PDA

View Full Version : Plug-in Question



moon1
06-14-2018, 09:59 AM
What plug-ins work in Lightwave 2018? I have the Worley plug-ins, DP plug-ins, True Art plug-ins, IFW Nodal plug-ins just to name a few. Is there a list of older plug-ins that work? Thanks in advance.

Sensei
06-14-2018, 10:15 AM
TrueArt's Global Materials 2018 (there is needed special version)
http://globalmaterials.trueart.eu

TrueArt's Batch Baking Camera 2018 (there is needed special version)
http://batchbakingcamera.trueart.eu

TrueArt's Node Library 2018 (there is needed special version)
http://nodelibrary.trueart.eu

TrueArt's TrueType Text 2018 (there is needed special version)
http://truetypetext.trueart.eu

Modeler plugins (if they don't use Node Editor or Texture Editor.. or analyze/read/write LWO or LWS files) should work as expected.

ps. Worley plugins, DP nodes and textures, IFW nodes and textures, won't work, unless their authors won't make special versions. Because their authors used plugin classes (nodes,textures) which were just updated to new, incompatible version.

Kryslin
06-14-2018, 10:27 AM
If its a modeler only plugin, it works in 2018. This includes lscripts.

IFW nodal does not work, nor is the author interested in updating.
DP kit, Rman collection, the DP lights do not work as well, and it appears that Denis isn't going to update them. DP Sunsky, however, does, along with the motion modifer that comes with it.

Of the Worley plugins, Sasquatch is the only one I know that doesn't work (and it has been on it's last legs for a while, now). Fprime has been superceded by the VPR quite some time ago.

There is a list of things that do and don't work, but it may be buried a few pages back in the forum.

If you wish to keep using those, I would keep a 2015.3 or 11.6.3 loaded. Get your procedurals looking good there, and then bake them out for use in 2018.

prometheus
06-14-2018, 11:15 AM
If its a modeler only plugin, it works in 2018. This includes lscripts.
DP Sunsky, however, does, along with the motion modifer that comes with it.

.

I do not think that is correct, the sunsky Sunmotion seem to be broken, you can only apply it but it has no affect and is lacking the menu and controls that used to come with it, unfortunately I used that sunsky sunmotion modifier a lot and it was crucial to get proper sunlight on clouds.

Kryslin
06-14-2018, 11:18 AM
My bad, then. Ah, well. Time to write some more lscript or python code...

jeric_synergy
06-14-2018, 02:10 PM
A sticky thread on what works and doesn't, in spreadsheet form, would be useful to everybody.

jwiede
06-14-2018, 02:52 PM
I do not think that is correct, the sunsky Sunmotion seem to be broken, you can only apply it but it has no affect and is lacking the menu and controls that used to come with it, unfortunately I used that sunsky sunmotion modifier a lot and it was crucial to get proper sunlight on clouds.

I'm pretty sure that's not the only part of Sunsky that's not working in LW2018. I seem to recall stuff like the lights, volumetrics, etc. don't work either. Does the sun color channel mod still work for you?

I just tried on Mac, and neither the Sun light nor Sky light work properly in Mac LW2018 either. Just after triggering AddSunsky.ls with defaults, Layout crashes to desktop.

raymondtrace
06-14-2018, 03:03 PM
A sticky thread on what works and doesn't, in spreadsheet form, would be useful to everybody.

I think that is what this is for:
https://www.lightwave3d.com/assets/plugins/

It could use some updating to filter on version compatibility. I submitted a bug report on general improvements (LWB-4021). Some progress has already been made. That bug report is still open so more magic may appear.

Ideally, this database would be more open to user input, like the user-submitted compatibility reports seen here. https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=339

It would also be good if NT operated a plugin app store, like auto****. https://apps.autodesk.com/MAYA/en/Detail/Index?id=7028623843288563914&appLang=en&os=Win64

Offering a central store like this would make it easier on developers who don't want to be bothered with setting up their own web site...and for users who have to look to archive.org to dig up old plugins abandoned years ago by some developers.

jeric_synergy
06-14-2018, 03:15 PM
I think that is what this is for:
https://www.lightwave3d.com/assets/plugins/

Not really the same thing as a simple chart. And 'wayy slower to access.

raymondtrace
06-14-2018, 03:24 PM
My meaning is that the assets/plugins pages are pulling from a central database, which could be queried to make a simple chart or whatever format one wants. This stuff is already in a table. It just needs some improvements.

jeric_synergy
06-14-2018, 03:43 PM
Possibly the way to go is make the chart of plugins first, with columns for which versions they work with. then users can contribute their knowledge. EG, Sensei probably knows which of his many plugins work.

The database, while valuable, is the wrong format.

raymondtrace
06-14-2018, 03:51 PM
I'm wondering if you're not familiar with the data tables that drive https://www.lightwave3d.com/assets/plugins/ or even what a database is. There is no format for a database. A database is structured data that is queried into a view (or a formatting of data).

You may be surprised to know that this forum is powered by a database too. So when you suggest a sticky thread, you're suggesting a messy blob in a database.

jeric_synergy
06-14-2018, 07:51 PM
So when you suggest a sticky thread, you're suggesting a messy blob in a database.
It's not like there's no precedent for sticky threads: in fact, IMO they could be aggressively weeded out.

raymondtrace
06-15-2018, 06:12 AM
There's nothing wrong with sticky threads. It just seems odd to ignore the precedent of an existing plugin database...to favor a further fracture of data.

One can still make a sticky thread that points to a better plugin database.

Tobian
06-15-2018, 06:40 AM
It would make a lot more sense to just append the existing plugin database with a flag regarding versions. LightWave is incredibly odd in the industry for supporting legacy plugins as long as it does (excluding maybe Photoshop!)

Regarding compatibility. Everything which had a node in it, must be recompiled to work with the new format, and in the case of DP, there's so many nodal functions which won't or can't hook into the new system with out more than just a basic recompile, so I can understand why he isn't. The sunsky code which is a procedural works perfectly as both the standard background plugin and procedural. The lights don't work because the lighting and shading model of Lightwave was completely rebuilt. with a couple of exceptions though, most of the functionality is subsumed by the current suite of lights natively built in to Lightwave.

jeric_synergy
06-15-2018, 09:51 AM
OK, so apparently people don't want a simple chart.

Re compatibilty: those functions that are now superseded by native should be underlined by the LW3D organization, as was recently done by lertola's (?) addition to the dox re PARTS MOVE, wherein he demo'd the MESH PART node as a replacement for DP KIT "Part Move" et al functionality ( https://docs.lightwave3d.com/display/LW2018/Move%2C+Rotate+and+Scale+Parts+in+LightWave+2018), which seemed to be escaping some users.

raymondtrace
06-15-2018, 11:02 AM
OK, so apparently people don't want a simple chart...

I don't see where anybody said that. We might be discussing two separate issues.

We don't need a simple chart (or anything else) that is separately maintained from the plugin database (https://www.lightwave3d.com/assets/plugins/), using redundant/unmanaged data. We might benefit with an additional view from that database that looks like a simple chart.

jeric_synergy
06-15-2018, 02:10 PM
We might benefit with an additional view from that database that looks like a simple chart.
And we don't have control over views. OF COURSE I wouldn't mind if we had display control of the existing database, but what are the ODDS of that occurring before the heat death of the universe?

I just think a text chart would be done far faster. VERY far faster. Almost infinitely faster.

jwiede
06-15-2018, 02:33 PM
And we don't have control over views. OF COURSE I wouldn't mind if we had display control of the existing database, but what are the ODDS of that occurring before the heat death of the universe?

I just think a text chart would be done far faster. VERY far faster. Almost infinitely faster.

I think this is the crux of the problem. While it'd be great if we could get a column/field added to the LW plugin db for "LW2018 compatibility", and a report view added that offers a spreadsheet-like view, I do think history's been pretty clear that there's no way such changes will happen in any remotely timely manner.

So, if expecting timely changes to the LW plugin db contents and reporting isn't practical, producing a separate spreadsheet/chart (or sticky thread, or whatever) of "LW2018-compatible plugins" becomes the (likely) easiest/fastest/most-pragmatically-viable means to get such data publicly available in reasonable timeframe.

I'm no fan of having something driven by redundant, static data versus using the existing plugin db either. However, as nobody outside Newtek (if even them) has direct access to the plugin db data, I see no other easy/fast means of getting such a compatibility list directly pulling from existing LW plugin db published any time soon. Do you?

What Jeric's proposing might not be an optimal solution, but it does appear to be one that can feasibly be done in a timely manner -- which I believe is his main point, but if I've misunderstood, I'm sure he'll correct me. :devil:

jwiede
06-15-2018, 02:46 PM
It would also be good if NT operated a plugin app store, like auto****. https://apps.autodesk.com/MAYA/en/Detail/Index?id=7028623843288563914&appLang=en&os=Win64

Offering a central store like this would make it easier on developers who don't want to be bothered with setting up their own web site...and for users who have to look to archive.org to dig up old plugins abandoned years ago by some developers.

I strongly agree, something like that would be great, both for convenience (to users and devs) as well as in it's "lasting store" potential. By offering direct browse/install integration into LW, it could add another reason to upgrade as well. Having the free marketing, etc. would also likely encourage third-party development. There are lots of potential wins there.

Alas, Newtek's track record with LW IT-related projects, this forum, etc. hasn't ever really been great. Operating such a store requires a bunch of effort put into curation, fraud prevention, and general oversight and management. Unless Newtek could find a third-party company willing to develop and maintain such store services at minimal cost, I really don't see it as something they'd be up for undertaking for LW. Still, agreed, it'd be very good to have, and is clearly the direction the 3D markets are taking.

Hmm...does the Tricaster "ecosystem" have such a sponsored store? Certainly that'd offer a much, much greater upside potential for Newtek, so if it isn't happening for Tricaster, the odds of it happening for LW seem vanishingly slim at best.

jeric_synergy
06-15-2018, 03:59 PM
Hmm...does the Tricaster "ecosystem" have such a sponsored store? Certainly that'd offer a much, much greater upside potential for Newtek, so if it isn't happening for Tricaster, the odds of it happening for LW seem vanishingly slim at best.
Possibly the understatment of the week.


What Jeric's proposing might not be an optimal solution, but it does appear to be one that can feasibly be done in a timely manner -- which I believe is his main point, but if I've misunderstood, I'm sure he'll correct me.
Exactly. Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of "good enough".

Your points about NewTek's inability to handly ongoing data services is taken: this is exactly the sort of task an ACTUAL wiki might be good at (it just seems to me that LightWIKI never actually was a good reference): updated by users, ONE spot, etc. That's BETTER than a sticky thread, exactly because it would not be a thread. It would just be a table.

Aside from the dozens of LScripts that were generously created (mostly gratis, buddha bless the writers), there's not that many hardcore (i.e. compiled) plugins remaining, right?

raymondtrace
06-15-2018, 04:31 PM
I share in the skepticism and disappointment of NT marketing efforts. However, in recent days "2018" appeared in the list of LW versions ( https://www.lightwave3d.com/assets/plugins/submit_entry/ ). So somebody @ NT is poking at this.

Allegedly, ODRoot will offer a plugin DB/store ( https://www.origamidigital.com/lwNews/#page5 ). As much as I appreciate Oliver's tools, I know what happened to flay.com and setuptab.com...and believe NT is the ideal source for this kind of data. But I still look forward to what's to come.

It would not take much effort to scrape the pages at https://www.lightwave3d.com/assets/plugins/ and load them into another database. This could be done in a day, including the addition of features discussed above. The only reason why I wouldn't do this is because there's be no way to synchronize with any updates that might be made on lightwave3d.com. But then, is synchronization really an issue if NT never updates its own DB?

Perhaps if nothing @ NT resolves soon...

Regarding "fraud prevention", the Maya example link ( https://apps.autodesk.com/MAYA/en/Detail/Index?id=7028623843288563914&appLang=en&os=Win64 ) requires little responsibility on AD's end. If you try the "buy now" button, it just leads you to a PayPal screen for the plugin's author. AD is not involved in the transaction.

My plugin DB bug report included an offer of help (that's "free" if anyone @ NT is reading this). Let's make something useful.


...Aside from the dozens of LScripts that were generously created (mostly gratis, buddha bless the writers), there's not that many hardcore (i.e. compiled) plugins remaining, right?

There's enough that I've got a list of them still to buy. My plugin archive is up to 125 developer folders, 1400+ ls/lsc, 150+ py/pyc, and 700+ p files. This is way more than I can make use (or even sense) of.

jwiede
06-15-2018, 04:52 PM
Regarding "fraud prevention", the Maya example link ( https://apps.autodesk.com/MAYA/en/Detail/Index?id=7028623843288563914&appLang=en&os=Win64 ) requires little responsibility on AD's end. If you try the "buy now" button, it just leads you to a PayPal screen for the plugin's author. AD is not involved in the transaction.

I wish that were the only type of fraud prevention in question.

Stores are constantly attacked/infested by unscrupulous types fraudulently selling "mimic items", or otherwise selling questionable products. Preventing that kind of thing requires continuous monitoring and validation of accounts, sold items, and so forth. Stores have a lot more to deal with these days than used to be the case, precisely because they've become so prevalent and driven new forms of "phishing/mimic-fraud" as a result. On top of all of those kinds of concerns, there's also continual need for monitoring for "better known" kinds of inappropriate or illegal content (incl. IP violations, piracy, payment fraud, etc.).

It's nowhere near as simple as just allowing vetted vendors to register and sell products anymore. Too many bad people have motivation and means to take advantage of such systems, and are well-aware of and well-equipped to do so. The processes and systems (and security) required for such vendor presences have unavoidably become much more complex and costly as a result. You'd be quite shocked how much staff time and effort is continually consumed running something even as "constrained" as the AD App Store.

raymondtrace
06-15-2018, 07:09 PM
That's all true but we're already at a point where developers are promoting their tools here on NT's web property. In the past few months I've spent $1000+ on 4 developers that appear on these forums. All PayPal transactions. All could have been sketchy transactions.

A decent way to discern real developers from a scammer is to relate their product lock ID, also maintained in the NT hive mind. If NT can't verify you as a customer, you can't sell your plugin or rate/comment as a user of a plugin.

It would be a wonderful problem if we ever got to the point where NT was overwhelmed with developers to validate.