PDA

View Full Version : LW 2018 - "Shape" primitive question



Axis3d
02-19-2018, 02:36 PM
Do the new "Shape" primitives act like the old hypervoxels (surface), in the sense that they can blob together (like the T-1000 in T2). I really like the way they look and can be textured, but can they be made to behave like two drops of liquid that come close to each other, then form one blob. Or pull apart to form two? Or do we have to use the legacy hypervoxels to do this?

lertola2
02-19-2018, 06:17 PM
No shapes are objects not volumes. So, yes, you would have to use hypervoxels to get that effect.

prometheus
02-20-2018, 12:45 AM
No shapes are objects not volumes. So, yes, you would have to use hypervoxels to get that effect.

Are you sure...just skimmed them briefly.
They do have in limited detail..which leads me to think they are volumetric.
Not sure if they blend as hypervoxel per primitive shape..
I do know that they do not work with particles though...you would have to instance them.

prometheus
02-20-2018, 03:07 PM
Confirmed, I see no way for the primitive shapes to have a blending mode ala old hypervoxels.

after some thoughts about the primitive shapes in general, my own conclusion of itīs workflow is bad, it suffers from the trending dismantling of good Easy fast acess workflow in the UI, as you have with the new volumetrics..lacking the texture access directly instead of jumping in to nodes for the primordal stuff, same as the light is lacking the direct access of changing light falloffs as we could in the old system, nodes are nice and powerful if implemented right, but making the wonderful fast and easy approach, a trademark of lightwave ..now inaccessable in this 2018 release, isnīt encouraging.

So what we got with the primitive shapes, a newbie comes along and add a null, make it a primitive shape...and where does he go for applying textures? firstly he would need to read the manual, not that he could simply just assume a texture would be there like with hypervoxels or something, how should a newbie assume or even guess that a texture can be applied in the surface tab, and not only that..when he goes to the surface tab, there are no texture there, unless entering nodes.

The lightwave team really needs to rethink what they are doing right now in terms of workflow, just get these simple basic stuff UP front as they used to be and as the Should be, a texture button in the primitive shape attribute settings, once clicked the connection should be hooked to some texture, with an option to change any texture, if that can not be done direcly in a drop down list.

Positives about the primitive shape, great unlimited detail for all kinds of things, without any stretching artifacts issues that comes with displaced geometry at some point, and unlike old hypervoxels..any new material can be applied, and working in sync with other materials.

gerry_g
02-20-2018, 04:13 PM
I like the the new nodal lights they are orders of magnitude better than the old way, can do more and can achieve more, things I could never have dreamt of doing before, same goes for volumetric shapes, they will hold the sort of high frequency detail that a mesh won't, just because they are not meta and can't blob together does not undercut their value. Besides how is texturing in the node editor any less usable than what was done previously

prometheus
02-21-2018, 01:53 AM
I like the the new nodal lights they are orders of magnitude better than the old way, can do more and can achieve more, things I could never have dreamt of doing before, same goes for volumetric shapes, they will hold the sort of high frequency detail that a mesh won't, just because they are not meta and can't blob together does not undercut their value. Besides how is texturing in the node editor any less usable than what was done previously

I thought I was clear and gave an extensive description on why the workflow is bad..not what you actually can do with the new volumetrics lights.
But there are some things..sprite s in volumetric lights...They removed that..and i dare to state they were way faster..and easier to work with texturing than the new lights.

The old distant light could be volumetric.
.The new distant light do NOT work with the new volumetrics scattering.

Regarding "how texturing in node editor is any less usable than was done previously" that is not what I described...it isnīt much less usable, except all the dpont rman collection in nodes do not work, with the exception for you can acess some of it through the layer node, but not the node versions themself.

What I said is that basic functions as adding a texture in volumetric lights, light falloff, new volumetric primitives, displacement...Requires jumping in to node editor for the basic functions that should already be connected with a millisecond workflow change when you simply scale a value slider or choose a texture in a drop down list, the workflow in many places has changed in a whole new ..you have to do it in nodes philosphy, and I really do not like that, it can not be excused by saying..but itīs so powerful..which is irrellevant in comparison to how fast it could be changed for simpler stuff, there is no way around it..the old workflow for "Basic functions" was way faster ..and apart from that easier for any newbie to get going.
A texture drop down for primitive shape, wouldnīt be so bad, wether or not primitive shapes is intended or not as replacement for hv surfaces metablob...I donīt think it was.

Donīt get me wrong..what we can do with the new primitive shapes is expanding on our possibilities in that way, but the general workflow of acessing things has taken a beating due to the new structure, if it continuous like this..we may up having to rebuild or lightwave software with code nodes, it will be extremely powerful, but extremely difficult to work with and get a lightwave software by your own design..to itīs extreme, they can just give us the code and let us write it all from scratch ..as we want it eyh....silly perhaps, but nodes for simpler stuff isnīt artist friendly, I dare to state that to be valid for most artist actually, nodes are powerful in other ways..but not in all ways, so what we need it the best of the old workflow combined with nodal power, and previous lightwave wasnīt directly out in the wrong direction.

There are wiz guys who can do magic with nodes, but wouldnīt even they prefer to have hypertexture directly accessable but with a hook to nodes when needed, wouldnīt you like to have a light falloff slider directly the old way, but with optional node editor? beats me why some folks comes up with excuses of ..nodes are so powerful, thatīs not the point.

gerry_g
02-21-2018, 04:04 AM
I'm crap at nodes and I share your pain, but if I am forced to use them for just about everything sooner or later my skill level will improve, I remember when I first used LW around fifteen years ago I was crap at texturing in the surface editor.

prometheus
02-21-2018, 04:25 AM
I'm crap at nodes and I share your pain, but if I am forced to use them for just about everything sooner or later my skill level will improve, I remember when I first used LW around fifteen years ago I was crap at texturing in the surface editor.

I do hope that you do not insinuate that I am as crappy with nodes. .when you refer to share my pain :)

I wouldn't place myself as finding node's that difficult. .I think I can handle myself with them in both blender. ..Lightwave and houdini. ..but that is not the point..

Again..it's the change of workflow for the basic functions that I feel they are dismantling the old good concept of fast easy access. .not how you work in nodes on general.
You could for instance check the principle bsdf and anisotropy. .It requires you to enter nodes and add projection inputs to the material to get anisotrophy to work with out artifacts. .that function should be hooked to the shader by default..In blender you can apply this directly within the shader..but it takes longer time to do it in Lightwave. .unless of course saving a preset.
But there you go..same with volumetrics..required to enter nodes ..search for the texture ..add it..then connect it just to get a texture going...compare that to choosing a texture in old has. .
Changing light falloff...fast and easy with old lights. .now the new light falloff. ..much more hassle.
And changing particle variation size for volumetrics...that function isn't implemented the same way..now you have to do it with nodes. .or switching interface to emitter plus minus vacation.

It all gives an impression that the current team lacks a sense..or haven't had time to be careful about the workflow in many areas...They have made some good changes though.

jwiede
02-22-2018, 02:34 PM
It's more an issue of "discoverability" (and "visibility", for more experienced users). There's nothing in the surface editor UI which suggests to users that texturing must be added via nodes, yet clearly some surfacing parameters do NOT require nodal manipulation. As a result, there's this big learning "cliff" the second the user wishes to go past basic coloration & attributes, without the UI itself providing much in the way of direction for "next steps" beyond the listed "basic" surface attributes.

In order to understand even basic attributes about a textured surface (such as what texture assets are used where), the user not only has to open the surface editor, but also open the surface's node editor, and then the texture node's attributes, just to see what assets are used. At least having those "T" and "E" boxes (in prior versions) quickly let users access textures and envelopes present in a surface, as well as providing them quick access to see the details and assets used. Now, all the user can see is that nodes are involved, and finding out the same level of info as in prior versions requires quite a bit more digging around inside the nodes themselves (which also presumes the user "understands" the node flow, which isn't an entirely safe presumption given canned nodal presets, etc.)

If the devs want to focus primarily on nodes, that's fine, but then don't hide the nodes away, have them immediately visible as part of opening a entity's properties. Instead of futzing around showing a rather incomplete set of "basic surface attributes", just immediately open a nodal overview with the per-node attributes visible below the overview. Otherwise, if you are going to show a bunch of basic attributes like diffuse, specular, etc. then also directly indicate in that UI (via "T" boxes or whatever) when there are textures associated with those attributes (and upon clicking the indicator, open the node editor focused on the relevant texture node).

This continued obscuring of assets and interconnections ever-deeper in the Layout UI must end. The UI must become "broader not deeper" for purposes of accessing and manipulating assets and interconnections, in order to improve UX/workflow efficiency. Getting to texture details is now three or more layers deep in the UI, which is a PITA for anyone trying to assess what assets are used by which surfaces (or worse, make general changes to those attributes). The amount of UI "navigation" required to do so in LW2018 for even a modest scene of 10+ objects with textures is painfully time-consuming, and generally inefficient UX/workflow.

prometheus
02-22-2018, 03:23 PM
This continued obscuring of assets and interconnections ever-deeper in the Layout UI must end.

Agreed. ..and with all the rest you said..no need to quote it all.

Dan Ritchie
02-22-2018, 04:09 PM
I suspect shape primatives are actually distance field primitives. Maybe someone on the development team could clear up how they work.