4 3D MAX & its opening remark

& send it to Andrew Cross at Newtek? hmmm?

jeric_synergy
09-11-2017, 10:07 AM
I can see this as a heated debate. But the icon hate thing is pretty silly. Honestly. When I first heard someone say they hated them I thought they must be joking.
UI designers don't have that luxury of assuming the way they'd prefer things is The Best Way. Because it is not.

I mirror your response in that I find it silly anyone prefers icons, but there it is.

Flexibility is best. You prefer icons, I prefer, mostly, text. Designers should allow both.

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?144665-3dCoat-users-turning-off-icons

paulk
09-11-2017, 01:48 PM
I just saw in 3D Artist Magazine that LWCAD has now been ported to 3D Max and CD4. The line in the mag said it was due to the shrinking Lightwave market share or something along those lines.

Is it still called LWCAD?

Marander
09-11-2017, 01:54 PM
Is it still called LWCAD?

Yes. LWCAD Lite actually, some features are not yet included (and many are obsolete outside LW anyway)

hrgiger
09-11-2017, 01:56 PM
Yes its still called LWCAD.

Viktor hired another developer a while back who is helping Viktor port LWCAD to other applications. There probably will be support for other apps in the future, possibly even something for Unreal Engine as more and more archviz work is being done in real time environments. The LW base is very small and for Viktor to survive as a business, he has to grow the product and that means porting to other applications. Obviously the market for archviz work is bigger in applications like Max and C4D so it was natural for him to start there. LW version of LWCAD will continue to be developed and supported.

I mean, you know, as long as there is a LightWave Next.

CaptainMarlowe
09-11-2017, 10:32 PM
And I stick to my opinion based on my vast experience in applications in various flavors as architect, developer and end user the last 25 years, that (good) icons are superior.

I beg to disagree. Your experience is worth for you, but not for everyone. It really depends upon people frame of mind (sorry for the bad English). In some designers schools, teachers explain that some people have a mind better suited for icons, some others for text, not a question of cleverness nor experience or whatever. The same way people are small or tall. That's why a good UI must have icon/text+icons/text options. Because what's good for some may not be for others.

DrStrik9
09-11-2017, 10:42 PM
Why have I stuck with Lightwave all this time? Because text or icons. :D

Surrealist.
09-11-2017, 10:51 PM
UI designers don't have that luxury of assuming the way they'd prefer things is The Best Way. Because it is not.

I mirror your response in that I find it silly anyone prefers icons, but there it is.

Flexibility is best. You prefer icons, I prefer, mostly, text. Designers should allow both.

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?144665-3dCoat-users-turning-off-icons

Well that would be all OK if we were talking about something fixed. Which we aren't. At least I am not aware of any program that forces it on you.

So that point is already a done.

In Maya you can turn off the shelf or even ignore it an go menu as well as context based menus and pie menus all text. Everything else is text based mostly. And the icon shelf is nothing more than an optional aid. Does not take up a lot of space and can be hidden or even customized with icons and text or text only.

My point was only that in the context of graphical feedback in Maya all around. I prefer that over purely numbers and text and it is not at all a sterile environment.

And we already accept the existence of icons all around us. Not just in computers but in the real world. Text is nothing more than an icon. Some sophisticated languages are purely icon based. Language is after all nothing more than a series of symbols that convey ideas. Icons are another symbol to convey ideas. Even though you are telling me you prefer not to use them. You have used them to get here and tell me. You used them to drive your car and go to work or wherever you go. You have used them - long since forgotten that letters were once merely icons that conveyed ideas - to tell me you don't like them.

I could go on and on. I will spare the boring dissertation.

I would say the argument against them is purely semantics.

Surrealist.
09-11-2017, 11:05 PM
I beg to disagree. Your experience is worth for you, but not for everyone. It really depends upon people frame of mind (sorry for the bad English). In some designers schools, teachers explain that some people have a mind better suited for icons, some others for text, not a question of cleverness nor experience or whatever. The same way people are small or tall. That's why a good UI must have icon/text+icons/text options. Because what's good for some may not be for others.

We all use icons. All the time. Most programs already give you these options. It is really not even a subject for discussion. Like not knowing that a program actually offers edge selection before going into a dissertation about needing edge selection.

We already have options. People against icons are only voicing a preference that they can already control themselves. It is really a non issue.

CaptainMarlowe
09-12-2017, 02:06 AM
Of course, choice is better and already here in a lot of applications. I certainly don't contest that, nor did I advocate for a text only UI being better than icon only. But I'm not comfortable with dismissing other people preferences on the ground one own experience is a universal truth and superior to others. Once again what is true for one may not be for the other. A good UI is the one that let you choose. For instance, I like a lot 3D-coat UI because you have a lot of choice (text, text+icons, icons, dockable windows...). But you're right, it is a non issue.

Wade
09-12-2017, 06:46 AM
I know it, it works for all I need and a lot more and more to learn. It gets faster and faster - as each new workstation gets much faster. This last part is huge as where once a lot of work in LW or Photoshop for that matter took time to just save a file or render a frame now goes so much quicker. I don't have to buy it or pay for an upgrade or monthly fee so it has been a good working low cost tool that I enjoy using. W.

erikals
09-12-2017, 07:09 AM
we like text .......... that doesn't mean we can't add optional icons

i didn't see anyone complain about for example the Transform tool icons. Rightfully so.

icons can be Alright.

Surrealist.
09-12-2017, 08:08 AM
Shhhh... quiet now. Don't give it away. Next thing you know they will realize they use icons to turn on the computer, stop go or yield at an intersection... know if something is hazardous (and a zillion other warning labels and signs) or a pedestrian crossing... (and hundreds of other street signs) ah.... the list is endless. And the argument pointless.

erikals
09-12-2017, 08:28 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxusPufsN4c

jeric_synergy
09-12-2017, 05:37 PM
If you want a concrete demonstration of the difference between text and icons and mixtures, fire up 3d Coat. In my current configuration (YMMV), most of the "rooms" have ICON+TEXT buttons, but the Paint "room" has Icons only.

The are almost completely opaque in meaning. For instance, one looks like a beaker on its side: balloon help tells me (thank gahd) it is "SHIFT" tool. The balloon help is good, and that's fortunate since it's pretty much a necessity.

But examine your mindset as you toggle between the ICONS only, ICONS+TEXT, and TEXT only settings in the other rooms (apparently this isn't an option in PAINT), see how quickly your mind grasps what each button is for. See which mode makes you most productive, most satisfied.

Surrealist.
09-12-2017, 07:43 PM
Yes. You hit the nail on the head. What it cones down to - if you really want to be objective - is that those things you don't understand you reject. It is natural.

What is wrong with this picture if all around us in every day life there are icons? Think about it. What is wrong with this argument? It contractions itself. Why?

Why are people who "hate", "dislike", in general reject the idea of icons, appear to be walking contractions?

They really aren't. At all. I am just saying that for effect. Should put one of these :D.

The reason lies in the study ironically of language. A language is nothing more than an arrangement of symbols that convey meanings. A letter is nothing more than a symbol with a meaning. Same with a character. Same with the elements that make up the complex characters of Chinese and Japanese languages. Each element is nothing more than a symbol with a meaning. And like letters or script in other languages they are arranged in clusters to convey more complex meanings.

But the entire thing falls apart if you don't know what the individual symbols mean. You need to be told, shown, have demonstrated or discover for yourself, what the meaning is behind the symbol. Same is true with icons. They are just symbols with meaning. And that is all an icon is.

And this is why an icon with a text is needed. Or if not present why all icon based apps that I use have a balloon that pops up next to it when you hover over it. So you can learn what it means, and of course what it does, what tool it represents and so on.

An icon without its associated meaning is useless. Some of them are better at being self explanatory than others.

But a graphical icon is nothing more than a progression of conveying complex ideas in a shorthand way. After you have come to understand what they mean. And this is why icons are a vital part of so much of our lives in areas where ideas need to be conveyed much quicker and more universally than other forms and complex clusters of symbols which take longer to assimilate each time.

Even studies of text interfaces prove that people stop reading the text as far as its meaning and associate the general shape and location of the word. In other words, because this is a natural progression for human interaction, text also becomes an icon after repeated use. And why we have short hand way of saying things and slang. It is all the same concept.

It is how we are wired.

But it requires that the link not be broken. And you have to understand that people who design interfaces know this stuff. That is why you have balloon pop ups.

jeric_synergy
09-12-2017, 09:06 PM
In general we're agreeing here. But to continue what I consider an interesting conversation to kill the time until LW Next is released.....

Well, I reject that phonetic writing is equivalent to [whatever Chinese et al is]. Because you can derive meaning from the bits of a phonetic language, where you need to KNOW the entire symbol (to a great extent)(cue the Chinese readers) to get the meaning in Chinese.

When researchers found that ACCOMPLISHED readers recognize whole words without looking at each individual letters, they tried to teach children to read that way. Predictably*, it was a miserable failure-- you have to have some fluency first, you have to crawl before you walk.

For me, there's little to no advantage to using icons once I'm familiar with a program (and some penalty for little used features, PShop proves that to me every day), but there's a HORRENDOUS deficit to not having explanatory text during the learning phase. Having a CONSTANT visual presence is a great deal different than having balloon help: I noticed that when Modeler (well, Stuart actually) finally put the hotkeys ON the buttons (yes kids, there was a time when the hotkeys were not displayed on the buttons constantly) I finally learned hotkeys that had resisted memorization for years.

Same with entire tools: the training wheels mode should definitely have TEXT, and with an eye towards mastery, TEXT & ICONS (+hotkey). Once the user is familiar s/he can decide for themselves whether to consolidate real estate by excluding the (presumably space intensive) text, although I doubt an icon could be crammed into the same space a LW button takes up.

Just for interest, here's the difference in living pixels (I haven't yet found an option for 3dC: PAINT that includes text beyond balloon help):
137887

* i mean, c'mon!? Who thought that would work???

Surrealist.
09-12-2017, 11:01 PM
Yes. It is important to not sever the link. Methods to try and teach a language - or anything for that matter - that try to jump to shape recognition right away all fail. Because they overlook the obvious point that to get to that level of simplicity you have to fight through a lot of complexity of learning. Icons are not an initial level of understanding, unless they are super obvious. Which can happen. Icons and icon type recognition are the end of a progression of learning. They always are.

We always progress towards simplicity through complexity in learning and in all concepts of doing things. People who "hate icons" are doing this already as well. My theory -if you will - thinking on this, is that all that has happened is icons were initially rejected because they were not understood and put at the start of the chain. Rather than the end.

You go to text base and you see something like "Rounder". This is really a disassociated concept until you use it. ( and find it performs questionably... lol) But, only after you use it does Rounder have any true meaning. And after you use it several times you start to think in terms of short hand. What tab it was in, what section, where on the list. Or you memorize the hot key or assign one and bypass everything and just go to the tool. The keyboard shortcut then becomes your "icon". It is just that simple of a concept.

Icons are at the end of the chain. Not the beginning. They were never intended that way. You should not mistake the presence of them on your initial exploration as something you need to immediately understand any more than you would about any other concept.

I am always in favor of advocating more understanding and not less. Rejecting something is fine. No one has to accept everything. But I think it is better to come away from a discussion on this with more understanding of icons and how they can and should be used, and not just more blatant rejection.

My opinion.

erikals
09-12-2017, 11:38 PM
30 icons = yes please
300 = no thanks

Rayek
09-13-2017, 11:45 AM
30 icons = yes please
300 = no thanks

~240 in this screen - Truespace could get worse, though.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/fnDX_1_uFhk/maxresdefault.jpg

Icons, text-only, a combination of both: moderation is key in any GUI. Cognitive overload is to be avoided at all costs.
Any good GUI can be skewered to become a truly horrendous one:

http://i68.tinypic.com/2r5x1c7.jpg

wingzeta
09-13-2017, 01:30 PM
That is the stuff of nightmares. Text interface is a strength of LW. With good tool handles and OGL buttons as part of tool UI, like LWCAD for instance, there is no need for icons along the side. I'm all for a customizable UI though, so those who want icons can put them in place of, or alongside text. But please don't pretend icons are about speed, when often used functions are performed with keyboard shortcuts by speed users. Less used functions are better described by text, because it literally tells you what it does without having to roll over it. Right click menus are the other speed up. If you are going to the edges of the screen to click icons, you are wasting time. That said, I am not in that much of a hurry myself. Hopefully LW will always be text by default. It works, and it is distinctive in a good way, when all the others look the same.

TheLexx
09-13-2017, 02:24 PM
Maybe it's a left brain, right brain thing. :)

Chris S. (Fez)
09-13-2017, 02:34 PM
Primarily text with a spattering of common sense icons please. But, yeah, customizable to keep everyone happy.

Marander
09-13-2017, 03:31 PM
Primarily text with a spattering of common sense icons please. But, yeah, customizable to keep everyone happy.

Yes I agree.

For LWNext I don't expect any icons and I'm fine with it.

But at least some UI enhancements, high res display support (scaling), decluttering (better default organization of menus and tools) and dockable panels should be there.

Nice to have would be a global, context sensitive attribute manager, but again, I don't expect this in LWNext.

The endless drop down menus and More... submenus are highly inefficient. Same for the various floating dialogs. I noticed that in many LW tutorials alot of time is wasted moving these dialogs / panels out of the way. There should be a way to stack / dock (and of course detach and lock) them.

But since they have a UI/UX engineer (Matt) there is hope.

jeric_synergy
09-13-2017, 03:48 PM
Note how, although C4D uses a lot of icons, their choice to use a VERY few colors in each icon (black, white, and a color) allows each one to be understandable AND color coded as to functionality.

Generators are one color: deformers are another, etc.

Someone shoulda clued in the Truespace designers.

(Also, the C4D icons are well designed, not mysterious and/or puzzling. For the most part. )

Ernest
09-13-2017, 04:50 PM
I think a lot of it has to do with nouns Vs verbs. Nouns work great with icons. I never, in any application get confused if they show me an icon with the picture of the primitive that will be created by that button. If I see a sphere, I know it will draw a sphere. I might not know what the word Torus means, but I will easily know that the icon that looks like a doughnut will produce a shape that looks like a doughnut. Likewise with edges points and polys. Those are nouns and the icons in all applications that let you switch from vertex to edge to face mode are clear to anyone at first glance.

Icons get confusing when they try to represent verbs. If I see a picture of a dog running with a big smile and they ask me for the noun, I'll easily know it's a dog, but if they ask me for the verb, it could be running, smiling, being happy, escaping, hunting. And with a picture it's easier than with an icon. After the "Big Easy 3" verbs (move, rotate, scale) trying to make clear icons for the dozens or hundreds of verbs that a 3D app has to perform is just... not possible.

I think we all use 3D apps in a similar way. We use a few tools a lot of the time, and the rest of the tools very seldom. That means that we can't memorize the app's 300 icons because we normally only use 20 on our day to day work. Those 20 can look like anything, because we know them by reflex. But when we need to perform one of the operations that we seldom use... how do we find it? If we look at text buttons, we'll eventually find a verb that sounds like what we want to do. If we look at dozens of verb-icons that we don't normally use, we will probably have no clue what any of them do. So we have to move our mouse over them and wait for the tooltip. Which effectively makes those icons a very slow form of text buttons. And imagine calling support and they tell you to click on the kumquatchize icon and you looks through the menus trying to imagine which one that could be. Whereas with a text button you'd just have to ask if that's with a K or a C (because the people who invented languages were masochists and just couldn't keep to one symbol per sound :P ).

So having a poor designer trying to come up with a clear icon for each and every command is a massive waste of time and sanity and will not be useful for the user. If noun commands are clearer (and smaller) with icons than words, make them just icons. The 10 super-common everyday tools that almost everyone uses all the time and will easily memorize, make them just icons or icons with text. All other verb commands work better as just text.

hypersuperduper
09-14-2017, 12:33 AM
I like intelligently labeled text buttons or properly descriptive illustrations such as sculpting tool illustrations or brush presets for most tools. Icons are great but primarily when the function is something that may appear anywhere in the interface or multiple places at once and therefore needs to be as compact yet readable as possible. A typical example would be an eye that is open or closed to represent visibility of a layer. Icons are also great when used in tandem with text like a little custom hieroglyph or emoji. Blender's modifier list is very good example of this, a nice little icon next to a word makes it very easy to quickly find the modifier you want if you already understand the concepts but are not familiar with the interface. Problems arise when icons are built into the design of an application's UX in a way that means space is not reserved for text i.e. horizontal rows of icons. Maya's shelf strikes me as a case like this. Custom shelves are great in Maya, but because they chose a horizontal row of icons there isn't really room for a good label for each icon. You can use a custom icon, but in my experience we usually had the default icon and then some cryptic little label so we knew what it was. A vertical list like LW would be much better in this case.

TheLexx
09-14-2017, 01:21 AM
One thing that might be of relevance is that I can imagine a non-English speaker better understanding an English tutorial video if the video shows a guy using icons. In that sense maybe icons are a universal language for some. I think I recall a thread here where people were requesting translations of Dstorm Japanese language tutorials, so possibly "universal" icons might have helped a certain percentage of English speakers to figure things out from Japanese. I prefer text though. :)

Danner
09-14-2017, 01:36 AM
One interface that I realy like is MOI, It's very clean and organized, the icons are big and all have text and some are only visible when needed. I think that could also be taken further, for example some icons for polygon specific operations could only be made visible when you have polygons selected.

fablefox
09-14-2017, 04:57 AM
I think a lot of it has to do with nouns Vs verbs. Nouns work great with icons. I never, in any application get confused if they show me an icon with the picture of the primitive that will be created by that button. If I see a sphere, I know it will draw a sphere. I might not know what the word Torus means, but I will easily know that the icon that looks like a doughnut will produce a shape that looks like a doughnut. Likewise with edges points and polys. Those are nouns and the icons in all applications that let you switch from vertex to edge to face mode are clear to anyone at first glance.

Icons get confusing when they try to represent verbs. If I see a picture of a dog running with a big smile and they ask me for the noun, I'll easily know it's a dog, but if they ask me for the verb, it could be running, smiling, being happy, escaping, hunting. And with a picture it's easier than with an icon. After the "Big Easy 3" verbs (move, rotate, scale) trying to make clear icons for the dozens or hundreds of verbs that a 3D app has to perform is just... not possible.

I think we all use 3D apps in a similar way. We use a few tools a lot of the time, and the rest of the tools very seldom. That means that we can't memorize the app's 300 icons because we normally only use 20 on our day to day work. Those 20 can look like anything, because we know them by reflex. But when we need to perform one of the operations that we seldom use... how do we find it? If we look at text buttons, we'll eventually find a verb that sounds like what we want to do. If we look at dozens of verb-icons that we don't normally use, we will probably have no clue what any of them do. So we have to move our mouse over them and wait for the tooltip. Which effectively makes those icons a very slow form of text buttons. And imagine calling support and they tell you to click on the kumquatchize icon and you looks through the menus trying to imagine which one that could be. Whereas with a text button you'd just have to ask if that's with a K or a C (because the people who invented languages were masochists and just couldn't keep to one symbol per sound :P ).

So having a poor designer trying to come up with a clear icon for each and every command is a massive waste of time and sanity and will not be useful for the user. If noun commands are clearer (and smaller) with icons than words, make them just icons. The 10 super-common everyday tools that almost everyone uses all the time and will easily memorize, make them just icons or icons with text. All other verb commands work better as just text.

This.

I still remember when trying the early MAX releases demo. I think a lot of side button were text, only the bar up screen were icons to something simple we understand.

http://download.autodesk.com/us/3dsmax/interface_overview/2011/3dsMaxUIOverview.htm

This is an example of what I like. If it wasn't for the price and now it became rent only, I would have been user of MAX.

http://download.autodesk.com/us/3dsmax/interface_overview/2011/3dsMax%20Interface%20Overview_files/3dsmaxUI.jpg

Back then, even creating items are represented as text.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Daqing_Piao/publication/23425719/figure/fig2/AS:[email protected]/Fig-2-a-3ds-MAX-Interface-b-Mesh-to-Solid-Interface.png

Come to think of it, maybe this is one of the reason why I stay with LW, and if the next version come with enough improvement, I will upgrade my LW10 edu to full commercial.

shrox
09-14-2017, 06:52 AM
With an icon heavy interface, one must spend quite a bit of time learning and rememering what is basically a new language. And every icon heavy program uses a different language. Even the magnifying glass has two different meanings, search or enlarge.

Spinland
09-14-2017, 12:44 PM
Ten pages. Wow, glad to see some passion about LW. Did I read them? Nope; no point. The OP asked a straightforward question so I'll drop my response and then move on.

I stick with LW because it gets the job done, does it well, and I know its strengths and weakness so there are no surprises and no need to absorb a learning curve while working on the client's dime. Buying into an alternative software solution does not make fiscal sense for my studio.

Simple as that. :jam: