PDA

View Full Version : Annoyed by Lightwave 2018



Aggi
02-11-2018, 10:16 AM
Hi there,

is someone like me annoyed by Lightwave 2018?

I build up a bunch of models (Star Trek) an I loaded the old scenes and objects into the new Lightwave 2018. The result:

Surfaces changed
Volumetric lights are gone
Hypervoxels preferences and results changed
Render preferences changed

Ok, I said to me: Let's try to correct the surfaces and built up new volumtric lights. But everything I tried I can't get near to the old result. Maybe someone has a suggestion for me (see image)...

Aggi (Georg Angelakis)

140063
Old scene loaded in new Lightwave 2018. Lights are gone or have wrong intensity.

140065
Here I tried to build up new VLights, but whatever I try I see the reflection of the Light on the model.

prometheus
02-11-2018, 11:32 AM
Hi there,

is someone like me annoyed by Lightwave 2018?

I build up a bunch of models (Star Trek) an I loaded the old scenes and objects into the new Lightwave 2018. The result:

Surfaces changed
Volumetric lights are gone
Hypervoxels preferences and results changed
Render preferences changed

Ok, I said to me: Let's try to correct the surfaces and built up new volumtric lights. But everything I tried I can't get near to the old result. Maybe someone has a suggestion for me (see image)...

Aggi (Georg Angelakis)

140063
Old scene loaded in new Lightwave 2018. Lights are gone or have wrong intensity.

140065
Here I tried to build up new VLights, but whatever I try I see the reflection of the Light on the model.

You really need to be aware of what Lightwave 2018 has gone through..with respect to a new renderer, new surfaces, new lights...very different, you simply can not expect surfaces not to change, simple as that.
Lights are completly new in 2018, thus do not excpect old scenes to produce the same output..you need to rework old scenes.

It sounds you really arenīt aware of what has been going on these years with a very drastic change in Lightwave?

volumetric lights ala old lightwave doesnīt exist anymore, you would have to rework any such type of light to work within the global scattering volumetric settings.

jwiede
02-11-2018, 02:55 PM
Hi there,

is someone like me annoyed by Lightwave 2018?

I build up a bunch of models (Star Trek) an I loaded the old scenes and objects into the new Lightwave 2018. The result:
...
Volumetric lights are gone

There appears to be a bug in LW2018.0.1 on Mac (possibly Windows as well, can't check atm), where even if marked as "Affect Volumetrics", lights won't actually generate volumetric effects unless "Intensity Falloff" is set to "Inv distance^2". If you set falloff to "Off", they just behave like regular lights.

It's possible your lights are coming in with "Intensity Falloff" set to "Off", try changing to "Inv distance^2" and see if that causes them to re-appear. Also, if you're seeing the same broken behavior on Windows LW2018.0.1, please let me know.

Hope this helps!

jwiede
02-11-2018, 03:10 PM
volumetric lights ala old lightwave doesnīt exist anymore, you would have to rework any such type of light to work within the global scattering volumetric settings.

Per-VLight scattering medium color/texture settings were an immensely powerful tool for VFX in LW. Limiting customers to a single scattering medium coloring/texturing scene-wide greatly reduces volumetric lights' utility and flexibility -- and that IS annoying.

prometheus
02-11-2018, 03:59 PM
Per-VLight scattering medium color/texture settings were an immensely powerful tool for VFX in LW. Limiting customers to a single scattering medium coloring/texturing scene-wide greatly reduces volumetric lights' utility and flexibility -- and that IS annoying.

I agree on that one, mind you..the volumetri lights also had a sprite mode, which I often used for nebula gas in the backgrounds, I donīt think I can do that in the similar way, with such speed as it delivered.

gar26lw
02-11-2018, 04:33 PM
The usual reply to this sort of question is just use 2015, esp. on facebook lw wiki. :P

Maybe the old renderer will be added as an option in the render settings at some point?

shrox
02-11-2018, 05:17 PM
Well, contradicting my previous statement on another thread, I think I am going to wait on upgrading.

prometheus
02-11-2018, 06:01 PM
The usual reply to this sort of question is just use 2015, esp. on facebook lw wiki. :P

Maybe the old renderer will be added as an option in the render settings at some point?

Unfortunately, we have a lot of things broken or simply changed ..removed.
Volumetric lights as they act now with gloal scattering is nice, but optional effect volumetric lights per light and sprites is something I still wanted to have, extremely fast and easy to set up volumetric gas nebs in 2015, simply not as fast and smooth to do now.

went back to try a bit with lw 2015old hypervoxels, and actually using viper for preview hypertexture effects, viper seem all gone now, so that is a bit of missing as well, VPR doesnt refresh that fast and easy with a preveiw window play and replay, granted it may not be compared to full renderer, but I always though it was nice to try out various speed effects.

to note is that we can not use the new volumetric on point clusters, it wonīt work on that, so you are left with either employing the old hypervoxels on that in 2018, the new primitive shapes with unlimited detail and such is nice, but you can not use that on point clusters either, you would have to instance them on particles, so any kind of point on terrain then trying to make rocks with them that way wont work on points, and these new primitive shape are extremely slow to render with GI on, sort of acceptable without it..but not with GI I think.

new surface stuff is very nice, though they need to hook anisotropy with a premade projection, if I work with blender and principled bsdf, itīs working from scratch, if you are a product visualizer, 2018 may be for you though due to the nice surfacing and the new path tracer, though being a bit slow and noisy.
Then again, blender seem equally equipped for product renders, equally nice and maybe faster with cycles and easier to control noise,for no cost at all
I think Lighwave holds the upper hand though when it comes to light types and sampled lights and volumetric lights globally.

I need to try out the old space jockey scene in lightwave 2015 64 bit, in 2018 the open gl movement when moving camera is very fast and smooth, so I will have to compare against 2015 and itīs performance.
the new volumetric primitive is nice to some degree, more realistic shading and assymmetry, but on the otherhand...harder to set up textures for it, and the provided sample content shows small scale volumetrics, and I am beginning to suspect why that is, which is that it simply doesīt scale very well to more real to life sizing, not in quality and not with decent speed.

prometheus
02-11-2018, 06:06 PM
Well, contradicting my previous statement on another thread, I think I am going to wait on upgrading.

Probably me too, I will make some suggestions for them, and maybe follow what will happen to the next release, with the geo engine and intergration, new modeling tools or not, weight paint and visualistion or not, ui overhaul or not, some tabs are simply unreadable now, the node visualization is quite poor compared to blender or houdini, modo.

plus up for the skin shader, prinipled shaders in general, and some of the lighting, but too much broken for my kind of liking.

Chris S. (Fez)
02-11-2018, 06:16 PM
Resources are limited and NewTek is headed in the right direction. Keep moving forward. Expand and optimize and simplify the new renderer. The new lighting and shading is superb.

erikals
02-11-2018, 06:37 PM
from what i read the part-rewrite was a Massive amount of work.

LW2018 does have drawbacks here and there, still, it looks like lots of new fancy code was added.

we'll just have to wait a bit for the final touches.

personally i'm mostly interested in what took place "under the hood"
hope to see modeling features in Layout soon.
a start > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRCv4TakYQg

shrox
02-11-2018, 07:28 PM
Don't worry, I'm not dating two 3d programs at the same time. I do have 3d mistress however. We both know what it is, nothing serious, I'm just using it for exporting to 3ds...

There is a naughty joke in there somewhere, the parts are all there, you put it together.

jwiede
02-11-2018, 10:30 PM
I agree on that one, mind you..the volumetri lights also had a sprite mode, which I often used for nebula gas in the backgrounds, I donīt think I can do that in the similar way, with such speed as it delivered.

Yep, the VLight sprite mode was another very useful tool for VFX. I was kind of shocked, given how much LW is/was used in space stuff, to see how much the new engine limits VLights, all things considered. Sucks when you cannot easily use VLights as weapons fire, glowy stuff, etc. within the same scene (they typically relied on having different volumetric scattering medium settings for the different uses). Really don't get why they thought that particular limitation would be acceptable.

jwiede
02-11-2018, 11:38 PM
hope to see modeling features in Layout soon.
a start > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRCv4TakYQg

Hardly, that's just point-level deformation. There was that SculptMesh demo plugin that could do the same in 2015 (and earlier, IIRC). Even the new plugin can only deform existing points, it still can't create or delete em (per DeformableMesh capabilities in SDK). It's a useful plugin, don't get me wrong, it appears to finally give a good method for producing pose-space corrective deformations -- but that was doable prior as well (somewhat anyway), the UX was just a lot less friendly.

When/if SDK APIs for MutableMesh are exposed, then it'll be a "first step" towards viable modeling in Layout. Point-deformation of meshes in Layout is neither new, nor "modeling" in any practical sense.

marchermitte
02-12-2018, 01:55 PM
Maybe the old renderer will be added as an option in the render settings at some point?
That's what I hope, and what I thought would be the case.

Rayek
02-12-2018, 03:54 PM
Maybe the old renderer will be added as an option in the render settings at some point?

They can't, it seems. Too many architectural changes, it was said - which is a crying shame, in my opinion. It complicates the transition for veterans, and limits the flexibility of Lightwave as an all-purpose render tool. The old render engine is still quite outstanding for a lot of work, in particular for animation. The path tracer: not so much at this point. In a year or two it will have improved, hopefully.

The older render engine kept me bound to Lightwave for a long time. The new path tracer, while it has potential, is unfinished and simply can't compete with what is currently available. The old render engine has unique advantages which sets it apart from all the path tracers in the market. LW 2018 lost that advantage - just one more in a long list of path tracers. And one without a GPU option, which is BAD. No other way stating this.

The lack of GPU support is a mistake. Not sure if NT devs will be able to remedy this - programmers are hard to find for GPU render coding, and harder to hold on to. Aside from this, the render engine code must be rewritten from scratch for GPU rendering, so I don't see this happen - might in a year or four, but probably never. And established path tracers have been adding or are in the process of adding simultaneous hybrid GPU/CPU rendering.

LW 2018's new path tracer lacks a number of features, is still unfinished, and the lack of GPU support make it a somewhat lackluster proposition. At this point I still feel the 'old' Lightwave render engine stands out more as a competitive render engine for production work.

I still don't understand the need for NT to re-invent the wheel. Cycles or ProRender could have been integrated instead. But hey, time will tell.

Dodgy
02-12-2018, 09:31 PM
Unfortunately, we have a lot of things broken or simply changed ..removed.
Volumetric lights as they act now with gloal scattering is nice, but optional effect volumetric lights per light and sprites is something I still wanted to have, extremely fast and easy to set up volumetric gas nebs in 2015, simply not as fast and smooth to do now.

You do know you can set up different textures in nodes for each light? The Volumetric Scattering colour is just like a multiplier, and set to white the colours of the individual lights come through..

Dodgy
02-12-2018, 09:33 PM
Same scene with a yellow Scattering Colour.
140087

JamesCurtis
02-13-2018, 07:36 AM
Could this be used for animated textures using an amimation file like an mp4 or image sequence?

prometheus
02-13-2018, 10:59 AM
You do know you can set up different textures in nodes for each light? The Volumetric Scattering colour is just like a multiplier, and set to white the colours of the individual lights come through..

Yes I do , which I pointed out to jweide on my first reply in the thread regarding this as well, though my comment in This very thread was a bit poorly formulated, and shouldnīt be read as I wished the new volumetric lights was controllable that way, they are to some degree but not fully if you read the thread, what I ment that I wanted additional lights ..as they were in old lightwave with sprite options as well, just because the new volumetrics despite itīs texturing options...can not compete with the speed and easy of use when setting up lasers or nebula gas backdrops.

So I simply think we need to Get back on track on some unique features that enhanced Lightwave before ...such as very fast volumetric lights in sprite mode for instance, itīs totally thrown out of the picture, and ergo one of the features that made lightwave great.

http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?156049-No-per-light-volumetric-medium-coloring-texturing-etc-anymore-!


http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=140078&d=1518462948

prometheus
02-13-2018, 11:06 AM
Could this be used for animated textures using an amimation file like an mp4 or image sequence?

Canīt imagine why it not should be possible, but loading an mp4 file, wouldnīt recommend that, png seqences must still work I think, so simply use that, procedural textures like ripple and some other are animateable, so shouldnīt be a problem there either.

jbrookes
02-13-2018, 12:45 PM
They can't, it seems. Too many architectural changes, it was said - which is a crying shame, in my opinion. It complicates the transition for veterans, and limits the flexibility of Lightwave as an all-purpose render tool. The old render engine is still quite outstanding for a lot of work, in particular for animation. The path tracer: not so much at this point. In a year or two it will have improved, hopefully.

The older render engine kept me bound to Lightwave for a long time. The new path tracer, while it has potential, is unfinished and simply can't compete with what is currently available. The old render engine has unique advantages which sets it apart from all the path tracers in the market. LW 2018 lost that advantage - just one more in a long list of path tracers. And one without a GPU option, which is BAD. No other way stating this.

The lack of GPU support is a mistake. Not sure if NT devs will be able to remedy this - programmers are hard to find for GPU render coding, and harder to hold on to. Aside from this, the render engine code must be rewritten from scratch for GPU rendering, so I don't see this happen - might in a year or four, but probably never. And established path tracers have been adding or are in the process of adding simultaneous hybrid GPU/CPU rendering.

LW 2018's new path tracer lacks a number of features, is still unfinished, and the lack of GPU support make it a somewhat lackluster proposition. At this point I still feel the 'old' Lightwave render engine stands out more as a competitive render engine for production work.

I still don't understand the need for NT to re-invent the wheel. Cycles or ProRender could have been integrated instead. But hey, time will tell.


So true. I couldn't have said it better.

prometheus
02-13-2018, 01:43 PM
So true. I couldn't have said it better.

Compared to using blender cycles and path tracing, I feel more comfortable with blender Path tracer nowadays, and it seems faster as well, especially when using GPU
That is a i7-6700 3.40 Ghz
32gb ram, ssd disk
and gtx 1080 GPU

Needs a lot of polishing, I get the impression it simple wasnīt ready for release, but forced to be released due to the long wait and silence it seems.

But something that worries my quite a lot, that is the Change of workflow philosophy, going more and more nodal, I see nothing wrong with "Optional" nodal control for full power, but it should kill the lightwave philosophy of not getting in the way for the artist or the speed workflow..which I feel they kind of have broken with requiring nodes for simple textures in volumetrics, both on volumetric primitives, volumetric lights.

Dontīget me wrong about the new volumetric lights, I like them very much for what they can do in some circumstances, but the removal of volumetric sprite lights is very sad, and the way we could enable texture and have full focus on that texture layer system with adding, unchecking, blending, reorder texture effects directly in the volumetric light sprite..and with unparalleled speed compared to only volumetrics now.

This is a direction I feared would happen and seem to have manifested itself with the new change, not the direction I wished.
There is positives for me as well with this new release, refering to more realistic lighting and materials so you can get easier what you need in that regards..but I really am suspecious of how the workflow is handled, itīs gonna be very hard to decide if this is what I wanted and..what need I will have it for, and if the cost can motivate it nowadays with blender gaining momentum.

The image above..donīt think I could get close in neither quality or speed with lightwave 2018 if I would try that image.

Paul_Boland
02-13-2018, 08:19 PM
Lightwave 2018’s new engine renders decades of past work, and scenes, problematic to use. Load them in and lights and surfaces are different. Having to try and rework old scenes to match their previous looks is a nightmare. And the new render engine is slower because you have to increase render passes to try and get clear clean renders, never had that problem with old Lightwave.

And the node editor interface has taken over a lot of areas, from texturing to lighting. So many inputs, so many outputs, I’m lost!!

Lightwave 2018 has hindered workflow in a big way. It’s a shame because for an upgrade, it feels like a downgrade.

samurai_x
02-13-2018, 10:08 PM
Lightwave 2018’s new engine renders decades of past work, and scenes, problematic to use. Load them in and lights and surfaces are different. Having to try and rework old scenes to match their previous looks is a nightmare. And the new render engine is slower because you have to increase render passes to try and get clear clean renders, never had that problem with old Lightwave.

And the node editor interface has taken over a lot of areas, from texturing to lighting. So many inputs, so many outputs, I’m lost!!

Lightwave 2018 has hindered workflow in a big way. It’s a shame because for an upgrade, it feels like a downgrade.


Yeah it would have been better if they added a gpu renderer with lightwave 2015 renderer still intact for this latest version of lw.
Best of both world having a fast gpu renderer and bonus of backward compatibility.
Totally wrong direction imho.

tyrot
02-14-2018, 02:50 AM
They can't, it seems. Too many architectural changes, it was said - which is a crying shame, in my opinion. It complicates the transition for veterans, and limits the flexibility of Lightwave as an all-purpose render tool. The old render engine is still quite outstanding for a lot of work, in particular for animation. The path tracer: not so much at this point. In a year or two it will have improved, hopefully.

The older render engine kept me bound to Lightwave for a long time. The new path tracer, while it has potential, is unfinished and simply can't compete with what is currently available. The old render engine has unique advantages which sets it apart from all the path tracers in the market. LW 2018 lost that advantage - just one more in a long list of path tracers. And one without a GPU option, which is BAD. No other way stating this.

The lack of GPU support is a mistake. Not sure if NT devs will be able to remedy this - programmers are hard to find for GPU render coding, and harder to hold on to. Aside from this, the render engine code must be rewritten from scratch for GPU rendering, so I don't see this happen - might in a year or four, but probably never. And established path tracers have been adding or are in the process of adding simultaneous hybrid GPU/CPU rendering.

LW 2018's new path tracer lacks a number of features, is still unfinished, and the lack of GPU support make it a somewhat lackluster proposition. At this point I still feel the 'old' Lightwave render engine stands out more as a competitive render engine for production work.

I still don't understand the need for NT to re-invent the wheel. Cycles or ProRender could have been integrated instead. But hey, time will tell.

dude you have just nailed it..

Snosrap
02-14-2018, 09:19 PM
Lightwave 2018’s new engine renders decades of past work, and scenes, problematic to use. Load them in and lights and surfaces are different. Having to try and rework old scenes to match their previous looks is a nightmare. And the new render engine is slower because you have to increase render passes to try and get clear clean renders, never had that problem with old Lightwave.

And the node editor interface has taken over a lot of areas, from texturing to lighting. So many inputs, so many outputs, I’m lost!!

Lightwave 2018 has hindered workflow in a big way. It’s a shame because for an upgrade, it feels like a downgrade.

Don't load old scenes. :) The new render engine and shading is way more powerful (yes it seems a tad slower and there can be some fireflies) but man is it gorgeous.

Marander
02-15-2018, 01:03 AM
Don't load old scenes. :) The new render engine and shading is way more powerful (yes it seems a tad slower and there can be some fireflies) but man is it gorgeous.

It's below average. Considering all factors (speed, quality, capability etc) it's the weakest of all render engines I have. So far I've not seen a single 2018 render that stands out or cannot be done better. Besides noise and fireflies, conductors seems the worst part in my opinion.

gar26lw
02-15-2018, 02:27 AM
It's below average. Considering all factors (speed, quality, capability etc) it's the weakest of all render engines I have. So far I've not seen a single 2018 render that stands out or cannot be done better. Besides noise and fireflies, conductors seems the worst part in my opinion.

which one is the best?

samurai_x
02-15-2018, 03:47 AM
I'm guessing since he's a cinema4d user, redshift, vray, octane are obviously faster than lw 2018 renderer. The only advantage with lw is that you get 999 render nodes. So buy 999 computers with lw. :D

tyrot
02-15-2018, 03:53 AM
Don't load old scenes. :) The new render engine and shading is way more powerful (yes it seems a tad slower and there can be some fireflies) but man is it gorgeous.

slower and fireflies ... no gpu ... ... ... no comment ...

fishhead
02-15-2018, 04:14 AM
I'm guessing since he's a cinema4d user, redshift, vray, octane are obviously faster than lw 2018 renderer. The only advantage with lw is that you get 999 render nodes. So buy 999 computers with lw. :D

Well, you will have to admit the gpu rendering is not the holy grail (yet) as you just cannot simply throw everything a production demands at it and be done, so cpu rendering still has its place and also for the price of one 1080Ti you easily get a decent dual multi core Xeon racknode with much, much less power consumption that is way more flexible in regards to tasks it can handle...

jwiede
02-15-2018, 04:49 AM
Well, you will have to admit the gpu rendering is not the holy grail (yet) as you just cannot simply throw everything a production demands at it and be done, so cpu rendering still has its place and also for the price of one 1080Ti you easily get a decent dual multi core Xeon racknode with much, much less power consumption that is way more flexible in regards to tasks it can handle...

With a hybrid engine like Vray or Cycles4D which can take advantage of both CPU & GPU, you get the advantages of either (and both) as needed.

Vray remains a leading competitor across MANY markets, esp. now that Corona tech seems likely to migrate into Vray over time. ChaosGroup are in a great position overall, and are clearly taking steps to ensure they don't fall behind.

fishhead
02-15-2018, 05:09 AM
VrayRT is still a good bit behind the regular version when it comes to feature implementation. Itīs surely promising but just not there yet..

samurai_x
02-15-2018, 05:42 AM
Well, you will have to admit the gpu rendering is not the holy grail (yet) as you just cannot simply throw everything a production demands at it and be done, so cpu rendering still has its place and also for the price of one 1080Ti you easily get a decent dual multi core Xeon racknode with much, much less power consumption that is way more flexible in regards to tasks it can handle...

That depends on the market. Lightwave's market is small studios, freelance, hobbyists. It would have been a better fit to have lightwave 2018 use the versatile 2015's renderer for compatibility with an enhanced compatible gpu renderer.
Lw isn't going to be used in a huge AAA facility for rendering when those facilities can afford top tier renderers and custom renderers anyway.

Marander
02-15-2018, 06:16 AM
which one is the best?

For me Vray (quality and speed), Cycles 4D (particle effects and GPU rendering) and Physical (quality, features). Redshift not yet but definitely on the radar. Corona is rental only unfortunately. iRay is also a nice renderer and works very well hybrid.

Marander
02-15-2018, 06:21 AM
I'm guessing since he's a cinema4d user, redshift, vray, octane are obviously faster than lw 2018 renderer. The only advantage with lw is that you get 999 render nodes. So buy 999 computers with lw. :D

Yes correct. With C4D Studio, in Standard renderer (comparable to LW2015) and Physical I have unlimited render nodes. Then there is the Hardware renderer which can produce acceptable images in no time thanks to newer OpenGL features. With Vray 3.6 I have 10 DR nodes included (but I think it works unlimited via C4D network render which is a big plus for the Cinema integration).

Edit: I haven't really used ProRender yet and as far as I know network rendering is not yet supported. However Maxon just released R19 SP2 yesterday with many ProRender fixes and optimizations so I'll have a look again.

Redshift is definitely the speed king and Arnold the beauty queen with Vray very close. Physical can produce stunning quality and has tons of shaders, procedurals and tweaking possibilities but renders slow.

LW2018 is nowhere close to them in my opinion. It has potential tough and volumetric effects look nice.

Snosrap
02-15-2018, 06:51 AM
It's below average. Considering all factors (speed, quality, capability etc) it's the weakest of all render engines I have. So far I've not seen a single 2018 render that stands out or cannot be done better. Besides noise and fireflies, conductors seems the worst part in my opinion.


slower and fireflies ... no gpu ... ... ... no comment ...

It's the best renderer I've got. :) Most of my rendering is done overnight anyway. I can get to the point of where I want to commit to a render much faster with the new shading and PBR workflow that is new to 2018. That being said we will be investigating Kray3 when/if it eventually ships as well as further investigation of Octane. But for now - this is the best I've got. And it hands down provides prettier output than earlier versions - for me. For a first iteration I think the new renderer is really nice. Does it need refinement - absolutely!

SBowie
02-15-2018, 07:03 AM
This thread is on thin ice. We've had this conversation, and I'm not going to reiterate it in detail. Those who have traditionally been given to negativity have reverted to form; evidently anyone with a positive view must be opposed on each detail, and every competing product on the planet glorified.

My suggestion to those who feel this way is that - if you're not here to make a positive contribution - there are doubtless venues where your views will be welcome. We will not endlessly tolerate posts, threads, or members whose efforts resemble nothing more than a relentless effort to dishearten those who are encouraged by recent progress, eager to learn more about using LW 2018, and to assist one another in doing so. I'm not going to spend time debating this: posts, threads and, if necessary, people are going to start disappearing if this continues.

Skywatcher_NT
02-15-2018, 07:17 AM
This thread is on thin ice. We've had this conversation, and I'm not going to reiterate it in detail. Those who have traditionally been given to negativity have reverted to form; evidently anyone with a positive view must be opposed on each detail, and every competing product on the planet glorified.

My suggestion to those who feel this way is that - if you're not here to make a positive contribution - there are doubtless venues where your views will be welcome. We will not endlessly tolerate posts, threads, or members whose efforts resemble nothing more than a relentless effort to dishearten those who are encouraged by recent progress, eager to learn more about using LW 2018, and to assist one another in doing so. I'm not going to spend time debating this: posts, threads and, if necessary, people are going to start disappearing if this continues.



+1 !!!
Sick of whiners who show up every time just to promote other stuff. Did they ever try the new renderer, other then comparing to Blender or whatever very expensive, power consuming multi GPU setup
testing it with some free archviz scene ?

Schwyhart
02-15-2018, 07:26 AM
No kidding. +1

gar26lw
02-15-2018, 07:26 AM
new renderer is good but needs global shading and faster vpr. miss dpont pixel filter.

now get to work! :-p

SBowie
02-15-2018, 07:33 AM
Did they ever try the new renderer, other then comparing to Blender or whatever very expensive, power consuming multi GPU setup testing it with some free archviz scene ?I understand where it came from, but please do not answer this question and, in consequence, prolong this conversation. I don't care what the answer is - move along, nothing to see here.

shrox
02-15-2018, 07:43 AM
I have a cat.

SBowie
02-15-2018, 07:52 AM
Clearly a person of refined taste.

MichaelT
02-15-2018, 08:06 AM
I love animals.. but I can't be responsible for them given my current erratic life. It wouldn't be fair to them.

samurai_x
02-15-2018, 05:51 PM
Soft like charmin.

shrox
02-15-2018, 06:14 PM
Ok, sorry to up and grab the steering wheel on this thread...but it needed to be done.

Cats! Toonces!

Aggi
02-19-2018, 11:04 AM
Hello together,

After trying and trying to get the right volumetric light I'm about to stop working with Lightwave 2018. Maybe someone can help me and give me a hint on the volumetric lights to get the result I want. Please take a look at the image below.

140191

The upper volumetric lights in Lightwave 9.6 have the following data:

Radius 2,4m
Luminosity 800%
Opacity 0%
Attenuation 25%
Red Shift 0%
Density 50%
No textures

Aggi (Georg Angelakis)

souzou
02-19-2018, 11:22 AM
Hello together,

After trying and trying to get the right volumetric light I'm about to stop working with Lightwave 2018. Maybe someone can help me and give me a hint on the volumetric lights to get the result I want. Please take a look at the image below.

140191

The upper volumetric lights in Lightwave 9.6 have the following data:

Radius 2,4m
Luminosity 800%
Opacity 0%
Attenuation 25%
Red Shift 0%
Density 50%
No textures

Aggi (Georg Angelakis)

Have you turned on volumetric scattering?

140192

Aggi
02-19-2018, 11:35 AM
Yes, I have. But I see you turned down the scattering weight to 10%. So I turned it also down and now I got this:

140193

Much better!!! Thank you very much! But I still have a red "ring" around the yellow light. I try to reduce the scattering weight more.

Aggi (Georg Angelakis) :)

shrox
02-19-2018, 12:48 PM
I used an animated texture for the bussard collectors on mine.

jbrookes
02-25-2018, 03:42 AM
As you're working your way through LightWave 2018, don't forget to request any features that you'd like and to report any bugs that you find. They don't mind duplicate requests. You can email them at [email protected] dot com and at [email protected] dot com. And you can use the nifty reporting agent (oultined in the following video along with a bunch of info about the differences between LW 2015 and 2018 as well as a discussion of the 2018 Preset shelf and Render Panel):

https://youtu.be/xHcAFtqcQFs?t=2476

prometheus
02-25-2018, 05:02 AM
I really donīt see the problem, for me it was super easy, just changed the default light to point, moved it to center, then moved it again with a little offset to the side, went to item array, and arrayed radial 6 times, lowered scattering weight, see images, changed color for each light, done.

for individual falloff, you would have to go in to nodes, or use spherical lights and change the light size.


http://forums.newtek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=140308&d=1519560090