PDA

View Full Version : Things in Lightwave that bring me down....



hrgiger
05-31-2004, 05:46 PM
I love Lightwave but these are just some of the things in Lightwave that make the program difficult or a pain in the *** to work with.


1. Rendering. Just forget about Radiosity on a high polycount scene where you also have to deal with volumetric lighting. FPrime is of course a wonderful renderer/alternative but currently without support for volmetrics and shaders....We've been told Newtek is going to work with Worley on improving the SDK and that would be a fine enough answer for me on LW's slow, but high quality renderer.

2. The hoops I have to jump through to set up joint morphs. Ridiculous. Why can't I just bend a joint and shape it and then have it remember that morph when the bone is bent there the next time? This is as basic for animation as beveling is to modeling. The rotate skelegons was a good throw but misses the target. We need to see what the joint looks like when it's responding to multiple weight maps. We need a solution all in Layout.

3. Slow animation. We need some near real time feedback. I shouldn't be able to find out who is guest starring on the west wing in the same time it takes for me to rotate a bone in layout.

Exception
06-01-2004, 05:44 AM
1. Rendering
The speed is the problem, as you say. Also the inability to properly save out a radiosity lighting solution. Baker is terrible.

2. No subpixel displacement

3. Inconsistency. I think this frustrates me more than anything. Why are there some channels animateable and others not? Why is there still no clip map in surface properties? Why is there mapping possibilities in some channels and others not? Why is Fog so controllable in terms of distance and falloff and Light falloff not? Why does everything have an opacity modifier but pixel and image filters do not?
I understand why, dont get me wrong, but I still get annoyed by it.

4. Weird lags hickups, lockups for a few seconds, non-responsiveness, modeler errors which make no sense and do work after restarting and so forth. I must say it works a lot smoother in [8] so kudos to Newtek for solving most of that. I havnt had it crash on me ONCE, which is so amazing that I'd like to kiss some people (you too chuck ).

Exper
06-01-2004, 09:30 AM
Just a little more about Rendering:
improve Refraction+Reflection interaction cos when you have both of them actived the renderer completely sit down (not mentioning if you have Radiosity and/or Caustics actived).

hrgiger...
maybe I'm misunderstanding but...
volumetrics can be excluded using "Volumetric Radiosity On/Off" switch.

Panikos
06-01-2004, 10:31 AM
Exper, you are right about Volumetrics Radiosity.

Its pitty this IMPORTANT function is hidden by default, and you have to manually place it on the LW-GUI.

The Volumetric Radiosity Switch, enables "Participating Media" to be considered into the GI calculation. These are Volumetric Light Beams, HyperVoxels or any other Volumetric Elements added in the Volumetric Plugins Slot (HD_Instance, etc)

I always remember to turn this switch off when I use Radiosity. LW renders way faster when you dont need this feature.

Of course, if you have Participating Media into your scene and you have this Switch-OFF, they will be rendered but they wont be shaded by GI, and GI will simply cross them along.

Pitty that the manual writes 10 words about this. Pitty !!!!

hrgiger
06-02-2004, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by Exper
Just a little more about Rendering:
improve Refraction+Reflection interaction cos when you have both of them actived the renderer completely sit down (not mentioning if you have Radiosity and/or Caustics actived).

hrgiger...
maybe I'm misunderstanding but...
volumetrics can be excluded using "Volumetric Radiosity On/Off" switch.

Yeah, I know you can exclude volumetrics, but I was more referring to the fact that FPrime doesn't render them. Once they do, I can't see much reason to ever use Lightwave's radiosity again.

Librarian
06-03-2004, 02:56 AM
The only thing that makes it a pain to work with 8 ofr me is stability.
I´ve had more crashes in a day with 8 than with 7.5 in a month :(

Exception
06-03-2004, 09:23 AM
Librarian: honestly?
I find [8] to be infinite more stable that 7.5-anyversion. It hasnt crashed once on us with scenes and operations that would normally cause 7.5c to crash with us a couple of times a day.

Maybe something is wrong with you? Video driver maybe?

Librarian
06-03-2004, 10:12 AM
You lucky man :D
I doubt it`s a driver issue. I´ve tried it on different configurations with different driver version. Makes no difference.
It happens when using some of the new tools. Dopetrack, Scene editor and bone tools and I regulary get the 'LW has generated erors message' .
Everything else is fine :(

Exception
06-05-2004, 04:53 AM
Do you run a self diagnostic each morning before showering to check your systems for any biomechanical faults?

*sorry* just noticed my previous comment saying 'maybe there is something wrong with you?'

clarityprod
04-07-2005, 05:16 PM
None of these things should be a problem ever. LW is like driving a beat up old dodge dart LOL. The only reason it is even used in the industry is cost. This is not going to be the case from now on. Maya and XSI are now competing in price now. LW also has a look to it when rendering. Kind of like Bryce does LOL. LW is like a third world country that we are always being asked to support. The only artist that like LW are the ones that havent had the time or experience in real software like Houdini, Maya and XSI.

Good luck fellow artist in using that 2 dollar paint brush while trying to paint a million dollar house LOL

Thumbs Down
:)

UnCommonGrafx
04-07-2005, 08:30 PM
Gotta ask, clarityprod: Whatchya sellin'?

Or marketing for? Seems those others are sending out armies to support the 'low' entry price to get them into the system for the higher priced goods.




I want Realtime preview; press and play.
Consistency in the interface.
Everything hookup-able to everything else. {Tesselator seems to have this in that Nodal thing he's talked about}
Subpixel displacement
Everything for done for fprime to be the answer to number 1 on my list
Lots more integration with their other IP materials, i.e., Aura, VTEdit, etc.

MooseDog
04-07-2005, 08:46 PM
None of these things should be a problem ever. LW is like driving a beat up old dodge dart LOL. The only reason it is even used in the industry is cost. This is not going to be the case from now on. Maya and XSI are now competing in price now. LW also has a look to it when rendering. Kind of like Bryce does LOL. LW is like a third world country that we are always being asked to support. The only artist that like LW are the ones that havent had the time or experience in real software like Houdini, Maya and XSI.

Good luck fellow artist in using that 2 dollar paint brush while trying to paint a million dollar house LOL

Thumbs Down
:)


the poignancy, clarity, intellect and professional insight just stuns me.

i have confidence in the new dev team, judging by their recent actions and activity, and humbly predict great changes (based on speculation by me :) ) that wil generally render such above literature to slowly disappear. mho.

Celshader
04-07-2005, 09:04 PM
The only artist that like LW are the ones that havent had the time or experience in real software like Houdini, Maya and XSI.

Honestly, I'd go learn another software package, but I can't get rid of all these LightWave jobs that keep falling on my head. Since September of 2003 I've had to deal with non-stop employment as a LightWave artist. I haven't sent out my reel since late 2003 and I still get calls from folks who want me to do LightWave work. I haven't had any free time to work on my own stuff or even clean up the apartment because of all this [email protected]#$ing LightWave work I've been getting.

Oh, the horror, the agony of a never-ending paycheck. :D


Good luck fellow artist in using that 2 dollar paint brush while trying to paint a million dollar house LOL
Well, I still haven't seen another software package do this yet:
http://www.celshader.com/gallery/lore/lore-blink.mov

...or this:
http://www.celshader.com/gallery/md/TKD-kara.mov

So I have no incentive to switch to another package for personal projects.

---

On a serious note, I have great faith in the current development team, and I am truly excited for LightWave's future.

Hervé
04-07-2005, 11:46 PM
hey Clarity, Van Gohg was painting with cheap paint and one dollar brushes... (maybe even cents...) so even though you can buy whatvever software at whatever price... it is not so important... your brain is what's important... and you come here with your 3 small posts telling us we don't know what we're missing...

trust me, I know what I'll miss if I quit LW to go XSI... ;) ;) :D

Kuzey
04-08-2005, 05:24 AM
I could say something but I won't...it's just be too easy to even be worth it. ;)

This thread started out so interesting!!


Clarityprod, can you post some of your amazing work, I know I'm not great at 3d but I like to learn from masters such as yourself.

Kuzey

Hervé
04-08-2005, 05:59 AM
BTW, my father had a dodge dart 270... :p

Dodgy
04-08-2005, 07:00 AM
Maya and XSI are now competing in price now. LW also has a look to it when rendering.

A world class look, which is why maya bought in MR and so did Max and XSI. Those programmers must really know a lot about 3d to buy one in...


The only artist that like LW are the ones that havent had the time or experience in real software like Houdini, Maya and XSI.

I use Maya at work, and I'm repeating myself here when I say it's okay, but it's no where near as good as you make out. I still prefer LW.

jeffb
04-08-2005, 07:02 AM
Let me add to this better Open GL support. Especially nice if procedurals and gradients as well as multiple image maps could be shown.

:eek: And one more thing, not to start a war but...

Integration of modeler and layout. As an animator I must say I've been slowed in projects by the clunky, work around solutions needed because modeling and animating are artifically seperate.

Nemoid
04-08-2005, 10:11 AM
as things will progress i see a process of evolution of Lw towards better animation performance , both from the rigging side and animation. there's a great work on plugs for rigging and animating better in lw, and so many probs will be solved .
F prime has been just updated, and will improve with new sdk changements. it will come a time where it will be fully integrated and working with shaders and so on. just a matter of time.

sure, i am always been for a good integration between modeler and layout, despite many users seems toi be more conservative. i still believe this is the right solution to many probs and also to software management of system resources, and organization, even from the programming side : common tools shared from modelling and layout compartments , modules or whatever, means less but better tools and great possibilities even on animation side.

i don't think Lw is into a bad situation right now tho. to me, its only at the first steps of a path that will bring it to a strong evolution. right now is a cool package,very capable, fast but with some area to enhance. and with the new team i think it will rise in its full glory. :cool:

wacom
04-08-2005, 11:05 AM
Anyone who says the other packages are priced that same as LW must not be using the "hi-end" features of those packages. Even the people in XSI are britch'n about how XSI doesn't have any USABLE hair/fur until you buy the $6,000 version. And guess what- that's the only choice you have.

Maya? Don't even go there. I'm so sick of that PR stick they keep waving around. If they didn't have fairly good animation tools...well we know...
All they seem to do is go around to instructors and wisper "Maya is the industry standard..." over and over. It's like Alias wants to be the PhotoShop of 3D. Fat chance at that- there ain't nothing like PostScript in 3D to make you the main cheese!

Houdini? Find me a small team that uses it alone effectivly. Houdini is great...but the useablity/price?


No for me the main things I want fixed in LW have to do with the SDK. Many of these problems could be addressed by third parties. Infact LW has a foaming at the mouth third party community. Open the SDK and feel the love.

See that's what keeps me from going over to XSI: choice. I don't like the everything hardwired into the main app way of doing things. I like that LW doesn't cost $1000 more out of the box because LW is including the full version of Sas and Fprime. I'd rather choose when to buy those things and IF I need to.

I will say that the new dev team will most likely address my latest SDK concerns. The animation tools are getting there...but there is still a HUGE amount of room for improvement. I'm going to look into that PMG and Pointoven solution for now.

I'm going to be faithful to LW 'till 9 comes out (ok so I've played around a bit on the side, but I was drunk and...)...after that point we'll just have to see.

lardbros
04-08-2005, 02:54 PM
wacom: "I'm going to be faithful to LW 'till 9 comes out (ok so I've played around a bit on the side, but I was drunk and...)..." Hahahaha thats funny

Anyway, with that guy going on about XSI and Maya, and Wacom saying Maya PR whisper in instructors ears. I had a peek at the Digimation website the other day to see if my model was on there, and they have a plugin for 3DMAX. It's with a bunch of other ones all called Reyes 'something'. They claim it's the ONLY cloth simulation to enable users to have cutting or sewing. THE BLOODY CHEEK OF IT! Us lot get it out of the box, and also save a couple of grand over 3DMAX, not including these plugins.

I'm sure the plugins work fine, but why lie about it being the only solution. Maybe they just meant for 3dMAX? :rolleyes:

Now, things that bring me down are, Modeller and Layout using separate RAM chunks... i don't have enough as it is, but this takes the **** a bit. Just wish that somehow they could not integrate the programs but make it so they use image and model info from a single place.

Also, many other software users that bring me down about LW gets me down. A friend of mine from uni made the Maya leap after using 3dMAX and he is always impressed when he sees some of my work and i tell him i use lightwave. (not being a bighead :) , but i like it when it happens)

Gollum
04-09-2005, 07:06 AM
Forgive me for ignoring the troll from page one and skipping right to the interesting part of this discussion. ;)

1) Integration
Don't get me wrong, I like my modeler and layout seperate, I'm used to it after 8 years I guess. BUT Hub still isn't working as efficiently as it should in connecting the two apps and there's many scenarios where I wish that the seperation was a thing of the past. I want textures and geometry to only occupy memory once; I want to see and adjust my bone deformations right in modeler; I want the power to use my modeling tools in animation, etc... It should be possible to have all that and still keep the basic modeling and animation interfaces seperate (for those who love it so much and insist on using only one app at a time).
Importance: 7/10

2) SDK Limiations
LW has always had an abundance of cool plugins, many of which are free. The past years have seen plenty of complaining about the SDK's limitations preventing developers from bringing their tools and LW to the next level. I think Newtek is finally on this (as the latest FPrime update indicates) and given more time will hopefully pave the way for a brave new world of great LW plugins...
Importance: 9/10

3) Animation and Rigging
8 was a major step in the right direction, but there's still a LONG way to go. The classic toolset has plenty of weaknesses compared to other animation packages, the new rigging tools don't adress this issue. Newtek obviously knows this, or they wouldn't have developed IKBooster. But will they continue improving IKBooster, turning it into a real world class animation system to replace the aging "traditional" CA tools, or will it stay a half-hearted and unfinished attempt to offer an alternative? The potential is there, but IKB still needs more power, usability, speed and most of all documentation. Either that or its about time the traditional tools get a major overhaul!
Importance: 8/10

4) OGL Performance
I don't mind the sluggishness in modeler as much as I do in layout. Fast feedback is essentioal for animation and layout's OGL just doesn't cut it. Some of today's games display more animated, texture mapped and pixelshaded geometry at 60 fps, than LW can display at 20 fps in flat shaded mode, something's definitely wrong here!
Importance: 9/10

5) Modeler Toolset
I love modeling in LW. The toolset needs consolidation almost as much as refinement or additions though. Over the years such a wealth of tools have accumulated in Modeler that its becoming a bit cumbersome. There's too many tools that do essentially the same thing. I suggest a spring-cleaning! Also give us edge support at last, its really time for it! And would someone please be so kind and look up that old piece of code that made Metaform Plus tick, Ctrl+C it and Ctrl+V it into our beloved Tab key SDS mode? Pretty please give us N-Gons, it can't be that hard!
Importance: 8/10

faulknermano
04-09-2005, 10:09 PM
I find [8] to be infinite more stable that 7.5-anyversion. It hasnt crashed once on us with scenes and operations that would normally cause 7.5c to crash with us a couple of times a day.


not infinitely, but NOTICEABLY more stable. before, loading, reloading, clearing scenes built up this dam that would burst after a few goes. lw8 seems to have a bigger dam. lscript also is much better in terms of affecting stability. although i still have some beef with master-class lscripts causing instabilty and thus, crashes.

i agree with exception, lw8 is more stable than the versions that went before it. that's my observation.

faulknermano
04-09-2005, 10:22 PM
The only artist that like LW are the ones that havent had the time or experience in real software like Houdini, Maya and XSI.

Good luck fellow artist in using that 2 dollar paint brush while trying to paint a million dollar house LOL

Thumbs Down
:)

ha! it goes the other way too, pal. what CG bigotry.. yeesh...



I use Maya at work, and I'm repeating myself here when I say it's okay, but it's no where near as good as you make out. I still prefer LW.

but after all this time you gotten used to it right? ;) i'm getting the hang of it, at least. still get the hair-ripping blues (but i wear a skinhead hairstyle <- oxymoron there). but now, i'm pretty much enjoying discovering what lies beneath

to keep in line with the thread, some of the things that have been originally posted about LW is what i find better in maya. like feedback: superb in maya. bones/joint are great (though i STILL dont like its skinning - smooth skin is dog-slow at times)

however, the notable exception is rendering. i dont share the sentiment with radiosity because i dont do radiosity. i light all my stuff "tradtionally". it gives me full creative control (and with lscript a breeze to get preset lighting and spinning lights into place and manage them) and render times are controllable.

i love lw for its rendering, truth be told, because like that 2 dollar brush that was mentioned earlier, it is easy to use, and i know how to use it, and its beautiful. sure i'd like to try mental ray and its gazillion options. maybe if i have the time, or given the luxury of research by my company (which they most likely wont). ;)

faulknermano
04-09-2005, 10:37 PM
Even the people in XSI are britch'n about how XSI doesn't have any USABLE hair/fur until you buy the $6,000 version. And guess what- that's the only choice you have.


the grass is either greener or crappier on the other side. after working with maya and lw for some years now, i'm getting mighty curious what's so good about XSI. ah well... just curious. heh.



Maya? Don't even go there. I'm so sick of that PR stick they keep waving around. If they didn't have fairly good animation tools...well we know...
All they seem to do is go around to instructors and wisper "Maya is the industry standard..." over and over.

PR is PR, but working knowledge of maya is different. you can judge as much as you know. if you know little, you can only judge little, if more, then more. you can discriminate maya simply because of PR, but thats discriminating: not a rational thing.


Houdini? Find me a small team that uses it alone effectivly. Houdini is great...but the useablity/price?

well, surely YOU cant afford it.. hehe. :D



I'm going to be faithful to LW 'till 9 comes out (ok so I've played around a bit on the side, but I was drunk and...)...after that point we'll just have to see.

i stopped understanding software "faithfullness". i try to be faithful to my fiancee, faithful to my God, but faithful to LW? :D just me... you can safely ignore me on this point.

Celshader
04-10-2005, 03:20 AM
the grass is either greener or crappier on the other side. after working with maya and lw for some years now, i'm getting mighty curious what's so good about XSI. ah well... just curious. heh.

I'm tempted to buy the $500 "Foundation" version of XSI for just two things: playing with "real" fluid dynamics and being able to apply to Stan Winston Digital as an XSI artist, since that studio uses XSI more often than LightWave.

It's hard to drop $500 on software that I'll use more as a toy than a tool, though. I use my $400 copy of FPrime all the time, and I bought the $500 Sasquatch for a recent project that has more than paid for the initial cost of the tool. Every $500 upgrade of LightWave has paid for itself at one point or another.

XSI, though...I can't justify $500 for it at this time. I gotta pay my rent. :o

Dodgy
04-10-2005, 06:25 AM
but after all this time you gotten used to it right?

Yeah but you can get used to hammering nails in your head too :)

I just find LW has less nails for me :)


PR is PR, but working knowledge of maya is different. you can judge as much as you know. if you know little, you can only judge little, if more, then more. you can discriminate maya simply because of PR, but thats discriminating: not a rational thing.


Yeah, but in this case I think a LOT of maya is PR. I've used it in depth, modelling, animating and rendering, and there are a lot of things they've done which make no sense to me. Don't get me wrong, it has a lot of nice features, mostly in the animation side, and the ability to put a channel on EVERYTHING should be a standard in LW (or any 3d package) as it is in maya, but there's a lot in maya which is rubbish quite frankly :) So I definitely don't believe the hype where it's concerned.

faulknermano
04-10-2005, 06:52 AM
but there's a lot in maya which is rubbish quite frankly :) So I definitely don't believe the hype where it's concerned.

:) i got some fellows whose been using maya for a lot longer than i have, who haven't, in my view, dug into maya's bowels. honestly, i think they'd be better off using lw, given their complaints about maya being too complex where it shouldnt be (e.g. surfaceing, modelling). but for them, they started out with Alias PowerAnimator, so they chose maya because of its familiarity. but i think they miss the good ol' poweranimator days (they tell me), especially on the side of rendering: the native renderer of poweranimator was, according to them, so much better than maya's native renderer now.

Dodgy
04-10-2005, 08:42 AM
Yeah, I think the main problem is one of perception. A lot of my fellow artists see LW as being backward, or just think that it lacks a lot of things in comparison in maya. When I've told them of failings in maya they're usually 'Nah, that can't be right' because they expect it to be the best. How mental is that?

For example, you can't set up IK on a hierachy in maya, you can only do it on joints(bones), so you have to parent objects to joints (or skin them!) before you can use IK on them. I just found this out the other day from a friend using maya. He is used to using LW, and went to Ik a robotic arm and couldn't without this workaround :P

Maya is littered with things like this, tools that don't work properly, and they're on version 6 already, with tool which haven't been fixed from 2 or 3 or even 1. I'm not saying LW doesn't have this problem too, but I am saying it's not alone in this, whilst some people seem to think it is.

Nemoid
04-10-2005, 12:59 PM
well every software has its problems and also every software applies diffrent methods to solve the same problem. for example u can't properly rig a char in Maya without weigh maps. they're used to control bone influence. period.

but u can - and it's recommandable- in Lw, just because bones have their fallof, power, and other settings to make a decent work, and then, if u really need apply weights too. weights slow animation in Lw, also.

the point is : different software, different toolset and techniques to achieve the same results. some tasks that can make use of huge workarounds can be a two click task into another. that's life, and also depends from the coders and if they thought that tool with animator in mind.

so, what's is good and what's bad ?

good is all that make u work better and creatively . freeing u from thinking too much to solve a simple prob, whle u will focus in important problems : in the case of animation, timing : movement, staging and more.

bad, is the opposite, unintuitive tools to solve small tasks. u just loose time, focusing in small things. u maybe find a good workaround, but the problem u solved is small however.

every program have both things, btw. so u simply adopt the app that u feel is more confortable for you, even economically wise, but not only btw. i's more a personal feeling than a rational fact.

Lamont
04-10-2005, 11:35 PM
Since I model a heck of a lot more than I render and animate timewise, here they are in no special order:

- The location of some of the options... well snap option in particulars. I want to be able to set the snaps in the tools settings (move, rotate, drag, scale, stretch..), not in the global options. There needs to be a modifiyer key for snaps.

- Grrrr.. what else? Oh, yeah.. location of some options again. The subdivisions should be able to be dialed up or down without going to the options. Or just assigned to a hot-key.

Kuzey
04-11-2005, 04:13 AM
- Grrrr.. what else? Oh, yeah.. location of some options again. The subdivisions should be able to be dialed up or down without going to the options. Or just assigned to a hot-key.

I like that idea!!!

Maybe they can do something similar to the "rendering" button in layout, click and you get a dropdown menu with each of the options??

Kuzey

Gollum
04-11-2005, 07:31 AM
Speaking of Sub-D, I'd love to see a mode similar to what ZBrush has, where you can model at different subdivision levels and move up and down between them at any time you want. I'm not asking for ZBrush-like sculpting tools (yet), but something like that, well executed, could be the next endomorphs (read: one of the few über-cool features pretty unique to LW).

So basically one button to go up a Sub-D level, and another to go back down. The upper level should inherit the deformations done to the lower and vice versa...

wacom
04-11-2005, 10:06 AM
Speaking of Sub-D, I'd love to see a mode similar to what ZBrush has, where you can model at different subdivision levels and move up and down between them at any time you want. I'm not asking for ZBrush-like sculpting tools (yet), but something like that, well executed, could be the next endomorphs (read: one of the few über-cool features pretty unique to LW).

So basically one button to go up a Sub-D level, and another to go back down. The upper level should inherit the deformations done to the lower and vice versa...

I don't see how this couldn't be scripted by someone and attached to the scroll wheel on your mouse! It's under "o"...but I don't know how easy it would be...

I guess what you guys are asking for is a visable subdivision level as well (ie lines)?

------------------------------------------------()-------------

On a side note: Does anyone use PM and Maya? I'm wondering just how good PM's animation tools are...point oven + the basic studio could be a real wining combanation as I'd get a new renderer with SSS and subpixel displacement too!
Just wondering since I'm an IK fool and would rather support a small group of people who know LW than a certain other group...

Hell maybe I'm just lazy? So how good is PM for animation? What are the point oven limitations?

wacom
04-11-2005, 10:45 AM
the grass is either greener or crappier on the other side. after working with maya and lw for some years now, i'm getting mighty curious what's so good about XSI. ah well... just curious. heh.
----------------------------------------
Well $500 gets you a lot of XSI for the money. It seems your XSI dollars go a lot further in many instances than your Maya dollars. Game companies are figuring out too that there is more to making games then Maya. And SoftImage is good at most likely paying them to make their games in XSI (kind fo like Alias?). Half Life 2...Resident Evil 4. Games are big biz. The student pricing on XSI is amazing as well so I think we'll have a new crop of SoftImage people in a few years.

After using 3DS and then Max, trying Maya, and falling in love with LW I'd say that XSI is most likely going to be the only program I'm thinking of looking at. It just seems more of a logical program to add to the tool set than Maya, but that's me. There are a few LW'ers who have added it to their tool set and say it fills many holes for them. I'm also looking into a PM and PointOven solution...



________________________
PR is PR, but working knowledge of maya is different. you can judge as much as you know. if you know little, you can only judge little, if more, then more. you can discriminate maya simply because of PR, but thats discriminating: not a rational thing.
---------------------------------------
I have a lot of friends who were using Maya and guess what- with a few demonstrations (and hey Fprime didn't hurt) they started moving over closer to LW. When you're a freelance artits, graphic designer or work in a really small studio LW CAN make a lot of sense. Why do they start out using Maya? Because the Art Instatutootie and others from which they graduated had some encyclopedia sales man came to them with Maya under his arm. For the animators this is fine, but as I said for other people Maya doesn't make sense. You can't take a blanket approach to 3D. Arch Viz, Graphic Design, Industrial Design, Film, Video, Broadcast Video, Game design, Simulation etc. are reason it upsets me to see one program that claims to do it all.

Besides I get upset when something is supposed to be as good as it gets and it leaves me hanging. I don't buy into marketing, but so many people do and so many other great things get over looked because of it. I like compatition and I don't want 3D to come down to one application (just look at how slowly Adobe updates/reinovates PhotoShop...urg...the brush tool isn't a replacement for Painter or Flash. Dont' even get me started on the stoneage tool that is Illustrator).


___________________________________
well, surely YOU cant afford it.. hehe. :D
---------------------------------------------------------
Well Houdini is actully free to try all the way up the the highest levels without a watermark! You can download it and go to town if you want. I'll leave the renderman stuff to Pixar and shadder junkies though.


_________________________________
i stopped understanding software "faithfullness". i try to be faithful to my fiancee, faithful to my God, but faithful to LW? :D just me... you can safely ignore me on this point.
------------------------------
I'm not overtly faithful- I just don't like to waste time learning new tools when I don't have too. LW works for everything I need so far. I'd like a little better animation tool set, but on the whole I haven't found anything else in other programs that isn't simply feature lust. My itch to learn more about MR is better served with XSI than Maya- can you argue that one?

Nemoid
04-12-2005, 05:52 AM
Well $500 gets you a lot of XSI for the money. It seems your XSI dollars go a lot further in many instances than your Maya dollars. Game companies are figuring out too that there is more to making games then Maya. And SoftImage is good at most likely paying them to make their games in XSI (kind fo like Alias?). Half Life 2...Resident Evil 4. Games are big biz. The student pricing on XSI is amazing as well so I think we'll have a new crop of SoftImage people in a few years.



well, softimage was very expensive when Maya was low in prices yet, but then they suddenly and greatly changed the price policy, mantaining development quality. Maya is still the leader even because of the great advertising it got in years and bevause u can learn it in many schools. Alias is a good promoter of itself. fortunately quality pays and so XSI is expanding its user base alot recently and not only for price.




After using 3DS and then Max, trying Maya, and falling in love with LW I'd say that XSI is most likely going to be the only program I'm thinking of looking at. It just seems more of a logical program to add to the tool set than Maya, but that's me. There are a few LW'ers who have added it to their tool set and say it fills many holes for them. I'm also looking into a PM and PointOven solution...


Modelling wise i didn't like Maya.with my techniques it takes ages to make something good in maya. i will try XSI and see if its comparable to modeler, but i don't think i'll get the same feeling as in modeler thoug. Maya vcan be good for animation, and rendering, i think also for sfx, but i think modelling will remain the one Lw strong point.




I have a lot of friends who were using Maya and guess what- with a few demonstrations (and hey Fprime didn't hurt) they started moving over closer to LW. When you're a freelance artits, graphic designer or work in a really small studio LW CAN make a lot of sense. Why do they start out using Maya? Because the Art Instatutootie and others from which they graduated had some encyclopedia sales man came to them with Maya under his arm. For the animators this is fine, but as I said for other people Maya doesn't make sense. You can't take a blanket approach to 3D. Arch Viz, Graphic Design, Industrial Design, Film, Video, Broadcast Video, Game design, Simulation etc. are reason it upsets me to see one program that claims to do it all.

Besides I get upset when something is supposed to be as good as it gets and it leaves me hanging. I don't buy into marketing, but so many people do and so many other great things get over looked because of it. I like compatition and I don't want 3D to come down to one application (just look at how slowly Adobe updates/reinovates PhotoShop...urg...the brush tool isn't a replacement for Painter or Flash. Dont' even get me started on the stoneage tool that is Illustrator).


agree totally. Lw can and is one of the best solutions for solo users and small team, in term of costs, toolset to work fast and many other things. you can build a great renderfarm with only the cost of machines ,and this is a good point to be considered when buying a software. toolset is quite good even despite some probs. so, i'd say Lw suits many users of this kind, and small studios can surely start with Lw as the main software, and couple it with other solutions only if necessary.




Well Houdini is actully free to try all the way up the the highest levels without a watermark! You can download it and go to town if you want. I'll leave the renderman stuff to Pixar and shadder junkies though.

never tried Houdini i know is a good package though totally parametric or something. it's used alot in movie industry especially for SFX and particle work.





I'm not overtly faithful- I just don't like to waste time learning new tools when I don't have too. LW works for everything I need so far. I'd like a little better animation tool set, but on the whole I haven't found anything else in other programs that isn't simply feature lust. My itch to learn more about MR is better served with XSI than Maya- can you argue that one?

i think that considering that's a good softwares, very streamlined and that does alot of things with a good work in animation and rigging toolset, coupled with a good UI organization and many little touches here and there, Lw could be better than now, without revolutions.

if then NT wants to go ahead rocking as always, they will slowly and patiently enhance the core and part of the base of the app, and sdk too. this would allow for a total silent revolution able to bring incredible things. i actually think this is the work the team is doing now and that with Lw 9.0 will be fully noticeable. :)

DaveW
04-18-2005, 03:31 PM
On a side note: Does anyone use PM and Maya? I'm wondering just how good PM's animation tools are...point oven + the basic studio could be a real wining combanation as I'd get a new renderer with SSS and subpixel displacement too!
Just wondering since I'm an IK fool and would rather support a small group of people who know LW than a certain other group...

Hell maybe I'm just lazy? So how good is PM for animation? What are the point oven limitations?

I don't know about messiah<->maya (ask on the cgtalk forum) but point oven workflow is great, you just save the animation as a mdd file and load it into LW, Maya, C4D, 3ds Max, and soon XSI. The mdd loader only loads the current frame, so it is more memory efficient and you can save a new version of the animation from messiah and it automatically updates in LW without having to reload the mdd file. It won't work for game exporters that require skeletal and weight info though, you'll need to use the DirectX exporter or write a custom exporter for your engine.

The animation tools are really great, imo if you're serious about character animation then messiah is the best plugin you can get for LW. It really is a killer combo.

faulknermano
04-19-2005, 01:58 AM
The animation tools are really great, imo if you're serious about character animation then messiah is the best plugin you can get for LW. It really is a killer combo.


or you can use Maya and this:

http://thespread.ghostoutpost.com/Maya2LW2.html




I'd like a little better animation tool set, but on the whole I haven't found anything else in other programs that isn't simply feature lust. My itch to learn more about MR is better served with XSI than Maya- can you argue that one?

the main reason why i wrote Maya2LW2 was because maya's MR implementation makes its usage more complex than writing a maya <> lw translator. :eek: then again, i dont think i've given maya's MR a fair shake yet.

however, i'd like to point out something about `features`. i dont see maya as a program with "a lot" of features. it just has this environment that, once you know it, makes animation very flexible. it's super stable, even in my most complex scenes - which is not saying much. still...

to illustrate "environment", i have this scene where this large mountain of ice cracks in the middle and the major pieces fall. because of additive transparency issues, i decided to crack it using animated booleans. in maya, there's no feature called "animated booleans", per se. what you do is boolean two objects and animate the second object. the construction history takes care of the boolean as it passes through time.

obviously this crack is not a straight line. so i use a segmented box and `run it through` a lattice, a technique inspired by the old classic lw `morph-through-a-bone`technqiue. if i want to change the shape of the crack, i edit the lattice.

next i have to split the object where the cracks lie. this can be done easily with object replacement, but i opted to use a node that separates the object; those not sharing each other's points are separated as separate objects. once the boolean cuts through the ice completely, the polySeparate node kicks in and i'm able to select and move the ice chunks individually.

the moral of the story is that you have a bunch of standard tools (e.g. lattice, boolean, etc), which are not impressive by themselves, some of which are assumed to be modelling tools only, yet work together to create animated booleans, and dynamic splitting of meshes and ability to control their transforms.

this is the part of maya that works as it should, which makes it the part which i like best about it. as for rendering, please dont talk to me about it. ;)

erikals
04-21-2005, 01:47 PM
I can't help make some points,

1. Maya's bevel tool didn't work properly untill version 6.5 :eek:
2. You still have to pay to upgrade to 6.5
3. SubDivision modeling in Maya 6.0 is dead-slow, you have to uprade to 6.5, and it's not free.
4. Before you had to export each SubD object in Maya, as of a bug.
5. Haven't checked this in 6.5, but 6.0 Mental Ray can't render SubD models with Partial Crease.

I've only started looking into Maya, I'm sure there is more annoing things.
C'mon... LW is not that bad.

Wonderpup
04-21-2005, 02:52 PM
For me the thing that really hurts rigging in lightwave are the hidden traps, the way some parts of the process conflict with other parts, like the way RPR messes up targeting for example.

Its sad because in many ways the rigging process is really nicely handled, and certainly for the cartoon type stuff I need to do, the ways bones and weightmaps interact seems superior to the way other apps do things.

It's just that ' walking on eggshells' sensation I get when guys like Jonny Gorden tell me that things like RPR don't really work properly with the other tools and should be avoided.

If these internal conflicts could be resolved I think it would increase confidence in the tools and go some way to dispelling the feeing that lightwave rigging is a 'black art' and hard to learn.

Dodgy
04-21-2005, 03:57 PM
For me the thing that really hurts rigging in lightwave are the hidden traps, the way some parts of the process conflict with other parts, like the way RPR messes up targeting for example.

Its sad because in many ways the rigging process is really nicely handled, and certainly for the cartoon type stuff I need to do, the ways bones and weightmaps interact seems superior to the way other apps do things.

It's just that ' walking on eggshells' sensation I get when guys like Jonny Gorden tell me that things like RPR don't really work properly with the other tools and should be avoided.

If these internal conflicts could be resolved I think it would increase confidence in the tools and go some way to dispelling the feeing that lightwave rigging is a 'black art' and hard to learn.

I completely agree. The biggest problem with LW's animation side (speaking as one who regularly defends LW from people who don't like it for animation) is the motion architecture. Getting things like IK and Match goal orientation to play well with other tools can be a bit of a pain till you know the pitfalls and work arounds. You can get it to work, but it requires a bit of experience. Hopefully the NT team is working to get that more uniform, as I've seen a few things popping up which show they're twiddling with it in the background (unfortunately backwards in some cases, but it must be a complex beast back there I think!) so give it another couple of revisions and hopefully we'll see some goodies.

If it did all play nicely it would be fantastic as weight maps are so much more adaptable in LW, and i very rarely use them at all...

Nemoid
04-22-2005, 01:36 AM
This is mainly because of Lw history and development in time. the stronger part of lw has always been the modelling toolset and not so much the animation side. also, the rigging tools were addressed in time into the faster way, but not the best way, with skelegons. i personally have nothing against skelegons, but they didn't allow for a rapid rigging unless you are very expert to not have to make so many changes. this is the same for some other features too wich brought partial implementations of cool things : sockmonkey anyone? distortions on subd's for uv maps too, and also conflicts we talked about in this thread.

now these things are changing, because the development strategy has changed with the new team that imo is very capable and follows a different roadmap.

great improvements are coming from Nt, and i'm sure many things will be furtherly optimized during the dev process. things are getting better free update by free update. :) and i underline : free

The intentions to make of Lw a fantastic app, with easier rigging and animation tools are noticeable.
And also, to add on this, good plugs and lscripts came to help with this too. right now we have : Maestro, T4D tools, LCS, ACS4, and TAFA.

Sure, alot of work is still to be done. But great times for Lw are arriving indeed. :thumbsup:

wacom
04-22-2005, 11:48 AM
Yeah I'll admit that I felt a little burnt when LW8 came out, but now that I see the new Dev team is addressing things that, while not as glitzy as others, have been in need of fixing since...well since before I started using LW.

Case in point: The text tool. I totaly forgot how #*#*'up it can be to work with at times as I've been doing 99% of my text outside of LW and importing it. Now for me the update isn't the biggest deal- but I know that quite a few people use LW for flying logo animations, credits etc. For them this will be a very nice thing to have fixed. PSD exporter is going to be revised so that it works and has more functionality- this has been needed by almost everyone I know for some time. So while we don't have photon maping yet (though Kray is doing a good job) it's nice to know things that should work with any graphics package are getting fixed.

It's also nice to see the dope track and such getting some more attention and it shows they aren't going to just introduce something "new" and call it good until 10 revisions go by without fixing the "new" problems it causes.

On a side note- People like myself want NewTek to open up the SDK ASAP, but I'm begining to understand why they might not want to open it up all the way...

Now this is just speculation, but lets look at it this way- LW's main seller to many studio's is the fact that LW has free render nodes. Now having the render closed off insures that the studio is going to need a few copies of LW running to set up the lighting and texturing, even if they the animation from another package. Maybe if things were opened up too far it would allow people to simply write in house middleware that would by pass using LW for lighting etc. They could do almost everything in one package- translate it to LW "code" and then run it on SN for free! Not a good way to sell copies fo LW.

This could be why they keep opening it up bit by bit, just to only let as little in and out of the enigine pipline as needed...just a thought.

dobermunk
04-23-2005, 02:32 AM
3-item-only windows...
http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=36060

I mean, - !?

nightowl22
04-23-2005, 11:16 AM
Lightwave is the runt of the litter! I've used lightwave for seven years and I find Maya and Cinema 4d much more reliable and easier to model with. I fight Lightwave everytime I use it and screamernetII. You can forget things like cloth.
I keep hoping the new updates will take care of things, only sometimes and somethings.

Celshader
04-23-2005, 12:10 PM
I've used lightwave for seven years and I find Maya and Cinema 4d much more reliable and easier to model with. I fight Lightwave everytime I use it and screamernetII. You can forget things like cloth.

I've used LightWave since 1997, and I cannot forget things like cloth. The past several months demanded that I do nothing but ClothFX to earn a living.

A key weakness of LightWave's dynamics tools right now is documentation. It took me two years to figure out the subtle but distinct difference between Spring (the force pulling points together along edges) and Stretch Limit (points cannot pull apart farther than the Stretch Limit allows). I also only figured out recently that, for tight-fitting clothes, I should not restrict the Stretch Limit to low values like 1%, and instead should reduce the Polygon Size to help correct sagging or drooping in my material. The manual doesn't cover this stuff -- I had to figure it out on my own.

If it helps, I have dynamics scenes for the LightWave community to download and reverse-engineer here:
http://www.celshader.com/gallery/md/

---

I find it interesting that you find Maya easier to model in than LightWave. It is a rare sentiment here in Los Angeles. Every LightWave user I know who went off to learn Maya came back with nothing but bitter complaints about modeling in Maya. I know a Maya veteran who stuck out a politically abusive job because of the pleasure he took in LightWave's modeler -- it was his first time using LightWave, and he enjoyed modeling in it. Even after Maya added subpatches, he still preferred LightWave's implementation of subpatches.

I figured the entire reason third-party modeler packages like Rhino, Silo (http://www.nevercenter.com) and Modo exist was because folks found Maya modeling so painful.

Cinema4D, on the other hand, has gathered much praise from a LightWave user who I greatly respect. On his opinion alone, I will concede that Cinema4D might rival LightWave for ease of modeling.

nightowl22
04-23-2005, 12:23 PM
I appreciate you defense of Lightwave.
I have always gravitated back to Lightwave after using other software.
Maya is a pain at best (powerful but a pain) However, it has many CAD like snapping and offset features that help Model true to engineering dimensions. Lightwave could really use more features like this. I use CAD programs like SolidWorks, SolidEdge and such, so I like exact measurements.
Maya has layers and layers of menus that really make life misreable. Texturing is a joke at best.
You are right about the documentation for dynamics. I don't need a restatement of the obvious. I want to know what the features do if I change them.

wacom
04-23-2005, 04:25 PM
I appreciate you defense of Lightwave.
I have always gravitated back to Lightwave after using other software.
Maya is a pain at best (powerful but a pain) However, it has many CAD like snapping and offset features that help Model true to engineering dimensions. Lightwave could really use more features like this. I use CAD programs like SolidWorks, SolidEdge and such, so I like exact measurements.
Maya has layers and layers of menus that really make life misreable. Texturing is a joke at best.
You are right about the documentation for dynamics. I don't need a restatement of the obvious. I want to know what the features do if I change them.

Which brings us back to what kind of work you're doing. Max has some great features when it comes to working with CAD type models- and it makes a lot of sense why it would. It also makes sense that one of the best photon map'n renderers was first made for it (Vray) since that reflects a large portion of who uses MAX. I often wish I had Rhino's point snapping and sliding for many models- but then again I wish Rhino had some of the more elegant functions of LW.

I also wish at times that LW had a history stack, or at least a command line, for me to do things in modeler. Then again LW's modeler has had to pick it up in other places to make it faster to model in- to compensate. I've found that for 75% of the stuff I could go back through a stack to alter I can just remodel in almost the same time in LW...still it would be nice. I still agree with the idea that LW has fewer, but often better wieghted tools, and other packages have a larger tool box...

Wasn't LW mainly made for film and video? Quick turn arounds that look right are more important to those people than ones that a perfect but take longer. AKA many would want faster rendering etc. over even something as simple as CAD like point snaps in LW.

nightowl22
04-23-2005, 05:02 PM
LW may have been made for film and video but visualization presentations has viewers with big pocketbooks. A one minute presentation can generate a 2-3 million dollar capital requisition with the right corporation. It's not the Incredibles or Monster's Inc.

wacom
04-23-2005, 07:18 PM
LW may have been made for film and video but visualization presentations has viewers with big pocketbooks. A one minute presentation can generate a 2-3 million dollar capital requisition with the right corporation. It's not the Incredibles or Monster's Inc.

That's until people start really bidding on these things...

But you're right, I feel the same way about game design- that is big biz too...and not always one of LW's strongest suits (though it works for many studios). Arch-Viz and such can make a solo artist or a small studio a lot of revenue for the hours put in. Have you been looking into Kray?

nightowl22
04-23-2005, 09:27 PM
I don't know Kray but I'm looking at anything right now. Easy is the key word. I'm too old to spend two years learning how to make cloth work for me.

I'm hoping when they install "Pope Benedict 16" that all software will work as the manuals say. (no offense to religious people), I just can't get over this "install" thing.

I.C.UpsetPeople
04-23-2005, 10:10 PM
I want to be able to paint all my textures in the UV Map window with all the tools from photoshop and be able to change the opacity of the UV map AND be able to adjust the UV map at any time while painting AND be able to see your 3d image in another window AS YOUR PAINTING. Its not too much to ask for.

nightowl22
04-23-2005, 10:44 PM
Kray seems to have some interesting features. I'm curious about the network rendering. It has to be easier than screamnetII. ( I have used snII on 10 computers many times with good success) I just have to exercise it and the network everyday to make sure it will be ready when I need network rendering.