PDA

View Full Version : A thought...



Amerelium
10-25-2017, 04:33 AM
I seems to me that a lot of people's main gripe with LW is the two separated components of it.

I don't get it; the fact that Modeler and Layout are two separated programs is one of the things I LIKE about LW.

When I have a scene with hundreds of objects, with a total polygon count of close to 50m, and I want to modify one object with a few thousand, I prefer to open that one up by itself in a separate program. Specially when the scene takes 26 of my total 32 gigs of RAM to have open, and is really giving my graphics card a hard time...

adrian
10-25-2017, 04:59 AM
I have to say I also like the separated apps too for the exact same reasons, but then I joined LW at version 6.5 so have never known anything different. I'm learning Maya at work and find it a bit strange with it being all together.

Surrealist.
10-25-2017, 05:18 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTVuSVG9DKA

Pretty much says it all for me.

Ztreem
10-25-2017, 05:47 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTVuSVG9DKA

Pretty much says it all for me.

:dance::thumbsup:

Luc_Feri
10-25-2017, 06:29 AM
It's just one of those things. It can be great but it also can be a huge pain, it really depends. As you suggested you can make it work for you on big scenes, swapping stuff out but, hey.

Marander
10-25-2017, 07:23 AM
I seems to me that a lot of people's main gripe with LW is the two separated components of it.

I don't get it; the fact that Modeler and Layout are two separated programs is one of the things I LIKE about LW.

When I have a scene with hundreds of objects, with a total polygon count of close to 50m, and I want to modify one object with a few thousand, I prefer to open that one up by itself in a separate program. Specially when the scene takes 26 of my total 32 gigs of RAM to have open, and is really giving my graphics card a hard time...

That's why other applications work with (optional) object references and have a filters / single / solo modes for isolating objects or parts of the geometry.

The application split like LW has (and I think it's the only 3D applications still working this way) can on the other hand limit you a lot (no animated modeling, synchronization issues, unable to just use splines or geometry for paths and helper objects (for example for emitters or collider objects), inability to model or modify the object that is fits right in the scene / camera perspective and a lot more). Not to mention the ridiculous character workflow with skelegons, weight painting and Genoma in LW.

Ztreem
10-25-2017, 07:26 AM
Here's how great it really is! Same model loaded in Layout, Modeler and Blender. (Look at memory usage) :D

138373

rustythe1
10-25-2017, 02:13 PM
Here's how great it really is! Same model loaded in Layout, Modeler and Blender. (Look at memory usage) :D

138373

but what app did you model in? ive always found the opposite with blender and max, when using image textures they always use more with me as they seem to load separate instances of images for each surface, where as lightwave can use one image over many surfaces, layout also dose use a lot more than modeller though, that may be a side effect of using different geo engines, try loading it into modeller and comparing

rustythe1
10-25-2017, 02:17 PM
this is what you get if you send a large model from layout, almost 2 thirds off!138375

laswaver
10-25-2017, 02:48 PM
this is what you get if you send a large model from layout, almost 2 thirds off!138375

Is this an argument to keep them separate? I hope not! I half to laugh when I see people defend the separate app workflow. All that it says is that the person uses 3d in a very limited context, and does not truly understand or use the app in ways that show why the split app is so limiting. Split app is ok for some types of 3d work (archvis, product shots) but when it comes to fx work or motion graphics (or anything that needs procedural control of geometry creation) there really is no way to defend a split app workflow. By being a split app LW is automatically limiting itself to very simplistic projects.

rustythe1
10-25-2017, 02:55 PM
Bryfill will disagree with you, a bad workman always blames his tools,

hrgiger
10-25-2017, 03:01 PM
Man I hope LW's well kept secret doesn't get out. This split app workflow that nobody else uses. What a secret weapon! While everyone else is foolishly doing preview renders in the same environment they're modeling in, painting weight maps in the same app they're rigging or animating in, procedurally creating geometry or adjusting geometry on meshes for animation...jokes on them! Fools!

Sarcasm deactivated.

laswaver
10-25-2017, 03:11 PM
Bryfill will disagree with you, a bad workman always blames his tools,


Another great irrelevant diversionary answer that addresses none of the facts mentioned. Also, I believe you mean bryphi, the master of nodes, get it right!

rustythe1
10-25-2017, 03:25 PM
i didn't see any facts that needed addressing, how can Lightwave be limited to the simplest of tasks if its still used in major TV and Film effects? it still pays all my bills, food on the table, just because some things are harder to do in lightwave doesn't mean it cant be done. just the same as some things are much easier in lightwave as they are in other apps, and most of us here are multi app users anyway,

laswaver
10-25-2017, 03:39 PM
i didn't see any facts that needed addressing, how can Lightwave be limited to the simplest of tasks if its still used in major TV and Film effects? it still pays all my bills, food on the table, just because some things are harder to do in lightwave doesn't mean it cant be done. just the same as some things are much easier in lightwave as they are in other apps, and most of us here are multi app users anyway,

Well you certainly didnt answer the only question I asked. Which was, are you arguing that it should be kept a separate app? Glad that you are not starving, but that also has nothing to do with whether a separate app is better or worse, nor does the amount of apps you use. I thought this thread was about the advantages and disadvantages of being a separate app. Really glad that you are well fed though. Make sure you stay healthy, and dont over eat.

UnCommonGrafx
10-25-2017, 04:42 PM
I would rather they used their engineering prowess to give us a switch; this switch would give us our cake and let us eat it, too.

This engineering prowess would also address the myriad of problems mentioned in this thread, and prayerfully, those mentioned over the last 20+ years.

Young kids can easier get into this process with it separated.
A unified state/mode to be able to enjoy all the goodness therein.
As it is today, it is a formidable tool in the hand that knows how to wield it.


For all others not wanting/able/desiring to wait, heck, the alternatives have been well established, i.e., a moot discussion.

Snosrap
10-25-2017, 06:53 PM
Here we go again. I love and hate that it is split. :) But really it's so stupid that people think if its one app it can't have those "advantages" of it being split.

Marander
10-25-2017, 07:42 PM
... just the same as some things are much easier in lightwave as they are in other apps...

Can you elaborate where LW is much easier than other apps? I struggle to see that and experience the opposite.

GraphXs
10-25-2017, 07:49 PM
It will always be a love/hate.

Modeler as a single benefit (for now) Is it works good with apps like Unity for static meshes and really don't need to use layout... As well as the FBX export naming convention is cleaner than layout. As well as testing simple shaders for mobile devices.
Modeler as a benefit for model ref only, ...but we really need a lwx scene reference for all the other parts of 3D....light rigs, proxies, etc.
Modeler workflow is also very nice,it sure is missing somethings, but I really like the "free form" way it works with polys. (I hope if modeling functions move to layout we get some of the modeler workflows.
Modeler loads fast is a benefit, but when both are open(layout/modeler) we do use twice the texture memory. BOOO!

It will be around for a while until we get some modeling tools in layout, which will help with condensing the tool set, as modeler does have so many, many,many tools! I wished they cleaned it up a bit.
I could almost see in the future them selling modeler as a separate app for low poly game dev? Maybe? Or will eventually kill it.

In the grand scheme of things , layout will benefit with modeling tools and a scene ref workflow, but until then modeler has a place, just as zbrush, or any other external app that works in a pipeline. Ya gotta make the model somewhere!

Rayek
10-25-2017, 11:16 PM
Aargh, this again? Look, the ONLY reason Modeler and Layout were separated was because of legacy reasons (read: ancient computer hardware and memory limits). At the time it was great, because larger scenes could still be rendered out. That was then, say 20 years ago. Now every half-decent rig has at least 8 or 16GB to play with.

Nowadays there is no reason at all to keep things separated, because all the major 3d apps allow for a similar workflow if the user prefers it. In Blender, for example, I can isolate singular models (or groups, or multiple selected objects) with a simple key press (numpad /). I can work with external library files, and use a simple add-on to switch seamlessly between the main scene and the assets in the external library file. And choose whether to open the asset in a new Blender instance, or not. And when done, save, and I am returned to the main scene that updates all the assets automatically.

Cinema4D also allows singular objects and hierarchies to be isolated in "Solo" mode. Maya, similarly, offers an isolation mode. Not sure about Max and Modo, though, but I'd be surprised if they did not.

So in practice a modeler<->layout type workflow is available in consolidated 3d apps. Choice exists. Not so with Lightwave - the split is forced upon its users, no choice given.

Another myth: supposedly a separate modeler loads up objects faster. Well, let's see, and compare native formats between Modeler and Blender. The identical object (Millenium Falcon) costs 4.5 seconds to load up in Modeler 2015 (with quad viewport, one textured viewport) until the app becomes responsive, while Blender takes 4 seconds to load the entire scene in material viewport mode - in solid mode it literally loads up in half a second!!! In flat shading mode it still takes Modeler 2.5 secs to load its own native format.

Simple reason: Blender's file format is kinda like a memory snapshot, so no interpretation of the model data is required. Modeler, however, needs to interpret its own LWO data first. Which takes FAR longer.

Snap! Myth splattered and debunked.

Anyway, a unified 3d application affords its users the same or similar workflow as the split Modeler<->Layout (if required), while still being faster and more efficient. And with all the benefits of having full integration of modeling inside "layout".

3D Kiwi
10-25-2017, 11:16 PM
Anyone that thinks Lightwave being split into two apps is a good thing is crazy, Its an absolute workflow killer, constantly jumping between two apps just to paint weights etc is a nightmare, not to mention morphs.
To move forward Lightwave needs to be one application .
You dont have to spend much time in other unified applications to see the benefits.
The big problem is I have no confidence that the LW3DG can pull this off. They have tried once and failed. If they do manage to merge modeler and layout I honestly thing it will be around 10 years before it is fully capable with all features working and a solid workflow.

I had to rebuild my pc a few months ago and for the first time since Lightwave 5 I haven't installed it. I would love Lightwave to be what it always could have been but I just cant keep waiting.

Rayek
10-25-2017, 11:29 PM
One more advantage of a unified app: when I load up a scene to continue working on it, Blender is returned to the exact state as where I left it. Including the polygon selection, if I had one active.
This is a real time-saver.


Not possible with the split Lightwave duo.

m.d.
10-25-2017, 11:36 PM
People settled in their ways...

Listen to the Blender crowd and they will tell you about the old timers that were against having undos in Blender....believe it or not they would argue the advantages of not having undos....
Come to think of it, there was a little of that here as well....

The reason has more to do with psychology than practicality.
People are resistant to change.

Imagine the first time toilet paper came around....that probably took some convincing :)

jeric_synergy
10-25-2017, 11:54 PM
Come to think of it, there was a little of that here as well....
Maybe I'm being too literal, but I think you'd have a hard time finding a LWer who seriously argued against Undo.

The lack of it is EPIC-ALLY confusing though: even some convoluted system that made allowance for WHICH thing to undo (Surface? Motion? Keyframing? Expressions?) would be preferable to a total lack of it.

Amerelium
10-26-2017, 01:36 AM
I have to say I also like the separated apps too for the exact same reasons, but then I joined LW at version 6.5 so have never known anything different. I'm learning Maya at work and find it a bit strange with it being all together.

How's Maya for modelling? I LOVE the LW modeller, specially for really complex models - never come across anything else even close to it. Remember trying 3DMax a som years ago; it actually made me angry in it's asininess...

hrgiger
10-26-2017, 01:54 AM
How's Maya for modelling? I LOVE the LW modeller, specially for really complex models - never come across anything else even close to it. Remember trying 3DMax a som years ago; it actually made me angry in it's asininess...

Asking a serious question here but have you tried many other apps? Modeler is seriously outdated and hasn't received hardly any updates in the last 20 years. Edges are only half working. CC subdivision surfaces are broken in some cases. Some tools aren't interactive, You're forced into a quad view for others like the bend tool, you've got multiple bevel tools because they can't have a tool that cant manage to round, inset, and extrude, on polys, points and edges in a single tool. There is no work plane. You're limited to 4 action centers (no local or element action centers). No procedural toolset so everything is destructive. The UV toolset is incredibly bare. No retopology. No smoothing groups. No model instancing. Other than a few specific tools, no background constraints. Other than a few specific tools, no tool handles.

rustythe1
10-26-2017, 02:08 AM
Can you elaborate where LW is much easier than other apps? I struggle to see that and experience the opposite.

you misunderstood my responses in this thread, i wasn't defending LW split at any point and my responses had nothing really to do with splitness as clearly someone else didn't spot, my response was to do with the fact that modeller used a lot less ram than layout so that actually pointed out where the splitness fails,
the later response was just a general response, also had nothing to do with being split, e.g. you could argue all day about small things like i can build a cube faster in lightwave than max, because LW opens in 3.5 seconds and max takes around 25,
it was just generalised.

Kaptive
10-26-2017, 02:09 AM
"Magic roundabout.gif"

i.n.c.o.m.i.n.g...m.e.s.s.a.g.e..........

Warning. You are currently imagining that you are reading a regular forum post, but in another reality, you are drifting into a black hole.
Don't get trapped, don't be sucked in!!! Direct energy to that creative project you always wanted to do... you can escape this negative energy suck! I believe in you!!! I BELIEVE IN YOUUUUUU!!!

e.n.d...o.f...m.e.s.s.a.g.e.........

laswaver
10-26-2017, 02:31 AM
"Magic roundabout.gif"

i.n.c.o.m.i.n.g...m.e.s.s.a.g.e..........

Warning. You are currently imagining that you are reading a regular forum post, but in another reality, you are drifting into a black hole.
Don't get trapped, don't be sucked in!!! Direct energy to that creative project you always wanted to do... you can escape this negative energy suck! I believe in you!!! I BELIEVE IN YOUUUUUU!!!

e.n.d...o.f...m.e.s.s.a.g.e.........

But didn't you just post here?

And to the other guy... I didn't assume anything. I asked you a simple question so that I could understand what you were getting at, and instead of answering it you told me about food you eat.

rustythe1
10-26-2017, 02:59 AM
Well you certainly didnt answer the only question I asked. Which was, are you arguing that it should be kept a separate app? Glad that you are not starving, but that also has nothing to do with whether a separate app is better or worse, nor does the amount of apps you use. I thought this thread was about the advantages and disadvantages of being a separate app. Really glad that you are well fed though. Make sure you stay healthy, and dont over eat.

and as stated above, my response had nothing to do with the app being split and in fact showed that layout has an issue with ram due to the fact it has to work around the GEO engines, your comments were obviously a personal attack as you only refer to my comments and no body else's even though my comments had next nothing to do with defending LW and its split app

Marander
10-26-2017, 03:02 AM
you misunderstood my responses in this thread, i wasn't defending LW split at any point and my responses had nothing really to do with splitness as clearly someone else didn't spot, my response was to do with the fact that modeller used a lot less ram than layout so that actually pointed out where the splitness fails,
the later response was just a general response, also had nothing to do with being split, e.g. you could argue all day about small things like i can build a cube faster in lightwave than max, because LW opens in 3.5 seconds and max takes around 25,
it was just generalised.

Did I mention LW split in my question? I only asked you to elaborate why you think LW is much easier than other apps. What has that to do with how much time Max takes to start and create a cube??? I would like to see an example where you think LW is much easier as you stated.

laswaver
10-26-2017, 03:04 AM
and as stated above, my response had nothing to do with the app being split and in fact showed that layout has an issue with ram due to the fact it has to work around the GEO engines, your comments were obviously a personal attack as you only refer to my comments and no body else's even though my comments had next nothing to do with defending LW and its split app
No... I didn't think you were defending a split app... That is why l asked. You have done nothing but attack me since I got here... so don't play the martyr now.

rustythe1
10-26-2017, 03:11 AM
again, i didn't specifically say LW was much easier in general than other apps, i was just generalising that all apps have there strengths and weaknesses and depending what field you work in and how you work things can be easier in one app and harder in another, i work with a group doing 3d prints and all the ones using max/modo cant build watertight models as fast as i can out of Lightwave, we have even had head to heads on the same models, it may be down to the artist, but personally i would blame the general work flow.

rustythe1
10-26-2017, 03:14 AM
No... I didn't think you were defending a split app... That is why l asked. You have done nothing but attack me since I got here... so don't play the martyr now.

uhhh, you did because your response started with "Well you certainly didnt answer the only question I asked. Which was, are you arguing that it should be kept a separate app? " and all my responses have been to yours as you have been directly quoting me from the start, any way I'm off

laswaver
10-26-2017, 03:21 AM
Yeah, guess you are off. I did quote you here cause I was asking you a question that you avoided. Please go reread the thread. Also, when I said you have attacked me since I got here I was talking about the other threads. I can tell you this much... from our little interaction here I can be sure that you are morally corrupt... That is for sure.

rustythe1
10-26-2017, 03:57 AM
ha ha, your a funny guy, you should re read your self,
the first post you made i asked a simple question and just pointed out everyone's experiences are different, then several other people attacked your responses, to which you replied with several sarcastic responses, i never responded in that thread again (poll thread),
i then quoted your third response in the 3 months thread and even stated that it was not a personal attack on you and that there were several people on the forums by there own omission don't and wont upgrade lightwave,
you then attacked one of my statements about LW being sold off in that post with a response that was discounted by someone else,
i pointed out you seemed to be trying to stir up negative responses (a point that several other people had made previously and more directly on another thread by calling you things like "troll" , yet you didn't respond to those)
you then responded with sarcasm to a couple of other people at which point Mr bowie stepped in,
then you responded to me in this thread,
so where did i attack you from the get go?

gar26lw
10-26-2017, 04:33 AM
Asking a serious question here but have you tried many other apps? Modeler is seriously outdated and hasn't received hardly any updates in the last 20 years. Edges are only half working. CC subdivision surfaces are broken in some cases. Some tools aren't interactive, You're forced into a quad view for others like the bend tool, you've got multiple bevel tools because they can't have a tool that cant manage to round, inset, and extrude, on polys, points and edges in a single tool. There is no work plane. You're limited to 4 action centers (no local or element action centers). No procedural toolset so everything is destructive. The UV toolset is incredibly bare. No retopology. No smoothing groups. No model instancing. Other than a few specific tools, no background constraints. Other than a few specific tools, no tool handles.

so what you're saying is that its ****, right? :P

Even with all that I prefer it as main modeler, weird hey?

hrgiger
10-26-2017, 04:38 AM
Actually no. Modeler may be fine for some. And if you prefer it, thats fine too. Its just objectively wrong though to say its better than what else is out there on the market.

Otterman
10-26-2017, 05:03 AM
The two app split suits my workflow just fine and dandy and no one can argue with me on that....as it's my workflow, not yours!

The only time I have had wished it to be a one app show is when doing camera projection mapping. Other than that 99% of the time it helps me out no end. I use massive files, lots of them all derived from cad. Once Ive surfaced them, cleaned them up I'm done with them...everything else I do is in the 'studio' as it were. Using Maya, it's a pain having to save reiterations of the same file. They can be 2GB+ and thats not economical at all. OK, I could use referencing but it is flakey as heck. LW Layout handles it much better.....there I said it, the two app solution is better, I thank you and good night!

gar26lw
10-26-2017, 06:53 AM
better for that particular workflow. there i agree. thing is when you want to do characters and such. not so hot.

i personally find the scene management, navigation and schematic utter dogs balls compared to maya/xsi. not dissin, just saying please for the love of god, match maya/xsi and it’s a strong win! xsi best imho.

in fact this is an easy one. a lot of stuff in xsi was sweet and ad dumped it.
rip it off and capitalize.

it’s like ford bought bmw and axed the 5 series.

gamedesign1
10-26-2017, 07:18 AM
So much arguing :(

Snosrap
10-26-2017, 07:43 AM
I love and hate that it is split.

I'm quoting myself because it is just so true for me. I work in product development/visualization and the current split is just fine for 98% of what we do except when it isn't. We pretty much do zero animation and we never do any character work so the split is "okay". Where I hate is when we do some camera match modeling or just want to move a part of a model that is not in its own layer. There are so many good reasons to combine the two apps and none to keep them separate as far as I can tell.

jeric_synergy
10-26-2017, 08:14 AM
You're limited to 4 action centers (no local or element action centers).
Is this particular bit true? Doesn't TRANSFORM allow you to select point/edge/polycenter action centers? --Of course, it's got other issues (resetting after every Extend, for instance, FFS that's annoying.....)....

probiner
10-26-2017, 08:43 AM
- Modeling a single object (file) at a time.
- Modeling without scene awareness or object posing.
- Management done with layers, instead of objects that can be picked in the viewport.
Are all major drawbacks for me that will keep me away from modeling in it for anything beyond moderate complexity.

The only things I miss from LW in this respect is the ability to just copy paste mesh and the "if nothing is selected everything is selected". Most things that are touted as good and might have actual benefits, most time they are baggage, imho. Just like the split workflow.

Cheers

Otterman
10-26-2017, 09:12 AM
- Modeling a single object (file) at a time.
- Modeling without scene awareness or object posing.
- Management done with layers, instead of objects that can be picked in the viewport.
Are all major drawbacks for me that will keep me away from modeling in it for anything beyond moderate complexity.

The only things I miss from LW in this respect is the ability to just copy paste mesh and the "if nothing is selected everything is selected". Most things that are touted as good and might have actual benefits, most time they are baggage, imho. Just like the split workflow.

Cheers


Probiner, You migrated over to Maya by any chance. The comment about copy and pasting mesh struck a cord with me. I'm really struggling with this 'or lack of' in Maya. So simple in Lightwave. How do you get around it?

probiner
10-26-2017, 09:24 AM
Softimage, now at Houdini, possibly Blender in the future for more quick tweak modeling. Only app I know that has this copy paste thing also is Modo. Most of the others require some sort of extraction and merging routine.

Cheers

hrgiger
10-26-2017, 09:50 AM
Is this particular bit true? Doesn't TRANSFORM allow you to select point/edge/polycenter action centers? --Of course, it's got other issues (resetting after every Extend, for instance, FFS that's annoying.....)....

Yes, transform gives you an element type of action center but that is a tool specific action center, not a a modeler global action center that applies to other tools where it would be useful in countless other situations.
But then that highlights another issue that has arisen with modeler over the years. When work has been done on modeler, as rare as that has been, someone may have sought to improve an existing tool. Instead of improving the existing tool, they decided to keep the old one and add a new one. So we have bandsaw and bandsaw pro. We have array and in lw next we will have live array. Not only do we end end up with 10 bevel tools but its sad we have to point out how some of the tools arent interactive by calling other tools "live" tools.

jeric_synergy
10-26-2017, 10:50 AM
True, and sometimes tools aren't 'finished'-- like ROVE, a tool I actually enjoyed quite a bit, never worked in Symmetry.

ROVE, in combination with EXTEND, made subd modeling a breeze, BUT.... it no workee with Symmetry. Dumb.

Over
10-26-2017, 11:42 AM
Well, itīs not "better", but I will say itīs certainly faster. :D


I prefer it as a main modeler too.

bobakabob
10-26-2017, 02:19 PM
What's up with multiple apps in a professional pipeline - Zbrush anyone? Anyone tried it with Maya or C4d - works a treat.

Just use what gets the job done. Like others here, I find I can work quickly in Modeler, and combined with LWCad + 3rd Powers and Zbrush the only (sobering) limitation is skill and imagination.

I'd love to see those users of expensive subscription based tools post some of their artwork to show how it's done. Strangely they rarely do, or else it's something akin to a YouTube video bevelling a cube in C4d. Yes, there's Blender. It looks worthy but I personally don't feel limited by LW combined with ZB (after so many years years I've worked out I'm not so keen on so many of the so called "industry standard" tools, mainly on account of economics).

Max for example is great if you're a rich engineer with a penchant for bizarre UI design. OK, non linear modelling is cool, but essential? In reality I've never ever missed this modelling characters, buildings and environments in LW. Zbrush shockingly doesn't have a non linear modelling stack - so how do users ever get anything done??

Giger has a point, it's great to model and render WIP interactively. I use Maya at work and compared to the limited legacy tools it now has a slick economical modeller and Arnold a PBR answer to VPR. However, I still find working in Lightwave fast despite the limitation of not being able to render in Modeller - the quality of Layout's renderer makes up for it. Plus, you can work freelance in LW without crippling subs. I would only turn to Maya purely for character animation. LW has come a long way in the last decade. I recently used both Maya and LW for CA and Genoma 2.0 and RHiggit held their own thanks to Lino and RebelHill.

I'm looking forward to LW Next, but not expecting anything earth shattering - I trust the team to come up with a practical flexible affordable app. In this era of diversity in CG, people will use the most flexible economical and useable tools. It's not a little elitist to mock someone for not owning an expensive so called 'integrated' app, or a freebie that swathes of users find unintuitive or impractical. Audiences really don't care about this stuff, it's all smoke and mirrors in the end.

Ztreem
10-26-2017, 03:43 PM
Softimage, now at Houdini, possibly Blender in the future for more quick tweak modeling. Only app I know that has this copy paste thing also is Modo. Most of the others require some sort of extraction and merging routine.

Cheers

In Blender you can just press 'p' and it will cut and make your selection a new object even faster then cut, move to new layer and paste. :)
If you want to copy selected faces you have to duplicate first (shift+d) then p to separate it to a new object still fast and easy.

Snosrap
10-26-2017, 04:02 PM
Is this particular bit true? Doesn't TRANSFORM allow you to select point/edge/polycenter action centers? --Of course, it's got other issues (resetting after every Extend, for instance, FFS that's annoying.....).... Yeah and it's those other issues that makes that tool "almost" worthless.

jeric_synergy
10-26-2017, 04:15 PM
Why the coder thought that resetting the action center after an EXTEND operation made sense.... smh.... seriously, WTF?

Surrealist.
10-26-2017, 05:40 PM
In Blender you can just press 'p' and it will cut and make your selection a new object even faster then cut, move to new layer and paste. :)
If you want to copy selected faces you have to duplicate first (shift+d) then p to separate it to a new object still fast and easy.

Not many people know you can use copy and paste in Blender it works just the same as modeler for objects (at the object level in Bender). For component selections you have to use p as you have pointed out. You can also cut/copy paste objects in Maya. You can also use ctl x to cut components in both Blender and Maya. But not really useful.... lol Just FYI if you don't want to reach for the del key in Maya. ;)

Copy and Paste (ctl c and v) also works on keyframes in Blender. Cut/Copy and Paste (ctl x, c and v)also works on keyframes in Maya.

Exclaim
10-26-2017, 06:24 PM
Actually no. Modeler may be fine for some. And if you prefer it, thats fine too. Its just objectively wrong though to say its better than what else is out there on the market.

Actually its not, but I think the fine folks who defend modeler are making a stand by having you explain the reasons why modeler is so outdated/classed by other software. If the argument is that modeler is not procedural, the point is moot because it's not a procedural modeler. Everything else people are complaining about, is preference. I say modeler has by far the best layers system of any software. I also enjoy how easy modeler makes morphs. Things I'm finding out LW has been good at for years, and the other guys have just caught on to.

GraphXs
10-26-2017, 06:39 PM
If ya think of modeler as a it is a stand alone app, it is pretty good. I know it doesn't have procedural modeling, but it layer system is a good fit to keep exploring a models workflow. I use the layers as building blocking when working on a model. It also looks like at least in LWNXT they are adding some helpful tools to bridge the gap before they start on modeling tools in layout. Like the layout camera in modeler. At least we will finally have camera based modeling.

It is too bad that modeler didn't keep up with tech, but it gets the job done! I really hope we can get the CS engine of modeling in layout with some of modelers great workflows!
Until then, so many great plugins for modeler, go get them if ya want to enhance LWM! (LWCAD, 3rdPowers, ODTools, TrueArts, PLG, RopeEditor, etc,etc,)

Snosrap
10-26-2017, 07:09 PM
Actually its not, but I think the fine folks who defend modeler are making a stand by having you explain the reasons why modeler is so outdated/classed by other software. If the argument is that modeler is not procedural, the point is moot because it's not a procedural modeler. Everything else people are complaining about, is preference. I say modeler has by far the best layers system of any software. I also enjoy how easy modeler makes morphs. Things I'm finding out LW has been good at for years, and the other guys have just caught on to.

It's a testament to the original design of Modeler that it is still as good as it is today with the almost zero work on it over the last 17 years or so. But there was also some really big mistakes made during the Purple (v6) cycle in the underlying structure that really didn't allow Modeler to grow. Hastings and Ferguson discovered their errors after v6 got off the ground and started work on the next iteration of LW now known as Modo. With what they learned from developing v6 they concentrated their efforts on the underlying structure which has paid off later in that product life cycle. I like the immediacy of Modeler and as a long time user of Modo its easy to see the failings of Modeler. But with all the great modern tech in Modo, I still start every model in Modeler and have pretty much relegated Modo to UV mapping. The old clunker just seems to work. :) But this split mentality needs to go and unfortunately I don't see NT being able to pull this off in an elegant way. Sometimes you just need to scrap the whole shebang and start over. Core 2! :)

hrgiger
10-26-2017, 08:12 PM
Actually its not, but I think the fine folks who defend modeler are making a stand by having you explain the reasons why modeler is so outdated/classed by other software. If the argument is that modeler is not procedural, the point is moot because it's not a procedural modeler. Everything else people are complaining about, is preference. I say modeler has by far the best layers system of any software. I also enjoy how easy modeler makes morphs. Things I'm finding out LW has been good at for years, and the other guys have just caught on to.

Then again, I would argue that you either just really have a preference for the way modeler works or that you're really unaware of how other apps work. Because even taking procedural modeling out of the mix, not sure why anyone would defend half implemented edges, broken catmull clark subDs, a limited uv toolset and suggest its better than other offerings on the market. And the layer system you say is the best yet only allows a wireframe background display type, doesn't allow me to drag and drop to parent layers, doesn't allow me to group layers, doesn't allow me to lock the layer, all things that Modo allows me to do with my layers If I even wanted to which I wouldn't, I can even get them to look like LW layers.

138377

jeric_synergy
10-26-2017, 09:04 PM
Once upon a time, and w/very little effort, I sent (then) NewTek a (physical!) letter specifying at least ten changes that would make the Layers Panel MUCH more useful.

I don't think any of them got implemented.

I even made PSD mockups, which was far harder than thinking of possible improvements. (heck, they might be floating around in the "Feature Request" forum....)

Exclaim
10-26-2017, 09:41 PM
Then again, I would argue that you either just really have a preference for the way modeler works or that you're really unaware of how other apps work. Because even taking procedural modeling out of the mix, not sure why anyone would defend half implemented edges, broken catmull clark subDs, a limited uv toolset and suggest its better than other offerings on the market. And the layer system you say is the best yet only allows a wireframe background display type, doesn't allow me to drag and drop to parent layers, doesn't allow me to group layers, doesn't allow me to lock the layer, all things that Modo allows me to do with my layers If I even wanted to which I wouldn't, I can even get them to look like LW layers.

138377
I've used other apps, and I never really cared for their modeling interface. I can use modeler edges just fine. Catmull Clark works just fine for my version of LW. UVing in Lightwave does leave much to be desired, but I don't always need to UV my assets. I will add that the surfacing in LW, with and without nodes, was easy for me to figure out compared to 3DSMax and Maya. MODO has a very good implementation of many things. But, I found it's interface more confusing/cluttered than LW's. I think that is why I like the split, it gets rid of clutter. Layer grouping sounds like a nice feature but the wireframe in LW comes in handy for me.

hypersuperduper
10-26-2017, 11:38 PM
For all it’s faults, modeler’s simple layers setup (that is completely distinct from any sort of scene heirarchy) enables one really useful workflow: Using countless scratch layers for geometry. You can have the object in your scene in one layer and then multiple iterations and helper geometry and all kinds of other crap in other layers and copy paste effortly between them, but your scene in layout stays clean as a whistle. Not going to argue that it is worth the trade offs, but it certainly has value. Do any other apps offer this sort of workflow? Not a rhetorical question. I don’t actually know.

Marander
10-27-2017, 12:17 AM
I'd love to see those users of expensive subscription based tools post some of their artwork to show how it's done. Strangely they rarely do, ...

Yeah the old 'it's the artist - not the tool' discussion... I agree that there are many 'users' which just play around with the 3d tools and don't create anything.

For me this was the case for many years before I got serious with 3d too.

Now I have created hundreds of renders and some animations over the years (and with some I'm really happy), but I do this for myself and work on improving them constantly in an artistic and technical level.

Many LW renders I see in users profiles / galleries or posted look like from the last millennium and some artists need a reality check imho. I would never post anything like that (ok I posted some in the past and I'm not happy with that). There is only a handful of really good LW artists who have published their work in my opinion (like David Aguero, DJ Waterman, Greenlaw or David Ridlen).

Nevertheless the technology I work with is very important to me. With the limited time I have I like the most efficient tools and workflows.

Ztreem
10-27-2017, 12:28 AM
For all it’s faults, modeler’s simple layers setup (that is completely distinct from any sort of scene heirarchy) enables one really useful workflow: Using countless scratch layers for geometry. You can have the object in your scene in one layer and then multiple iterations and helper geometry and all kinds of other crap in other layers and copy paste effortly between them, but your scene in layout stays clean as a whistle. Not going to argue that it is worth the trade offs, but it certainly has value. Do any other apps offer this sort of workflow? Not a rhetorical question. I don’t actually know.

You could basicly have the same workflow in a unified app if you want. Just do a new scene where you do all your models and then you can do another scene for animation and just load or reference in your model. You also have the ability to model in the scene you’re animating which is a BIG bonus.

Rayek
10-27-2017, 12:46 AM
For all it’s faults, modeler’s simple layers setup (that is completely distinct from any sort of scene heirarchy) enables one really useful workflow: Using countless scratch layers for geometry. You can have the object in your scene in one layer and then multiple iterations and helper geometry and all kinds of other crap in other layers and copy paste effortly between them, but your scene in layout stays clean as a whistle. Not going to argue that it is worth the trade offs, but it certainly has value. Do any other apps offer this sort of workflow? Not a rhetorical question. I don’t actually know.

Yes. I'll take Blender as an example. In Blender external Blender files can be linked. Each linked asset may be a mesh object, or a material, or both, or even an entire scene. These are then embedded in the master scene. Which means the linked asset(s) may contain all sorts of helpers, (hidden) layers, object hierarchies, lights, animated characters, rigs, notes, grease pencil comments, etcetera. Anything, really.

This goes beyond the Modeler<->Layout workflow and takes it to a whole new level, since a linked asset may not only be an object (like in Lightwave), but may contain entire scenes or a group of objects. Or only a single material. As you can imagine, it goes much deeper compared to Lightwave's object<->Layout handling. One library file may contain many objects, even many scenes, and all can be separately linked. When one of the artists updates one of the original objects, the master scene updates automatically when it is reloaded (or specifically updated for the updated links).

Which means if you like you could maintain a very clean master scene - indeed, much cleaner than is possible with Lightwave.

I compare it a bit to Flash/AnimateCC movieclips: those may consist of entire scenes as well. It is tremendously flexible. Much more is possible with this workflow in Blender, though. Blender's file format is similar to a database with "data blocks", and a single file, when opened when appended or linked, consists of folders of data (object, mesh, material, lamps, etc.). It's quite a different paradigm compared to Lightwave, but allows for an identical workflow, if required. But it just takes the concept of linking much further.

And if the user dislikes the idea of maintaining external files, it is also possible to manage objects, light rigs, animations, etc. in separated scenes in one master file, and then create a master scene that embeds all those other objects and/or scene data.

Other applications allow for similar linked/referenced workflows.

hypersuperduper
10-27-2017, 12:52 AM
Unless the app seamlessly and instantly opened the referenced objects source scene and came back to the target scene just as easily this would entail closing and opening different scenes which would definitely throw a big wrench in the works, and limit its viability as anything other than for special use cases. The ease at which lightwave does this is sort of key to the whole thing.

This was a Reply to Ztreem

hypersuperduper
10-27-2017, 01:06 AM
I have done one video game project in blender and learned to really appreciate the blender way of doing things, but I never really explored its referencing system beyond a cursory glance at the manual, but yes it did seem very robust. Still, I returned to lightwave for my next project for some reason, partially because I really really like modeler, warts and all. Modeler really feels like working with a 3D sketch pad for me. You sketch stuff out, and then refine it and then send it to layout. I never really got that feel in blender. Maybe I should try exploring it’s referencing system more.

jeric_synergy
10-27-2017, 01:12 AM
Using countless scratch layers for geometry. You can have the object in your scene in one layer and then multiple iterations and helper geometry and all kinds of other crap in other layers and copy paste effortly between them, but your scene in layout stays clean as a whistle.
This particular workflow is why I'd like/much prefer Modeler Layers to DEFAULT to "inactive" (ie, "eyeball off").

Generally, I'd guess that I have more helper/temp/cutter/boolean/storage/safety/version layers than actual 'working'/visible layers. By having them, the majority of my layers, default to "INACTIVE", I'd be saved an annoying and continual chore.

Having layers default to "ACTIVE" I think is just a hangover from LW's early, naive days, just like how everything sorta defaults to animation instead of static (as in After Effects, C4D, and Anime Studio Pro, and for all I know, most programs) in Layout. Frankly, at the time I don't think Allen or Stuart knew much about animation workflow, and just did what seemed natural or easy. Like I said, naive.

It could always be a USER PREFERENCE for those that like the current method.
OR, as a kludgey stopgap, Layer 01 could default to ACTIVE, with other layers needing to be be explicitly made Active. A sort of "training wheels".

Ztreem
10-27-2017, 01:14 AM
Unless the app seamlessly and instantly opened the referenced objects source scene and came back to the target scene just as easily this would entail closing and opening different scenes which would definitely throw a big wrench in the works, and limit its viability as anything other than for special use cases. The ease at which lightwave does this is sort of key to the whole thing.

This was a Reply to Ztreem

I would open two instances of the app and then have the model scene open in one and the master/animation scene open in the other very similar to modeler / Layout.

Rayek
10-27-2017, 01:45 AM
I would open two instances of the app and then have the model scene open in one and the master/animation scene open in the other very similar to modeler / Layout.

The "Edit Linked Library" add-on is quite brilliant for this workflow. Select the linked object, click "Edit Library: XXXitem". Optional "New Blender Instance" to open the asset in a new Blender window. When finished editing, click the "Return to Original" button to return to the master file.

Saving is automated. Literally one click to edit a linked asset, and one click to return to the master file.

Unfortunately, the addon seems to be a bit broken in the latest version (Blender closes when the "Return to Original File" button is clicked.) I have reported a bug. Perhaps you could test it as well to see if it works properly or not?

hypersuperduper
10-27-2017, 02:00 AM
That actually works REALLY well. You don't need two instances cause it opens so fast. I am not on the latest blender though.

Just for fun I tested linking a mesh with a live boolean operation. works like a charm. even freezes the linked mesh when exporting to fbx. Blender never ceases to amaze.

Rayek
10-27-2017, 02:49 AM
Don't forget to group the object in the linked file and link to the group if you require the object to be transformable in your master file.

Ztreem
10-27-2017, 03:05 AM
The "Edit Linked Library" add-on is quite brilliant for this workflow. Select the linked object, click "Edit Library: XXXitem". Optional "New Blender Instance" to open the asset in a new Blender window. When finished editing, click the "Return to Original" button to return to the master file.

Saving is automated. Literally one click to edit a linked asset, and one click to return to the master file.

Unfortunately, the addon seems to be a bit broken in the latest version (Blender closes when the "Return to Original File" button is clicked.) I have reported a bug. Perhaps you could test it as well to see if it works properly or not?

Sounds good, I’ll have to test that.

probiner
10-27-2017, 03:59 AM
In Blender you can just press 'p' and it will cut and make your selection a new object even faster then cut, move to new layer and paste. :)
If you want to copy selected faces you have to duplicate first (shift+d) then p to separate it to a new object still fast and easy.

Who mentioned a new object? ;) What if I want to copy some polygons of a sphere to another mesh containing a cube? Like I said:

Most of the others require some sort of extraction and merging routine.

There's also things, like someone said in here, that might not be the best but they are fast and LW delivers there.
The problem is when speed doesn't matter if you're not getting the results you need in a meaningful time. It's balancing act. The best is when you can have both, meaning, you can just drive fast, but then you can also go under the hood when needed.

Cheers

Ztreem
10-27-2017, 04:11 AM
Who mentioned a new object? ;) What if I want to copy some polygons of a sphere to another mesh containing a cube?


Ok, didn’t think about that. 😀

Rayek
10-27-2017, 04:39 AM
Who mentioned a new object? ;) What if I want to copy some polygons of a sphere to another mesh containing a cube?

Cheers

True, many of the other apps require some kind of merging. While copying and pasting works on object level in Blender, to copy on a mesh level it works like follows:

1 - select object, enter edit mode.
2 - select polygons.
3 - duplicate polygons
4 - separate these polys from the original object.
5 - exit edit mode.
6 - select both the duplicated polygons and the second object.
7 - join both
done.

Alternatively it would be (which is not possible in Blender):
1 - select object, enter edit mode.
2 - select polygons.
3 - copy polygons.
4 - exit edit mode.
5 - select second object.
6 - enter edit mode.
7 - paste polys.
done.

The number of steps are the same, although copying and pasting would save 1 mouse click. One additional action is required in either case depending on whether you want to end up in mesh edit mode, or not.

I recall doing this in Cinema4D and the process was kinda painful due to having to split and connect things.

In any case, I totally agree that simply copying and pasting mesh data makes the most sense [between mesh objects]. While the process is quite quick to pull off in Blender with shortcut keys, both Blender and Cinema4d use obscure commands to achieve something that is essentially very basic.

Having said this, I almost never need to copy polygons from one object to another. More often than not I need to copy polygons in the same mesh object - and in this case duplicating and splitting is more efficient than copying/cutting and pasting, because the latter actions require twice or four times more mouse actions.

hypersuperduper
10-27-2017, 05:12 AM
It could be that you rarely duplicate separate select join because it is a pain compared to copy paste in lightwave . It is all about ease of use and lightwave makes copying and pasting between objects VERY easy. This leads to a particular workflow which, while blender and surely others can to a large degree replicate, is simply easier in lw.

The lightwave modeling workflow with its liberal use of copy paste doesn’t generally translate well to other applications in my experience. To be fair, the other applications don’t really need that workflow because they have lots of other advantages that a unified non-schizophrenic architecture brings (merging objects In a scene for one), but still. There are legitimate reasons to appreciate the way lightwave some does things that other apps don’t really do, at least not as well. And the super easy copypastyness is one such reason and is arguably a byproduct of the split architecture.

Rayek
10-27-2017, 05:21 AM
Yeah, but if you really think about it, it's rather odd that 3d software doesn't implement cut/copy/paste like in other apps. I mean, in Blender and C4D the context is quite clear: a bunch of selected polygons in MESH EDIT MODE. It doesn't require a rocket scientist to realize that the user intends to cut or copy those polygons. Then switch to another object's mesh editing context and pasting those polygons seems rather logical to me.
Instead, both apps decide that the user wants to copy the entire object...?! What?! Why? The user is working in MESH MODE, not OBJECT MODE!!! That makes no sense whatsoever.

No matter that Lightwave is a non-unified app - it just seems that developers often prefer rather long-winded obscure methods rather than the simple expected ones.
So I am a bit confused why many 3d applications decide to make it harder to understand than it needs to be. It really has nothing to do with being unified or not.

To be clear, those additional commands are super handy when working on a singular mesh object, and much faster and efficient than copying and pasting. Btw Blender only implemented copy and paste commands relatively late in its development cycle.

hypersuperduper
10-27-2017, 05:48 AM
it could be that copying and pasting is simply a much more complicated operation in an application that can't assume that all objects have the same origin, scale, rotation, like modeler. There would have to be additional transformations and maybe its not as easy as it seems, maybe there are some weird clipboard limitations that get in the way. It seems unlikely, but why else would it be so uncommon in 3d applications when every other kind of application uses copy paste?

hrgiger
10-27-2017, 05:48 AM
I've used other apps, and I never really cared for their modeling interface. I can use modeler edges just fine. Catmull Clark works just fine for my version of LW. UVing in Lightwave does leave much to be desired, but I don't always need to UV my assets. I will add that the surfacing in LW, with and without nodes, was easy for me to figure out compared to 3DSMax and Maya. MODO has a very good implementation of many things. But, I found it's interface more confusing/cluttered than LW's. I think that is why I like the split, it gets rid of clutter. Layer grouping sounds like a nice feature but the wireframe in LW comes in handy for me.

Well try to mirror edge weighting (which is part of the benefit of using catmull clark subDs in the first place) and you'll see they're not working.

And its simply a misnomer that a UI has to be any more cluttered in a unified application than it has to be in modeler or Layout respectively. Clutter is removed with the proper use of workspacing. I dont' see this UI (below) being cluttered at all. It get even better if you add a third party toolkit called Zen which completely removes all panels.

As far as layers are concerned, yes wireframes are fine. I'm just saying that in other apps like Modo you can set layers to be whatever display type you want them to be.

138382

Marander
10-27-2017, 06:25 AM
T
I recall doing this in Cinema4D and the process was kinda painful due to having to split and connect things.


But it's also very simple in C4D: Select your geometry - Clone - Apply (within the same object)

Edit: Sorry, for Copy and Paste between objects you're correct, its: Select geometry - Split (which creates a new geometry object) - Connect&Delete with the geo's you want to combine

Agree, this is easier in LW. But for proper subd modeling copy&paste polygons is seldom used imho. And complex models are built from parts / layers anyway, where normal Copy & Paste works.

gar26lw
10-27-2017, 06:43 AM
Then again, I would argue that you either just really have a preference for the way modeler works or that you're really unaware of how other apps work. Because even taking procedural modeling out of the mix, not sure why anyone would defend half implemented edges, broken catmull clark subDs, a limited uv toolset and suggest its better than other offerings on the market. And the layer system you say is the best yet only allows a wireframe background display type, doesn't allow me to drag and drop to parent layers, doesn't allow me to group layers, doesn't allow me to lock the layer, all things that Modo allows me to do with my layers If I even wanted to which I wouldn't, I can even get them to look like LW layers.

138377

yeah i agree but the thing is i prefer lw layers and find modos a pita.
i guess cos they are simple. strange

Chris S. (Fez)
10-27-2017, 06:58 AM
yeah i agree but the thing is i prefer lw layers and find modos a pita.
i guess cos they are simple. strange

It's not strange. LW with third powers + hotkeys is super fast and straightforward. Much like sketching in a notebook with a pen. The "interface" disappears.

Lots to like in Modo. I do think they need to take the Zen philosophy to heart.

hrgiger
10-27-2017, 07:25 AM
I don't know why you find them to be a pita. They're simple. and they give you much more control if you want it.

GraphXs
10-27-2017, 07:32 AM
Modeler has always felt more "free-form" than other modeling applications, as it really doesn't create meshes like a element called sphere. Modelers is Polys, Edges and Points and always being in edit mode makes it fell immediate when editing, coping, pasting, etc. I really don't find this workflow out-dated but intuitive. Maybe all the others programs (besides sculpting ones) did it the wrong way.

If the layers could have some more options, a bigger handler of geo, a stack for some procedural modeling, better uv tools and sculpting, I don't think people would care that it is never apart of layout. (assuming layout could have a simple edit mesh in it's stack.)

But we kinda have most of those things if ya use 3D coat or ZBrush in your workflow.

gar26lw
10-27-2017, 08:04 AM
yeah it’s like photoshop for polys

jeric_synergy
10-27-2017, 09:56 AM
::whew:: I'm glad it's not just me that found simple polygonal C&P operations in C4D laborious.

It seemed to me that the issue is the data structures used in C4D and Blender are substantially different from the simpler concept in LWM. While those advanced structures are powerful, they are rather 'silo'd' in regards to data xfer between Objects, where in LWM it's just "points and polys" being swapped/copied about.

That said: since it is POSSIBLE (however onerous) how much work would it be to script the steps listed above, and map to a single button? I guess the workflow would be "order specific", with the user selecting two objects..... meh, maybe a dialog that says "Copy to...?".

IOW: you're in edit mode in one Object, select points/edges/polys, hit a button, dialog asks "Copy to...?", you specify {by various methods} the target object, and WALLAUGH!

Marander
10-27-2017, 10:25 AM
::whew:: I'm glad it's not just me that found simple polygonal C&P operations in C4D laborious.

It seemed to me that the issue is the data structures used in C4D and Blender are substantially different from the simpler concept in LWM. While those advanced structures are powerful, they are rather 'silo'd' in regards to data xfer between Objects, where in LWM it's just "points and polys" being swapped/copied about.

That said: since it is POSSIBLE (however onerous) how much work would it be to script the steps listed above, and map to a single button? I guess the workflow would be "order specific", with the user selecting two objects..... meh, maybe a dialog that says "Copy to...?".

IOW: you're in edit mode in one Object, select points/edges/polys, hit a button, dialog asks "Copy to...?", you specify {by various methods} the target object, and WALLAUGH!

I think I could develop something like that using python (I have never used python before nor used the c4d sdk (but C++ , Java, Perl etc. and lots of proprietary sdk's). Problem would be catching CTRL+C etc. but another shortcut would be ok too. Might be a nice learning exercise if I find time.

hrgiger
10-27-2017, 11:29 AM
If the layers could have some more options, a bigger handler of geo, a stack for some procedural modeling, better uv tools and sculpting, I don't think people would care that it is never apart of layout. (assuming layout could have a simple edit mesh in it's stack.)

.

Well aside from bigger handler of geo which admittedly isn't tons better than modeler(currently), you're pretty much describing Modo which already cuts/copies and pastes geo. Modeler will never be improved with any of these options. I mean, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but modeler won't ever be significantly improved. It just won't be. Not without being rewritten. And that's either years away or its going to take being reimagined in Layout in some way and that's probably still years away if its ever going to happen at all.

I mean, its time for a reality check. If you're happy with modeling in LW then great, its all good. But if you're holding out hope that there are going to be some significant improvements coming anytime at all in the near or even relatively near future for LightWave modeling, than you're just deluding yourselves. There just aren't. Period. End Service announcement.

jeric_synergy
10-27-2017, 11:44 AM
I think I could develop something like that using python (I have never used python before nor used the c4d sdk (but C++ , Java, Perl etc. and lots of proprietary sdk's). Problem would be catching CTRL+C etc. but another shortcut would be ok too. Might be a nice learning exercise if I find time.

I know zip about scripting in c4d, but capturing keypresses is trivial, indeed, almost mandatory, in LW/LWM.

However, you might want to chose something other than ctrl+C for this specialized operation, as it might break so many other things. ALT+C jumps to mind.

(BTW, fwiw, I really hate the c4d hotkey & menu editors: they seem 'waaayyyyyy overcomplicated to me.)

Rayek
10-27-2017, 12:05 PM
I think I could develop something like that using python (I have never used python before nor used the c4d sdk (but C++ , Java, Perl etc. and lots of proprietary sdk's). Problem would be catching CTRL+C etc. but another shortcut would be ok too. Might be a nice learning exercise if I find time.

Funny, I had the same idea with Blender. A quick Google search revealed someone already decided to write one (and one that does much more such as automatic linking when copying and pasting objects between files).

https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/3D_interaction/CutCopyPaste3D

This allows for copying and pasting between mesh objects! Can't believe I never discovered this gem before. CTRL-Insert to copy anything, SHIFT-Insert to paste. Also handy that pasting activates object move mode, so the mesh data can be positioned immediately without invoking Move.

It simplifies the process considerably!!!

Thanks for the heads-up on making me aware of this. While I do not often copy mesh data from one object to another, when I do the duplicate/separate/join workflow always bothered me, and broke the flow. This is much more efficient and easy compared.

Over
10-27-2017, 12:12 PM
I think that how you work in LW is also how you can work in Modo too, after all, they are about the same thing (yes people, stop trying to cover the sun with a finger) and the things that apply to LW modeler apply to Modo modeler too. I think that how things go, and Iīm going to put an example of my own is that you can dismantle and aircraft with just an screwdriver, a hammer and an adjustable wrench. It would be easier to have an entire tool box, but not necessarly faster.

Right now the kind of access you have to editing your mesh in LW is only replicated by Modo, but there you have so many more options, and handles and gizmos that that may affect your workflow negatively regarding speed. Thereīre many things that canīt be done in LW modeler, but if you donīt run into those too often then you will surely work faster there than in any other app. Iīm a Max user, and with Max I always have the impresion that Iīm working with robotic hands, with LW (and Modo to some extent) I feel that Iīm using my own hands.


and hrgiger, did you really use Modo beta layout?

Rayek
10-27-2017, 12:39 PM
I think that how you work in LW is also how you can work in Modo too, after all, they are about the same thing (yes people, stop trying to cover the sun with a finger) and the things that apply to LW modeler apply to Modo modeler too. I think that how things go, and Iīm going to put an example of my own is that you can dismantle and aircraft with just an screwdriver, a hammer and an adjustable wrench. It would be easier to have an entire tool box, but not necessarly faster.

Right now the kind of access you have to editing your mesh in LW is only replicated by Modo, but there you have so many more options, and handles and gizmos that that may affect your workflow negatively regarding speed. Thereīre many things that canīt be done in LW modeler, but if you donīt run into those too often then you will surely work faster there than in any other app. Iīm a Max user, and with Max I always have the impresion that Iīm working with robotic hands, with LW (and Modo to some extent) I feel that Iīm using my own hands.


Isn't that your own proficiency level in an application, though? Familiarity often breeds tribalism.

I worked in most of the major 3d apps (excepting Maya), and was extremely proficient in both Cinema4d and Lightwave at some point in my career (taught both apps too). I admit Lightwave felt "better" for modeling than Cinema4d (which I always found to be on the clunky side for modeling), and more direct. However, since I've become somewhat adept in Blender, there is just no comparison. Less clicking and a generally much faster and efficient workflow allow me to fly at heights while modeling in Blender, the likes of which I never was able to achieve in Max, Lightwave, or C4D - where Lightwave and C4D stopped me in my tracks when I reached a reasonably high level of familiarity with both. Mostly Blender's modeling is extremely efficient. And very direct if required. The toolset is far more consolidated and much more usable compared to Modeler.

To be fair, I might be victim of my own counter-argument here: Blender's tool set for modeling has matured throughout the years, and I haven't kept up with Cinema4D and Max for over 6 years now.

Still, I am not the only one to state that Blender's modeling speed out-performs most others once the user becomes highly familiar with the tools. But granted, for anyone switching over to Blender from another application it might initially be a somewhat surreal experience. It's improved a lot, though, in these few past years.
On a side note, Blender may be customized to provide a more... seamless transition coming from Lightwave or Modo.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?152579-Brent-s-Blender-LW-Modo-Setup

hrgiger
10-27-2017, 12:45 PM
and hrgiger, did you really use Modo beta layout?

Oh yes, and still do. I love the alternative layout. All my panels are available from the bottom freeing up my viewport. Options, handles and gizmos slowing you down huh? :) See that's what I call ergonomics in Modo. Handles, action, centers, the workplane... its these things that allow me to work almost exclusively in a single viewport where in LightWave I'm constrained to a quad view to perform a number of operations with any level of accuracy.

I know you're a lot more comfortable in LW than you are in Modo so I understand your preference. I was there too once. I just don't trust those are permanent feelings. :)

gar26lw
10-27-2017, 01:15 PM
be cool if lw loaded modo scenes

Over
10-27-2017, 01:16 PM
Isn't that your own proficiency level in an application, though? Familiarity often breeds tribalism.

I worked in most of the major 3d apps (excepting Maya), and was extremely proficient in both Cinema4d and Lightwave at some point in my career (taught both apps too). I admit Lightwave felt "better" for modeling than Cinema4d (which I always found to be on the clunky side for modeling), and more direct. However, since I've become somewhat adept in Blender, there is just no comparison. Less clicking and a generally much faster and efficient workflow allow me to fly at heights while modeling in Blender, the likes of which I never was able to achieve in Max, Lightwave, or C4D - where Lightwave and C4D stopped me in my tracks when I reached a reasonably high level of familiarity with both. Mostly Blender's modeling is extremely efficient. And very direct if required. The toolset is far more consolidated and much more usable compared to Modeler.

To be fair, I might be victim of my own counter-argument here: Blender's tool set for modeling has matured throughout the years, and I haven't kept up with Cinema4D and Max for over 6 years now.

Still, I am not the only one to state that Blender's modeling speed out-performs most others once the user becomes highly familiar with the tools. But granted, for anyone switching over to Blender from another application it might initially be a somewhat surreal experience. It's improved a lot, though, in these few past years.
On a side note, Blender may be customized to provide a more... seamless transition coming from Lightwave or Modo.
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?152579-Brent-s-Blender-LW-Modo-Setup

Yeah, you might be right.

But Iīm like others here not able to wrap my head around Blender now, I always download the latest version and give it a try for a few minutes. I like to learn a lot, but that can only be done when I have the time. Maybe when I finish my current project I will go and spent a week or two with Blender because I may find something that I like. I have spent some time learning C4D too, but I donīt like it. Sure itīs great and very powerful, but for some reason is not for me. The dumb in me went and bought the full studio version only to sell it a few weeks ago. Damn, that thing is pricey.

Anyhow, I'm really doing well now with my LW+Modo+3D Coat --> 3D Max workflow.

Bottom line is, I like LW to model even if every other app is technically better.

Marander
10-27-2017, 01:18 PM
I know zip about scripting in c4d, but capturing keypresses is trivial, indeed, almost mandatory, in LW/LWM.

However, you might want to chose something other than ctrl+C for this specialized operation, as it might break so many other things. ALT+C jumps to mind.

(BTW, fwiw, I really hate the c4d hotkey & menu editors: they seem 'waaayyyyyy overcomplicated to me.)

Haha, I can save my time, there is already a nice free plugin for it (it also keeps uv's and other stuff). Just tried it (see below, works fine in R19). Assign a shortcut and WALLAUGH - Copy&Paste like LW :D

http://www.welter-4d.de/fplugs/freeplugins_en.html

138383

138384

138385

138386

Marander
10-27-2017, 01:35 PM
To be fair, I might be victim of my own counter-argument here: Blender's tool set for modeling has matured throughout the years, and I haven't kept up with Cinema4D and Max for over 6 years now.

Blender modeling is nice and fast once you know the shortcuts (and the required experience).

6 years means 6 major C4D releases, most tools have been rewritten / replaced since then and a new modeling core was just introduced in the current release. For me it's a perfect modeler, the knife, bevel, polypen and spline tools are brilliant.

I guess modo with the built-in meshfusion is king but in my short demo testing time I didn't really figure it out.

Ztreem
10-27-2017, 01:43 PM
Haha, I can save my time, there is already a nice free plugin for it (it also keeps uv's and other stuff). Just tried it (see below, works fine in R19). Assign a shortcut and WALLAUGH - Copy&Paste like LW :D

http://www.welter-4d.de/fplugs/freeplugins_en.html

138383

138384

138385

138386

And here is one for blender. 😀
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/3D_interaction/CutCopyPaste3D

Marander
10-27-2017, 01:45 PM
be cool if lw loaded modo scenes

Yeah, most applications can import lwo / lws, but LW itself cannot import the others...

138387

138388

(even with SubD, vertex / weight maps, textures etc.)

Rayek
10-27-2017, 01:46 PM
And here is one for blender. ��
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/3D_interaction/CutCopyPaste3D

Hey! I had dibs on that (previous page). ;-P

Ztreem
10-27-2017, 01:58 PM
Hey! I had dibs on that (previous page). ;-P

Sorry! I missed that, this thread moved forward too fast. 😀

Snosrap
10-27-2017, 03:05 PM
Bottom line is, I like LW to model even if every other app is technically better. Great statement. I had to quote it. :)

Surrealist.
10-27-2017, 04:41 PM
I think people are mostly worried about things they don't need to worry about. Change to LightWave is a long way off. You will be able to experiment around and see how things are working for you. It will be a gradual and long process. But if LightWave is going to survive as a generalist app, which is what it is offering, it needs to move into integration. I don't even have a lot of interest in arguing why anymore. But those against it will not have anything to worry about. Those people will stick to the things that are working for them as long as possible and be able to experiment with new LightWave tools, test the waters before committing. And if I was in their shoes that is exactly how I would approach it. Just that the necessity to even argue these things right now are really impractical. We don't even know when or if a new version is coming. Either way, a full functioning integration is a long ways off, as Steve correctly points out.

Amerelium
10-30-2017, 01:59 AM
Asking a serious question here but have you tried many other apps? Modeler is seriously outdated and hasn't received hardly any updates in the last 20 years. Edges are only half working. CC subdivision surfaces are broken in some cases. Some tools aren't interactive, You're forced into a quad view for others like the bend tool, you've got multiple bevel tools because they can't have a tool that cant manage to round, inset, and extrude, on polys, points and edges in a single tool. There is no work plane. You're limited to 4 action centers (no local or element action centers). No procedural toolset so everything is destructive. The UV toolset is incredibly bare. No retopology. No smoothing groups. No model instancing. Other than a few specific tools, no background constraints. Other than a few specific tools, no tool handles.

I've tried several other apps. Many of you here mention tools I never use or miss. What I do is to create very large, very complex models, from scratch. Mechanical and mostly static objects that is, I rarely do anything organic, and I know other software are supposedly superior in doing that. I just like the layout of Modeller, how it allows me to never lose track of where I am, as the polygon count goes beyond 10M (and I love doing anything in real scale - there's something perversely fun about building a 10M km Culture orbital and putting in mm sized details just to have the option of flying a camera past it). Now, this can of course be because LW is the software I am the most used to, but it is the only modeler that gives me that feeling of not being limited by anything, that allows me to create something without being constrained by any set design perimeters.

erikals
10-30-2017, 04:17 AM
lot's of great things in Modeler, however, even though i've had my cat-fights with SteveGiger, he is 100% correct here.

Modeler must add those features mentioned.

in some form or another.

jwiede
10-30-2017, 10:53 AM
lot's of great things in Modeler, however, even though i've had my cat-fights with SteveGiger, he is 100% correct here.

Modeler must add those features mentioned.

in some form or another.

And there are plenty of other examples where Modeler has serious limitations compared to other pkgs' more modern toolsets: C4D's bevel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnvvk8_llp8) and knife (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QTM0S1PVCg) tools are vastly more flexible and precisely-controllable compared to LW's equivalents. Functionality like being able to _precisely_ modify or even disable the tool's effect on arbitrary elements while the tool is active represents a huge workflow efficiency boost, esp. when doing large element quantity operations (edge rounding being the classic example).

Even the very basic constant-use functionality like viewport navigation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzkT06jXeSU) is substantially more efficient/controllable in C4D (thanks to on-the-fly selectable cursor-set-vs-static centrism) -- if you've ever tried to zoom into small concave details on a highly-complex object, you should immediately understand the benefits (f.e. C4D adjusts to local scale _during_ moves, LW only does between moves (and even then, there's a floor)).

All that's really happening here is a bunch of LW Modeler-attached users are demonstrating the strength of the Backfire Effect (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwisi9Pc5ZjXAhWLgFQKHXcdBpcQFgg-MAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fyouarenotsosmart.com%2F2011%2F06 %2F10%2Fthe-backfire-effect%2F&usg=AOvVaw2mWFmvzaq9BnaePZP3wa1j), doubling-down on emotional bias in the face of obvious, objectively-measurable examples demonstrating how Modeler has fallen behind in important ways. Their "I don't care, I still believe Modeler's better"-type conclusions are ample indication of that.

jeric_synergy
10-30-2017, 11:13 AM
That page is fun, until it's not. "Instead, they said the issue was something science couldn’t understand. When asked about other topics later on, like spanking or astrology, these same people said they no longer trusted research to determine the truth. Rather than shed their belief and face facts, they rejected science altogether."

That's what all these accusations of "fake news" and actual, planted, bogus items does: makes people reject REALITY. It's not that they believe some specific b.s., it's that they don't accept FACTS. And who benefits when people don't accept reality and truth?

Rayek
10-30-2017, 12:10 PM
Read "Four Reasons for the Elimination of Television". Explains a lot about the current sad state of affairs.

jwiede
10-31-2017, 09:52 AM
Thomas Nichols' "The Death of Expertise" is also an important read, IMO.

gerry_g
10-31-2017, 02:08 PM
the notion "the death of expertise" could be stood on its head, modern 3D packages have a button for everything, a solution for everything, older packages such as LW require ingenuity to get you out of a fix, as in a greater degree of expertise in using the software to work around a problem. I looked at my PS 2017 update recently and most of it is about making it more idiot proof, there is little in the way of real technical improvement

ActionBob
10-31-2017, 03:43 PM
There are no "facts." There are only our best perceived approximations. Your brain lies to you all the time in order to save time and to be able to make sense of the world around you; there is simply too much to process.

To have blind faith in any system, including science as a static / concrete construct / philosophy, instead of the FLUID practice it is, leads to stagnation and intellectual laziness.

Without getting too political.... Concerning FACTS...... A year of nothing stories from most media outlets... Having NO FACTS doesn't seem to stop the propagation of BS stories. Meanwhile, there are plenty of FACTS (documents, witnesses (with gag orders on them until recently) that point in a different direction. But do you see a ton of coverage on that? Nope.. Doesn't fit the narrative...

Anyway, I would prefer to not go down this rabbit hole.. I am now as guilty as another in potentially hijacking this thread when it should remain about Modeler and other LW stuff. But I couldn't help it when I see someone speaking in such an absolute, binary manner. There is ONE TRUE fact: There is a lot we don't know and our quest for knowledge through real science and discovery only takes us closer to a perceived, slightly more accurate observation. In simple terms, our guess is probably a little better than the one before that "science" hailed as the absolute truth.

Happy Tuesday and Happy Halloween!

-Adrian

Surrealist.
10-31-2017, 06:58 PM
Not seeing all of this talk as constructive really. I can't fault artists for making choices that make sense to them.

I don't see anything wrong with challenging people's preconception though. And I absolutely feel people should be encouraged to explore software.

That said I think an artist should consider what he says as having an effect on others.

And just because something is fine for you is no reason to discourage others from exploring.

So it is a two way street.

shrox
10-31-2017, 07:42 PM
I like it too!

Amerelium
11-24-2017, 03:02 AM
...well, just had a look at Blender just for the hell of it - seems anything BUT intuitive.

Gonna stick to LW until I need to do something it won't let me.

prometheus
11-25-2017, 05:17 AM
There are no "facts." There are only our best perceived approximations. Your brain lies to you all the time in order to save time and to be able to make sense of the world around you; there is simply too much to process.

To have blind faith in any system, including science as a static / concrete construct / philosophy, instead of the FLUID practice it is, leads to stagnation and intellectual laziness.

Without getting too political.... Concerning FACTS...... A year of nothing stories from most media outlets... Having NO FACTS doesn't seem to stop the propagation of BS stories. Meanwhile, there are plenty of FACTS (documents, witnesses (with gag orders on them until recently) that point in a different direction. But do you see a ton of coverage on that? Nope.. Doesn't fit the narrative...

Anyway, I would prefer to not go down this rabbit hole.. I am now as guilty as another in potentially hijacking this thread when it should remain about Modeler and other LW stuff. But I couldn't help it when I see someone speaking in such an absolute, binary manner. There is ONE TRUE fact: There is a lot we don't know and our quest for knowledge through real science and discovery only takes us closer to a perceived, slightly more accurate observation. In simple terms, our guess is probably a little better than the one before that "science" hailed as the absolute truth.

Happy Tuesday and Happy Halloween!

-Adrian

I thought it was a fact that Lightwave next hasnīt been released for the public yet, but then again..it may be very approximately estimated by all us who wantīs it and those who doesnīt care, I would like some one to change my perception on it, so I can wake up and realizing it is actually installed on my computer right now.:D

As for the thread topic, I prefer to have a two split modeler and layout, as well as having the option to model full out within scene, meaning that if I would like to focus eniterly on a model I would like to do that in modeler then replace a model in layout when needed..and being able to work with the scene without switching viewport going from model mode to layout mode, simply to keep the current scene in POV, but also I would like tp in some cases model full out in layout without modeling restrictions other than that the UI may look a little different than a model instance session.

May not be possilbe, may not be the best way..but it sort of is what I imagine I would like to work with.

gamedesign1
11-25-2017, 08:57 AM
I thought it was a fact that Lightwave next hasnīt been released for the public yet, but then again..it may be very approximately estimated by all us who wantīs it and those who doesnīt care, I would like some one to change my perception on it, so I can wake up and realizing it is actually installed on my computer right now.:D

As for the thread topic, I prefer to have a two split modeler and layout, as well as having the option to model full out within scene, meaning that if I would like to focus eniterly on a model I would like to do that in modeler then replace a model in layout when needed..and being able to work with the scene without switching viewport going from model mode to layout mode, simply to keep the current scene in POV, but also I would like tp in some cases model full out in layout without modeling restrictions other than that the UI may look a little different than a model instance session.

May not be possilbe, may not be the best way..but it sort of is what I imagine I would like to work with.

I have liked the split apps and I think its because I like to be presented with just what I need when working. I hate having hundreds of options all around me when I don't need them. I would love to have a combined app that does it all to get rid of the drawbacks of having two apps, but I would like to be able to have separate environments like a lot of other apps do. I like to have a nice clean workspace, minimal.

hrgiger
11-25-2017, 09:48 AM
This has all become a moot discussion because LW will probably never be a unified application. There's no motiviation for NT to risk alienating the small number of users they have left who are resistant to change and don't see the overwhelming benefit to having a unified environment.

erikals
11-25-2017, 10:14 AM
perhaps... it would've been a nice beginning though...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dab8UkEKZZQ

jeric_synergy
11-25-2017, 11:34 AM
I have liked the split apps and I think its because I like to be presented with just what I need when working. I hate having hundreds of options all around me when I don't need them.
It's this kind of thing, and I do it myself, that makes me wonder how USEFUL, or at least, USED "workspaces" or custom layouts are.

No doubt they could be useful, but somehow I get the feeling they are rarely used. (And before all the turbo-nerds push their masking taped glasses back up their nose in umbrage and start typing "Well, accccccctuallllllly...", shove a sock in it.) People bring up the "drowning in options" argument, but rarely do I see it suggested that they use the normally supplied-by-vendor workspaces that focus exclusively on one task, say, modeling.

For example, I've seen many many many demos of c4d, and iirc I've never seen a demo-er switch to the supplied alternative workspaces, even when it might make the demo clearer. I can see where they might think it would just confuse the audience, but still. And I'm talking user group meetings, not just YouTube demos.

"Hiding all the (irrelevant) options" is easily accomplished in many apps: switching to "Modeling Workspace 3b" is equivalent to having a split app, and likely switches over easier and faster than F12'ing.

I don't recall how the Blender set up for this works.

prometheus
11-25-2017, 12:57 PM
This has all become a moot discussion because LW will probably never be a unified application. There's no motiviation for NT to risk alienating the small number of users they have left who are resistant to change and don't see the overwhelming benefit to having a unified environment.

and also aimed for Jeric Synergy..

I see a problem with 3d software that has this workspace switch, If this doesnīt allow for an exact switch and doesnīt allow for working on models seperately from the scene you are currently in, then I would say itīs hardly no benifit VS modeling in a two split app, I would need exact switch that will not change the current viewport in any way, I would need a way of modeling on seperate entities of an object that with ease can replace with a simple sync only when I am finished with it, then fine, I see no reason to argue agains a unified app, if it does all that ..I do however doubt that a single app actually does that.

And no..blender doesnīt seem to have that Model workspace only, unless there is some stuff floating around made by others than the defaults, you are still gonna have to remove and change the UI yourself to get rid of animation timeline etc, it might not be that big of an issue, but by default it doesnīt seem to have any Full model only workspace.

hrgiger
11-25-2017, 04:49 PM
and also aimed for Jeric Synergy..

I see a problem with 3d software that has this workspace switch, If this doesnīt allow for an exact switch and doesnīt allow for working on models seperately from the scene you are currently in, then I would say itīs hardly no benifit VS modeling in a two split app, I would need exact switch that will not change the current viewport in any way, I would need a way of modeling on seperate entities of an object that with ease can replace with a simple sync only when I am finished with it, then fine, I see no reason to argue agains a unified app, if it does all that ..I do however doubt that a single app actually does that.

And no..blender doesnīt seem to have that Model workspace only, unless there is some stuff floating around made by others than the defaults, you are still gonna have to remove and change the UI yourself to get rid of animation timeline etc, it might not be that big of an issue, but by default it doesnīt seem to have any Full model only workspace.

Well don't know what app you're working in (Blender is garbage when it comes to this) but workspaces do exactly what you're talking about when I use them in MODO. The only thing that changes when you're modeling workspace is your list of tools along the side bar which is no different than what Modeler does in LW. Your workspace tabs are along the top and those can be easily opened and closed if you don't want to see them at all. So the workspace switch to modeling can have only modeling relevant tools on screen.

The difference comes when you can open a preview render window, use dynamics or use animation deformers for modeling, apply vertex smoothing or smoothing groups as a part of game assets, do modeling for projection mapping, use modeling tools in corrective shaping in animation, animate modeling operations, item based scene organization and handling... These are the kinds of benefits to having modeling in a unified app vs having your two split app.

prometheus
11-25-2017, 05:38 PM
Well don't know what app you're working in (Blender is garbage when it comes to this) but workspaces do exactly what you're talking about when I use them in MODO. The only thing that changes when you're modeling workspace is your list of tools along the side bar which is no different than what Modeler does in LW. Your workspace tabs are along the top and those can be easily opened and closed if you don't want to see them at all. So the workspace switch to modeling can have only modeling relevant tools on screen.

The difference comes when you can open a preview render window, use dynamics or use animation deformers for modeling, apply vertex smoothing or smoothing groups as a part of game assets, do modeling for projection mapping, use modeling tools in corrective shaping in animation, animate modeling operations, item based scene organization and handling... These are the kinds of benefits to having modeling in a unified app vs having your two split app.

modo has been way to sluggish for my liking (canīt tell from the latest version though), and I simply loath the shader tree, I may give it a go one day in the future, but that time isnīt now...I actually prefer blender for some things.
I would like to try out the workflow of using the preview window in modo in full view, while in a single alt switch or similar switching to a full modeling environment...that means a shortcut setup or command in modo to do so, otherwise it is actually more faster and reliable to use alt tab and switch from modeler to layout.

I donīt disagree with the difference opinions in your last sentences, but from what I can see..those are things that seem to arrive in the next lightwave as far as I can see, or it is the beginning of it.

hrgiger
11-25-2017, 06:05 PM
modo has been way to sluggish for my liking (canīt tell from the latest version though), and I simply loath the shader tree, I may give it a go one day in the future, but that time isnīt now...I actually prefer blender for some things.
I would like to try out the workflow of using the preview window in modo in full view, while in a single alt switch or similar switching to a full modeling environment...that means a shortcut setup or command in modo to do so, otherwise it is actually more faster and reliable to use alt tab and switch from modeler to layout.

I donīt disagree with the difference opinions in your last sentences, but from what I can see..those are things that seem to arrive in the next lightwave as far as I can see, or it is the beginning of it.

Well don't know when you last tried it but unless you're dealing with a lot of items in a scene or deforming characters (which is a separate discussion altogether), its no slower and often faster than modeler(depending on selections) and certainly more capable in so many ways that discussions of speed become irrelevant when you consider all the things you can do in modeling in Modo vs Modeler. And I would say probably most people have an initial dislike of the shader tree until they understand just how flexible it is. As far as preview goes, I often have a preview window open on a second monitor (f8 is the shortcut key) while modeling full screen on my main monitor giving me real time feedback. But certainly faster than jumping between applications. But then that's another part of the reason I have moved to Modo for modeling in the first place, I'm not constrained to a quad view like I am in Modeler and do all of my modeling from a single viewport thanks to having a workplane and axis handles for tools.

Well, as far as LW next goes, I certainly wouldn't hold my breath on most of those differences. You're still years away from any kind of true unified environment for modeling and animation and I think I'm being kind by saying that. Because I very much have my doubts that meaningful unification will ever happen for LW.

jeric_synergy
11-25-2017, 06:51 PM
Blender has both "Layouts", which are amazingly easy to create (I'm not sure how it could be easier), and Application Templates, which appear to be "workspaces on steroids".

A small amount of work and I'm pretty sure you could easily emulate the joys of split applications very well.

shrox
11-25-2017, 07:16 PM
Blender has both "Layouts", which are amazingly easy to create (I'm not sure how it could be easier), and Application Templates, which appear to be "workspaces on steroids".

A small amount of work and I'm pretty sure you could easily emulate the joys of split applications very well.

Stop encouraging me to learn new things and expand my comfort zone!

prometheus
11-25-2017, 07:25 PM
Stop encouraging me to learn new things and expand my comfort zone!

Hereīs another one :D:devil:

Go for blender sculpting for alien mountains in your space scenes, if you prefere..send it back to lightwave for camera setup, animation and rendering.

jeric_synergy
11-25-2017, 07:42 PM
Stop encouraging me to learn new things and expand my comfort zone!

It's my revenge for you having MY career, if I were more industrious, talented, and less lazy.

Oh, and hair.

Surrealist.
11-26-2017, 12:18 AM
Workspaces are overrated.

They are an old idea in Modo carried over from LightWave. And one of the things I did not like about Modo. But I did learn to get used to them. I would not say they were a completely bad idea but they unessesarily complicate your workflow in my opinion.

You can set up workspaces in Blender very easily. Not from the Workspaces drop down. That is a bit of a misnomer.

Currently not is not possible to reduce the available tools. That I think will come with 2.8.

But if isolating your workflow is what your are looking for you can do that with scenes and even use that in conjunction with workspaces.

In addition to the already available "workspace" options in Blender they are revamping this in the next release in a big way.

Let me know and if there is enough interest and I will record a video on workspaces currently in Blender, how to set them up and the various options/limitations I am aware of.

But regardless. The interface in 2.8 is going to really turn heads. Some very good and well-thought-out changes coming. Some of them completely unique.

gar26lw
11-26-2017, 02:48 AM
yeah i suspect if they pull off a decent ui then it’s game over man.

colkai
11-26-2017, 02:55 AM
And no..blender doesnīt seem to have that Model workspace only, unless there is some stuff floating around made by others than the defaults, you are still gonna have to remove and change the UI yourself to get rid of animation timeline etc, it might not be that big of an issue, but by default it doesnīt seem to have any Full model only workspace.

Ctrl+UpArrow, not exactly difficult, toggles the viewport to fullscreen. Chaging the UI is a doddle, do it once, save theat as startup and you have your custom layouts. Two minute job, if that.

Surrealist.
11-26-2017, 03:46 AM
Ctrl+UpArrow, not exactly difficult, toggles the viewport to fullscreen. Chaging the UI is a doddle, do it once, save theat as startup and you have your custom layouts. Two minute job, if that.

That is blender "workspaces", not the same as what is being requested. But as far as I understand the current options in Blender using Scenes is pretty close to what.you'd want.

colkai
11-26-2017, 04:23 AM
That is blender "workspaces", not the same as what is being requested. But as far as I understand the current options in Blender using Scenes is pretty close to what.you'd want.

TBH, scenes is probably one of the most overlooked aspects, I know I don't use them when truthfully, it would be better if I did as it saves multiple file versions. Just have 1 file with multiple scene versions.

safetyman
11-26-2017, 05:54 AM
You ever notice how a lot of these threads invariably point to discussions about Blender? Hmmm... must be something to it.

gar26lw
11-26-2017, 06:29 AM
i notice how they point to anything but lightwave next

prometheus
11-26-2017, 06:45 AM
Ctrl+UpArrow, not exactly difficult, toggles the viewport to fullscreen. Chaging the UI is a doddle, do it once, save theat as startup and you have your custom layouts. Two minute job, if that.

Itīs probably a bit more than that, at least from how some other aspects of the UI works, I loath the outliner for working with cameras, lights and objects, same with modoīs shader tree....compared how it is always in the same place in Lightwave, camera, light, actor/object..then action, I still think lightwave has the best setup of the major 3d softwareīs when it comes to a "stage" but it may be a different topic maybe...not so much about having two seperate apps/or workspaces.

Surrealist.
11-26-2017, 07:07 AM
Itīs probably a bit more than that, at least from how some other aspects of the UI works, I loath the outliner for working with cameras, lights and objects, same with modoīs shader tree....compared how it is always in the same place in Lightwave, camera, light, actor/object..then action, I still think lightwave has the best setup of the major 3d softwareīs when it comes to a "stage" but it may be a different topic maybe...not so much about having two seperate apps/or workspaces.

Actually there is quite a lot under the hood here. The Outliner can be more of a data manager. It can display everything from the Scenes in the file to the Blender file itself as well as data blocks. And having access to the Blender File is how you can manage things such as manage image files (delete all of them for example in one go) as well as manage data paths.

When you get into more complex workflows these can become very vital to managing your production. If a link to an external file is broken you can fix that in the Data Block view for example. When you get into referencing, this is good to know. And team environments increase the complexity.

Regarding Workspaces and Scenes go. Think of Scenes as, well Scenes. If you have several assets in a file. Lets say camera, lights and so on, as well as many props and characters, you can easily manage these by having them linked between Scenes. You could then have a master Layout Scene that has all of the elements in it for a shot. You could (although I don't like to do this) have several Scenes in one file for several camera angles and shots. Each exporting frames to a unique directory and file name etc.

But regardless if you set up shots or not in each Scene the assets such as props and environments could all be linked from other Scenes. And you can go back to those Scenes where there is no animation or anything else and update those props. They would update in the master scene as well. And of course there is linking. These assets could be linked from other files as well. And also assets can be copied between scene rather than linked. If a copy you can have unique versions of each on in each scene. And this is what you would want for cameras.

Now where workspaces come in, you could set up each Scene with its own configuration. And this is completely customizable - within the limits of what is possible with the current interface. But say for modeling you could have just the asset and the windows you want open and configured for that. Or UV or whatever.

Then there are groups. Another way to conveniently link between scenes, files or just for good organization as well as group instances to save ram.

We have not even talked about render layers yet.....:)

jeric_synergy
11-26-2017, 10:19 AM
It's not like Workspaces are some Modo innovation: lots of apps have them, conspicuously several Adobe products, including the heavy hitters.

It appears the Blender term for this is "Screen", including "Game Logic", "Motion Tracking", and "Scripting". I'm reasonably sure whipping up a modeling-centric one wouldn't be too difficult, as Colkai points out. Giving that 1980's UI style. :\

My point is, I rarely see them being trotted out and used: people just seem to stick to the default Startup screen, even though it's no beauty-contest winner. And this is true for all apps: After Effect, PShop, etc. I have seen them used in C4D, particularly for animation tasks, where it gives priority to the c4d equivalent to the Graph Editor.

Surrealist.
11-26-2017, 10:27 AM
That is a "workspace". Think of Modo's stuff as workrooms. And yes some other apps have those too. You can configure the interface in Blender to have certain screens available. But with Scenes you can create rooms with isolated assets as well as screens that you enable. I think, though I am not sure to what extent, 2.8 is going to take workspaces to another level. And they are going to introduce Templates which supposedly will be like Blender default start up files that only load a focused tool set for certain tasks. I have argued that it would be better not to have this hard-wired. But rather just allow us to chose what tools are available in the interface.

Rayek
11-26-2017, 10:29 AM
Giving that 1980's UI style. :\



Which is easily corrected by picking a different visual theme. Given that 2.79 includes 16 different themes... And more can be found on the web.

jeric_synergy
11-26-2017, 10:49 AM
Which is easily corrected by picking a different visual theme. Given that 2.79 includes 16 different themes... And more can be found on the web.

I was referring to LW-style "split-ness", not theme.

Amerelium
11-27-2017, 01:23 AM
Stop encouraging me to learn new things and expand my comfort zone!

"Stop confusing me with your logic"

- Richard Castle