PDA

View Full Version : Dear Newtek/lightwave development group..Please be careful



prometheus
03-21-2018, 12:54 PM
A little call out to Newtek and the Lightwave development team.

I will probably not upgrade this time..mainly becuase of this...

Please be careful about how the workflow is currently changing in lightwave, one of lightwaveīs old strenghts has been ease of use and fast to work with in many cases, what I currently have seen in terms of how the workflow has changed more and more to a REQUIRED nodal editing for what used to be BASIC FUNCTIONS, that is something that doesnīt encourage me to continue to upgrade, and not what I want to see in Lightwave in the future.

That said, I am not unfamiliar with nodes, and I know for instance Deuce Bennet mentioned, do not be scared of nodes, I am definitely not, and I can work them out, but that doesnīt mean statements (Not sure that was the intention) should be made in a similar way, that we should learn nodes etc ..and Have that as an excuse for the future lightwave development to disregard, neglect a good workflow with better access.

Ecactly what has happened is the very thing I was afraid of, a new volumetric system that REQUIRES entering node editor just to get a hypertexture going on, Light falloffs only editable inside node editor instead of a much much faster direct tweaking in a slider in a more open interface.

What is happening now is that every user inevitable will have to work in a way that takes longer to set up, searching for the right node, adding it, connecting it...instead of choosing a direct function in a slider or drop down list, it is counter productive and in fact seems like the initial thinking of the development either has been rushed out, or resources is short on time to implement a better hook to the basic functions.
Nodes are great in someways, but if you argue everything should be nodes, then we would end up with a menu of node editors to build our own interface before getting anything done...maybe a bit of taking it to the extreme, but I do not see why the development should have had the need to change so drasticly, when we actually had better UI access in 2015, with the OPTION TO GO NODAL...rather than REQUIRED.

I love the new lights, and to some degree the new volumetric scattering, the new volumetrics is however not there, it doesnīt do sprites, nor directly working with points, doesnīt do surface modes for liuqids..and despite of it has much better softness, and blending between nulls and have physicly realistic shading...all the samples is provided in very small scale, and when Using more real to life scale for clouds, it is appearant why content scenes are at meter scales, once you go up for more realistic scales, it becomes very very slow...and if you try to balance by raising step size..inevitable it will become too noisy, there is no middle ground where you can get both good speed and quality, so in that sense the old legacy hypervoxel system IN 2018 is faster at larger real life size and getting better noiseless quality, the fact that it may not be as physicly correct as the new system is another issue though, you can still get nice results from the old system.

If lightwave more and more have the tendency to neglect basic functions just going more and more nodal and without that basic hook, then that is not what I want to work with..Especially also since when you compare how you work with nodes and zoom navigate, consider the horrible jagged rubberbands, overlapping nodes when you start with them, and you can not zoom in enough...If working with nodes is a must, then most other software does a much better job att displaying nodes and working with them.

The many tours of silence, and a policy of not disclosing more on where Lightwave will go , especially with modeling and modeling in Layout..makes me uneasy and I do not feel it would be fair to myself to invest in such uncertainty and with that also comes the situation on why Rob suddenly left, and Lino...I can not speculate in why, it can be private reasons just like that..but it all sums up to a seemingly very shaky situation which really doesnīt display a company in good balance.

Another issue I feel bad about, except that I excpected some modeling tools should already be there in layout
since 9.6 I have been upgrading, and I think I will pass this one out, Lightwave environment has always been my favourite, and I loved it because many tools where so easy to acess and fast, in a way that not many other software did, but when that now is changing..I have to look elsewhere.

I am also frustrated how the UI Still havenīt gotten any real useful upgrade, I really loath having to change x,z,y values three times everylittle change I do, where on most other software I can select all the channels and change value One time, and frustration also on how we can not scale UI windows, and many of the tabs can not be readable until you actually click on them.

Please..also be careful with the still remaining UI of having Lights, camera, object..Constantly directly accessable, and placed in the stage at always the same location, that is also what I love about Lightwave...unlike blenders or modos way of using scene lists, or shader tree...with lightwave you know where things are without scrolling in list and without accidently checking something else, so Please..I urge for keeping that and donīt try to go for Trending scene or shader lists, we already have scene editor...just improve on that but keep cameras, lights, objects, navigation ctrls as they are...that is something that makes Lightwave Unique and feeling like a movie stage, not a bulk/ soup of mixed 3d items for you to browse through.

Good luck Lightwave team, I hope this may serve as a note for you guys to consider, and make lightwave a bit better, and maybe take a step back and think abit again about how the workflow can be improved...Even if more and more goes nodal.

Ps...new surfaces and lights are indeed great, but it doesnīt weigh it over more to the positive side..than what I have complained about which goes to more weight on the negative side for me.

SBowie
03-21-2018, 01:09 PM
Oh good - a thread where I can move any similar 'not gonna do it and here's why' posts for easy reference. :)

hrgiger
03-21-2018, 01:55 PM
Oh good - a thread where I can move any similar 'not gonna do it and here's why' posts for easy reference. :)

That sounds awfully dismissive of a what seems like some very constructive criticism coming from a long time customer like Prometheus.

SBowie
03-21-2018, 01:57 PM
I think you must be reading it with a jaundiced eye.

TheLexx
03-21-2018, 02:05 PM
"Not gonna do it" might have seemed a bit dismissive, but we should not disregard the "here's why" in the reply. It looks more like a "famine and feast" thing to me (though I do respect you long time users). :)

hrgiger
03-21-2018, 02:05 PM
Or it could be that I'm surprised that NT isn't seriously expressing serious graciousness or appreciation for anyone taking the time to still give the time of day to say what they'd like to see as a customer after the way they've been handled after the last 3 years instead of comments like that.

SBowie
03-21-2018, 02:21 PM
Prometheus has been a longtime contributor, and has been quite generous in sharing his experiments and reflections as he evaluated LW right up until today. And he did so with consistent civility and respect to the best of my knowledge. As any exchanges he and I have had have always been cordial, I'd be quite surprised if he took offense - especially where none was offered (I find, though, that if one is inclined to look for it, it can always be found).

Keeping any such remarks that might arise over time in a single thread will make it easier to refer to them, as opposed to having them scattered through the forum in some random fashion, which would effectively guarantee that any benefit they might offer would fall by the wayside over time.

This said, I'm not going to let this (or any other) thread degenerate into some long-winded gripe fest for any individual. If someone wishes to say adios and offer their rationale for posterity, they get to do that - once.

prometheus
03-21-2018, 02:32 PM
Prometheus has been a longtime contributor, and has been quite generous in sharing his experiments and reflections as he evaluated LW right up until today. And he did so with consistent civility and respect to the best of my knowledge. As any exchanges he and I have had have always been cordial, I'd be quite surprised if he took offense - especially where none was offered (I find, though, that if one is inclined to look for it, it can always be found).

Keeping any such remarks that might arise over time in a single thread will make it easier to refer to them, as opposed to having them scattered through the forum in some random fashion, which would effectively guarantee that any benefit they might offer would fall by the wayside over time.

This said, I'm not going to let this (or any other) thread degenerate into some long-winded gripe fest for any individual. If someone wishes to say adios and offer their rationale for posterity, they get to do that - once.

This thread was mainly aimed for the Newtek/Lightwave Team...I do not wish for a long debate here, maybe some polite feedback if folks feel similar, it can be closed if moderators so wish without me taking offense, I Just hope they read it and take note for their sake and maybe my and others sake..for a better Lightwave in the future.
I could of course direct a mail directly towards Newtek, so it wouldnīt be as sensitive as it may be here, and further on make a video on what I think Newtek should be careful about regarding the future of Lightwave, and If I get the time, a blog site will maybe pop up with certain remarks and considerations..Heck I may even provide a road map in full dress as a Lightwave dictator :D

I am a customer who cares about what direction Lightwave takes, Please Make Lightwave Great again:D I heard that it helps to mumble such things.

SBowie
03-21-2018, 02:47 PM
This thread was mainly aimed for the Newtek/Lightwave Team...I do not wish for a long debate here, maybe some polite feedback if folks feel similar, it can be closed if moderators so wish without me taking offense, I Just hope they read it and take note for their sake and maybe my and others sake..for a better Lightwave in the future.Exactly how I took it, thanks (and it will not be closed, so long as it continues in the same spirit).

MonroePoteet
03-21-2018, 05:54 PM
In my opinion, the nodal system wouldn't be much of an issue by doing the following (based upon LW2018.0.2):


Implement the F8 Preset shelf in ALL contexts, and provide a good set of Presets
Restore the "T" button (maybe "N" for node input) to all nodal input parameters
Have the "N" button check for an existing input node, creates a good default input if not, hooks it up to the correct nodal input
Have the "N" button bring up the nodal input panel


PRESETS:

Right now, the Surface Editor has a bunch of Presets, accessible by F8. This means the user can get some nice Surfaces without ever opening the Node Editor, but allows them to invoke the Node Editor to see how they are implemented if they want. The availability of Presets on Surfaces implies to me that the Preset shelf architecture could be (and should be, IMO) implemented for any node-based LW item.

When a Null (or other object) is set to Volumetric, pressing F8 would give a reasonably comprehensive set of Presets. Or for a Light, or any other node-based item. The Preset would load up the node network, and the user can learn from it, modify it, etc.

Right now for Volumetric objects, there are no presets which means a new user has to start from scratch. Indeed, it looks like in LW2018.0.2, I can't even *create* Preset libraries or Save presets. "Save Preset" might be implemented as a comprehensive "Save This Node Network and it's Inputs / Outputs", but it'd be organized in Libraries.

THE "N" BUTTON:

There should be a shortcut into the control panel for any of the node-network's various feeds into the nodal inputs. I think LWDG could retreive a lot of usability by reinstating the Texture button (or rename it to N for Nodal-Input button for differentiation) onto the main panel for each node-based item (e.g. Volumetric). Pressing it provides a default node for that nodal input if one doesn't already exist (hooking it up appropriately), and brings up the panel for that added node.

Pressing the "N" (nodal input) button next to any parameter would:


If there isn't an appropriate Scalar, Bump, or Color Layer (or Gradient, or another appropriate default node) already in existence for that nodal input, create one and hook up it's output(s) appropriately


In my case, I almost *always* use a Procedural Turbulence Layer in Bump, Scalar or Color to get a feel for what's going on, so that might be a good default (just my opinion, folks! Sometimes I feel like a One Trick Pony using all those moving Turbulence procedurals! :) )

*Optionally* opens the Node Editor
Bring up the panel for the exiting or created Layer even if the Node Editor isn't brought up


So, as an example, on the Volumetric Object main panel, it'd be great if there was an "N" button next to the "Texture" (having a numeric field there makes no sense at all, IMO). When I press the N button next to the Texture, it *automatically* creates a Procedural Turbulence Scalar layer for the Texture nodal input, hooks the scalar and alpha outputs to Texture and Texture Density, and pops up the Layer panel.

Here's a faked up screen shot:

140817

P.S. oops - grabbed the wrong nodal-input panel for the Emission input, but you get the idea!

As always, just my opinion!
mTp

pixym
03-21-2018, 10:09 PM
Interesting thread.
One think I would like to have in the instance pannel is the rotation step angle on any axis like "old" HD instance instead of struggling with node for such a basic function :(

MarcusM
03-22-2018, 03:15 AM
A little call out to Newtek and the Lightwave development team....

I have 2018 but still using 2015.3. Reason is what you wrote, longer to set up. Nice workflow in my game dev area, where I need many textures and UV, etc. was destroyed.

- Default materials in Modeler is principled BSDF, too dark color to pleasent modeling. So first step is change material and then color. This is many extra steps compare to 2015.3.
- Every new created material in Modeler is by deafult principled BSDF. In General Options should be possibility to change default material.
- In 2018 Texture Editor is missing Use Texture and Remove Texture. Remove Texture clear all settings for each channel what is very usefull. How I can clear all setting for example in Color channel now? By hand or remove all node!

UnCommonGrafx
03-22-2018, 03:58 AM
Surely the moderator has, thus your ability to say what you have.

Hope this same note has been sent DIRECTLY to lwg, through the bug system or what have you.
Posting it here offers more to foment on rather than a fix. Such posts also make the assumption that these things aren't known, aren't being worked on, generally an "aren't" situation is presented.

I appreciate the idea of culling these notes into one place, as has not been done in the past, so to better watch what has been reported vs what has been done.
But then, one has to presume that the same notes have been sent up-the-pipe, as it were, if they were not sent through the feedback system.


The points are valid; the angst that follow are really killing the spirit here. Much more than the moderation.
Robert

Asticles
03-22-2018, 04:33 AM
I'm fine with the node system as it has been left, I would only add a preview node in which to hook any other to have an immediate preview of the whole node chain or, if it is selected, from the material without having to use the vpr material preview.

Keep in mind that in Cinema4d they have been asking for a material node system for a long time because they still use a system like the one that has LW.

It is possible that the old system is faster for simple things, but for advanced materials, nodes are much clearer, versatile and easier to understand. They can also benefit easily from other plugins that add nodal options and procedures.

In my opinion all should be nodal, and referable from other materials and program places.

Regards.

pauland
03-22-2018, 05:38 AM
Just a comment about nodes in the abstract sense.

Individual settings on a particular item is a fast way to go about things, especially when you know what you want and what you are doing. If something has the capability of being setup in a certain way, why not have that direct access without looking at a maze of nodes? I get it.

Nodes however do something different. It's a visual map of what is going on. You get a bigger picture, you get where your setting fits in the bigger picture. You get visual stimulation about how your setup works, so in many ways it can be far more powerful than seeing the setting itself.

A parameter gives you the close-up focused view of a part. A node view gives you the bigger picture and I would say that the node view is the most powerful because it invites creativity. I can understand why the node view may be a bit of a drudge if you have a fixed workflow you are committed to. But then again imagine how quick that workflow could be by saving/loading node nets?

Just an abstract thought.

Chris S. (Fez)
03-22-2018, 05:45 AM
Set nodes up once and import your network. Want to change all values at once? Use a constant node of some kind.

Why the melodrama and weirdness? Start a constructive thread and submit a feature request.

But, sure, more immediate, less clicky workflows like those found in Modeler and refined by 3rd Powers are Lightwavey and always welcome.

Continuum
03-22-2018, 06:21 AM
The nodal workflow is great, I can adjust to it eventually. However an abstraction layer on top wouldn't be a bad idea. I like how the new surfacing has been implemented, you can access the nodes in a list on the panel without opening the graph editor, nice abstraction.

Since XSi and now Houdini nodal workflows have become somewhat a hot topic, everyone seems to be moving in that direction. Sometimes it feels like a fad. I feel like nodal workflows sacrifice directness and speed for flexibility and non destructiveness.

That being said, I love 2018, not complaining. But I can see why some people wouldn't want a completely nodal workflow. But it seems that is where the industry is leaning at this point in time, and Lightwave is a business, so I also understand that aspect.

03-22-2018, 06:59 AM
As to nodes: let the old system live forever within the node systems.

I once thought I wanted nodes everywhere. Still do. But not like Houdini.

I would love a master node view: all nodes are there, like the schematic view, maybe in their own little window, ready to be clicked and opened as needed.
Even better, in this scenario, would be if all nodes could then plug into others across the divide.

For non-nodal works, Relativity takes care of a lot of what folks don't grok about nodes because its all text and math. I think it has been forgotten with the uptake of the fad of the day.

Ztreem
03-22-2018, 07:15 AM
Nodal is great, yes... but not for everything and not only. Sometimes you just don't need to go advanced and just want to add a quick simple texture, why go nodal? This is a UI/UX issue that NT has missed. No body is saying that we should stop to have nodes, just that we need faster and better workflows as LW isn't fast anymore and the competition is running circles around it.

Edit: Maybe I should record a video of the workflow difference between LW and Blender just to show how bad and slow the LW implementation really is.

roboman
03-22-2018, 07:30 AM
Well it's different and has made things more complicated, but on the other hand seems to opened up some options and has claims of working better across different scenes with different lighting setups. I guess my main problem is that I had lots of textures for the old system and have to start over from a small number, making my jobs longer for the next several years. If things do work as much better over different lighting setups, then a couple years from now, when I have a whole bunch of textures again, things will be better and faster then they are at this point. I'm a little surprised that there haven't yet been people posting textures. I'm among those who haven't, so don't have any right to complain. So the main problem I see is that Lightwave is less usable today with lack of premade textures and having to learn a new system, balanced against the promise of it being better after the learning curve and rebuilding of a large texture library.

Of course there is the voice in the back of my head saying they are trying to force me to learn nodes and the natural desire to push back at being forced to do something. I keep working at telling that voice that it's a new toy that I get to play with and learn.

JamesCurtis
03-22-2018, 07:36 AM
I bought into LW 2018, but am keeping 2015.3 for now too since I need to get things to my client quickly. The new node system is too slow and the firefly problem makes animation prohibitive for me, and I agree with those above about the need to reconsider the node system.

NewTek, please rethink some things.

Niko3D
03-22-2018, 07:56 AM
The point for me is: LW 2018 is good, but at the moment it is not competitive with the other standard packages.

raymondtrace
03-22-2018, 08:05 AM
Edit: Maybe I should record a video...

That would be appreciated.

sadkkf
03-22-2018, 08:45 AM
I haven't experimented much with volumetrics yet, but it seems like the preset shelf would be a quick way to apply them without a lot of fuss. At least enough to create a starting point rather than starting from scratch.

Can we save presets or setups in general for everything? If not, maybe that would be helpful.

inkpen3d
03-22-2018, 09:06 AM
I bought into LW 2018, but am keeping 2015.3 for now too since I need to get things to my client quickly. The new node system is too slow and the firefly problem makes animation prohibitive for me, and I agree with those above about the need to reconsider the node system.

NewTek, please rethink some things.

Same for me!

The fireflies mean I can't use LW2018.0.2 for any serious production work. I've ended up wasting too much time trying out various tricks to get rid of the fireflies, but with little or no success. When you've got a tight production schedule this is the last thing that you want to be doing!

This means that I either have the choice of reverting back to using LW2015.3, which nowadays feels like a retrograde step, or instead use Houdini+Redshift, which doesn't suffer from the fireflies problem and wins hands down producing nice clean renders.

As far as I am concerned, LW2018.0.2 is still not production-ready!

prometheus
03-22-2018, 11:03 AM
The nodal workflow is great, I can adjust to it eventually. However an abstraction layer on top wouldn't be a bad idea. I like how the new surfacing has been implemented, you can access the nodes in a list on the panel without opening the graph editor, nice abstraction.

Since XSi and now Houdini nodal workflows have become somewhat a hot topic, everyone seems to be moving in that direction. Sometimes it feels like a fad. I feel like nodal workflows sacrifice directness and speed for flexibility and non destructiveness.

That being said, I love 2018, not complaining. But I can see why some people wouldn't want a completely nodal workflow. But it seems that is where the industry is leaning at this point in time, and Lightwave is a business, so I also understand that aspect.

The issue isn't about nodal or not nodal..it's about how well it is implemented ..UI etc.
And industry standard isn't enough to follow alone..If that standard brings on bad workflow..but again, it doesn't if well implemented.

THIBAULT
03-22-2018, 11:13 AM
The point for me is: LW 2018 is good, but at the moment it is not competitive with the other standard packages.

Yes Niko, totaly unusable for archiviz with decent render time ! Just one solution for working with LW 2018, Octane !

Continuum
03-22-2018, 11:42 AM
The issue isn't about nodal or not nodal..it's about how well it is implemented ..UI etc.
And industry standard isn't enough to follow alone..If that standard brings on bad workflow..but again, it doesn't if well implemented.

I was just contributing my thoughts on nodal. As far as interfaces go, I haven't come across a package I can't adapt to if I set my mind to it. If I understand the design decisions behind an application I am a fast learner.

From my point of view nodal introduces some negatives for me regardless of which package I use, be it Blender or Houdini.

My gripes are not your gripes, I was simply giving my opinion, which I think is relevant to this thread.

jakuzaa
03-22-2018, 11:45 AM
Yes Niko, totaly unusable for archiviz with decent render time ! Just one solution for working with LW 2018, Octane !

Please stop with "totaly unusable" BS. My recent job, 6 min rendertime LW 2018:

Niko3D
03-22-2018, 11:52 AM
Yes Niko, totaly unusable for archiviz with decent render time ! Just one solution for working with LW 2018, Octane !

I agree...but unfortunately not everyone can use Octane. And also it's depend a lot if you are freelance or not and your setup.
But as you said...LW 2018 is almost unusable in archviz, in 1/2hr nowadays you can do render that LW2018 make in 10hr...and higher quality.

Niko3D
03-22-2018, 11:56 AM
Please stop with "totaly unusable" BS. My recent job, 6 min rendertime LW 2018:

Very nice...but 6min?really?...and are you sure your render is High quality standard?
It's not bad at all!...But the time/quality in other engine is better...

And what about interiors?

prometheus
03-22-2018, 11:58 AM
I was just contributing my thoughts on nodal. As far as interfaces go, I haven't come across a package I can't adapt to if I set my mind to it. If I understand the design decisions behind an application I am a fast learner.

From my point of view nodal introduces some negatives for me regardless of which package I use, be it Blender or Houdini.

My gripes are not your gripes, I was simply giving my opinion, which I think is relevant to this thread.

Itīs not really a matter of adapting to UI, itīs more about how fast you can acheive basic functions in how Lightwave use to to it VS How fast you can do it with nodes, believe me...it is many seconds slower in nodes.

We can start a challenge where we record how long time it will take for anyone to jump in to nodes adding texture and connect it VS how long time it will take you to simply add the texture in legacy Hypervoxels.
We an start a challenge how long time it takes to enter nodes, looking for light falloff, connecting it and setting itīs value VS how long time it will take in old lightwave to change light falloff value.

Itīs not about Ones own ability to learn or adapt to nodes, for any given user, I dare to assert that node workflow for these kind of basic stuff is slower..regardless what your level is at, note..that doesnīt mean that certain tasks can be made easier and faster..which it of course can with nodes, but that is really a different entity.
preset nodes with things already setup, well ...we obviously have to wait for that..or do the work on it first.

You donīt have to excuse yourself about giving your opinion, but your gripes vs my gripe isnīt really what it is about...even if you do not find it bothersome or something to gripe about, there is always the question of wether or not the workflow by itself will be slower or not ...regardless of user.

another issue of specific slower workflow, but not really related to nodes...see documentation, where Legacy hypervoxels had speed effects directly accessable just a tab switch time to do ...
Example - Volumetric Primitive Emitter
Introduction To create a smoke plume in 2018 requires a little more work than HyperVoxels in 2015 and before, but the results can be spectacular.

The new volumetrics is also a bit cumbersome to copy and paste settings, and also check uncheck visibility/active state, compared to legacy hvīs...and you can not select other items and move around with the volumetric settings open, you have to select the volumetric item per say, for it to work.

The Lw team may have loads of work left to do on the new volumetrics to get it to become as smooth as hypervoxels was, and also getting all the functions there, if it ever can be that is...and increase speed/quality at large scale, but the render realism is great if you work at low scales, so that is a positive.

Looking forward to see it Evolve, I think I had a small discussion with Anti about the old legacy hv system WITHIN 2018.. actually being much faster than the new Volumetrics in 2018, he returned with a misunderstood
result where he compared with old 2015 hv renderings vs the new system, and that was not what I refered too, though Anti for some reason never returned to that question when I explained it...hoping he is busy to improve the new volumetrics.

So just to note, the old hv system in 2018 is very fast..and allows for overlapping hv instances which we couldnīt do in 2015, so that is sort of good.

One question that bothers me, that is if nodal texturing passing through nodes ..if they by nature of being processed through nodal setups, becomes slower than standard layering textures..wether it be in various channels ..surfacing, displacement, volumetrics etc.. I think I have gotten that sense that they in fact do get slower, but can not say for sure.

prometheus
03-22-2018, 12:08 PM
Please stop with "totaly unusable" BS. My recent job, 6 min rendertime LW 2018:

Just great:thumbsup:

prometheus
03-22-2018, 12:11 PM
Nodal is great, yes... but not for everything and not only. Sometimes you just don't need to go advanced and just want to add a quick simple texture, why go nodal? This is a UI/UX issue that NT has missed. No body is saying that we should stop to have nodes, just that we need faster and better workflows as LW isn't fast anymore and the competition is running circles around it.

Edit: Maybe I should record a video of the workflow difference between LW and Blender just to show how bad and slow the LW implementation really is.

Exactly my point on the two first sentences.
Exactly, I was thinking of Making a video of nodal UI and navigation between those and showcase that it really needs an overhaul soon, I hope for that.

THIBAULT
03-22-2018, 01:21 PM
Please stop with "totaly unusable" BS. My recent job, 6 min rendertime LW 2018:

it's not true! This rendering quality in this resolution is totally impossible with native LW2018 render in 6mn. For me this flat exterior picture, it's Kray 2.62 !
Maybe you have a farm. If not, you are the only artist in the world who can achieve this performance!
Show us your settings !!!!

THIBAULT
03-22-2018, 01:51 PM
This WIP is underway on LW2018 / Octane.
3K render (still noisy, it's light test ) in 30mn with 6 Titans X 12GO - 8000 samples pathtracing.

So 6mn ........

140832

KANUSO
03-22-2018, 02:55 PM
- Default materials in Modeler is principled BSDF, too dark color to pleasent modeling. So first step is change material and then color. This is many extra steps compare to 2015.3.
- Every new created material in Modeler is by deafult principled BSDF. In General Options should be possibility to change default material.
- In 2018 Texture Editor is missing Use Texture and Remove Texture. Remove Texture clear all settings for each channel what is very usefull. How I can clear all setting for example in Color channel now? By hand or remove all node!

The strange Default material in the Modeler is one of the reason i changed the nuArchitect bundle (can be downloaded in the LScript forum) to handle at least for the objects created by the bundle have a Color Setting with more contrast to the Background. This low contrast with such extrem Highlights is not good for my old eyes. I wonder why the Default material can not be set by the user.

And please do not ever give the updates (fixes) a complete new Installation. It takes working time to do all steps to get the plugins function again. Do this only if there is a real reason to do so. A new Installation from 2015 to 2018 is ok, i think, but from 2018.0.1 to 2018.0.2 ... I think this is not necessary. Maybe I think wrong.

But I will also say, that for me LW is the best 3d Software, that is payable! Yes, it has some things, that can be done better, but many things are very fine implemented.

Regards,
KANUSO

wesleycorgi
03-22-2018, 03:41 PM
I decided to fully jump into 2018. What really helped was Rebel Hill's tutorials. In that series, the first dozen videos do not even require nodes to yield great results. After going through the RH tutorials, I realized that what I had heard previously in other tutorials is that a lot of the previous techniques were to fake how real lighting and materials work. Now it all makes sense.

By no means am I a nodes nor materials master. But understanding how the lighting/material system is intended to work in 2018, I am no longer producing renderings with unrealistic/blown-out whites or are overly dark, etc. I am struggling with noise reduction when turning off GI to get increased rendering speeds. But it's been fun experimenting where to ratchet up samples and other settings to adjust for that trade off.

I find the materials workflow with VPR to be more efficient and everything is that more responsive in 2018. The other leap I coincidentally took with 2018 was to move over to Windows. To me that was more of a struggle. Not only with Lightwave, I find a heckuva of lot more crashes/freezes in all my Windows apps (such as Adobe apps). But I was tired of Apple not giving me what I want/needed and at three times the cost.

samurai_x
03-22-2018, 08:50 PM
Please stop with "totaly unusable" BS. My recent job, 6 min rendertime LW 2018:

This kind of scene would render in less than 5 minutes with lw 9 backdrop radiosity on a q6600 quad cpu. But you have to know what you're doing. :D
In lw 2018's defense you don't need to know much about light and material settings to get good results though because they're physically correct from the start. But the render time just suffers because its cpu. Mark Granger thought he would have the opportunity to do a gpu version. Not!

djwaterman
03-23-2018, 04:40 AM
Please stop with "totaly unusable" BS. My recent job, 6 min rendertime LW 2018:

That's a really nice scene, hyper-real, like The Truman Show. I really like the use of people, they all look like they are doing normal stuff that doesn't draw attention away from the buildings.

jakuzaa
03-23-2018, 05:12 AM
Thanks all, I just wanted to prove that archviz in native 2018 is possible, in fact I enjoy 2018 more than 2015. High quality assets like Evermotion trees, AXYZ people or Dosch cars help a lot (also eat a lot of RAM). And it is definetely not slower if you know what you are doing. By the way I'm working on single Threadripper 1950x. THIBAULT, your scene is great but it has reflections all over it so it would also render longer on native renderer. On my example the reflections on foliage are very limited compared to your scene so maybe that is the reason for faster render.

SP00
03-23-2018, 09:09 AM
Is this the old AE vs Fusion/Nuke argument again? Node is better for complex setup, Layers are better for simple setup. They can make nodes easier to handle, which will probably come with time. If anyone uses Fusion and Nuke, they make it pretty easy to drop in nodes and hook things up.

thomascheng
03-23-2018, 09:14 AM
I would love to see Drag and Drop images onto a node input to connect things up.

robertoortiz
03-23-2018, 02:14 PM
I would love to see Drag and Drop images onto a node input to connect things up.

How about the ability to "compile" nodes and add a traditional interface to them. What i am saying is find a way to collapse the nodes so they can be shared like plug ins, and hell work the same way as plug ins.

Ztreem
03-23-2018, 05:11 PM
That would be appreciated.

Here is a quick example of applying a texture to a UV map on a cube. This is just one example of many where the workflow of Lw is cumbersome and slow. I feel that it is all these slow workflows/workarounds that takes the fun out of using LW nowadays.

Blender 4 clicks & about 5 sec.

Lightwave 10 clicks & close to 20 sec. (quite a big difference in workflow and effort from the user)

Ps. Look at the node editor in Blender in the end, it looks exactly as in Lw without me touching it. (all done automaticly)

140847
140846

Ztreem
03-23-2018, 05:36 PM
Here is an example of doing it only with nodes in Blender. 7-8 clicks and takes around 6 sec. This just shows how mush faster the workflow can be if its done right.

140848

jeric_synergy
03-23-2018, 06:36 PM
Ztreem, very nice illustration of the problem. --So, blender makes some assumptions, but as defaults, the assumptions are 'good'?

Just a thought: in LW can you simply load a Saved network that has all those settings implicit, and then choose, eg, the specific image? It's a clumsy solution, but...

- - - Updated - - -

Ztreem, very nice illustration of the problem. --(re: post 45) So, blender makes some assumptions, but as defaults, the assumptions are 'good'?

Just a thought: in LW can you simply load a Saved network that has all those settings implicit, and then choose, eg, the specific image? It's a clumsy solution, but...

In #46, it certainly looks faster, but the workflow looks much the same as in LW. How is it faster??

Chris S. (Fez)
03-23-2018, 07:05 PM
Yeah, R&D and set up your nodes once and import the network.

Ztreem
03-23-2018, 07:16 PM
Ztreem, very nice illustration of the problem. --So, blender makes some assumptions, but as defaults, the assumptions are 'good'?

Just a thought: in LW can you simply load a Saved network that has all those settings implicit, and then choose, eg, the specific image? It's a clumsy solution, but...

- - - Updated - - -

Ztreem, very nice illustration of the problem. --(re: post 45) So, blender makes some assumptions, but as defaults, the assumptions are 'good'?

Just a thought: in LW can you simply load a Saved network that has all those settings implicit, and then choose, eg, the specific image? It's a clumsy solution, but...

In #46, it certainly looks faster, but the workflow looks much the same as in LW. How is it faster??

It’s faster because the nodes has the options exposed instead of the need to double click the node to open up another window with options. Less clicky and shorter mouse movements thats all the difference but makes it much more fun to work with. You can do node trees and save them but you should not need to do that, that is really a bad workflow especially the way it works right now.
Edit: Custom node networks to save and re-use can also be done in Blender, but in a much more elegant way, if you ask me.

Chris S. (Fez)
03-23-2018, 08:08 PM
Set up a group node with only the pertinent node values accessible. These are all work flow refinements worth considering, but Lightwave work flow is not bad by any means...IMO.

jeric_synergy
03-24-2018, 12:02 AM
It’s faster because the nodes has the options exposed instead of the need to double click the node to open up another window with options. Less clicky and shorter mouse movements thats all the difference but makes it much more fun to work with. You can do node trees and save them but you should not need to do that, that is really a bad workflow especially the way it works right now.
Edit: Custom node networks to save and re-use can also be done in Blender, but in a much more elegant way, if you ask me.

AH, that's what I was missing. Yes, I agree: the sidebar IS awkward. Some of this awkward stuff is legacy thinking, I believe. That MANY things still have a renaming dialog, versus being able to simply type in OVER the current name is an example of ridiculously outdated UI.

Ztreem
03-24-2018, 03:49 AM
AH, that's what I was missing. Yes, I agree: the sidebar IS awkward. Some of this awkward stuff is legacy thinking, I believe. That MANY things still have a renaming dialog, versus being able to simply type in OVER the current name is an example of ridiculously outdated UI.

Yes, exactly. All these small annoying things taking a couple of seconds more builds up to minutes and hours and make it harder to compete and get clients.

Ztreem
03-24-2018, 03:53 AM
Set up a group node with only the pertinent node values accessible. These are all work flow refinements worth considering, but Lightwave work flow is not bad by any means...IMO.

Maybe bad is the wrong word, maybe just call LW workflow brute force without elegance. Whatever it is, it is slow.

Asticles
03-24-2018, 04:30 AM
Ztreem Can you make the same demo setting box projection in blender and rotating it 90 degrees?

You will see Lw is much faster for that. I feel your comparison is captious.

Ztreem
03-24-2018, 05:29 AM
Ztreem Can you make the same demo setting box projection in blender and rotating it 90 degrees?

You will see Lw is much faster for that. I feel your comparison is captious.

I’ll take a look at that later... in the mean time you can try add a uv map and paint a texture on an object in LW. There are no perfect softwares and LW has some nice workflows even if it feels like they we get less and less.

Asticles
03-24-2018, 06:33 AM
Of course, what I try to say is that is not worth comparing those things. If you have a request, make it to devs.
Saying that this software is better and such, doesn't do anything good, because Lw is better in other areas.

Best regards.

Edit: I'm not censoring you. I am seeing arguments like this day after day, instead of seeing positive and constructive things. This undermines my energies and the interest to continue reading the forum. Only that.

Ztreem
03-24-2018, 07:57 AM
Of course, what I try to say is that is not worth comparing those things. If you have a request, make it to devs.
Saying that this software is better and such, doesn't do anything good, because Lw is better in other areas.

Best regards.

Edit: I'm not censoring you. I am seeing arguments like this day after day, instead of seeing positive and constructive things. This undermines my energies and the interest to continue reading the forum. Only that.

That is what this thread is about to show the devs that they need to really focus on workflows in LW because many users feel that its going in the wrong direction and therefor not upgrading.
What I wanted to show with the blender comparison was not to say that everything in blender is better than LW. I only wanted to show that you can have quick nice workflows for doing simple things without going nodal and at the same time have nodal access when you need it. We kind if had that in LW2015 but not in LW2018.

prometheus
03-24-2018, 08:27 AM
Ztreem Can you make the same demo setting box projection in blender and rotating it 90 degrees?

You will see Lw is much faster for that. I feel your comparison is captious.


I sort of agree on that specific function..
For initial state of applying simple textures with box, planar projection, lightwave standard material is superior to anything the principled BSDF material does..and that is valid for both nodes in blender and nodes lightwave.
The mapping and coordinates is built in to the image texture itself.

And I think you have a point about rotating a box projection is a bit easier to acess in Lightwave...Even if it is nodes, since the image node itself contains all those mapping parameters, while blender miss texture coordinates.
but otherwise blender is doing it more smoothly with exposing the nodes and have them beeing abled to be applied from the main UI, so you would go for mapping add texture coordinates in the same kind of manner Ztreem showcased in his Gifsīand then in nodes you would have the coordinates automaticly connected without you having to do it directly in the node window.
So what blender needs is an image node with direct texture coordinates parameters instead of applying additional ones, if they get such node or if someone writes it, then blender will have the upperhand.

Lightwave could reallly benefit from taking a look at how nice it is otherwise to work with blender nodes, toggle "M" for mute nodes is nice in blender...allowing for bypassing the active node without removing it.

The initial thread was more about being careful of good lightwave workflow as opposed to Lightwave blender workflow, and Particular about making workflow good connections, not breaking connections..which I think Lightwave 2018 has started to do with the lack of the basic functions in for example the new volumetrics adding texture, and light falloffs, I think it must be possible to start working on making better connections to get back to the basic stuff again, and one Idea may be to take a look of how blender does that with their ways of exposed nodes.

Some of this workflow changes also propagates through other areas in lw 2018, as for random particle scale, which requires you do enter nodes and really wrestle that, or alternatively...use the particle scale in the emitter tab forcing you to constantly switch between particle emitter and the volume primitive for adjusting it...while in legacy hypervoxels Its there exposed for the artist as a "finished color" changable value directly in the hv particle size tab, you really donīt have to blend mix make your colors yourself so to speak as we do have to now.

LouO311
03-24-2018, 08:41 AM
To the developers. If you're reading these threads and reactions to 2018 the gist of it is "be like other programs". While I get that sentiment I think it's not the way to go. Years ago Lightwave was ahead of its time with the easy subd modelling and great renderer. Maybe, just maybe it's time to come up with something revolutionary again. Something that will rock 3D and put you on top. Mimicking the competition is the easy and frustrating way out imho. It's easy for me to write make something revolutionary! Yet you are the ones who have to do that arduous task while I sit back. Just an example: how about an artist draws a character in Modeller but the drawing becomes a model. For instance, an artist draws a front head shape and a side profile shape. A model is generated then he continues adding features like eyes, lips, nose, horns, whatever by just drawing or sculpting for those inclined.

The ability to generate models from model sheets and/or blueprints. Perhaps have great drawing tools within Lightwave and/or import model sheets already created too. Select the corresponding shapes to let the program know this is a front shape, a side shape et al. I don't know if I am making any sense. But this would speed up modelling by leaps and bounds. Instead of a UI that all 3d programs have loaded with icons or text have it look like a drawing table or sculpting wheel etc. What I am getting at is go full artist which where all programs have been leading to anyways. Come up with a modeling technique that will allow any artist to know how to work your program with very little overhead. My 2 cents. This program has been good to me. I love it. Yes it has its drawbacks but I really love it.

One more thing. Have a Water/Ocean primitive (waves, foam etc) with Material presets.

jeric_synergy
03-24-2018, 09:07 AM
It would seem that it would be good to : identify the superior workflows that Lightwave already has, and optimize them, and to look at other apps and plagiarize as appropriate.

prometheus
03-24-2018, 09:07 AM
One more thing. Have a Water/Ocean primitive (waves, foam etc) with Material presets.

Do you refer to the new primitives with unlimited detail, that isnīt polygons? using such as an ocean? in such case..mind you, displacement on such primitive is very slow, The documentation even recognize that and trying it confirms it, using it for ocean scenes may be very slow.
We do have the hot ocean plugin as an option.

prometheus
03-24-2018, 09:12 AM
It would seem that it would be good to : identify the superior workflows that Lightwave already has, and optimize them, and to look at other apps and plagiarize as appropriate.

Surely they must have known for years that the kind of direct access to certain functions has been a big part of lightwave superior workflow for ages, which is why I am scratching my head with confusion on how they now implemented new workflows.
Things like doing animated speed texture effects in volumetrics is Recognized as a more slower process than previous hypervoxels, add to that the basic texturing, random particles, light falloffs, basic texturing taking a beating if you use any other material than standard materials, adding displacement textures etc.

Ztreem
03-24-2018, 05:20 PM
Ztreem Can you make the same demo setting box projection in blender and rotating it 90 degrees?

You will see Lw is much faster for that. I feel your comparison is captious.

Just tested this and in Lw2018 it was 13 clicks and in Blender 10 clicks to do the same. Time wise I think its about the same... So I don't get your point?

Edit: actually, with node wrangler I can do it with only 6 clicks and way faster than Lw2018.

Asticles
03-24-2018, 05:38 PM
The point is that you have everything in one node.

On the other side, one for mapping, one for transform and one for the texture, but as I said before, comparing those things is a bit futile.

Ztreem
03-24-2018, 06:11 PM
But having the transform and mapping outside the image node can actually be a benefit if you want to add say 5 more images with the same mapping. Even though you can argue that its better with one node instead of three it boils down to how fast can you set it up and how much clicking around you need to do. As said before I think LW can improve a lot in this area and it's not just nodes it's about many things in LW that has gotten very clicky and spread out all over the app. I think NT needs to sit down and look at what they got and how things work and how it can be made easier to use. They really need to come to that GUI rewrite so they're not so restricted how to implement things, it's time for new and better workflows.

rustythe1
03-24-2018, 07:05 PM
it's not true! This rendering quality in this resolution is totally impossible with native LW2018 render in 6mn. For me this flat exterior picture, it's Kray 2.62 !
Maybe you have a farm. If not, you are the only artist in the world who can achieve this performance!
Show us your settings !!!!

sorry but it is true, even for most interiors, exterior renders fly out of 2018, all of these images took around 6 min and they are all in 4k, so larger than your 6 titan image, done on my 5 year old i7, so i saved my self around Ģ20,000 in hardware, to get it done quicker than you? for the price of your 6 titans i could probably build a hefty render farm, so i don't see that argument as any kind of valid against a single cpu renderer, that in some cases can easily compete, cpu hardware is far cheaper than gpu, (and GPU is set to double in price this year thanks to coin mining)
140852140853140854
140855140856140857
And I'm using DOF and full volumetric light by the way!

samurai_x
03-24-2018, 08:48 PM
Although octane is the slower gpu renderer compared to redshift, it shouldn't be that slow and should be faster than any cpu renderer especially for exterior shots. A render like that would render in less than 2 mins in octane 2 with one mid level gpu.
He does not use octane in the right way if he's getting those render times. The 6 titans won't matter if the user doesn't know how to use the renderer.

jeric_synergy
03-24-2018, 10:11 PM
But having the transform and mapping outside the image node can actually be a benefit if you want to add say 5 more images with the same mapping. Even though you can argue that its better with one node instead of three it boils down to how fast can you set it up and how much clicking around you need to do. As said before I think LW can improve a lot in this area and it's not just nodes it's about many things in LW that has gotten very clicky and spread out all over the app. I think NT needs to sit down and look at what they got and how things work and how it can be made easier to use. They really need to come to that GUI rewrite so they're not so restricted how to implement things, it's time for new and better workflows.
Quantifying 'clickiness' is a tedious task-- usually involving video and counting and whatnot. Oy, I pitty the person tasked with that. OTOH, I'm with you, and I feel it's required.

I do wish that some of the LHF that we constantly point out would be addressed: LWG recreating DPKit, for instance. At this point, they even know which bits of DPKit they can IGNORE, the parts no-one ever found a use for but were included for completeness.

While global strategy in UI is important, I feel that just addressing the many many small speed bumps would have a synergistic effect, as long as it didn't become too idiosyncratic and amounting to "say this magic phrase and.....".

LouO311
03-24-2018, 11:18 PM
Prometheus, I do have Hotocean. The water is outstanding. Have thought of seeing whether parametric objects could pull it off though but hopefully they find a way to speed it up.

rustythe1
03-25-2018, 04:10 AM
Although octane is the slower gpu renderer compared to redshift, it shouldn't be that slow and should be faster than any cpu renderer especially for exterior shots. A render like that would render in less than 2 mins in octane 2 with one mid level gpu.
He does not use octane in the right way if he's getting those render times. The 6 titans won't matter if the user doesn't know how to use the renderer.

exactly my point, ( and funnily enough the new version 4 is slower than the old, but faster for some scenes because of AI, slower on others that its not trained on) it would seem the 3D industry is gradually turning everything back to a "you have to work for it" skilled medium and not a one button push and forget it, which is good if your prepared to work for it, and its not as simple as tell me your settings, for e.g. every object in a scene can have its own GI, so how would you can compare settings?

rustythe1
03-25-2018, 04:39 AM
P.S. sorry Prometheus for hijacking your thread into a can/cant thread again, but as for nodes, i think it has to be the way to go, it opens up so much, many other packages like unreal are almost 100% nodal so it makes sense to use the same methodology throughout, and now OD tools has created a node pre-set shelf, i know you don't want to upgrade, but if you did i would seriously consider LW and OD tools as a full package as the guy is a machine pumping out 1 or 2 extra plugins a week that fill so many functions,
https://vimeo.com/261631061

prometheus
03-25-2018, 05:29 AM
P.S. sorry Prometheus for hijacking your thread into a can/cant thread again, but as for nodes, i think it has to be the way to go, it opens up so much, many other packages like unreal are almost 100% nodal so it makes sense to use the same methodology throughout, and now OD tools has created a node pre-set shelf, i know you don't want to upgrade, but if you did i would seriously consider LW and OD tools as a full package as the guy is a machine pumping out 1 or 2 extra plugins a week that fill so many functions,
https://vimeo.com/261631061

Itīs ok by hijacking..surfing to other areas of non topic, I am quite tolerant to that..I can always jump in and with some discussion stear something back if it gets too polluted:)

I do however disagree with you ...why would an approach of look at what others do, industrial standard be a classification of what is The best to do, certainly not by itself, and I do not think for a second that it makes sense
to use the same methology of making it harder to work with methology, when you know there is a way of making different, while still making it more nodal, and that sums up to making it even better to use than other nodal software.

The thing is, I just suspect It is more work for the coders..perhaps too much so that they simply do not bother, leaving us with a product that seemingly should follow industry standard, but with lesser focus and work on improving it for us ..so it would be easier to work with.

OD tools, I have looked a bit at that, It doesnīt seem to solve the issues here really though, but I know too little of it as for now..so with reservation.. my statement can be wrong about that.

I seriously, doubt that making these hooks I spoke of, getting direct sliders more accesable would be coding impossible thanks to the new stuff, I do believe that it is either lack of time and resources to get things accessable as they were, or it is a from Newtek/lightwav group a blind belief in node Industry standard..and it is up to users to adapt and do more work without really giving it a serious thought of consideration on how users may like the workflow ...or even counting in how much longer it takes to do things unfortunately if I would speculate, the truth only the LW team knows for sure.

Again to be clear, so many things in nodes may open up for things we couldnīt do before and even faster results in some areas...but the problem is still in our face, basic functions that previously was accessable with a blink of the eye..getīs buried in to node workflow that takes longer time to set up.

To be honest to the issue, I donīt think we just can discuss..every other software does this and that, industry standard etc, you have to weigh in what it Actually does, and in this case...ask yourself if not the old way of adding a texture...changing a lightfallof was faster than what now has been implemented, and if it would be possible to get things back to that node workflow while maintaining the new implemented stuff, and I seriously doubt that it would be impossible.

Asticles
03-25-2018, 05:34 AM
Illustrator and 3dmax are industry standard, and OMG it's not a pleasure to work with them.

prometheus
03-25-2018, 05:41 AM
Illustrator and 3dmax are industry standard, and OMG it's not a pleasure to work with them.

God forbid anyone goes against Industry Standard, or try to improve Industry standard, then it wouldnīt be Industry Standard, Even though it would be implemented as better...letīs nuke Industry Standard from a point of view that things can evolve,
Itīs the only way to be sure.

robertoortiz
03-25-2018, 06:32 AM
Illustrator and 3dmax are industry standard, and OMG it's not a pleasure to work with them.

Illustrator is a perfect program to try to emulate in terms of its "clever" simplicity.The program is POWERFUL as HELL and when they redevelop it to do more 3d(they are rewriting it as we speak ), it will be a modeling monster for designers.(Mark my words)
Now Imagine if you could draw in Lightwave 3d space the same way you could create shapes in illustrator. Or assign material or her draw with actual vector pressure based brushes in 3D space?

Try this experiment with a PROFESSIONAL GRAPHIC DESIGNER who does not use 3D YET.
Sit him or her in from of LW and ask this person to try to do simple tasks.
(for example : A flying Logo)
Then Trying to do a more COMPLEX task
(Trying to reproduce a REAL product like a Beverage BOTTLE)
RECORD THOSE SESSIONS, and show it to your design team.

Also I think that the team should look into the work the Jonathan Ive, lead designer at Apple. he makes some amazing points about usability, reducing clutter and simplicity.

http://www.businessinsider.com/7-philosophies-of-apple-designer-jony-ive-2014-3

A way for Newtek to claim a piece of the DESIGN market is to produce a piece of software that is both POWERFUL and INTUITIVE TO USE.
NT you got a GREAT ENGINE behind the scenes, now try creative ways to get to it.
The GRAPHIC DESIGN MAKET IS HUGE.

gerry_g
03-25-2018, 07:09 AM
well nurbs modelling is this more or less, NT can't even manage to implement CC properly so I don't hold out much hope here, I think modelling per se is remarkably straightforward to master, it's more a case of the tools being all over the place that is the problem, that and the fact that many tools only do half a job requiring a second tool to complete any given action. I learnt to model with Amapi and in less than week had built a castle and got familiar with every tool, LW Modeller took me much longer to master because of its odd distribution of tools and the fact most did only one specific thing rather than being multi purpose. Also I disagree with the idea that Illustrator is any kind perfect benchmark, its very slow with big files and makes 3D look zippy by comparison and I still hate its workflow now every bit as much as I did fifteen years ago

prometheus
03-25-2018, 07:31 AM
Illustrator is a perfect program to try to emulate in terms of its "clever" simplicity.The program is POWERFUL as HELL and when they redevelop it to do more 3d(they are rewriting it as we speak ), it will be a modeling monster for designers.(Mark my words)
Now Imagine if you could draw in Lightwave 3d space the same way you could create shapes in illustrator. Or assign material or her draw with actual vector pressure based brushes in 3D space?



The GRAPHIC DESIGN MAKET IS HUGE.

which other 3d software does that 2D drawing just as easy?

bezier tool in lightwave..not very good, and spline draw obviously miss some handle ctrl..
the Only tool I see best for that kind of 2D drawing...that would be the pz bezier curve..which allows for snapping, (in some ways more advanced than illustrator) then you also can change handle type to smooth or sharp, make lines sharp with mix of smooth curves, paths are also savable and reloadable, what it doesnīt do is re-editing of the newly created path once dropped, only way is to save path before dropping and reload to once again edit it.
What it also do not do is subtract, onion operations, you would need free unigon plugin or lw cad for instance.

If they could manage to get a similar tool like pz bezier, with full parametric editing to allow for later editing, and also include options for subtract and union between segments, now that would be something.

Chris S. (Fez)
03-25-2018, 08:41 AM
I prefer Affinity Designer. Coming from somebody who has used AI for over 20 years. AI is still indispensable but AD is closing the gap.

Ztreem
03-25-2018, 09:06 AM
which other 3d software does that 2D drawing just as easy?


Rhino3D and in many aspects still is superior over illustrator in curve handling. Illustrator still missing a good curve blending option for example.

prometheus
03-25-2018, 09:28 AM
Rhino3D and in many aspects still is superior over illustrator in curve handling. Illustrator still missing a good curve blending option for example.

Oh gee..I forgot those nurbs special software, of course..I knew about that one but forgot it.
MOI was kind of nice too ..at first glance, but havenīt used it so much, I have the free Designsparks mecanical sitting on my mahcine that I also think does the curves well.

Chris S. (Fez)
03-25-2018, 09:48 AM
Astute has curve blending and other key functionality for AI. But, yeah, Rhino Nurbs curves are kinda on another level.

Asticles
03-25-2018, 10:15 AM
I prefer Affinity Designer. Coming from somebody who has used AI for over 20 years. AI is still indispensable but AD is closing the gap.

Agree,

Have worked several years with illustrator making large format prints, and affinity is much more "clever" to me. It has to improve, of course, but it is a pleasure compared to the other.
Also, I work with MOI and designspark mechanical. Each one have their good points. Good tools to complement Lightwave.

Regards

jaxtone
03-30-2018, 09:56 PM
Promotheus!

I am about to reinvent myself as a 3D and VFX artist after some years busy as an author, artist, film and music director. Eventually I have some customers popping up in the pipeline really soon and since you've been one of the most helpful and positive members in this forum for a long time I really trust you and of course all the other friendly hard working wavers that have proved excellent skills both in communication and as true Lightwavers.

1. Nodes

Are there really no alternatives in LW 2018 to switch between the old way and the new work design? I guess I saw a short film that presented an option in a presentation of Lightwave 3D 2018 for users that wanted to work in the old system.

2. Learning process v.s. customer deadlines!

I guess that it will take time to learn about the nodal system and I would prefer to adapt to the new system and learn slowly without risking the contracts. How do you experience the learning curve? Is it steep or long? Are there a lot of presets for the nodal system? Are there a lot of pedagogic tutorials for the nodal system?

3. Render engine, lights and volumetrics!

It seems like Newtek put a lot of energy in re-writing a lot in the basics and adding some interesting parts. I am really interested in the render engines increased speed and the light and shadow options.
During the years I have used a lot of tricks to limit render times adding point lights with glow inside Volumetrics etc. just to make things look smooth and still get render result under a minute per image.

When it comes to shades I have skipped the insane render times using Dome lights and most of the light setup in Lightwave. Mostly things can be done better with the old traditional "Shadow map" with increased Shadow map size and Shadow fuziness before exporting the shadows to After FX for detailed VFX post work.

Do you know if the Shadow map with settings is still an option in the light source gallery in the new version of Lightwave?

Earlier I have experienced insanely slow render speed when it comes to Voxels, Motion blur and Depth of field? Does anyone know if these really have been developed to reduce render times? Cannot find any kind of bench marking or examples that shows the difference between the old way and the new way!

Regards!

("SBowie", during the latest years this forum has been a very nice place to visit. I have recognized a number of people that have been helpful, friendly and interested in learning to know people and help them without any prejudiced attitude. Now I may have misunderstood you because of a language problem but my first impression, "and I am sad to say so", made me ask myself if this was one of the guys that wanted to turn back times into the old school Lightwave "cast system" from the 90īs where only the inner circle of wavers earned respect and help on the IRC-channels?

I have been a waver for 22 years and still have questions, are still hungry but cannot master all parts of the software especially not the weakest parts because they have forced me into alternative 3D-programs to make things happen easier. I hope you take this seriously and do not see your role as a moderator as a bullying thread killer or me as a whiner!

You may explain why you closed my first thread with seriously meant questions about "Lightwave 3D 2018". You just shut it down without any references to where I could find the information connected to the software update. I don't get why you tried to make fun out of me in front of your buddy in a thread that was seriously started.

To state a thread as "closed" without giving any further help or references is a bad thing to do as a moderator when someone asks for help. Do you understand that this behavior is one of the reasons I am not sure of what I am doing here at all. I thought the forum was for helping each others, not the opposite.)

pixym
03-30-2018, 09:58 PM
Shadow maps does not exist anymore…

jaxtone
03-30-2018, 10:53 PM
Damn, that was fast and could easily render shades in seconds that was edited in post in seconds without any problems. How the heck was NEWTEK thinking here?


Shadow maps does not exist anymore…

Asticles
03-31-2018, 04:46 AM
Because shadow maps are a prehistoric technology for offline rendering.

prometheus
03-31-2018, 06:29 AM
Promotheus!

I am about to reinvent myself as a 3D and VFX artist after some years busy as an author, artist, film and music director. Eventually I have some customers popping up in the pipeline really soon and since you've been one of the most helpful and positive members in this forum for a long time I really trust you and of course all the other friendly hard working wavers that have proved excellent skills both in communication and as true Lightwavers.

1. Nodes

Are there really no alternatives in LW 2018 to switch between the old way and the new work design? I guess I saw a short film that presented an option in a presentation of Lightwave 3D 2018 for users that wanted to work in the old system.

2. Learning process v.s. customer deadlines!

I guess that it will take time to learn about the nodal system and I would prefer to adapt to the new system and learn slowly without risking the contracts. How do you experience the learning curve? Is it steep or long? Are there a lot of presets for the nodal system? Are there a lot of pedagogic tutorials for the nodal system?

3. Render engine, lights and volumetrics!

It seems like Newtek put a lot of energy in re-writing a lot in the basics and adding some interesting parts. I am really interested in the render engines increased speed and the light and shadow options.
During the years I have used a lot of tricks to limit render times adding point lights with glow inside Volumetrics etc. just to make things look smooth and still get render result under a minute per image.

When it comes to shades I have skipped the insane render times using Dome lights and most of the light setup in Lightwave. Mostly things can be done better with the old traditional "Shadow map" with increased Shadow map size and Shadow fuziness before exporting the shadows to After FX for detailed VFX post work.

Do you know if the Shadow map with settings is still an option in the light source gallery in the new version of Lightwave?

Earlier I have experienced insanely slow render speed when it comes to Voxels, Motion blur and Depth of field? Does anyone know if these really have been developed to reduce render times? Cannot find any kind of bench marking or examples that shows the difference between the old way and the new way!

Regards!

("SBowie", during the latest years this forum has been a very nice place to visit. I have recognized a number of people that have been helpful, friendly and interested in learning to know people and help them without any prejudiced attitude. Now I may have misunderstood you because of a language problem but my first impression, "and I am sad to say so", made me ask myself if this was one of the guys that wanted to turn back times into the old school Lightwave "cast system" from the 90īs where only the inner circle of wavers earned respect and help on the IRC-channels?

I have been a waver for 22 years and still have questions, are still hungry but cannot master all parts of the software especially not the weakest parts because they have forced me into alternative 3D-programs to make things happen easier. I hope you take this seriously and do not see your role as a moderator as a bullying thread killer or me as a whiner!

You may explain why you closed my first thread with seriously meant questions about "Lightwave 3D 2018". You just shut it down without any references to where I could find the information connected to the software update. I don't get why you tried to make fun out of me in front of your buddy in a thread that was seriously started.

To state a thread as "closed" without giving any further help or references is a bad thing to do as a moderator when someone asks for help. Do you understand that this behavior is one of the reasons I am not sure of what I am doing here at all. I thought the forum was for helping each others, not the opposite.)

Cant speak for Sbowie, I think the closed thread was all about the fact that the forum has multitudes of 2018 threads, and if you really didnīt know that lightwave 2018 was out, then something has gone weird information wise, you really should know if you check the forums, sorry for saying that..and I think he was just afraid of having multitudes of the same threads.

As for the workflow, I really donīt think it would take anyone that long time to readjust to new lighting and the nodal workflow, and you can still use the standard material to some degree, it is beahaving a bit different though since new lights and rendering settings.
Personally I am not against the new renderer and new materials, just feel lightwave may have been rushed out since the long delay and lack of communication, and it doesnīt feel "ready" (as it ever will)
and I think they started a new trend of neglecting that direct hook to acess basic functions, textures, hypertextures, light falloffs etc, that doesnīt mean they have ruled that out, it may be so..but who knows.

as for hypervoxels, the old legacy voxel system is faster than in the 2015 versions, and you can use several hv instances without having it lagging, and the new volumetrics looks great and is feasable to work at low scale, but at larger real life scale, it becomes too slow ..and if you try and raise step size it becomes to noise, so you can not get a good balance between speed and render quality, where the old system feels faster at larger scale with a decent quality, the new system is however presenting more realistic light and shading, but is also harder to work with when it comes to coloring it, setting textures.
there is no sprite system or surface system within this new volumetrics, you would have to use old hypervoxels within 2018 for that.

the new volumetrics doesnīt allow for it to work on points, (if not a nodal approach is doable?) and you can not set random volumetric scale in itīs volumetric tab, you have to use variation in particle scale and check use that size, or use nodal setups for the volumetric scale. ( you could switch to old hypervoxels within 2018)

The new volumetrics has a much better edge softness though than the old hypervoxels.

As for volumetric lights, the old ones are gone..also presets with effects, itīs all global volumetric scattering, but you can controll the lights individually if you have to through nodes....unfortunately there is no volumetric sprite light..which I liked to use for nebual gas that renders much faster and with a softness quality that looked better in some cases than the new volumetrics lights.

As for softer shadowmaps, you would have to use other light, ambient occlusion etc, set a good balance between light samples etc.

I currently have a busy day ..eastern visit to the family, got some eggs to crack over there :) so I canīt give you more info on the new volumetric lights..no more than what I have already posted on threads.

The new skin looks good and a bit faster than the old skin I think, personally I have some issues of it getting that subsurface red illumination on ears, nose, fingers ...which I could manage to produce easy with the old skin, but it could probably be a case of me not knowing it too well yet.

Edit..I can see that in the sticky newtek threads, there really isnīt any direct point to Lightwave 2018 release, which may explain your confusion ..a bit, the thread instead goes...
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?155327-Hello-from-NewTek%85-the-silence-is-over
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?155330-LightWave-2018-Announcement-Discussion-Thread
https://www.lightwave3d.com/

odd though if you havenīt gotten any email about the release, and you should regulary really check the lightwave site and you would have seen it.
As for Sbowie being short on you, I can understand that impression...but that is something for Sbowie to answer, not me..I really donīt believe his intent was to make fun of you though.

As for learning nodals, check all the tutorials from rebelhill, check anti tutorials, check bryphi tutorials...(though it is for 2015)
You can go to rebelhils site and use his playlist and start playing from the playlists of interest etc learning 2018 ..or learning nodes ..
https://www.youtube.com/user/RHLW/playlists

Antis vids on volumetric lights ..volumetric primitive...
https://www.youtube.com/user/anttijarvela77/videos?shelf_id=1&sort=dd&view=0
https://www.youtube.com/user/anttijarvela77/videos?shelf_id=1&sort=dd&view=0


If you have 2015 you use that for critical work for clients, and if you decide to purchase 2018, you learn that as much as you can and use it when appropiate...hard to distinguish maybe, but use the new system when itīs not critical in the beginning, til you know how it works for you for sure.
For customer deadlines...use what you know and got for critical stuff, and only if you have time or requires something special..enter the new 2018.

I like the new surfaces, and the new volumetric lights to some degree, they miss some things though, Itīs up to us to point out what they need to consider, which I tried to do with this thread, for everyones sake.

As for presets..I think it is very thin, except for the new materials which on the other hand is nice, but presets for new volumetrics..is non existent, and same with volumetric lights, I think that will
popup after some releases, donīt think they have had the time unfortunately.

Note..the viper seems to be gone for previewing animated surfaces and hypervoxels texture effect movement, so you need to use VPR, which renders more correctly..but it is also significantly slower to create previews, and to simply create preview and play..is a bit more tedious in VPR.

Someone is making a new system for sharing content and presets..oliver holtz has some stuff, though partly commercial, so from going from provided free lightwave developed presets..that may not be so encouraging, though I cheerish that he has done presets for us.
https://vimeo.com/246048179
personally I will skip this upgrade..I really think so, have a few hours perhaps left and may try a render sequence with brute force GI to see if that renders much much faster than the old brute force..I think it really is a quite a bit faster, but it may not be enough...I am concerned about the small amount of modeling enhancements. implementation in layout of it, weight paint lack and weight particle emission lacking, lack off sculpting tools..and the concern of the recent going more nodal without that hook so to speak, and other concerns that I donīt think is appropiate to discuss here.

So I will most likely sit this one out..which probably means 1-2 more years, so I can see where it really goes..and by that time the accumaled sum of special prices may in the end be the same as if I then purchase a new license.

I am not sure what field you will focus on jaxtone? let that weigh in when you consider purchasing, if you want more realistic product renders, I would definitely consider Lightwave 2018, personally I am also used to other software which I instead may use for that, but in General..I prefer working inside of lightwave as the best movie stage 3d software, things are mostly where they should be with a good workspace and changable windows in a way I want, but all that is inherited from the old lightwave..nothing that the new lightwave brings on as a New feature.

jaxtone
03-31-2018, 09:50 AM
Thanks for your effort in answering my questions at a day when egg cracking is crucial here in Sweden. Gotta inhale some steak and stuff now but will read this later tonight when my Red Bull shift starts!


Cant speak for Sbowie, I think the closed thread was all about the fact that the forum has multitudes of 2018 threads, and if you really didnīt know that lightwave 2018 was out, then something has gone weird information wise, you really should know if you check the forums, sorry for saying that..and I think he was just afraid of having multitudes of the same threads.

As for the workflow, I really donīt think it would take anyone that long time to readjust to new lighting and the nodal workflow, and you can still use the standard material to some degree, it is beahaving a bit different though since new lights and rendering settings.
Personally I am not against the new renderer and new materials, just feel lightwave may have been rushed out since the long delay and lack of communication, and it doesnīt feel "ready" (as it ever will)
and I think they started a new trend of neglecting that direct hook to acess basic functions, textures, hypertextures, light falloffs etc, that doesnīt mean they have ruled that out, it may be so..but who knows.

as for hypervoxels, the old legacy voxel system is faster than in the 2015 versions, and you can use several hv instances without having it lagging, and the new volumetrics looks great and is feasable to work at low scale, but at larger real life scale, it becomes too slow ..and if you try and raise step size it becomes to noise, so you can not get a good balance between speed and render quality, where the old system feels faster at larger scale with a decent quality, the new system is however presenting more realistic light and shading, but is also harder to work with when it comes to coloring it, setting textures.
there is no sprite system or surface system within this new volumetrics, you would have to use old hypervoxels within 2018 for that.

the new volumetrics doesnīt allow for it to work on points, (if not a nodal approach is doable?) and you can not set random volumetric scale in itīs volumetric tab, you have to use variation in particle scale and check use that size, or use nodal setups for the volumetric scale. ( you could switch to old hypervoxels within 2018)

The new volumetrics has a much better edge softness though than the old hypervoxels.

As for volumetric lights, the old ones are gone..also presets with effects, itīs all global volumetric scattering, but you can controll the lights individually if you have to through nodes....unfortunately there is no volumetric sprite light..which I liked to use for nebual gas that renders much faster and with a softness quality that looked better in some cases than the new volumetrics lights.

As for softer shadowmaps, you would have to use other light, ambient occlusion etc, set a good balance between light samples etc.

I currently have a busy day ..eastern visit to the family, got some eggs to crack over there :) so I canīt give you more info on the new volumetric lights..no more than what I have already posted on threads.

The new skin looks good and a bit faster than the old skin I think, personally I have some issues of it getting that subsurface red illumination on ears, nose, fingers ...which I could manage to produce easy with the old skin, but it could probably be a case of me not knowing it too well yet.

Edit..I can see that in the sticky newtek threads, there really isnīt any direct point to Lightwave 2018 release, which may explain your confusion ..a bit, the thread instead goes...
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?155327-Hello-from-NewTek%85-the-silence-is-over
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?155330-LightWave-2018-Announcement-Discussion-Thread
https://www.lightwave3d.com/

odd though if you havenīt gotten any email about the release, and you should regulary really check the lightwave site and you would have seen it.
As for Sbowie being short on you, I can understand that impression...but that is something for Sbowie to answer, not me..I really donīt believe his intent was to make fun of you though.

As for learning nodals, check all the tutorials from rebelhill, check anti tutorials, check bryphi tutorials...(though it is for 2015)
You can go to rebelhils site and use his playlist and start playing from the playlists of interest etc learning 2018 ..or learning nodes ..
https://www.youtube.com/user/RHLW/playlists

Antis vids on volumetric lights ..volumetric primitive...
https://www.youtube.com/user/anttijarvela77/videos?shelf_id=1&sort=dd&view=0
https://www.youtube.com/user/anttijarvela77/videos?shelf_id=1&sort=dd&view=0


If you have 2015 you use that for critical work for clients, and if you decide to purchase 2018, you learn that as much as you can and use it when appropiate...hard to distinguish maybe, but use the new system when itīs not critical in the beginning, til you know how it works for you for sure.
For customer deadlines...use what you know and got for critical stuff, and only if you have time or requires something special..enter the new 2018.

I like the new surfaces, and the new volumetric lights to some degree, they miss some things though, Itīs up to us to point out what they need to consider, which I tried to do with this thread, for everyones sake.

As for presets..I think it is very thin, except for the new materials which on the other hand is nice, but presets for new volumetrics..is non existent, and same with volumetric lights, I think that will
popup after some releases, donīt think they have had the time unfortunately.

Note..the viper seems to be gone for previewing animated surfaces and hypervoxels texture effect movement, so you need to use VPR, which renders more correctly..but it is also significantly slower to create previews, and to simply create preview and play..is a bit more tedious in VPR.

Someone is making a new system for sharing content and presets..oliver holtz has some stuff, though partly commercial, so from going from provided free lightwave developed presets..that may not be so encouraging, though I cheerish that he has done presets for us.
https://vimeo.com/246048179
personally I will skip this upgrade..I really think so, have a few hours perhaps left and may try a render sequence with brute force GI to see if that renders much much faster than the old brute force..I think it really is a quite a bit faster, but it may not be enough...I am concerned about the small amount of modeling enhancements. implementation in layout of it, weight paint lack and weight particle emission lacking, lack off sculpting tools..and the concern of the recent going more nodal without that hook so to speak, and other concerns that I donīt think is appropiate to discuss here.

So I will most likely sit this one out..which probably means 1-2 more years, so I can see where it really goes..and by that time the accumaled sum of special prices may in the end be the same as if I then purchase a new license.

I am not sure what field you will focus on jaxtone? let that weigh in when you consider purchasing, if you want more realistic product renders, I would definitely consider Lightwave 2018, personally I am also used to other software which I instead may use for that, but in General..I prefer working inside of lightwave as the best movie stage 3d software, things are mostly where they should be with a good workspace and changable windows in a way I want, but all that is inherited from the old lightwave..nothing that the new lightwave brings on as a New feature.

SBowie
03-31-2018, 11:24 AM
1) ... my first impression, "and I am sad to say so", made me ask myself if this was one of the guys that wanted to turn back times into the old school Lightwave "cast system" from the 90īs where only the inner circle of wavers earned respect and help on the IRC-channels? (snip)

2) ... I hope you take this seriously and do not see your role as a moderator as a bullying thread killer or me as a whiner! (snip)

3) You may explain why you closed my first thread with seriously meant questions about "Lightwave 3D 2018". You just shut it down without any references to where I could find the information connected to the software update. I don't get why you tried to make fun out of me in front of your buddy in a thread that was seriously started.
1) Nope. Take a look at my (thousands of) posts and you will see that I clearly welcome all and do not suffer 'elitists' gladly.

2)The only ones here who think I'm a bully are those who have overstepped so many times in abusing others or flogging other software that they have worn out everyone's patience. And no-one, me least of all, accused you of whining.

3) Yes, I closed your thread. There are scores of threads here in the last 3 months that will answer your initial questions, and adding to the dispersion of those discussions will not be helpful (doubtless once you get a basic grasp of the changes, you will have some more specific questions that merit a thread of their own). As to the lack of a more detailed explanation, a) it's the run up to NAB and everyone is swamped, b) discussion of moderation decisions in the forum is specifically disallowed by forum policy, and c) the basic reason was supplied. Also, I certainly did not make fun of you, but I'm genuinely sorry if you took it that way.

jeric_synergy
03-31-2018, 11:47 AM
Yeah, guys, you don't have to quote entire LONG posts in your replies just to say "thanks". Edit it down, there's a link automatically included.

+++++++++++

I prefer Affinity Designer. Coming from somebody who has used AI for over 20 years.

Chris, jumped over and took a look, AD is definitely interesting.


.
>
(Hey bloviators, see the link? See how it was edited down?)