PDA

View Full Version : News about news in upcoming Lightwave updates or versions?



jaxtone
12-26-2018, 04:43 AM
Anyone more informed than myself that are able to tell what plans Newtek have for the development of Lightwave?

Haven´t used Lightwave for a while now because the new version not only have advantages and even if some parts of the Lightwave 3D 2018 were stunning some of the render and work processes felt less interesting in wasting energy on.
I know that some users often get mad when I pop up with my visions of what Lightwave could put more effort in when they update or make new versions. I especially announce the need of presets for hair, natural elements like water and plants just as much as real time booleans and character animation rigs automatically adapted to a body, but that´s probably because I am not interested in processes that takes so much effort that it kills all creativity, at least for me.

Maybe I wish for more than there is and of course salute Newtek´s Lightwave for being a wall against the Autodesk monopoly.

Anyway best of wishes for a new and better 2019 for all of you!

pixelinfected
12-26-2018, 04:43 PM
Me too i'm so curious about Lightwave 2019 and its releaseing time :-D

Franky6633
01-05-2019, 11:03 AM
143799

i would like to see a u.i overhaul, at least to have layout and modeler in the same window (attached is how i picture the layout and modeller in the same window)
also want to see hair & Fur, physics simulations and much more stuff in future lightwave products

prometheus
01-05-2019, 11:50 AM
143799

i would like to see a u.i overhaul, at least to have layout and modeler in the same window (attached is how i picture the layout and modeller in the same window)
also want to see hair & Fur, physics simulations and much more stuff in future lightwave products

There already are hair and fur and physics, nothing new to see..you need to stress on that you want to see improved ones, not mentioning something we already have :)

Not a big fan of that picture of the layout modeler, it´s too cluttered and we start to get to many side menu´s as we do have in blender for instance..not a big fan of that..I think there are smarter ways to go about it by switching theme layout, hopefully they try to keep
it as cleas as it is today, with some choices to switch layouts with presets, or a button only.

I agree on an overahaul ov the UI, that is mostly about fully resizable windows, probably docking options as adobe has it, I think this gives the most flexible hiding away and acessing windows, unless going blender modo window dragging that affects other windows, doing it the adobe way
avoids that and keeps the main windows and other windows as they are mostly, yet being able to stack up menus exactly where you want them.


Otherwise we need instant color respons in the UI changes and not having to reboot to see it in effect, and we need to be able to several values at once.

Foremost probably a majour undo fix in layout, it may not be possible though.

we need a curve import svg format to work, which could allow for parametric curve changes and full 3d extrusion when needed.

Getting Layout to recognize mesh and vertex to the point of mesh creation, deletion, and editing is probably a must very soon.

Weight paint natively in layout and the option ot use that for fluid emission, particle emission...I really miss that.

Sculpting in both layout and modeler.

Bevel and rounding needs serious overhaul to work in modeler and in layout as well.

Native GPU render solution.

The fiberfx render speed needs overhaul, or do a new rewrite, it isn´t fast exactly, currently it is at a level that forces me to look elsewhere really, native solution of GPU as mentioned may help, or it will be non cost effective with octane, if that is the purpose of getting octane, advantage is if you can afford it and need it anyway of course.






Then we are starting to catch up..but it´s only catching up, what I mentioned in the above list, is something I can use a free software to deal with pretty well, if I am going to invest my money in to something, I wouldn´t expect anything less
And that was really only the top of the iceberg really.

Ivé Just gone off topic, this was a thread about news about any eventual upcoming release, not a feature request...Sorry for that.

jaxtone
01-05-2019, 08:43 PM
Not to be itchy but I wonder where the quick fire and liquid engine are and also where an immediate dynamic endless boolean solution that integrates borderless tree and vegetation functions to build forests and lanscapes in minutes. Ehm... I guess I already mentioned the lack of a fully functional C.A. part of LW, but if not, its a joke as it is now and since way back in time! I would also need a working concept for dynamic hair and cloth, not as it is now, too much guessing and months of hard work without even get close to a decent result. No matter what the experts say, they are just excellent experts that that unfortunately don´t live in my software.

Fur, what can I say more than there must be loads of presets to not get crazy. How hard would it be for the Lightwave team that always say that its easy done to build ten presets of hair that easy could be editable to fit the purpose? If the same concept was added to most of the functions in LW that today and since day one takes a lifetime to conquer I guess LW would be one of the leading softwares again!

Maybe it was only a dream but I am awake now :)

pixelinfected
01-06-2019, 10:17 AM
i will do devil's advocade.
developing software need resource, resource arrive with new software or better new users.

we can thought in different branch of work.

new user... documentation with wiky is too weak.
Old Pdf are better, and if an old user (from 3.5 amiga like me) can download all pdf, new user not have it.

new advertising
many people think lw is dead, lw is not developed from many years and more, you need to do a better advertising about software.

educational free or near free
if you want to build a new users base you need to fight against autodesk that deliver all software free to student and teacher for years
and deliver them a lots of learning stuff

refresh to software, interface and concept
clean up all clones of tools, too much bevels, extrusion and more, reduce to one or two tools with all option
add TONS TONS TONS of preset to help newbey to start fast to do materials, light, set limbo, render settings, GI settings, Multipass settings, to speed up intial workflow

you must give people reason to use lw instead of free and powerful Blender... if you not work in that direction... lw will be like real3d, like other software that did history of CGI but actually too old to use.

all that i told need very few work of software developing but a lots of users work for preset, optimization and more. you can do, and you can have a new software....

ah and you can think to change the name and sell only importer fbx, collada, etc to import in layout and render... think to sell also render engine only, it's good, fast and well developed, think to sell like single interface or plugin for other software, think to load a layout where you can hide most of tools, leave only materials, light, render tools, and importer and you have render tool with netrender and more.

erikals
01-06-2019, 10:34 AM
make it cheaper. one can't expect many people to pay $1000 when a free App X has better features.

that's the current situation.

unless a drastic LW change comes along.
good start with LightWave 2018, but again, the challenge against App X remains.
can the $1000 price tag be defended? only to a certain degree.

Chris S. (Fez)
01-06-2019, 11:56 AM
No commercial package can defend their pricing compared to Blender. LW is still a reasonable price compared to C4D and Autodesk. LW is never going to have all the features so focus on performance and workflow. Don't spread the program too thin.

erikals
01-06-2019, 02:32 PM
just giving an inevitable forecast, also seen by Maya/Max/C4D.

i'm sure NewTek knows this though, and will have an upcoming strategy.

pixelinfected
01-06-2019, 02:36 PM
Lw have the right price, too cheaper is seen like not value, it's old but real big business law.
If cost few bucks it value few bucks. Open Source, low cost often are seen like low quality.
I know perfectly that is not a real value, you can see Resolve, the software used to manage color correction of Starwars' Solo cost only 299$ (today), everyone can buy it, and many people think is crap only be cause cost few bucks...
but is more difficult to fight against prejudice then fight against bug and features lacks.

erikals
01-06-2019, 02:41 PM
yes, but i'm not saying to make LightWave free, just lower the cost. or the alternative, Up the quality/features.

anyways, looking forward to LW2019.

jwiede
01-06-2019, 04:24 PM
LW is never going to have all the features so focus on performance and workflow.

Alas, that means focusing highly on UX and UI, something Newtek for whatever reason has been very reluctant to do. It means fixing basic lacks (like undo in Layout) as well, stuff modern users simply won't tolerate -- which also includes silent failures over error messages, user data/config corruption failures, and other workflow killers of that ilk, of which LW has _many_.

I think LW could have a bright future, but doing so means a radical change in how they manage and direct LW development, and where they focus LW dev efforts. It's not too late quite yet, but that window's almost completely closed.

Unfortunately, there's a fairly extensive historical record demonstrating Newtek's lack of willingness to make lasting changes in LW direction even when it costs LW major customer base attrition and revenue loss. That history leads me to believe that there is no basis for expecting the kind of changes needed any time soon.

prometheus
01-06-2019, 04:35 PM
Lw have the right price, too cheaper is seen like not value, it's old but real big business law.
If cost few bucks it value few bucks. Open Source, low cost often are seen like low quality.
I know perfectly that is not a real value, you can see Resolve, the software used to manage color correction of Starwars' Solo cost only 299$ (today), everyone can buy it, and many people think is crap only be cause cost few bucks...
but is more difficult to fight against prejudice then fight against bug and features lacks.

If blender would have a price of 1 dollar, or 50 ..or 400, I wouldn´t consider it getting more value, just less...so your statement I don´t follow.

I think the problem may lay in that it isn´t as full in the box as Houdini..which is specificly aimed for heavy effects, pricing comes with that, and cinema4d with mograph and lots of other stuff, better TurbulenceFD support etc.
3d max is also a heavy vfx player nowadays, (keep track on Alan McKay) and max has for a long time been there with vray for architechture, then you of course got maya.

Seems like modo and Lightwave places itself in the lower range..which could be dangerously if a free open source can manage most of what lw and modo does, and can also do much more natively, either they need to drop the pricing from current to even lower and continue to develop in the rate they do know, or really put some effort on catching up on the bigger boys..and probably raise the price a bit, when there are so good free tools nowadays, I suspect it will kick out the lower end software in the end.

I could probably accept a higher pricing of Lightwave..just for the sake of continue to develop a software that falls behind some of the free software.
That would mean no to a third party fluid solution and I would demand a fluid simulation that works with the same volumetric update as lightwave got, I do not want to live in uncertainty for half a year weather or not a third party fluid engine will be compatible or not.
I would also demand scultping and weight paint in native lightwave, and modeling tools in layout, and parametric stuff.

With that I would probably accept a higher price, but it still needs to compete against houdini and cinema in pricing.

jwiede
01-06-2019, 04:45 PM
Up the quality

This is the real answer (upping quality, in all aspects), and historically represents an area where FOSS projects have a difficult time competing in any lasting manner. Such efforts aren't "fun" for the devs, and they don't add to feature bullet-points, but there's a reason so many of LW's competitors have been quietly (or in some cases, quite openly) upping their quality and customer satisfaction game for years now -- precisely because they recognize it's value as FOSS differentiation.

Let's hope LW2019 brings some evidence of serious changes in LW engineering management and direction. I've see negligible evidence of such changes in LW2018.

Rayek
01-06-2019, 06:43 PM
User experience and GUI design in FOSS software like Krita has arguably left behind some of the industry giants in specific areas (digital painting in the case of Krita). Krita's GUI experience as a digital painter works just as well, if not better, than Photoshop or Painter because the developers listen very well to their users. It is a joy to use, in my opinion as a digital artist.

The elephant in the room is the upcoming 2.8 release of the open source 3d alternative: the GUI is modern, slick-looking, and very much an overhaul of the original 2.79 version (which isn't that bad in the first place). Hiring a properly trained professional User Experience Designer made all the difference indeed.

Add all the other eye-candy and new original features, and with legions of developers working on interesting (new) free and commercial (inexpensive) add-ons, new books being released, masses of video tutorials being produced for it... The community is VAST. And more and more is it accepted in studio workflows. It's going to get tough for lower-end commercial 3d software that doesn't look half as good, nor can offer even a tenth of the content available for it.

Point is that these mainstream open source options are no longer "unpolished" or unaware of the user experience.

I agree with Erikals and JWiede: it's an uphill struggle for Lightwave, and I feel the cost needs to come down, as well as the GUI updated. The ball is in the court of Lightwave's development team. If I were them, I'd feel somewhat intimidated by the open source storm blowing their way - or rather, with the storm already happening they will need to weather it. Although I hardly use Lightwave anymore, I do hope they will deliver 'the goods' this next update. Something needs to happen to Modeler now.

I wish the LW team the best of luck in 2019. They'll need it. And yes, I sincerely hope Lightwave WILL make a comeback, because the market needs the competition. Otherwise chances are it'll become polarized between expensive commercial packages and the free open source option, and I feel that wouldn't be a good thing.

prometheus
01-06-2019, 08:07 PM
User experience and GUI design in FOSS software like Krita has arguably left behind some of the industry giants in specific areas (digital painting in the case of Krita). Krita's GUI experience as a digital painter works just as well, if not better, than Photoshop or Painter because the developers listen very well to their users. It is a joy to use, in my opinion as a digital artist.





Well..I can see Krita as better in terms of digital painting for concept art etc, especially with the brushes, but I also feels it really is too slow compared to photoshop when it comes to editing in large images, and also when doing cutouts.
The text tool is horrible in my opinion in Krita, and I prefer to have photoshop layer effects as parametric, which I don´t think is possible in Krita.

Otherwise I enjoy it, has nice filters..but again, many are slow..I learned how to use the path tool and use vector layers to do cut outs, that I actually became more comfortable with than photoshop paths, and to go back and edit the curves and handles.

I did all cut out retouching on our products on my current work, good enough anyway...I prefered the gradient toning in photoshop though for adding shadows, but it worked out and the company didn´t have to invest in prescriptions for photoshop.

If you opt for creating digital art, and concept art..go with Krita.
Retouch and matte painting..I think I would advice go with photoshop.

they can all work for all the tasks ahead, just different workflow and speed on certain tasks.

erikals
01-06-2019, 09:54 PM
I sincerely hope Lightwave WILL make a comeback, because the market needs the competition.
Otherwise chances are it'll become polarized between expensive commercial packages and the free open source option,
and I feel that wouldn't be a good thing.

in time Blender will cost money as well, since specialized Plugins will be required.
on can already see this with the recent Fluids plugin.
of course, there is the built in water fluids option, that hasn't been upgraded note worthy for 15 years.

once Blender reaches a certain level, it will eventually operate as a platform, with dedicated, paid, plugins.

a "counter attack/defense" for NewTek would be to specialize LightWave, either for Film, Motion Graphics, or other.

Ztreem
01-07-2019, 03:36 AM
in time Blender will cost money as well, since specialized Plugins will be required.
on can already see this with the recent Fluids plugin.
of course, there is the built in water fluids option, that hasn't been upgraded note worthy for 15 years.

once Blender reaches a certain level, it will eventually operate as a platform, with dedicated, paid, plugins.

a "counter attack/defense" for NewTek would be to specialize LightWave, either for Film, Motion Graphics, or other.

Blender is and will always be free. Then of course if you want it to develop further and faster you should contribute to the developing fund or contribute with code.
Blender is soon getting a new native fluid solver similar to the flip fluids addon. (Very fast and good fluid solver for a very good price).
Newtek has to step up and communicate with their users and start to implement things like new gui, undo, better & faster workflows etc

Otterman
01-07-2019, 07:17 AM
Blender is and will always be free. Then of course if you want it to develop further and faster you should contribute to the developing fund or contribute with code.
Blender is soon getting a new native fluid solver similar to the flip fluids addon. (Very fast and good fluid solver for a very good price).
Newtek has to step up and communicate with their users and start to implement things like new gui, undo, better & faster workflows etc

Totally agree. I never understood the business model of Blender. How is it still developed without funds? What is the grand idea, kill off all the competition and monopolise the industry? I can't imagine it makes much of a dent with the big maya/max houses but the small guys, free is very appealing. Im surprised Lightwave is still profitable...if at all?

raymondtrace
01-07-2019, 07:43 AM
...How is it still developed without funds?...

It, and other open source projects, have funding.

We may need to get over the distractions of cost. Open source is more about being free to do what you want with code than just freely obtaining the code. This is one of the reasons for popularity of the software we're not talking about. Third party developers are more likely to build plugins or add-ons when they have greater access to the core functions and an understanding of the road map of the core. In our current situation, there may be 2 or 3 different developers competing among themselves to develop the same type of plugin, uncertain if NewTek is already developing the same.


...in time Blender will cost money as well, since specialized Plugins will be required...

That time is already here. There's a healthy ecosystem of sales, with easily navigated marketplaces. NewTek could benefit from doing the same.

Ztreem
01-07-2019, 09:59 AM
Totally agree. I never understood the business model of Blender. How is it still developed without funds? What is the grand idea, kill off all the competition and monopolise the industry? I can't imagine it makes much of a dent with the big maya/max houses but the small guys, free is very appealing. Im surprised Lightwave is still profitable...if at all?

The best part with Blender is not that its ”free”, it’s that it is ”open”. It is a community project driven by passion with open communication about features and roadmaps. I would say its more about contributing to an artist community than a business model. Coming from LW it’s breeze of fresh air, love it! :)

Rayek
01-07-2019, 10:22 AM
The best part with Blender is not that its ”free”, it’s that it is ”open”. It is a community project driven by passion with open communication about features and roadmaps. I would say its more about contributing to an artist community than a business model. Coming from LW it’s breeze of fresh air, love it! :)

I admit the open communication was one of the reasons I made the switch. I don't really understand why many (most?) software companies choose to be so secretive. Maxon, for example, was worse than Newtek, and I liked the relative openness of Newtek at the time when I switched to Lightwave. That changed, unfortunately, after the Core thing happened. Then that unnerving silence, and the open communication and road maps (even though they are changing all the time) on the BL side drew me in more and more. All those v2.8 development videos really got me excited. At this point it's not as if Lightwave will worry the competition or "secrets" will be stolen - so why not open up about what's happening? Or perhaps it is a terrible idea after all for Newtek. Don't know.

A general roadmap from the LW team would be nice, but probably not happening based on past events. And roadmaps can be held against a company as well (seeing the responses of some Affinity users at the Affinity forums). Still, I prefer open communication over silence. That I do know.

gar26lw
01-08-2019, 08:02 PM
unity has roadmap. stuff can be on the roadmap for a long time but it’s there. nested prefabs for example.

prometheus
01-08-2019, 11:44 PM
I admit the open communication was one of the reasons I made the switch. I don't really understand why many (most?) software companies choose to be so secretive. Maxon, for example, was worse than Newtek, and I liked the relative openness of Newtek at the time when I switched to Lightwave. That changed, unfortunately, after the Core thing happened. Then that unnerving silence, and the open communication and road maps (even though they are changing all the time) on the BL side drew me in more and more. All those v2.8 development videos really got me excited. At this point it's not as if Lightwave will worry the competition or "secrets" will be stolen - so why not open up about what's happening? Or perhaps it is a terrible idea after all for Newtek. Don't know.

A general roadmap from the LW team would be nice, but probably not happening based on past events. And roadmaps can be held against a company as well (seeing the responses of some Affinity users at the Affinity forums). Still, I prefer open communication over silence. That I do know.

Just quick thinking with a bad cold infection I got now.
I reckon blender doesn´t really have to live up to any potentional promised roadmap, developer may jump out or say, well it didn´t work ..or have as much as time as possible to do it.
There are no Paying customer to be responsible for, and they do not have a boss to answer for either.

The good part is the vast community, more artists, more feedback, and probably more developers that jump in by own interest, or to add some minor cost in addons, or find funding.

Rayek
01-09-2019, 01:02 AM
Just quick thinking with a bad cold infection I got now.
I reckon blender doesn´t really have to live up to any potentional promised roadmap, developer may jump out or say, well it didn´t work ..or have as much as time as possible to do it.
There are no Paying customer to be responsible for, and they do not have a boss to answer for either.


That's a myth that keeps getting mentioned. The Blender Foundation employs a core team of developers to work on Blender, and history has proven they've always come up with the goods for the most part. Proof is in the pudding: the successful complete rewrites from 2.49 to 2.5, and now the almost finished 2.7 to 2.8 rewrite. Compare this to Truespace and its demise when it was overhauled, or the Core failure... (Maxon seems to be doing well with their core update too, btw.)

And the BF DOES have to live up to promises and keep up with current 3d requirements, otherwise users will just leave, just like some users would leave if Lightwave won't come up with Modeler improvements in the next version. Both development teams are held accountable (even if that accountability may be focused differently). Popular software and its users are co-dependent. I'd almost go as far as stating here that Blender users have far higher expectations of Blender 2.8 than Lightwave users have of the next version of Lightwave.

Next, commercial plugin developers for any 3D package are accountable to their customers - no difference there either.

It is only the volunteers who work for free that your reasoning sort-of is valid for. But that also holds true for free plugin developers for other packages.

Perhaps Blender and other FOSS projects such as Krita might have been more grass-roots when they started out, but they've long outgrown that stage. Compare OpenToonz, for example as well: a core developer who is paid by an animation studio keeps everything nicely flowing, and is surrounded by a large group of volunteer developers. Some leave, others enter the scene.

The real question to ask, in my opinion, is: looking back at the development history of any of the still existing 3d applications, ask yourself which ones turned out successful and are kept updated in regular major overhaul cycles. Which are the ones that attract a large crowd of users. Which are the ones that come up with innovative new features. And which ones lag behind.

Houdini, Cinema4D, Blender, Maya, Max... all are proven very successful for various reasons. Others, like Lightwave, have not kept up as well, and management has made crucial mistakes in the past decade. As a consequence less users are attracted to Lightwave and development has lagged behind the competition.

Whether free, commercial, or open source has had little to do with the outcome, I feel, and more with (mis)management. Reading the times, and truly listening to your users.

I'd say the FOSS development philosophy seems to have been very successful for a number of software projects (not all, of course - same as commercial offerings).

Anyway, I'd prefer to think that so many factors are involved in the success of any software, no matter if it is commercial, open source, or otherwise. I agree with Erikals that Lightwave probably needs to find a good niche to become truly competitive once more.

(PS On a totally unrelated side note, of all 3d software I feel that "Lightwave" is by far the most attractive of names in all of 3d software history, and "Blender" and "Modo" the least attractive ones. "Maya" has a nice ring to it too. I mention this because just for the name alone Lightwave ought to be successful :) )

prometheus
01-09-2019, 03:37 AM
That's a myth that keeps getting mentioned. The Blender Foundation employs a core team of developers to work on Blender, and history has proven they've always come up with the goods for the most part. Proof is in the pudding: the successful complete rewrites from 2.49 to 2.5, and now the almost finished 2.7 to 2.8 rewrite. Compare this to Truespace and its demise when it was overhauled, or the Core failure... (Maxon seems to be doing well with their core update too, btw.)

And the BF DOES have to live up to promises and keep up with current 3d requirements, otherwise users will just leave, just like some users would leave if Lightwave won't come up with Modeler improvements in the next version. Both development teams are held accountable (even if that accountability may be focused differently). Popular software and its users are co-dependent. I'd almost go as far as stating here that Blender users have far higher expectations of Blender 2.8 than Lightwave users have of the next version of Lightwave.

Next, commercial plugin developers for any 3D package are accountable to their customers - no difference there either.

It is only the volunteers who work for free that your reasoning sort-of is valid for. But that also holds true for free plugin developers for other packages.

Perhaps Blender and other FOSS projects such as Krita might have been more grass-roots when they started out, but they've long outgrown that stage. Compare OpenToonz, for example as well: a core developer who is paid by an animation studio keeps everything nicely flowing, and is surrounded by a large group of volunteer developers. Some leave, others enter the scene.

The real question to ask, in my opinion, is: looking back at the development history of any of the still existing 3d applications, ask yourself which ones turned out successful and are kept updated in regular major overhaul cycles. Which are the ones that attract a large crowd of users. Which are the ones that come up with innovative new features. And which ones lag behind.

Houdini, Cinema4D, Blender, Maya, Max... all are proven very successful for various reasons. Others, like Lightwave, have not kept up as well, and management has made crucial mistakes in the past decade. As a consequence less users are attracted to Lightwave and development has lagged behind the competition.

Whether free, commercial, or open source has had little to do with the outcome, I feel, and more with (mis)management. Reading the times, and truly listening to your users.

I'd say the FOSS development philosophy seems to have been very successful for a number of software projects (not all, of course - same as commercial offerings).

Anyway, I'd prefer to think that so many factors are involved in the success of any software, no matter if it is commercial, open source, or otherwise. I agree with Erikals that Lightwave probably needs to find a good niche to become truly competitive once more.

(PS On a totally unrelated side note, of all 3d software I feel that "Lightwave" is by far the most attractive of names in all of 3d software history, and "Blender" and "Modo" the least attractive ones. "Maya" has a nice ring to it too. I mention this because just for the name alone Lightwave ought to be successful :) )

Thanks for your clarification on that.
And yes, Lightwave has been the coolest name for ages...but I don´t follow your conclusion on how that alone would promise a sucess.

Marander
01-09-2019, 04:01 AM
That's a myth that keeps getting mentioned. The Blender Foundation employs a core team of developers to work on Blender, and history has proven they've always come up with the goods for the most part. Proof is in the pudding: the successful complete rewrites from 2.49 to 2.5, and now the almost finished 2.7 to 2.8 rewrite. Compare this to Truespace and its demise when it was overhauled, or the Core failure... (Maxon seems to be doing well with their core update too, btw.)

And the BF DOES have to live up to promises and keep up with current 3d requirements, otherwise users will just leave, just like some users would leave if Lightwave won't come up with Modeler improvements in the next version. Both development teams are held accountable (even if that accountability may be focused differently). Popular software and its users are co-dependent. I'd almost go as far as stating here that Blender users have far higher expectations of Blender 2.8 than Lightwave users have of the next version of Lightwave.

Next, commercial plugin developers for any 3D package are accountable to their customers - no difference there either.

It is only the volunteers who work for free that your reasoning sort-of is valid for. But that also holds true for free plugin developers for other packages.

Perhaps Blender and other FOSS projects such as Krita might have been more grass-roots when they started out, but they've long outgrown that stage. Compare OpenToonz, for example as well: a core developer who is paid by an animation studio keeps everything nicely flowing, and is surrounded by a large group of volunteer developers. Some leave, others enter the scene.

The real question to ask, in my opinion, is: looking back at the development history of any of the still existing 3d applications, ask yourself which ones turned out successful and are kept updated in regular major overhaul cycles. Which are the ones that attract a large crowd of users. Which are the ones that come up with innovative new features. And which ones lag behind.

Houdini, Cinema4D, Blender, Maya, Max... all are proven very successful for various reasons. Others, like Lightwave, have not kept up as well, and management has made crucial mistakes in the past decade. As a consequence less users are attracted to Lightwave and development has lagged behind the competition.

Whether free, commercial, or open source has had little to do with the outcome, I feel, and more with (mis)management. Reading the times, and truly listening to your users.

I'd say the FOSS development philosophy seems to have been very successful for a number of software projects (not all, of course - same as commercial offerings).

Anyway, I'd prefer to think that so many factors are involved in the success of any software, no matter if it is commercial, open source, or otherwise. I agree with Erikals that Lightwave probably needs to find a good niche to become truly competitive once more.

(PS On a totally unrelated side note, of all 3d software I feel that "Lightwave" is by far the most attractive of names in all of 3d software history, and "Blender" and "Modo" the least attractive ones. "Maya" has a nice ring to it too. I mention this because just for the name alone Lightwave ought to be successful :) )

This!!! I agree to every word you wrote.

raymondtrace
01-09-2019, 07:11 AM
...There are no Paying customer to be responsible for, and they do not have a boss to answer for either...

Blender is a business with income and prioritized budgets. There is indeed a boss. Take a look at the number at the bottom of https://cloud.blender.org/welcome

As of this post, there are 3949 subscribers paying at least $9.91/month USD. That equates to about $40,000 of revenue per month, in addition to grants and other donations made to the foundation.

Franky6633
01-09-2019, 08:26 AM
@prometheus well another idea i had in mind is to find a way to keep the top and bottom toolbars and just have 2 buttons on top of modeller and layout that would just switch windows and menus within the same software and just let users focus on your task without interfering with the layout, just a thought, i just want an easy way to do 3d in lightwave, i REALLY LOVE lightwave, but switching between programs is unfortunately frustrating for me

prometheus
01-09-2019, 09:43 AM
@prometheus well another idea i had in mind is to find a way to keep the top and bottom toolbars and just have 2 buttons on top of modeller and layout that would just switch windows and menus within the same software and just let users focus on your task without interfering with the layout, just a thought, i just want an easy way to do 3d in lightwave, i REALLY LOVE lightwave, but switching between programs is unfortunately frustrating for me

That idea is what I kind of had in mind too.
I am not as frustrated perhaps as you with split app, I find it more easier to go direct in to any model operation in modeler, while having other objects in the scene just as they are, without modeling process interfering In Anything, not changing layout windows or anything, when I am satisfied I just send it over.

This doesn´t mean I am against modeling tools in layout, they are desperately needed..My dream would be to have both a split app, as they are today, or simply model in layout when needed, doing extrusions with time animatable parameters, doing realtime booleans animated without the need of dp nodes and similar, and sculpting both in modeler and layout.
I am not just sure how feasable it would be to expect they could develop both a seperate modeller and one in layout that works in essence the same.

- - - Updated - - -


Blender is a business with income and prioritized budgets. There is indeed a boss. Take a look at the number at the bottom of https://cloud.blender.org/welcome

As of this post, there are 3949 subscribers paying at least $9.91/month USD. That equates to about $40,000 of revenue per month, in addition to grants and other donations made to the foundation.

Yes...I already answered Rayek on that, I was just guessing, not knowing....wearing a shame hat right now :)

raymondtrace
01-09-2019, 11:48 AM
Yes...I already answered Rayek on that, I was just guessing, not knowing....wearing a shame hat right now :)

I posted that more for the benefit of any NT employee reading this thread. It hurts my tiny brain to wonder why NT does not similarly cultivate an audience for its product. I would love to spend an hour just having an open conversation with the NT marketing manager to discuss fundamental concepts in marketing. I admire how long the Lightwave program has survived without marketing. It is an industry miracle.

art
01-09-2019, 01:44 PM
(PS On a totally unrelated side note, of all 3d software I feel that "Lightwave" is by far the most attractive of names in all of 3d software history, and "Blender" and "Modo" the least attractive ones. "Maya" has a nice ring to it too. I mention this because just for the name alone Lightwave ought to be successful :) )

I've been thinking the same for quite some time :)

gar26lw
01-09-2019, 05:14 PM
I posted that more for the benefit of any NT employee reading this thread. It hurts my tiny brain to wonder why NT does not similarly cultivate an audience for its product. I would love to spend an hour just having an open conversation with the NT marketing manager to discuss fundamental concepts in marketing. I admire how long the Lightwave program has survived without marketing. It is an industry miracle.

it is quite amazing at the resilience over the years with that and slow development, lack of industry standards, feature requests etc. its a good program and ui, up to 2015.

jwiede
01-09-2019, 08:02 PM
I'd love to hear from Newtek management what their "top 5" problems are with Lightwave, and what directions/efforts they're taking to address them.

3dslider
01-21-2019, 04:26 AM
I would love to hear from Newtek too for his words the upcoming LW 2019 in Blog or Roadmap what they have achieved now... It is time to change in 2019 and don't make the same error in the past cause there are a lot users who love Lightwave still and ready to invest more with Newtek. All need are two world to make as reconciliation : Artists and Developers team ! We need to move instead of staying in one's own corner, is it not better than this ?

I will like to say as jwiede : what are their "Top 5" features in the upcoming with Lightwave 2019 ?

Ztreem
01-21-2019, 06:03 AM
I would love to hear from Newtek too for his words the upcoming LW 2019 in Blog or Roadmap what they have achieved now... It is time to change in 2019 and don't make the same error in the past cause there are a lot users who love Lightwave still and ready to invest more with Newtek. All need are two world to make as reconciliation : Artists and Developers team ! We need to move instead of staying in one's own corner, is it not better than this ?

I will like to say as jwiede : what are their "Top 5" features in the upcoming with Lightwave 2019 ?

It won't happen!

raymondtrace
01-21-2019, 07:46 AM
...All need are two world to make as reconciliation : Artists and Developers team !...

There is no difference between artists and developers. They both go through the same processes to create a product. Many artists cannot reveal their work or clients here because of NDAs. We don't find out about their artistic efforts until the final product is released.

You can be assured that there is a LW2019 in development, just as there was a LW2016 in development.

3dslider
01-21-2019, 10:06 AM
It won't happen!

:( Why ?



There is no difference between artists and developers. They both go through the same processes to create a product. Many artists cannot reveal their work or clients here because of NDAs. We don't find out about their artistic efforts until the final product is released.

You can be assured that there is a LW2019 in development, just as there was a LW2016 in development.

I mean if developers listen to artists on what they need to create better in term of tools, so it is win-win for both and they grow up in every year this exchange, right ?
If LW 2019 was as LW2016, it will take very long time to finish :/

erikals
01-21-2019, 10:26 AM
If LW 2019 was as LW2016, it will take very long time to finish :/
as a NewTek programmer said,

the Mesh Engine of Modeler is more tricky to get right compared to the Layout Mesh Engine.
so, quite some time >if< they are working on Modeler that is.

nothing else to do but wait.

meanwhile, add some new plugins >
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD495DCA5001810EB

https://i.imgur.com/fMb2Mjm.gif

raymondtrace
01-21-2019, 10:44 AM
...I mean if developers listen to artists on what they need to create better in term of tools, so it is win-win for both and they grow up in every year this exchange, right ?
...

There has never been any obstacle in offering the artist's perspective to the developers. There is a function in the program and on lightwave3d.com to submit bug reports and feature requests. In exchange, you wait to see what is offered in a patch or full release.

Expecting any other exchange from developers (or artists) is extraordinary in every creative endeavor. Surely you would not break into a recording studio to coach Beyonce on how she should perform and then expect her to give you status updates on each recording take. Nor would you require her to report on which tracks will appear on her next album.

Ztreem
01-21-2019, 12:12 PM
:( Why ?



Because NT has said that they will not talk about future updates or development with anyone. So sit and wait and hope they have fixed the issues you have with LW.

3dslider
01-21-2019, 01:03 PM
as a NewTek programmer said,

the Mesh Engine of Modeler is more tricky to get right compared to the Layout Mesh Engine.
so, quite some time >if< they are working on Modeler that is.

nothing else to do but wait.

I got it.



meanwhile, add some new plugins >
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD495DCA5001810EB

https://i.imgur.com/fMb2Mjm.gif

Awesome ! Damn i am still working on my plugin for 3D rendering hope in early 2019 if it goes well :) Great for inspiration ;)


There has never been any obstacle in offering the artist's perspective to the developers. There is a function in the program and on lightwave3d.com to submit bug reports and feature requests. In exchange, you wait to see what is offered in a patch or full release.

Expecting any other exchange from developers (or artists) is extraordinary in every creative endeavor. Surely you would not break into a recording studio to coach Beyonce on how she should perform and then expect her to give you status updates on each recording take. Nor would you require her to report on which tracks will appear on her next album.

Pity ! How developers can make some tools without listen to artists, i mean they are artists or what ? As examples, i hear in Disney, inside the developer always listen to artists to make better tool that is a lot of success for 2D or 3D animation... Why not for Newtek ? It feels a little to much as monologue.




Because NT has said that they will not talk about future updates or development with anyone. So sit and wait and hope they have fixed the issues you have with LW.

Oh well... that sound not good. I find it a little mute between users and developers. If in futur there will be a bridge between both that would be great !

raymondtrace
01-21-2019, 01:54 PM
...Pity ! How developers can make some tools without listen to artists, i mean they are artists or what ? As examples, i hear in Disney, inside the developer always listen to artists to make better tool that is a lot of success for 2D or 3D animation... Why not for Newtek ? It feels a little to much as monologue...

I sense there is confusion based on language. The developers are listening to artists. Try my very rough translation below.

#####

Il n’ya jamais eu d’obstacle à offrir aux développeurs le point de vue de l’artiste. Il existe une fonction dans le programme et sur lightwave3d.com pour soumettre des rapports de bogues et des demandes de fonctionnalités. En échange, vous attendez de voir ce qui est proposé dans un patch ou une version complète.

S'attendre à tout autre échange de la part des développeurs (ou des artistes) ne se fait pas dans une entreprise créative. Vous ne diriez jamais à Beyonce quelles chansons elle devrait chanter. Vous n'auriez jamais besoin d'elle pour vous donner des mises à jour sur les chansons qu'elle pratique. Beyonce n'a pas besoin de vous dire quelles chansons apparaîtront sur son prochain album. Vous découvrirez les chansons qu'elle a créées lors de la sortie de l'album au public.

3dslider
01-21-2019, 02:13 PM
@raymondtrace : sorry i was reading quickly xD... yes you are right

Oui j'avais compris ton texte mais j'ai du lire en diagonal car j'avais pas le temps lol

english : Yes I understood your text but I had to read diagonally because I had no time lol

thank you your effort :)

Photogram
01-21-2019, 09:52 PM
@3dslider
Bon courage cousins de la France!!!
Ne laissez pas les oligarques détruire votre belle patrie...
On pense beaucoups à vous ici au Québec!
Je vous admire car vous êtes debout et solidaires!
Vive la France!

shraddhamane
01-23-2019, 12:26 AM
Great

jwiede
01-23-2019, 09:00 PM
I will like to say as jwiede : what are their "Top 5" features in the upcoming with Lightwave 2019 ?

Except that's not actually what I asked. I asked what they felt the "top 5" _issues_ were facing Lightwave. That's different, and I asked that way specifically to avoid them having to discuss future development, roadmaps, or in any other way make statements that could be misconstrued as commitments.

I'd still like to know, too.

erikals
01-24-2019, 04:59 AM
Layout undo, must have been one, so happy they mostly solved it.
lack of modeling tools in Layout another
third is perhaps the Modeler / Layout split

i'm not sure if a company would ever do that though, giving a list of "5 things we struggle with"

gar26lw
01-24-2019, 05:27 AM
i'm not sure if a company would ever do that though, giving a list of "5 things we struggle with"

I just read the other day..

Allegorithmic acknowledged that lack of multi-texture layer baking to single textures was a problem and wrote that they had it on their roadmap to fix in the future, giving an explanation of why it was hard to do and why it might take a while.

can't say fairer than that really.

jwiede
01-24-2019, 02:01 PM
i'm not sure if a company would ever do that though, giving a list of "5 things we struggle with"

Wow. If you're having trouble believing companies discuss "priority product concerns" with customers, that suggests a serious lack of awareness in how other 3D and even gfx software companies in general interact with their customers.

erikals
01-24-2019, 02:44 PM
they didn't in the past, so if what you say is true, that policy must have changed.

but yeah, not an expert on that area. interesting to see how times changed.