PDA

View Full Version : This isn't fun anymore...



harlan
09-27-2004, 07:25 PM
I'm sooooooooooo sick of this non-standardized "let's do everything our way" mentality. As much as I love Lightwave, sometimes it gets me so frustrated that I could just "BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP" and then "BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP" right after "BLEEEEEEEEEEPING" down someones "BLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP" neck.

Seriously, this is getting ridiculous!!!!

How many friggin button clicks, jerry rigs, and half-assed workarounds do I have to make to accomplish one simple task. I swear to god I'm 3 minutes away from bailing on this thing for good - which is awful coming from a LW user since the first release of LW!

Come on guys, seriously!!!

PS - I'm going to post a more detailed complaint a little later, but I really needed to vent for a second.

PPS - One thing that just pisses me off so much is that we still don't have the basic tools like Lattice Deformation or even "real" bones!! These are things that have been in existence for years. There's tons of documentation & code samples on these things yet we don't even have a rudimentary implementation of these things. Hell, SIGGRAPH exists for a reason guys!!! Attend some of the seminars, get some of the "papers" while you're there rather than just demo at the expo...of course you'll need to start with the papers published circa 1987!!!!

UnCommonGrafx
09-27-2004, 07:30 PM
Been there...

Breath, brother, breath...

Now... when you come back later... bring them there tools you told us about. I'll get the rum bottle and have a sit with ya.

Just don't write as long as DJ does. I'm gonna be reading ALL night over there!

Drop me an email when the time allows.

harlan
09-27-2004, 07:32 PM
We can't import a friggin 16 bit TIFF file on the Mac LW, but by god we can certainly "BOOST" our IK and work even slower than before "BOOSTING" it.

harlan
09-27-2004, 07:54 PM
lol Robert!

Just to be a complete pompuous ***, I animated the same scene in 3DS (the DOS version, not MAX) in a whopping 23 minutes - the same scene took approximately 6hrs to reach a barely useable test setup in LW. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not a 3DS user in any way shape or form - I hate that App with a passion. The point is, I did an animation using the STANDARD toolset of an ancient application from the DOS era, because you CAN'T accomplish the same thing in LW without painstaking workarounds.

The first person who says "then just go use 3DS" will be on the receiving end of a virtual pimp-slap. I'm simply bitching about the fact that we don't have the basic tools that have been around for nearly 10 years.

hrgiger
09-27-2004, 08:03 PM
Well, then just go use 3DS.

Had to.

Seriously though, I would have to agree that there are a few basic functions that have been left out that really need to be implemented. Deformation latices would be nice but I'd settle for a real implementation of smartskin.

harlan
09-27-2004, 09:47 PM
A few? I can think of at least 20 off the top of my head.

SmartSkin would be a great addition, but even that is well beyond what I'm talking about. I'm talking the BASIC tools found in every other application on the planet (including free apps, like Blunder).

Lattice Deformation is a basic deformation tool, but that's just one tiny little tool out of many with the algorithms, code snippets, and documentation freely available on the net that we still don't have integrated; and lightwave has been around how long???? Exactly!

Rather than feed us stupid little tools that hardly anyone will ever use (ie: Sockmonkey), spend your resources on standardizing the app to some degree.

Oh, and consider yourself pimp-slapped! ;)

nemac4
09-28-2004, 12:40 AM
Lightwave does have it's problems but at the same time,.. when I read things like this about apps like XSI, I can't help but feel better as we have had most of these features for some time now.

http://www.xsibase.com/news.php?detail=1104

SplineGod
09-28-2004, 01:14 AM
Harlan, what are you doing thats causing you so much grief? :)

Tom Wood
09-28-2004, 04:51 AM
I'd settle for decent audio in Layout. :rolleyes:

TW

nixx
09-28-2004, 05:10 AM
Lightwave does have it's problems but at the same time,.. when I read things like this about apps like XSI, I can't help but feel better as we have had most of these features for some time now.

http://www.xsibase.com/news.php?detail=1104

Yes, but have you seen just how these things are implemented in XSI ? Way more than just entries in a feature list - the much-talked-about knife tool is just one shiny example of this, and the same goes for most all of the other features.

I hate to be the devil's advocate but that's the way it is if you ask me.

nick

Yog
09-28-2004, 06:41 AM
Yes, but have you seen just how these things are implemented in XSI ? Way more than just entries in a feature list - the much-talked-about knife tool is just one shiny example of this, and the same goes for most all of the other features.
Yep, the knife tool is a bad example. Sure, it took Softimage a long time to implement it, but when they did they leavered all the functionality they could into it.
In LW you knife some geometry you just get a cut through your polygons. In XSI, you get that, pus the option of having multiple parralel cuts automatically, plus you can hide all of the geometry on one side of the cut or the other.
Plus you can animate all the perameters of the knife tool, i.e. hide all the geometry on one side of the knife, key frame it low down on the model and then animate the knife tool moving to the other side of the model for an instant hide/reveal technique.

Exper
09-28-2004, 07:51 AM
Yep, the knife tool is a bad example. Sure, it took Softimage a long time to implement it, but when they did they leavered all the functionality they could into it.Good example Yog!
We can only dream about a simple function like this one! :(

nemac4
09-28-2004, 08:52 AM
Good example Yog!
We can only dream about a simple function like this one! :(

The way I look at it is like this:

I have a really fancy swiss army knife and small multi-tool money clip/knife. Which do I use most? Which do I prefer? Well,.. I like the small one due to it's portability and also doubles as a money clip.
As you can guess, I look at LW like the small knife. It may not have all of the tools but the tools it has are fast, functional and get the job done on most levels... and it's cheaper. With Lightwave I don't have to pay 2k or more to get hard body dynamics or 6k or more to get hair/fur. Concerning the xsi knife tool, LW users can do those things in one way or another,.. be it right clicking to reposition the cut or a series of morphs for the cut effect. I find that when I use the knife tool,.. I generally just want a simple cut.
I'm not saying I never need the swiss army knife and I'm not saying it is not nice to have. What I am saying is that the tools we use depend on our needs, ..which varies by the user. LW fills most of my needs on a day to day basis. There is always room for improvement but given the new dev team,.. I'm sure we will see more in the upcoming versions.

starbase1
09-28-2004, 09:20 AM
It's hard to gauge now, but when i first started using LW, (5.6), the interface sent me completely round the bend. There were so many things where I did not realise you could click on them. There still are quite a few! Though the free video tutorials have helped me discover a lot here.

But surely in this day and age there is no excuse for a product without a built in context sensitive help! Even notepad manages this much!

Similarly for 'Undo' in layout. Particularly irrritating when setting up surfaces.

Lack of full undo and help is unforgivable at this price point.
:mad:
(Unless they arrived with V8?)
:p

cresshead
09-28-2004, 12:38 PM
harlan, what's your top 20 gripes?

1.animated booleans?

2.a modify stack to text/bevel...that would be sooooooooo cool as i do loads
of 3d text for illustration work and currently use 3ds max as i can simply re type a new text word or phrase and the extrude and bevel will update...i can even change font!..that's useful!...and the bevel mod has a prevent crossing ability too.

3.path deform for tank treads or growing vines..

4.instancing and referencing...nuff said!

5.shift drag copy/reference/instance...want 10 objects to be spaced out?
just hold the shift key and drag the object to where you want to next one to be..
let go and get a dialgue box asking for how many at this repeated offset and if you want them as copies or reference or instances...VERY useful!

6.prcedual ik rig...like biped woud be nice..drag out and attatch to a model..then animate....

still max has it's top 50 annoying things!
and xsi has a few too...not found them yet but i will!
and maya..and cinema!

harlan
09-28-2004, 02:07 PM
guys, I'm talking about really basic shiiit. Stuff that's been around for years, not complicated app. specific type stuff (ie: Character Studio, SmartSkin, etc..). On top of that, you can create a workaround in LW to accomplish a similar effect for a multitude of things, but that's just it, it's a workaround. Not only is it a workaround, but it's a workaround that requires 50 different steps.

The only reason I was harping about Lattice Deforms is because if LW had animatable lattice deformation I would already have gotten paid for this gig. I want to be able to do what needs to be done & get paid for it as soon as possible, half-assed workarounds for extremely simple stuff that end up costing you time is completely unacceptable.

Yeah, every app has its niggles, no doubt about that. I'm very forgiving with Lightwave. There are a few hundred extra clicks involved in rigging a character for example, that don't really need to be there, but i really don't even mind that. Even with the horrendous workflow involved, I can rig a fully functional multi-pedal character in LW faster than most other apps can boot up (pats himself on back). What gets me is when I need to do something as simple as "squish an object a certain way" I have to rig up a completely half-assed solution for no logical reason whatsoever.

I resolved my problem with a workaround that took about 6 hours of trial & error to get an acceptable result, the results look great, but I could've accomplished the exact same thing by "click" apply lattice, "click, click, click" drag a few lattice nodes around, "click" render - 10 friggin minutes, not 6 hours.

Librarian
09-28-2004, 04:33 PM
Yes, but have you seen just how these things are implemented in XSI ? Way more than just entries in a feature list - the much-talked-about knife tool is just one shiny example of this, and the same goes for most all of the other features.

I hate to be the devil's advocate but that's the way it is if you ask me.

nick
You hit the nail on the head.
Itīs not about tools being integrated.
Itīs about how tools are integrated. Just thrown in without thinking about usability and innovation.
The competition thinks about how to make well known tools even better.
In Cinema 9, there are very cool new modeling tools with tons of neat options.
Maxon hasnīt just thrown in these features, they thought about how to make them better and artist friendly.
I hope NT doesnīt just implement edges but makes edge tools better than the competition.
As a developer, thinking ahead should be an essential attitude.

Exper
09-29-2004, 04:07 AM
I resolved my problem with a workaround that took about 6 hours of trial & error to get an acceptable result, the results look great, but I could've accomplished the exact same thing by "click" apply lattice, "click, click, click" drag a few lattice nodes around, "click" render - 10 friggin minutes, not 6 hours.Anoter good example!

I wanna be a little more arousing:
how many times we was (and we are) asking for modern tools?

Maybe... a proper Lattice deformation tool is too much modern...
I know...
I was using it in Caligari for Amiga...
we must wait some more years!

Sorry for this rude/harsh post... but I must still speak frankly! :eek:

jevinstudios
09-29-2004, 06:54 AM
Harlan --

Sounds like you need to evolve into a multi-app studio. this is why I had to add Maya to the pipeline. Altho LW is my fav, and always will be, there are some things that just need to be done elsewhere, then composited together in post (I personally use AE, but if you received the DFX+ package, this would be a good time to put it to use).

If this gig you're workin' on can earn ya some extra $$, set aside a chunk and buy a license of Maya Complete (skip the maintenance "Silver" package and put that $$ into a license of PolyTrans + PolyTrans for Maya). Then, you can have the beauty of Maya at your fingertips, and share the files with LW with unabashed joy.

DNA studios (the creators of Jimmy Neutron) model, texture, light and render in LW. But 100% of their animation is done in Maya, primarily because of the tools you're lookin' for.

This is how I work, and it's been perfect. Just my two pennies.....

cresshead
09-29-2004, 07:16 AM
same here...i run a lightwave/3dsmax&CS way of working
though i'll be switching/adding to a lightwave/xsi or lightwave/max/xsi route soon as i get to grips with xsi.

currently max is great for scenes needing instancing or loads of changable 3d text models [cg illustration work for books needing changable 3d text in the scenes] and character poses i can save/edit load onto other characters with bip files and character studio rigged characters]

lightwave needs a generic biped rig that's capable of saving poses and animation to a file that can be loaded onto other characters and auto resize the animations and poses...maybe based off rotations like biped is in max.

lightwave really needs instancing and more importantly referencing built into lightwave core...not a commercial plugin for such a basic need in a 3d app.

so...i model in lightwave nr 90% and render stills about 50%...character animation is still max based though i'd like to change this over to lightwave if when i feel more comforable and productive in lightwave if not then maybe xsi will sort that side out.

steve

Exper
09-29-2004, 07:40 AM
Ok... it sounds like:
"Do you want modern tools? Buy a competitor's application!"

Good if you want your work accomplished... bad if you want do it in LW! :eek:

jevinstudios
09-29-2004, 08:16 AM
Ok... it sounds like:
"Do you want modern tools? Buy a competitor's application!"
Good if you want your work accomplished... bad if you want do it in LW!

Not at all. The way I look at it is -- each software app is different. If they were all the same, there wouldn't be a need for more than one app throughout the entire industry. Should every toolbox only contain a screwdriver and nothing else? No. Different tools are needed for different jobs.

LightWave is LightWave. It's a beautiful, dam fine application that's a lot of fun to use and has a helluva toolset in it's code. But, it doesn't have everything. Neither does Maya, XSI or Houdini. They all have strengths, and all have weaknesses.

I think it's unreasonable to demand that NewTek add every other tool that all other apps have, just because people think they should. We all use LW becuz we like it, it works fast and cheap. If you NEED other tools that are available in other apps, and your workload/productivity relies on them for faster production, then put your $$ where your mouth is and invest in expanding your toolset. You'll get your work done a lot faster than waiting for NewTek to add them to version 10+ (and bitching about it all the way in the forums), and you'll make yourself more marketable and versatile in the big picture.

If you can't afford another tool as a working professional, then reach out to people like Larry Shultz, Dan Ablan, or the kewl techs at NewTek, and see if there are some workarounds or tips that can speed up your workflow, LScripts others have written, etc. Gotta work with what ya got sometimez.....

TheDevil
09-29-2004, 08:20 AM
It's just 3D software. Some of you seem to be getting your nickers in a twist. Use Lightwave for what it is good at which is many things. Use some other software where LW lacks. Quite simple really. No need to cry. It is more constructive to just state where LW needs improving or updating rather than whining. Newtek say they are listening and I believe they are. Getting emotional will not make Newtek work any faster or listen any harder. I am sure they are working overtime and sweating over the keyboard to get the next update out.

Newtek will evolve Lightwave further. They have a big incentive in the forms of the excellent modeller Modo, XSI Foundation, Cinema4D etc. If Newtek don't move forward then you have got those nice options.

I don't think Newtek have hired this new super doopa development team just for a laugh, to drink up coffee, get pissed on Vodka and play Doom 3 all day (though that could be a good job). Maybe whiners think otherwise, but I think the team are busy coding up cool tools and cutting out some crap by making/redoing some tools to be more efficient/productive/workflow friendly/bla bla bla.

Maybe Newtek could communicate a roadmap of sorts though. I do think that would be a good idea.

Exper
09-29-2004, 08:47 AM
jevinstudios, cresshead and TheDevil (nothing personal)
your own points are good and true!

For crying out loud... we'll simply shut up! :D

TheDevil
09-29-2004, 09:03 AM
1.animated booleans?


There are two free plugins which can do this for you. This one is my fav as easy to set up. http://www.shift.gr.jp/html/staff/sp/sp000002.html

Can't understand Japanese? Then this thread (towards the bottom, dicusses the other one at the top) tells you how to use it.
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=76657

lunarcamel
09-29-2004, 10:23 AM
Having to read instructions on how to use a Japenese animated boolean plugin is exactly what harlan is talking about ;)

Such a simple thing should be built into LW.

rabid pitbull
09-29-2004, 10:55 AM
All the points brought up here and more are why I never upgraded to lw8. Lw has very strong points, but it is getting old and those points are getting weaker. I am sure many people will in fact add other tools in since LW is not evolving fast enough. I like working in lightwave, until I need to work with character animation then it is just one work around after another. Lots of room for improvement, and if and when these changes get made lw will be fun again, untill then it is just frustrating . So newtek if your listening focus on the fundementals and stop adding gimmicks, your user base going to shrink otherwise.

harlan
09-29-2004, 12:05 PM
Exper (regarding the Caligari comment),

Exactly. My point exactly!!! ;)

Jevin,

We're currently a LW & Maya house, but we're pretty much entirely based on the Mac platform - at present, no translation tools like PolyTrans exist yet for the Mac. The only real WinTel boxes I have is a VT&LW box plus like 150 headless WinTel boxes for LW rendering. While I've been using Maya since around 1.5, I dumped the Intel licenses for the Mac one's.

Cresshead,

I couldn't agree more. An app is an app, use whichever one works the best for the situation. The problem is, there's no REAL reason to stay in LW anymore. Sure you can do a ton of stuff, usually a lot faster than you can in other apps, and it has nice rendering, but when it comes down to it - the capabilities of the other packages faaaaaaaaaaaaaaar outweigh the advantages of sticking with LW. I'd love to change my opinion regarding this @ LW8.1 or 8.5 or whatever, but at present there isn't any glowing advantage to using LW anymore - there needs to be. With 8 we get tons of Bug Fixes, terrific, we've needed those, but on a feature basis, whoooopedeeedoooo nothing really beneficial to me other than the dynamics (which btw are still a "NewTek" kind of scheme rather than a dynamics system that adheres to the normal standards offering flexibility, interchangability, etc..).

Pitbull,

Exactly my friend, Exactly. Give people a reason to upgrade!!!! I understand the whole difficulty NewTek has had with the old LW team leaving, and all that, but they need to put something solid together for the next rev. or they're going to be shooting themselves in the foot. A "new feature" like Sockmonkey in the next rev ain't gonna sell sh!t.

brb

Exper
09-29-2004, 12:25 PM
Promising tools were discarded and others never finished... ok...
most users seems happy about it... then they'll stay happy...
but lonely!

I found jevin and Devil advices very wise (d**n idiot... I am):
they're right; we'll look for another solution rather than LW! :cool:

Thanks a lot! :)

jevinstudios
09-29-2004, 02:37 PM
I found jevin and Devil advices very wise (d**n idiot... I am):
they're right; we'll look for another solution rather than LW!

I'd change a coupla words in your statement to make it in line with my intentions:

Instead of "another solution rather than LW", I'd like to say "another solution in addition to LW".....

I won't ever dump LW. But, I'll add to my toolset if necessary to ensure that I can handle any job I'm given with 100% efficiency.

We're currently a LW & Maya house, but we're pretty much entirely based on the Mac platform - at present, no translation tools like PolyTrans exist yet for the Mac. The only real WinTel boxes I have is a VT&LW box plus like 150 headless WinTel boxes for LW rendering. While I've been using Maya since around 1.5, I dumped the Intel licenses for the Mac one's.

Exactly why I'm a PC-based house, and don't do Mac (unless I have to work onsite at a client's! And then, I've got my mobile workstation with my PolyTrans so I can convert to my heart's content....).

nemac4
09-29-2004, 03:06 PM
It seems that multiple applications for 3d is the trend. Considering how much 3d has grown in the last few years, I can't imagine what it must be like to be a programmer for an all encompassing 3d program. I love LW like most people here but I don't do character animation in LW. Even with modeling,.. I do some in LW and some in other apps,.. but LW is the heart of my workflow and it fills my needs for rendering, fx ,dynamics and most day to day stuff. But I still wouldn't want to put all of my 3d eggs in one basket and only use LW.

harlan
09-29-2004, 03:59 PM
Exactly why I'm a PC-based house, and don't do Mac (unless I have to work onsite at a client's! And then, I've got my mobile workstation with my PolyTrans so I can convert to my heart's content....).

Yeah but PC's don't exactly run FCP or Shake which are two key elements of our pipeline. I'm not into the whole PC vs. Mac debate bullsh!t; we were a PC house for what seems like forever, but the Mac is far more on the same page with where we're at in-house as a workflow. Switching platforms on account of the incompetent lack of basic tools in an application would simply be absurd. ;) i know that's not what you were suggesting, but I really wanted to use the word "incompetent" in a sentence today. ;)

The whole point of this thread is that, understanding a majority of the "missing" toolest in LW is probably the result of the previous LW team & their bloated egos, but there really needs to be a focus on integrating BASIC tools into LW by the new team. In addition, there hasn't been any real "innovation" in LW since the inclusion of HV in 5.6 <--- Okay, so that's a little bit of a dramatic statement (6 did feature some cool tool additions).

IKBoost & BoneTools are not innovations. They're "integrated workarounds" for known flaws in the LW toolset. Fix the flaws, don't patch over them!

Don't get me wrong, LW is a great app, very versatile, but I become completely dumbfounded sometimes when I look at it and think "what the F???, I can't do **fill in the blank**, but I'll be ****ed I can create a StarSphere". Yeah yeah, so I can split a bone in layout now, I've been able to for years with the same **** plug-in that has now been "integrated" into [8]. Most of the new features in [8] are nothing more than 3rd party plugs that have now been "integrated" - f### all that noise, I want to see LW set precedent again.

Tom Wood
09-29-2004, 04:08 PM
I love LW like most people here but I don't do character animation in LW.

Hi nemac,

At present I'm modelling and animating in LW. But the audio support in Layout is so bad, I'm considering another program. What do you use that lets you import LW models and animate them? My characters are relatively simple but do include about a dozen layers and some morphs.

I presently use Magpie to generate the lipsynch curve, and then use MotionMixer in Layout to create a series of facial expressions. Is there another program that would behave similarly, especially like MotionMixer?

Thanks,

TW

Dodgy
09-29-2004, 05:32 PM
www.daz3d.com 's mimic for Lightwave let's you do all that and more. It can analyse the sound for you, and lay out phoneme morph targets to those sounds. It's incredibly versatile and easy to use. Check it out :)

As for the rest of this debate, I'll say what I've said before, only shorter . LW lost the old team, they took some time to get a new team together, the new team is working hard (as we have seen with an 8.01) to fix a lot of the bugs and add improvements. I for one miss the dopetrack when I'm working in maya :) If you want something different, make a feature request, or buy another toolset if that's what you need, 'cause shouting about it ain't gonna get it done any quicker.

cresshead
09-29-2004, 05:51 PM
if your looking for adding tools to your toolset you may want to look at xsi foundation though be fully aware that you'll hit a huge learning curve for surfaces and rendering...though i'm adding it for modeling with edges and uv mapping which should be pretty good and i can export from xsi over to lw no problem and the mesh is fine on import [obj] and will look at .xsi format too soon for out n back import/export to nfrom lw or xsi....it runs out at the cost of a decent plugin for lightwave so can be a low risk verture..

other than that look--- modeling: silo, wings 3d, modo
other than that look---animation/character ani : xsi, messiah animate

most 3d apps have good import export capability...notable exception is max
which is/has been rather flaky..but usable most of the time

this isn't intented to be some sort of advert to "jump ship" rather a way of adding a small runabout to use with your flagship app [lightwave]...where you fill a need and where you may only get to know a single part of another app to plug the gap your trying to solve...i probably won't get to be a big xsi user as i like lightwave very much...but xsi may help with my production in 3d so it's cheap to try out..

one thing you won't replace is this community...you have fantastic free help from the newtek community and that alone can be WORTH a considerable amount when you need some help...

try that with cinema4d or maya....

and don't knock plugins...we have access to hundreds of free plugins to enhance your capabilities of lightwave...the nearest competitor is max for the amount of plugins you can get for free...

it's def something to consider when looking else where for help in a project.

steve g

Tom Wood
09-29-2004, 06:00 PM
www.daz3d.com 's mimic for Lightwave let's you do all that and more. It can analyse the sound for you, and lay out phoneme morph targets to those sounds. It's incredibly versatile and easy to use. Check it out :)

I've looked at DAZ before but it's not clear whether or not they are still using the LightWave Layout audio engine. Does it run in Layout so all my MotionMixer motions are available?

Thanks

TW

nemac4
09-29-2004, 08:11 PM
Hi nemac,

At present I'm modelling and animating in LW. But the audio support in Layout is so bad, I'm considering another program. What do you use that lets you import LW models and animate them? My characters are relatively simple but do include about a dozen layers and some morphs.

I presently use Magpie to generate the lipsynch curve, and then use MotionMixer in Layout to create a series of facial expressions. Is there another program that would behave similarly, especially like MotionMixer?

Thanks,

TW


Hey Tom,
I use Alias MotionBuilder (was Kaydara) which is fantastic. It has the story timeline and an independent shot track which enables you can do animatics quickly and re-use shots and animation clips. I also have Magpie pro2 which works well and Motionbuilder also has good morph controls. Like many others, I also have xsi foundation,.. but I'm still learning how to use it. After animating in motionbuilder I import the fbx file back into LW to apply hair or dynamics,.. etc.

Dodgy
09-30-2004, 03:07 AM
I've looked at DAZ before but it's not clear whether or not they are still using the LightWave Layout audio engine. Does it run in Layout so all my MotionMixer motions are available?

Thanks

TW

It basically has a seperate program which is launched from a plugin, and then when you've finished, outputs the results to morph mixer. The whole operation is completely seamless, if you go back into mimic, it still has all the settings and values from the previous opening. It lays out the phonemes like an NLA program, so you can adjust it as much as you want, you can even go back and reassign morph targets if you feel that you're better off in another configuration, and it'll update the animation for you. It really is very well thought out.

ACross
09-30-2004, 04:05 PM
Guys, (including Harlan who gets my vote as one of the coolest guys of all time ...)

I personally find this thread very interesting indeed. There are a lot of good points being made here which make excellent food for thought. On a conceptual note, I think that some of the things that you have seen historically in the LW product development process are changing very dramatically now that things have changed dramatically on the development team. Specifically, I have to agree with Harlan that our historical mind-set of "we know better" is very flawed and one that we are changing significantly. One of the first things we have done is set up a new department that have the single goal of working with customers to get feedback and work out customer requirements ... as a starting point we are now sending out (Flash) mock-ups to groups of users for feedback BEFORE anything is implemented in code to gage feedback and comments. Something else that I can guarantee is that anything sent to [email protected] is now ALL categorized and looked at, and we respond to every reasonable request (except the massive amounts of Spam we get on that account !)

On a more general note about the direction of Lightwave, I want to give you an analogy that I like. If you look at Adobe PhotoShop, it is by FAR the most popular graphics application in the world ... Yet if you look at applications like Corel PhotoPaint, they have FAR more features. The reason that Photoshop is still ahead is that it does what it does so well, and has tools that are sufficiently well rounded that it is perfect for the job that it is designed to do. I personally want to take a similar mentality with Lightwave which is one of the underlying thread in the conversation above. As such, I can say that we are concentrating on making the tools we have "be all they can be" and changing core architectural features to allow certain areas of Lightwave to be improved across the board. We are of course looking at new features in the areas that we are lacking, but these are in the scope of being integrated and

In any case, I hope that this clarifies our position slightly, and if you have any questions comments or flames, please do not hesitate to email me (across AT newtek DOT com) or our 3D Project Manager (Peter Jespersen. peter AT newtek DOT com.)

Andrew Cross, Ph.D
VP of SW Development,
NewTek, www.newtek.com

jevinstudios
09-30-2004, 05:14 PM
Wow. Anyone else out there think NT isn't listening? I personally nominate Harlan to be part of your field testing/suggestion pool. Here's a great opportunity to work directly with a frustrated individual, and use his experience with the product to help it grow and evolve.

Bravo, NewTek! I must admit, hearing from Andrew in this matter was truly extraordinary.

Kevin Soderlund
Jevin Studios

chriso1515
09-30-2004, 06:49 PM
Yeah, it is great to hear from NT, but I was hoping that Jin would chime in at some point before it got to that.

Librarian
09-30-2004, 07:24 PM
Wow. Anyone else out there think NT isn't listening?
In school, Iīve listened most of the time. Ok, maybe Iīm lying a little bit :D
I told my parents 'Iīm listening to my teachers. Donīt worry! '.
Sad to say, my new attitude alone was insufficient.
The grades didnīt change :(

The moral of the story.
Listening alone doesnīt solve problems.
People want to see results.

HowardM
09-30-2004, 07:45 PM
Thanks Andrew! :D Thats great news!

So, who do we gotta talk to ta get on da Flash list? ;)

EcLiPsE
09-30-2004, 08:16 PM
One thing id like to see for game development side of things would be built into lightwave 3d is an animation loop exporter where i can name my animation loops (run,jump,walk,swim) , bone and morph anims- and say WALK = frame start at 5 and walk loop stop at frame 30 or whatever with the option of useing single mesh characters or multi layer (from modeler) characters and export any and all of the options from layout to a game engine usable format, rather than paying extra for a plugin that works half ***ed.

here are 2 example plugins ive messed with

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~mbristol/md3/MD3Construction.html

and

http://www.greenbriarstudio.com/3D/GameLWMod.htm

NanoGator
09-30-2004, 10:16 PM
Heh I have a dollar that says a very similar thread his happening on XSI, Maya, 3D Studio MAX, and C4D's forums.

MediaSig
09-30-2004, 10:31 PM
Specifically, I have to agree with Harlan that our historical mind-set of "we know better" is very flawed and one that we are changing significantly. One of the first things we have done is set up a new department that have the single goal of working with customers to get feedback and work out customer requirements ... [/url]

Andrew....

please...PLEASE tell me you are changing this mind set when it comes to VT3 and TeD as well!!

Many basic and fundamental tools missing in the edit interface...


Greg

Exper
10-01-2004, 09:50 AM
On a more general note about the direction of Lightwave, I want to give you an analogy that I like. If you look at Adobe PhotoShop, it is by FAR the most popular graphics application in the world ... Yet if you look at applications like Corel PhotoPaint, they have FAR more features. The reason that Photoshop is still ahead is that it does what it does so well, and has tools that are sufficiently well rounded that it is perfect for the job that it is designed to do. I personally want to take a similar mentality with Lightwave which is one of the underlying thread in the conversation above. As such, I can say that we are concentrating on making the tools we have "be all they can be" and changing core architectural features to allow certain areas of Lightwave to be improved across the board. We are of course looking at new features in the areas that we are lacking, but these are in the scope of being integratedGreat post Andrew!

Just a note about Photoshop: flexibility!

kurv
10-01-2004, 10:32 AM
Andrew, it is great to hear from you on the forum and get some insight to your direction... thanks and I for one cant wait to see it :D

Thanks NT!!!

TheDevil
10-01-2004, 11:46 AM
... I can say that we are concentrating on making the tools we have "be all they can be" and changing core architectural features to allow certain areas of Lightwave to be improved across the board. We are of course looking at new features in the areas that we are lacking, but these are in the scope of being integrated and...
Andrew Cross, Ph.D
VP of SW Development,
NewTek, www.newtek.com

This is great news! Even for the devils amongst us.

Earl
10-01-2004, 11:51 AM
Something else that I can guarantee is that anything sent to [email protected] is now ALL categorized and looked at, and we respond to every reasonable request (except the massive amounts of Spam we get on that account !)


I can personally vouch for this. Just yesterday I sent in a feature request (after hours) and got an immediate response from Elmar with feedback. I think NewTek is listening to their customers now more than ever.

CoryC
10-01-2004, 01:52 PM
Heh I have a dollar that says a very similar thread his happening on XSI, Maya, 3D Studio MAX, and C4D's forums.

I can't comment on all the apps you mention but I have one of them and I can't say that I remember ever seeing a similar thread there.

cresshead
10-01-2004, 02:05 PM
yeah you don't see the creators of the 3d apps talking to users much anywhere else...discreet, alias and avid....i do see some posts from "bobo" in discreet forums but he's not in the core team making 3ds max i think..rather more a maxscripter of high note that discreet use from time to time.

matter of fact even the forum moderator in the discreet weboard has been dropped from discreet emplyment recently.

steve g

policarpo
10-01-2004, 02:20 PM
Good to hear you guys are listening.

Just curious, what has happened to the many feature and workflow requests that have been submitted over the past two years?

I know I personally sent in around 30 or so which were dedicated to making LW feel and perform better for the working artist.

Or have you guys just hit the reset button and all of this focus is to happen now?

-------------------


one thing you won't replace is this community...you have fantastic free help from the newtek community and that alone can be WORTH a considerable amount when you need some help...

try that with cinema4d or maya....


steve g

And to Cresshead, what exactly do you mean about the C4D community being closed lipped about helping out? They are just as dedicated as the LW community.

It's great to be a part of a family, but one should never think that their family alone is the best. Most artists help artists overcome hurdles so they can continue to create great work.

I just got a copy of XSI Foundation, and the XSI community has been more than helpful with helping me to get up to speed.

Cheers.

CoryC
10-01-2004, 02:46 PM
I have to agree with you Poli,

I was pleasantly surprised at how good the XSI people are after hearing forever that no community is better than the LW community. Personally I have to keep a lot of people on ignore in LW forums just to tolerate the place.

Xorlium
10-01-2004, 03:34 PM
I think the LW community has downgraded a lot since the release of [8]... why is that? who knows...

cresshead
10-01-2004, 03:36 PM
re cinema just what my students feedback to me who are cinema users..they also currently feel a little miffed at the 0.5 update price structure for cinema
as well as the 8.5 charged update which accoding to them added little execpt cash in maxon's pockets....no doubt cinema is a great app and may have good forums but their modular pricing is wearing a little thin on some users who want to keep up but need to keep extending all the modules every 6 months...point updates are not free from maxon remember and it's taked 9 releases to finally get polygons of more than 4 sides so i hear...i am not a cinema user so i simply
pass on what's being said by some cinema users in college.

re xsi, i have found cgtalk forum and xsi base to be pretty good [i have xsi] but there's zero coming from the creators of those apps feeding info and requests back to a new version of xsi....it took 4 releases to get shader balls and a knife tool so not all is brilliant in xsi..it's young app so it will grow in time.

you have to look at all the sides of the coin not just the shiny side up...

all these apps are of course very capable i just prefer to see more than the current "wow" or "media links to film/games" in them and look at the bigger picture of flexability and scalability plus the fun factor.

policarpo
10-01-2004, 08:10 PM
re cinema just what my students feedback to me who are cinema users..they also currently feel a little miffed at the 0.5 update price structure for cinema
as well as the 8.5 charged update which accoding to them added little execpt cash in maxon's pockets....no doubt cinema is a great app and may have good forums but their modular pricing is wearing a little thin on some users who want to keep up but need to keep extending all the modules every 6 months...point updates are not free from maxon remember and it's taked 9 releases to finally get polygons of more than 4 sides so i hear...i am not a cinema user so i simply
pass on what's being said by some cinema users in college.

re xsi, i have found cgtalk forum and xsi base to be pretty good [i have xsi] but there's zero coming from the creators of those apps feeding info and requests back to a new version of xsi....it took 4 releases to get shader balls and a knife tool so not all is brilliant in xsi..it's young app so it will grow in time.

you have to look at all the sides of the coin not just the shiny side up...

all these apps are of course very capable i just prefer to see more than the current "wow" or "media links to film/games" in them and look at the bigger picture of flexability and scalability plus the fun factor.

I guess innovation comes at a price. :)

XSI 4.0 seems like a solid version as does C4D V9 (8.5 was definitely lacking in the modeling and CA department, but they seem to have given a lot of needed features in R9 that are really more than I could have hoped for).

I don't know the XSI dev crowd, but it seems that the app itself is a pretty complete set of tools and the workflow and architecture are such that things can change at a moments notice....and dog gonnit, the price is perfect.

Anyway, we all know we are in heated times, and all that matters in the end, is this...we stick with the companies who have the best air conditioning to deal with the heat.
Cheers. :rolleyes:

toby
10-01-2004, 10:01 PM
Having to read instructions on how to use a Japenese animated boolean plugin is exactly what harlan is talking about ;)

Such a simple thing should be built into LW.

I'm sorry but I've heard this too many times now, it's rather short-sighted.

There are thousands of things like this that could be implemented, and somebody needs each one of them, should they drop the real development and pay their staff just to add, test and debug these little features? Especially when they are available on the web for free?

policarpo
10-01-2004, 10:06 PM
I'm sorry but I've heard this too many times now, it's rather short-sighted.

There are thousands of things like this that could be implemented, and somebody needs each one of them, should they drop the real development and pay their staff just to add, test and debug these little features? Especially when they are available on the web for free?

It's not about the short sighted features mate...it's about the long term vision that is in question.

Software is like architecture.

When it is built with society in mind, it grows quite naturally...call it holism if you will.

Cheers.

jevinstudios
10-02-2004, 08:29 AM
More and more in my career, I've come to the conclusion that multiple apps are becoming a way of life in the industry. Each app has strengths that can be drawn upon and put into play in the pipeline when needed. With the prices continuing to drop as the market is overrun by high-end 3D tools, this will also make it much more affordable for individuals and small studios to beef up their toolset.

Take XSI Foundation, for instance. A $500 version of XSI is cool, and many people will love it. I, though, am not interested because none of my clients use it. 100% of my clients use Maya, so that's my 2nd app I put into my pipeline. Unless you're doing CA/Creature Creation for the motion picture industry, I think XSI is pretty useless (just my opinion), and even in that area, Maya has taken the solid lead.

I have come to appreciate each application for what they are, and have stopped trying to blur the lines between them by trying to make LightWave a Maya Clone, or something to that nature. LW is a wonderful, full-featured app that can accomplish a TON of work for me -- efficiently and effectively. Maya can do some cool stuff as well to fill in the gaps. I like each, and want each to continue to grow in their respective directions independently.

Freedom of choice. Diversity. When you need the tools that Maya or XSI has, then buy them, incporporate them into the pipeline. But always use LW for what it has been reliable for, then bring your compositing apps into play to put it all together and dazzle your clients.

Grolo
10-02-2004, 08:49 AM
You talk like money didn't matter :)

U see, when you spend $1595 on a product, plus a few more bucks in learning materials, you kinda wish that product to beat the hell out of other similar software.

Maya costs too much, as does 3d studio max, xsi, and (specially) houdini...

The one thing that's making me stay with LW, is it's "great" price, and unlimited nodes... Also, it's ease of use. If we had infinite money, maybe what you are saying is true, jevin :D

jevinstudios
10-02-2004, 09:50 AM
Grolo --

Not at all. $$ is of great importance, and wise investments make successful and wise entrepreneurs. I have 2 seats of LW (with Sasquatch and RealFlow) and 2 seats of Maya (with Shave & a Haircut and RealFlow). Plus 2 seats of AfterEffects, 2 seats of Mirage and one of PolyTrans & PolyTrans for Maya. This setup is needed for the amount of work, rendering and post visual F/X I do. This set-up is not for everyone.

I need both apps because my clients demand them. Yes it was an initial expense, but it has paid off by dramatically increased revenue over the years. I have, tho, come to a conclusion that, in the future, I will be extremely selective as to what I upgrade, and what additional resources I purchase, in order to keep an even bottom line. If LW 9 doesn't significantly offer kick-***** improvements right off the bat, I will wait until 9.5 or even 10 to upgrade. The same goes for Maya (I have eliminated the maintenance contract, now dubbed "Silver Membership", because it just didn't pay off in the big picture. It's much cheaper to just purchase the upgrade, and find free tutorials on the web to help out in those rough spots I encounter). I may decide to not upgrade either at all, and just continue to exploit my current set-up (this is the most attractive option, as with each upgrade, you have to stop what you're doing, and learn, learn, learn. I'd rather just continue creating cool art and enjoy myself!.....). Time will tell. But $$ is definitely a factor here. (2 apps have already been shifted over to the "no upgrade" list: Photoshop 7 & After Effects 6 -- I hate the concept of Photoshop CS, and refuse to buy it. AfterEffects 6.5 did not play nice with my plug-in set, and therefore was not an option. I can keep both as they are, and continue to make excellent use of them for the foreseeable future. This will give me $$ to put into my 3D app maintenance, if I deem it necessary).

Because this is my investment, I protect it and use it daily. But I won't be adding any other apps unless a client needs them and will cover the expense as part of the contract. I'm happy with what I've got, and find that I can handle any job in the industry with this combo.

My fullest respect goes out to the freelancers and hobbyists who use LW exclusively, and love their day-to-day work and appreciate LW for what it is right out of the box. These people, IMHO, are NewTek's most valuable resource, and will continue to provide a consistently loyal user base.

Lightwolf
10-02-2004, 10:11 AM
My fullest respect goes out to the freelancers and hobbyists who use LW exclusively, and love their day-to-day work and appreciate LW for what it is right out of the box. These people, IMHO, are NewTek's most valuable resource, and will continue to provide a consistently loyal user base.
Now, that either puts me into the hobbyist/freelance category, or I need to get another package soon ;)
I'm just finding that there seems to be a lot in the box, unfortunately, a lot of the contents seem to be broken (must be damage during shipping I guess ;) ).
I will further explore my options, and that probably does include another app. Whether it will replace or complement LW remains to be seen...

Cheers,
Mike

toby
10-02-2004, 03:20 PM
It's not about the short sighted features mate...it's about the long term vision that is in question.

Software is like architecture.

When it is built with society in mind, it grows quite naturally...call it holism if you will.

Cheers.

I was only responding to the idea that Newtek could easily implement thousands of little features just because each one is thought to be simple, not the general topic of the thread ~

SplineGod
10-02-2004, 04:33 PM
Hey Jevin, Im with you on this one.

Lightwaves strong suit has always been its bang vs buck. I think its STRONGEST suit has always been its spontaneity. Ive always been able to go in and get things done quickly. Lightwave has also been easier for an individual to master.
I dont want to see Lightwave become Maya or anything else. If I absolutely have to I can buy any of those other apps. Alias and Discreet have had large teams working on their apps and they cant please everyone or provide some kind of universal tools or workflows. I use Lightwave because of what it does well and allows me to do. When or if it ceases to do that then I migrate to something else.

My advice to Newtek is to really figure out what Lightwaves strengths are/were and work like hell to not only preserve those strengths but broaden them and regain what was lost.

I loved the old scene editor because of the thumbnails it created and you could go back to pervious settings by simply clicking on that thumbnail.
I loved being able to load huge scenes quickly and work with them without any instabilities. I think Modeler has way too many tools. Theres now too much overlap between tools that have similar functions.

Many ppl are demanding to see N-Gon support for LW SubDs. What I dont get is why this hasnt been done already. Modeler has had N-Gon/SubD support for a long time in the form of Metaform plus. Its only problem is that its not interactive.
You could animate SubD cages that had N-Gons using Metamate in layout.

I also HATE the interface changes. What was so dramatically different between 7.5 and 8.0 that demanded that the hotkeys be changed? I understand the idea of making hotkeys "standardized". Has anyone ever heard the saying "when people settle upon a standard its usually at the cost of performance"? I dont use Lightwave because its somehow standardized but quite the contrary. Its always been fast to work with and has always had a PRODUCTION oriented workflow. When you design something to be fast sometimes you have to abandon those so called standards.

Lightwaves interfaces needs to be very customizeable. Take a look at Silo or C4D.
Its amazing how much easier they are to use once the interface is setup to something Im familar with. This is very difficult to do in LW now. I realize its going to take time for Newtek to develop and interface like that but there are alternatives:
Why not make the first 5 tabs at the top fo the screen more or less locked or standardized. That way people know where things are or learn where they are via the books, videos and tutorials that exist. The interface changes certainly didnt do anyone any favors in that regard. The amount of confusion created by doing this certainly wasnt offset by any payoff. I know that people can change back to the 7.5 menus but what a waste of time and effort. Anyways...
make the Tabs on the right side the ones that are user defineable. If you want Maya, XSI, Max, C4D users to have some kind of menus they are familar with that would be an easy way to go. Allow people to share JUST the Tabs without forcing me to load someone elses configs. Kevin Phillips wrote a plugin called Interface Builder that allows Tabs to be shard rather then complete configs. I know also that Newtek is aware of it. Why not get it and run with it? Newtek or end users could post up Tabs for others to download. For example Newtek could poll the top 10 people who do architectural work as to the top 20 tools they use. Those could be put under an Architectural Tab. This could be done for all sorts of topics.

Another thing that needs to be done with Lightwave is add in support for other popular file formats. Lightwave needs to be able to have the ability to SIMPLY drop into various pipelines. Dont give anyone an excuse not to use it. Applications like point oven or the beaver project are the first step in this direction. Lightwave need the ability to be able to load/save Maya, XSI, Max, C4D file formats. It also needs better support for platform independant formats such as .fbx.

I feel like Newtek needs to focus on fixing the SDK to make it more inviting to 3rd party developers. I think its better with the current atmosphere in the 3d market to develop strategic partnerships with those 3rd party developers. I would like to see the inner workings of Lightwave become tighter, smoother and more stable. Every feature/tools needs to be consistant. I dont understand why some of the interfaces like the surface editor or spreadsheet can filter lists in various ways but none of the other popups do. Anything that can be altered needs to have an E and T button next to it. One of LWs greatests strengths is the ability to use textures to control or affect just about anything. This needs to be deepend and extended. Plugins should be able to talk to one another which is something the new com ring now provides for. The expression engine needs to just be ripped out and replaced with something that works. My vote would be to talk to Prem and replace it with Relativity. It was around long before LW had expressions and it works. I dont understand why expressions have to be scattered around between the graph editor, motion panel and deform tab. Just put them in one spot and lose the inconsistancies such as seeing or not seeing IK. Let everything including match goal have the abilty to be properly baked. Make Match goal and features like that channel based rather then just an all or nothing situation. Newtek should use something like Amelie as a nice node based way of handling expressions. Again, Newtek should focus on keeping and expanding the core of LW both in terms of tools and workflow and develop those alliances that will allow new features to be easily added. Sometimes I feel that the quest for new features leaves too many important core aspects undone. I use Lightwave because its always been an awesome workhorse.

The distinction between the so called hobbyists and professional level is a gap that is getting smaller and smaller. Many people are creating and developing productions with small groups and budgets. Everyone knows that Maya is great for large movies or big projects. Outside of that very small community that paradigm doesnt work very well. 7% or so of the studios worldwide have more then 20 employees. The vast majority of the studios have far less people then that. Theres also a great many 3D artists who do freelance work. Those are the studios and people who really find Lightwave to be of great worth. I do a great deal of freelance work with Lightwave because I can do pretty much do anything with it. That said, Lightwave can still do more then I know how to do with it. As such its a great bargain because there is room for growth. If Maya, XSI or Max fit into my workflow and could allow me to turn around work as fast as I do with LW I would be using them.

Right now I also use Silo and C4D along with LW but not nearly as much. Why do I use them? One is cost. The other is that they do provide capabilities not found in LW yet. The other is compatibility. I can get objects back and forth between all 3 pretty easily. C4D also can pretty much load most of a Lightwave Scene file complete with objects, textures, lights, animation and so forth. It also has a very fast radiosity renderer. No other package(s) do that. I dont use those apps nearly as much as I do as LW simply because I can do most of what I need in LW. I go to those other apps for the things I can do in LW but occassionally need to do.

Newtek needs to define what Lightwave is and where it fits. Instead of developing features based on grabbing bits of candy from a bowl and then going off to unwrap them on a individual basis I would like to see Lightwave actually DEVELOPED based on corrrect principles and as a serious, focused team based effort. I feel that in the past there was a focus on this garage based mentality and cult of personality. Too much emphasis was placed on the idea of that whole crazy, wacky, eccentric programmer mentality. 3D is now mainstream and theres no reason to do that anymore. Good stable 3D programmers are out there. I want to know that Newtek has good stable, talented and professional 3D programmers working there developing and supporting the product. To be honest I think the current dev team for the most part IS that team. Recent changes have done a lot to convince me that Newtek is serious about keeping and making LW a serious contender in the 3D market. :)

jevinstudios
10-02-2004, 05:04 PM
Well said, Larry!

policarpo
10-02-2004, 08:14 PM
All good points Larry.

I hope they are listening 'cause I know who is listening.

We are. ;)

SplineGod
10-02-2004, 08:47 PM
To be honest my mind is a lot more at ease about several of these issues.Im encouraged by not only what Andrew said earlier but the fact that they have hired Pete Jespersen as the Lightwave Product Manager. Ive worked with Pete on the bone tools since the beginning going back almost 2 years.
Pete has a lot of experience in the very things I feel Newtek needs. I know that myself and many others are VERY encouraged to have him in his new position. Not only is it the right person for the job but it tells me that Andrew is serious and Newtek is too. BTW...congrats Pete! :)

NanoGator
10-03-2004, 01:05 AM
Gotta agree with Larry here. One of the things that is becoming a nuisance with Lightwave is how many little but important features are dropped in with little to tie them in to the whole grand scheme of things. I just found out recently that you can use an LScript to activate a plugin, but you cannot send parameters to it. Ugh.

I love Lightwave's approach. You really can get going with it pretty darned fast. But man, I can't believe how many times in the last month I've shouted "Doh! I can't do that!" for little reasons.

I really think Newtek needs to work more in the 'allow automation' department. I wonder if that's one of the reasons Maya's such a big player.

JVitale
10-03-2004, 01:21 AM
How come Newtek hasn't made an official announcement about Pete Jespersen's new post...I hope he gets to come to LA sometime so we could meet him

mattc
10-03-2004, 03:40 AM
Another thing that needs to be done with Lightwave is add in support for other popular file formats. Lightwave needs to be able to have the ability to SIMPLY drop into various pipelines. Dont give anyone an excuse not to use it. Applications like point oven or the beaver project are the first step in this direction. Lightwave need the ability to be able to load/save Maya, XSI, Max, C4D file formats. It also needs better support for platform independant formats such as .fbx.



There's already a dotXSI exporter (can't remember if it imports).

Max and C4D both use a paramteric file format so one would need those applications in order to handle load/save those files. i.e. forget it.

OTOH,Maya's ascii file format wouldn't be too hard.

M.

NanoGator
10-03-2004, 03:49 AM
Hey Matt, sorry to be OT and naieve, but what is a parametric file format?

Lightwolf
10-03-2004, 03:56 AM
Hey Matt, sorry to be OT and naieve, but what is a parametric file format?
I hope Matt doesn't mind if I answer this.
Basically, instead of saving a mesh, you save the building instructions for a mesh.
A series of tools and their parameters.
So, upon loading, there is no geometry to interpret, but, basically, a macro to play back to re-build the mesh.
Basically a saved construction history (which is actually what it is).
The disadvantage is, if you don't have the original tools, you can't make sense out of the building instructions (in another app for example).

Cheers,
Mike

NanoGator
10-03-2004, 04:01 AM
ooo ouch. Yeah well okay I can see that causing a problem.

Wow... that's a clever way to prevent people from importing your files, hehe. Well I dunno if that's the reason they do it, but the result's the same!

What's the benfit of using a file format like that? I can see this retro-improving older models with newer tools, but wouldn't it be a nightmare to maintain backwards compatibility?

Eh If I'm being too OT, lemme know and I'll shaddup. I just find this fascinating. I've had a lot of fun messing with LW's scene format lately. Hehe. :)

Lightwolf
10-03-2004, 04:11 AM
What's the benfit of using a file format like that? I can see this retro-improving older models with newer tools, but wouldn't it be a nightmare to maintain backwards compatibility?
Easy, with the construction history you can change parameters any time you want to, even after you have saved and re-loaded your object. There are a lot of areas where this makes tons of sense (just thing of animated spline extrusions for example ... and I mean an extrusion modelling operation on an animated spline here).

Cheers,
Mike

NanoGator
10-03-2004, 04:19 AM
Cool! Thanks for the info.

I needta try C4d one day.

Yog
10-03-2004, 07:05 AM
Lightwaves strong suit has always been...........

It's been a while, but I strongly agree with everything you said ;)

I do wonder if the horse has bolted on the SDK / 3rd party plug-in scene though, I know some previous developers have been unhappy with the way NT have treated the 3rd party base reciently.
It used to be the case that LW provided the bare bones of a program and if you wanted anything else, character rigging/animation tools, particle effects, UV tools, hair/grass generators, etc, then you went out and just bought the ones you needed. This suited me fine as it meant I only paid for the tools I needed, and it suited the 3rd party developers because it gave them a flourishing market.

However, with NT running a policy of first licencing a "lite" version, and THEN producing their own version, it has had the effect of decimating the 3rd party market on two fronts. First, in licencing one plug-in over another they are bound to hack off producers of similar plug-ins, see Shave and a haircut vrs Sasquatch. Also when NT first licenced Particle Storm Lite and then developed their own particle generator it effectively killed off Particle Storm (Napalm) despite Napalm being a much supior product, which has now led on to Dynamic Realities all but closing up shop. I know Steve Worley was mighty p***ed off that after showing NT a sticky front projection plug-in he was working on, only to find out that NT released their own about the same time.

Another factor is, who is left out their developing 3rd party plug-ins for LW ? Most of the new LW development team are made up of some of the more prolific 3rd party developers of recient years, which mainly just leaves Steve Worley (god bless him) on the outside.

If Newtek really do want to regenerate the 3rd party market, which used to be one of their biggest assets, then they need to do more than just revamp the SDK and release it to the world in the form of a one line e-mail anouncement.
I seem to remember that NT used to have a developers package for LW, its reintroduction would make a good start in rejuvinating the market.

jevinstudios
10-03-2004, 08:06 AM
Yog -- very good points! It appears that 3rd party developers have virtually abandonded LW in favor of Maya (which has an extensive SDK partnership program and actively encourages working with developers to design new tools -- including access to the code and complimentary licenses of Maya Unlimited to use throughout the process), Max, XSI & C4D. Take Joe Alter (Shave & a Haircut) for instance. It appears he has become vehemently "anti-LW", and to the best of my knowledge, refuses to even consider a version of Shave for LW (which is unfortunate, 'cause every other app EXCEPT LW has a version now, including Max, XSI, Maya & C4D).

The age of shielding code and alienating developers must end for NewTek if they want to maintain momentum in the 3D world. People want 3rd party choices (I know I do). I love LW, and continue to exploit the hell out of it every chance I get, but when I need creative new tools, I turn to Maya to fill in the gaps. Would like to have the same choices to add onto LW.

This point has been raised repeatedly over and over for years now. NewTek must either listen and join the race, or quickly lose users to other apps that offer a beautiful pallette of 3rd party choices to "customize" their program to do whatever the hell they want it to do....

This is a wake-up call. If ya keep on sleepin' NT, people WILL leave for greener pastures. It's never too late to change course and build new relationships with talented developers out there who can rapidly put LW on the top of the mountain with innovative new tools and choices for your customers!

wacom
10-03-2004, 10:02 AM
If we at least were given even a broad roadmap...that would at least be something I could hold them to. Right now I'm just not sure what they really think is important. We could say everything, but most companies can't improve EVERYTHING in one or two cycles.

If they keep having people leave they're going to have no choice but to scrap and rework many of the guts and tools in LW to win them back. To make maters worse those new "things" will have to be better than competing packages to have them give LW a look again.

Do they realize that the release 8 didn't stablize the user base but shake it up more? I'm seeing userers here taking issues with LW's development who use to defend it and that should be freaking NewTek out!

I want to see that Worley Fprime SDK super fix- or I want to know what the status is on it. I'm sick of lip service. And what about that native render improvment? Are we going to get a new SubD engine (or a revamped version of the older, better one) so that previews aren't as slow as hell and we can have Ngons? Is IK going to go further than a boost? How about a history or at least true undos?

There are so many questions...and just I'm just sick of lip service. I know the whole Lux thing threw people for a loop, but lets start hearing some positive news and then improvements NewTek!

Librarian
10-03-2004, 02:44 PM
and just I'm just sick of lip service.
Well, you could use Mimic instead. Lip Service isnīt supported anymore :D

Aegis
10-03-2004, 04:06 PM
I don't entirely agree with the idea that NewTek has damaged the third-party marketplace by integrating functionality/plugins into LightWave. One issue that does need resolving is opening up the SDK - for a while NewTek gave the impression that this was a top priority (and it may still be) but thus far little seems to have surfaced - FPrime and G2 is a great example - Steve Worley really wants to get these two great plugins working together but unless SDK issues are resolved that's unlikely to happen (he's stated that he could probably kludge it but he's reluctant to do so because he wants them to work fully together).

Many other great plugins have reached the limits of what's available to them via the SDK and consequently development has slowed or even stopped.

As far as integrating tools go, isn't that exactly what the users want? I'm sure Impact sales have been damaged by the inclusion of hard-body dynamics in LightWave [8] but without them LightWave is at a distinct disadvantage compared with competing 3D packages. The SasLite thang has been debated over in the past and yes, I'm sure Joe Alter was p*ssed when NewTek included a cut-down version of Sas with LightWave but hey - what else were they going to do? Include Shave on the PC version and give the Mac users nothing?

Rather than plugins offering limited additional functionality, a current trend seems to be in offering complete third party solutions - Messiah, MotionBuilder, modo, ZBrush etc. The benefit of this approach is that a developer does not have to rely on the support of a 3D package developer - as long as you can get the data in and out then that's fine.

In order to re-invigorate the 3rd party plugin marketplace, NewTek needs to take a serious look at the needs of those developers. If the framework doesn't exist to give them (and their customers) what they need then it's time to tear it down and start again (which IMHO is long overdue).

My $0.02

P.S. Librarian is right - Daz Mimic Pro RULES! :D

wacom
10-03-2004, 05:15 PM
I agree with what everyone has said about the SDK. If I were NewTek I'd think the SDK is the main issue to deal with since resolving the issues around it would resolve many other issues. If the SDK were more open then we could have Ngons, better IK, improved rendering etc. very quickly. Many of these things would be done by third parties for free or fee. These plug-ins would be much less "surface" plugins as well that have to use hacks like the current ones that try to coax out as much as they can from LW.

In an odd way this would create a kind of LW that is independently structured at diffrent customizable price points. You'd buy the base model, and then through 3rd party plug-ins you'd get diffrent rendering, modeling, etc. We have this already (thanks to the people at Worley and Evasion etc), but not to the great extent and viabilty it could have if the SDK was fixed up.

I just don't think that LW can "do" everything that some programs do without upping the price or having diffrent models to choose from if they don't adopt this more open arch model. I'd much rather have an "open market" model for prices and features via the SDK then just three choices of LW to choose from. The reason being that programs like XSI have high end models that have one feature that isn't in the base model that I need, but a hundred others that I could do without paying for. I'd much rather get to pick and choose- even if it's a little less elegant.

Hypershade
10-04-2004, 01:16 AM
harlan is talking about really basic shiit as he said, there are 20 things, fully documented for years, he can think of off the top of his head but he mentions only one, lattices

I would really like to know what some are

I for one can not stand layout. I will do anything I can to avoid it ... it is clumsy, clownish, bush league and un intuitive at best

I personally feel if lw becomes a one gui program it will improve ten fold ... having modeling, texturing, animation, deforming, lighting, and rendering all under one roof will allow for seemless, more valuable, sharpened and more sophisticated set of machinery

NanoGator
10-04-2004, 01:20 AM
Sorry, don't agree. Simply unifying Modeler and Layout will not make for a better app. Not only would it be a usability nightmare (what happens when you hit undo?) but a lot of what makes LW useful would disappear.

If Newtek were to thoughtfully address the issues that'd arise, that'd be one thing, but I'd be cautious until 3 versions went by like that.

Lightwolf
10-04-2004, 01:44 AM
Sorry, don't agree. Simply unifying Modeler and Layout will not make for a better app. Not only would it be a usability nightmare (what happens when you hit undo?) but a lot of what makes LW useful would disappear.

What happens now when you hit undo? In modeler I know most of the time, in Layout I'm lost, and it must be the most useless feature of 8.0 ;)
Currently the split approach is imho very much a usability nightmare, and I wonder how people can actually get any work done with the hub switched off (If the hub wouldn't work over here, I'd be completely lost in many cases).

Simply blundering on in development like now will not make for a better app either ;)
Integration does not mean the dev team won't have to care about design issues anymore, but they will have to care about different ones :)

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
10-04-2004, 02:20 AM
???

what happens when you hit undo in a unified environment?

what happens in maya? what happens in xsi? what happens in c4d? what happens in 3dsmax?

except for layout currently, "WHAT HAPPENS" when you undo is pretty self explanatory.

alas... it really really should be universally.

jin

Lightwolf
10-04-2004, 02:37 AM
what happens when you hit undo in a unified environment?

I have no idea, undo is for wimps anyhow ;)

Cheers,
Mike :p

ingo
10-04-2004, 02:46 AM
.....Currently the split approach is imho very much a usability nightmare, and I wonder how people can actually get any work done with the hub switched off (If the hub wouldn't work over here, I'd be completely lost in many cases).

Simply blundering on in development like now will not make for a better app either ;)
Integration does not mean the dev team won't have to care about design issues anymore, but they will have to care about different ones :)

Cheers,
Mike

Well i have to work mostly without the hub (integration rocks, yessir). The biggest advantage is you have to close Layout, open modeller, make your changes, save them and reopen Layout. That way Layout has to reload the whole file and the memory management is clean now for the next few actions, a big safety plus.

Undo, why do you do something when you undo it again, what a waste of time ;)

Yog
10-04-2004, 06:28 AM
I don't know why people WOULDN'T want LW integrated. It's not as though we would be faced with all the commands on the screen at the same time. If it follows the lead of other integrated programs we would (if it were done right), just be looking at another menu tab or two.

For years Newtek have been producing clunky tools that simulate some of the functions of an integrated application, i.e. ways of saving out poses as morphs so they can be taken back into Modeler for tweaking, skeligons, the Hub etc. Why not just bite the bullet, make an integrated app, drop the clunky work arounds and let people use the standard modelling tools for animation work ?

wacom
10-04-2004, 10:55 AM
Lets try and be creative to give NewTek some ideas that are BETTER than the competitor programs, not just as good.

I'm for intergration that gives us the best of both worlds:

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=23611

My idea was this: ditch the hub, and make all core functions run in a single modual. From this modual you can batch render (like SN) without loading everything, or you can load instances of the "LW modeler or layout GUI". From there you could designate diffrent windows to have either a modeler or Layout functionality. These would all reside within the "core" window when docked to it. Kind of like how viewports are now, but also like how toolsets are in almost every program like flash, photoshop, PSP etc. Click on a Layout window and you get a layout tool set. Click on a modler window and you get the modler tools. You could also lock the toolset to either the layout panel or the modeler panel, or make on unified custom toolset panel that works with each.

If you have only layout windows open you'll only get layout functions by default (and that will be all that is loaded besides the "core" program). Like wise if you have only modeler windows open you'll only get a modeler toolset. This saves on resources as you're only loading what you need.

To add to this would be this funtionality- say you have two layout windows (viewports) open and two modeler windows open. They are docked side by side in a quad layout fasion. By setting the modeler window to "current layout object" the modeler window will change to the current object(s) you've selected in you scene. Frame zero would act as a buffer where if you select a model in a layout window at frame zero it acts as the base model (kind of like the base model for morphs) and when you make modeling changes to it will change the model in all frames to match the base changes. However if you move to frame 1-X (X being any number of frames) you will be changing and animating the modeling you are doing to the model at that time. In essence animateable modeling/deformation.

In addition to giving us greater modeling an animation flexablity and speed this would also save on resources as you would only load a model once into memorey.
If you like the old way of working (one modeler, one layout) and you had a dual display setup you could just make one monitor have only modeler windows and the other have layout windows docked to each respective side along with their respectively docked tool panels. Save one with a layout preset of modeler and the other one of layout, or simple save them together as the default.

All plugins would funtion through the core so that modeling plugins could also be layout plugins etc. This would let EVERYTHING have the potential to comunicate.

Is this making any sense? I'm basicly saying this: man that old Amiga esk layout GUI is nice, but man there are so many new options for GUI's and loading programs now it's sick to have to use this same one with its limitations.

I don't want the maya's toolset- I want something better!

I'll stop for now...

Lightwolf
10-04-2004, 11:00 AM
Hi wacom,
yep, that is basically the idea (which seems to be quite close to what a competitor is doing by the way...).

Oh, and I wish LW would have a decent Amigaesque GUI, it never did have (at least not one that followed the style guide)...

Cheers,
Mike

wacom
10-04-2004, 11:14 AM
As far as undos go I think it should work like this...

The user has three choices that use stacks like photoshop-

One stack mode is by object only. So each object has it's own history stack with a user defined level. The power of this needs not to be explained, but we all know the resources it takes and the problems that can arise. Still it would be a nice option.

Second- one history stack for modeler, and one for layout that will cover EVERYTHING done up to a user defined "history/undo level". How the cross over parts (like surfaces changes) would work without first intergrating LW I have no idea.

Third is a unified history stack, for modeler and layout that acts as one with a user defined level. Very simple and straight forward. Maybe it would be a little more flexable in that every object could be given an seperate undo/history level. Simple objects might only need to have a few things undone, so there level would be set lower than others with more complexity? Do you really need a history stack for most buildings, roads etc in layout?

In an ideal world we'd be allowed to pick which objects utilize which form of undo and hisotry. Say you have a really simple scene except for one object with 40 morphs, 40 textures, bones and IK everywhere etc. The base setting for the scene could be the third method- a simple undo last action or total history setting.
Maybe the complex object would have it's own stack though acting like the first option.

Maybe the history stack undo option could be more like a universal plugin that the user can define to each object. Have a complex texuture that needs tweaking? Add the plugin to the shadder stack. Have a deformation that needs a lot of tweaking and reworking? Add it to the objects deformation tab stack to start a history of deformation setting etc. I know this is a crazy idea...and quite frankly it's impossable without a new SDK...but the power...

There are problems with any one of these methods though- but they'd be better than what we have.

cresshead
10-04-2004, 11:16 AM
just take a look at xsi and and implement the different modes as they do with a drop down mode switch and also have the modes colour coded so you "know" what mode your in..

version 9 or version 10 possibly

in version 8.5 i'd like f prime to work totally everywhere..all shaders etc.

still with the app "as is" it's quite capable which people shouldn't forget.

if your after tools "right now" you may want to add a app to fill a gap..such as silo, maya , xsi or messiah animate or wings 3d.

steve g

wacom
10-04-2004, 11:20 AM
Hi wacom,
yep, that is basically the idea (which seems to be quite close to what a competitor is oing by the way...).

Oh, and I wish LW would have a decent Amigaesque GUI, it never did have (at least not one that followed the style guide)...

Cheers,
Mike


Yeah you're right, but like many things that Lucks did with Mofo that seem "revolutionary" it's really old hat when you look outside the 3D market and even with in it. These ideas have been around for ever. I guess if your user base is afraid of change it makes it hard to roll with the times...let's hope they do have as large of a base to consider in the future...

TheDevil
10-04-2004, 11:22 AM
Lets try and be creative to give NewTek some ideas that are BETTER than the competitor programs, not just as good.

I'm for intergration that gives us the best of both worlds:

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=23611

My idea was this: ditch the hub, and make all core functions run in a single modual. From this modual you can batch render (like SN) without loading everything, or you can load instances of the "LW modeler or layout GUI". From there you could designate diffrent windows to have either a modeler or Layout functionality. These would all reside within the "core" window when docked to it. Kind of like how viewports are now, but also like how toolsets are in almost every program like flash, photoshop, PSP etc. Click on a Layout window and you get a layout tool set. Click on a modler window and you get the modler tools. You could also lock the toolset to either the layout panel or the modeler panel, or make on unified custom toolset panel that works with each.e along with their respectively docked tool panels. Save one with a layout preset of modeler and the other one of layout, or simple save them together as the default.

Now we are talking. This good idea seems to me a natural progression of LW development. The best of both worlds. Keeping the Lightwave identity but having a decent method where all parts can work and communicate together efficiently. I suppose the LW8 developemnt cycle will be refining the current tools plus some new additions. This idea would be great for a LW9 release. I really hope they do something like this.

Exper
10-04-2004, 11:32 AM
Andrew's post was better than a medicine! :D

UnCommonGrafx
10-04-2004, 11:38 AM
Harlan,
Look at what you started?
Now, give us something for this puppy* so that NewTek has even MORE reasons to give you, me and everyone else what they want: the magic back.

I didn't know Peter Jesperen was part of the team now. And Elmar's back and on the case. I think some... amazing things on the way. [email protected] well better be, huh?!?


So, Harlan, give us your schtuff now; even incomplete it gives us all an insight into a 'heavy hitters' settings.

* This puppy: http://www.creativecow.net/forum/read_post.php?postid=109644748386803&forumid=123

Cman
10-04-2004, 12:44 PM
Lets try and be creative to give NewTek some ideas that are BETTER than the competitor programs, not just as good.

I'm for intergration that gives us the best of both worlds:

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=23611

My idea was this: ditch the hub, and make all core functions run in a single modual. From this modual you can batch render (like SN) without loading everything, or you can load instances of the "LW modeler or layout GUI". From there you could designate diffrent windows to have either a modeler or Layout functionality. These would all reside within the "core" window when docked to it. Kind of like how viewports are now, but also like how toolsets are in almost every program like flash, photoshop, PSP etc. Click on a Layout window and you get a layout tool set. Click on a modler window and you get the modler tools. You could also lock the toolset to either the layout panel or the modeler panel, or make on unified custom toolset panel that works with each.

If you have only layout windows open you'll only get layout functions by default (and that will be all that is loaded besides the "core" program). Like wise if you have only modeler windows open you'll only get a modeler toolset. This saves on resources as you're only loading what you need.

To add to this would be this funtionality- say you have two layout windows (viewports) open and two modeler windows open. They are docked side by side in a quad layout fasion. By setting the modeler window to "current layout object" the modeler window will change to the current object(s) you've selected in you scene. Frame zero would act as a buffer where if you select a model in a layout window at frame zero it acts as the base model (kind of like the base model for morphs) and when you make modeling changes to it will change the model in all frames to match the base changes. However if you move to frame 1-X (X being any number of frames) you will be changing and animating the modeling you are doing to the model at that time. In essence animateable modeling/deformation.

In addition to giving us greater modeling an animation flexablity and speed this would also save on resources as you would only load a model once into memorey.
If you like the old way of working (one modeler, one layout) and you had a dual display setup you could just make one monitor have only modeler windows and the other have layout windows docked to each respective side along with their respectively docked tool panels. Save one with a layout preset of modeler and the other one of layout, or simple save them together as the default.

All plugins would funtion through the core so that modeling plugins could also be layout plugins etc. This would let EVERYTHING have the potential to comunicate.

Is this making any sense? I'm basicly saying this: man that old Amiga esk layout GUI is nice, but man there are so many new options for GUI's and loading programs now it's sick to have to use this same one with its limitations.

I don't want the maya's toolset- I want something better!

I'll stop for now...


That's awesome!
But how would modeling animate? I mean, if you add new polygons at frame 350, like a new cube or sphere, wouldn't they just pop into existence?

But I guess extrusion would animate nicely. :D

Lightwolf
10-04-2004, 01:45 PM
That's awesome!
But how would modeling animate? I mean, if you add new polygons at frame 350, like a new cube or sphere, wouldn't they just pop into existence?

No, they new polygons would just sit there, in the complete timeline, without any animation attached to them yet. This is basically how most apps handle that problem (including, for example, compositing apps).
If, of course, the polygon is attached to animated vertices, it would be animated as well.
Cheers,
Mike

Hypershade
10-04-2004, 05:18 PM
Still lookong for harlans 20 fully documented things

Never the less, heres just one example why layout is bush league at best, I found this in the tips and tricks section - http://www.andynicholas.com/thezone/index.php?area=showitem&fromarea=art&page=0&order=0&sort=date&article=3

In maya, for example, this can be done in one widow, one program and one can of soda :) :)

wacom
10-04-2004, 07:25 PM
Still lookong for harlans 20 fully documented things

Never the less, heres just one example why layout is bush league at best, I found this in the tips and tricks section - http://www.andynicholas.com/thezone/index.php?area=showitem&fromarea=art&page=0&order=0&sort=date&article=3

In maya, for example, this can be done in one widow, one program and one can of soda :) :)


Well I don't doubt that there are many other things in Maya that can be done more easily than in LW I'm afraid this isn't one of them. I've used HowardM's technique to get this going and it only takes dealing with a window and a few tabs in MD. I don't know why andy went through such lenghts with it... It was easy to setup and make- and if you know what you're doing you can make water like effects etc.

Hypershade
10-04-2004, 08:33 PM
In maya all you have to do is parent a deformer to the ball

Exper
10-05-2004, 04:33 AM
Yep... anoter time... simplicity + flexibility!

Many LW's tools are powerful but you must be an expert (or a super-expert) to use them also in low/mid complexity projects.

Doran
10-05-2004, 01:25 PM
A few? I can think of at least 20 off the top of my head.



20? Name em. This rant with no substance is a little non-constructive. So far I've got two things that you've listed. I'm not going to jump on the Lightwave bash train with you until I know what you are talking about.

faulknermano
10-05-2004, 01:42 PM
In maya all you have to do is parent a deformer to the ball

in maya, scuplt deformer.
in lw, polyfit.


"Away with all ideals. Let each individual act spontaneously from the for ever incalculable prompting of the creative wellhead within him. There is no universal law." --D. H. Lawrence

faulknermano
10-05-2004, 01:59 PM
Yep... anoter time... simplicity + flexibility!

Many LW's tools are powerful but you must be an expert (or a super-expert) to use them also in low/mid complexity projects.

exper: your statement is very vague. what is "expert"? what is "super-expert"? what is "low/mid complexity projects"?

faulknermano
10-05-2004, 02:05 PM
No, they new polygons would just sit there, in the complete timeline, without any animation attached to them yet. This is basically how most apps handle that problem (including, for example, compositing apps).
If, of course, the polygon is attached to animated vertices, it would be animated as well.
Cheers,
Mike

in maya, since it is node based, fcurves (or channel curves) are nodes in themselves that relate a particular value over time (or value over another value - as in the case of set-driven-key). this seems like a "natural" thing in the case of an object not related to time intrinsically. maya's animation nodes connect to particular attributes of the "object node" and drive those attributes over time.

the "paradigm", if it could be called that, fits rather well, although in the scheme of interfacing with the user, along with the ability to view and edit those connections, is rather complex. for maya's thorough complexity, its interfacing sucks, imo.

Hypershade
10-05-2004, 05:57 PM
in maya, scuplt deformer.
in lw, polyfit.



who in the world has time to keep track of every lw script known to man

faulknermano
10-05-2004, 06:02 PM
who in the world has time to keep track of every lw script known to man

strictly speaking, it's a plugin. and you dont have to "keep track" of anything yourself. those who search enough for a solution, find it. those who dont.. well there's always lw-community forums.

toby
10-05-2004, 09:48 PM
In maya all you have to do is parent a deformer to the ball

Then delete the history... ( wait, it's still screwed up? And why do we even have a history if you have to delete it? ) then export to Lightwave to render...

WizCraker
10-05-2004, 11:22 PM
You don't have to delete the History that is up to the User.

Dodgy
10-06-2004, 03:13 AM
who in the world has time to keep track of every lw script known to man

Christopher Stewart :) He's the guy behind www.flay.com which should be your first port of call if you find something you need which base LW doesn't cover. It has a searchable database of virtually all the LW plugins in existance.

Exper
10-06-2004, 04:12 AM
exper: your statement is very vague. what is "expert"? what is "super-expert"? what is "low/mid complexity projects"?Some examples...
ClothFX: just a simple cloth situation can drive you in banging you're head against the wall!

HDR: how many people have problems (often the same one: bright spots)?

Caustics: Intensity values and proper setups.

Just to mention the first ones I can keep in mind.

This let me think: powerful features... but not user-friendly implemented!

If you have an user-friendly tool then you can have good results in a fast way...
and then if you're an expert (you work predominantly with that one tool) you can have even better ones!

faulknermano
10-06-2004, 07:49 AM
This let me think: powerful features... but not user-friendly implemented!


i'm almost sure you can find a group of people here that will disagree with your assessment, and i will be one of them. i dont want to come across as rude or anything, but your assessment of the matter seems to be rooted on the lack of understanding the software (lw) - although i'm not saying outright that you lack understanding of lw at all. of course, that is only my opinion, just as yours is an opinion as well.

i say all of this because i also use another 3d app for work and i know for a fact that any kind of professional project undertaking the whole process is in the mercy of two broad factors (certainly not the only ones but the two most major): quality that the client requires, and the time-table set for the project. from here, it's only the 3d operator's personal capabilities (and a supervisor's ablity to manage) that will enable successs or failure or somewhere in between.

to say that lw cannot handle with ease "low/mid complexity projects" is vague (and you havent described exactly what the extent of low/mid complexity projects are - for i am talking about projects as a whole, not features of the product that the project will use, because there's always a couple of ways to skin a cat). you do not attribute user expertise into the picture. that's why i find that you painting a broad statement like lw is not fit for low/mid complexity projects does not hold up rationally. more importantly, it does not hold up experentially.

Exper
10-06-2004, 08:27 AM
faulknermano
first of all... I was only speaking about people who are forced to ask help in forums (you can easily look for yourself) for simple Cloth, HDR setups and so on!

You can find as many as you want... ok... you say it good... simple the skill... and I was not speaking about LW capacity in driving low/mid projects (we all know it can also afford complex ones) but about users.

As far as I can (in my own infinite ignorance) know... just a basic thing... no users no software: the user (skilled or wimp) is the basis!

Just a simple note: I personally know many users which cannot (for many different reasons) spend their time browsing the forums begging/asking for something, but they're LW's users, they paid for LW, they use it and they'll probabily jump to another boat (some had already done it).

We must consider a single source: documentation!
Forums, sample scenes (as provided: not documented), internet tutorials, plugins are only some optionals and they shouldn't be considered foundamentals... they are bonus stuffs: good, necessary, unrivalled but bonus stuffs.

LW is what you have out of the box: software + documentation.

Now I just think... how can an user fail in having a ball illuminated by an HDRI probe? Take a look at the manual... ok... no lucky (you can browse the forums and take a look about similar fails)!
Can NT provide an user-friendly HDRI use? Yes... if they want!

This is just a silly example... but the user-base is an user-base... it is not skilled nor wimp... it is just an user-base!

NT can't really develope the magic button: "Click here: I'll make everything for you!".
This is for sure! But they can drive the program to a land where many more users will find a fast response withouth going outside and beg for help!

It's really sad (I'm sorry for any eventual misunderstang... as I always say: "d*mn idiot... I am") but I've found lately too much grudge in some of LW's Community members (against other ones)... and I think this attitude will give bad results in return... and more... this is a palpable signal of a growing discomfort (I say of not seeing... so it doesn't exists... and if you say "It exists" then you're a fool)
NT should be very appalled about it.

Then as the final stage (before I can close the curtain): I'm using LW regularly since 5.0 (and before... occasionally the pre-PC versions... on Amiga+VT+PALs-converter in a couple of studios).

Good luck...
I give up! :mad: