PDA

View Full Version : Why doesn't Lightwave 3D have NURBS?



joeldberry
04-15-2005, 11:22 AM
Just curious, as just about every other 3D package I have reviewed or used has "NURBS" modeling as an option. With Lightwave, it seems limited to Polygonal/ Subdivision and Meta-object modeling.

Why not NURBS? Has this been made obsolete by technology in Lightwave? Am I missing something?

Just wondering...

jdb

Lightwolf
04-15-2005, 12:31 PM
Well, I guess basically because they are hard to implement and LW historically comes from polygon modelling.
Nowadays most people prefer to use SDS anyhow, allthough I think that Nurbs are great for more technical modelling.

Cheers,
Mike

Nemoid
04-15-2005, 12:43 PM
I dunno exactly. what i know is that some apps was born as a nurb modeler (for example Maya) some other mainly as a poligon modeler, like Lw.
nurbs can be very useful, if well implemented, and one thing i appreciate of -cough- Maya is the possibility to model in nurbs and then convert geometry to polys or subpatches.


in particular: subpatches are a different technology that somewhat joins the goodness of poligon modelling with the advantages of nurbs wich are indeed an old technology. in fact,nurbs aren't so good for organic stuff, because they tend to get separated in pieces in animation. but i agree that modelling wise they offer some good advantage for sure, especially for design purposes.

However, Lw has subdivision surfaces, actually an algorythm similar to classic catmul clark subpatches, and that in its first incarnations was called Metanurbs, to underline the fact they offered the advantages of both worlds.

at the end of the day : some nurbn tools would be welcome in Lw IMHO, especially for curves and some other use. but you have the possibility to use subdivision surfaces all the time and they're very good.

UnCommonGrafx
04-15-2005, 12:53 PM
Yeah, I wonder the same thing...

Captain Obvious
04-15-2005, 02:00 PM
Why should it have NURBS? After using PiXELS3D for many years, I'm actually quite glad to not have to deal with spline-based objects. Polygon modelling is just so much easier. If you want smooth organic surfaces, use sub-division surfaces. I'd say it's better. The only real advantage with spline objects is that you get the UV map for free.

Ztreem
04-15-2005, 04:48 PM
Why should it have NURBS? After using PiXELS3D for many years, I'm actually quite glad to not have to deal with spline-based objects. Polygon modelling is just so much easier. If you want smooth organic surfaces, use sub-division surfaces. I'd say it's better. The only real advantage with spline objects is that you get the UV map for free.

It's just depends of what you're modeling, try to do a detailed car model or any other design object with advanced surfaces with polygons and one with NURBS then you'll see why NURBS is superior in some cases. :D

I want NURBS in LW, but first N-gons support for SDS. :cool:

mouse_art
04-15-2005, 11:22 PM
Hmm buy Rhino3D, IMHO even mayas nurbs tools are not as good as Rhinos, yes Rhino is not cheap but then you have the full bandwidth of Nurbs tools.

LW needs other things first, but ok in 10 or 11 maybe. ;)

mav3rick
04-16-2005, 12:07 AM
peresonaly i dont need nurbs in my work but support for ngon subd surfaces would be nice addon

zecryan
04-16-2005, 03:41 PM
I would much rather see Lightwave add NURBS modeling in lightwave 9 or at the latest, 10 and then i would buy a upgrade instead of buying another app. If i am going to buy another app it would be maya and i would sell my lightwave.

Nemoid
04-17-2005, 03:15 AM
Hmm buy Rhino3D, IMHO even mayas nurbs tools are not as good as Rhinos, yes Rhino is not cheap but then you have the full bandwidth of Nurbs tools.

LW needs other things first, but ok in 10 or 11 maybe. ;)

i agree on that. Rhino is far superior to Maya in NURBS implementation.
BTW its an entire NURBS based package. what i'd like to have in Lw is not a complete NURBS toolset that would require a lot of time to develop and implement, but only some good and basic tools especially for curves editing.

hey BTW is Nt would give us a gorgeous and complete Nurbs toolset i'd never cry for that :D

Ztreem
04-17-2005, 08:23 AM
Lightwave doesn't need to be a super good NURBS modeleing package, it only have to support it a little bit more. Like Maya, the NURBS tools in Maya isn't that great, but it can read NURBS surfaces from other good NURBS apps like Studiotools and Rhino. Then you don't need to freeze your object to a dense mesh that is a pain to surface in Modeler and a pain to animate in Layout.

I think N-gons support for SDS and some more advanced spline tools would be a great start, than it will be easier to model design objects in LW and not as much need for a NURBS package. :D

cresshead
04-17-2005, 09:34 AM
the only things i really look for in lightwave modeler on a day to day basis as a relational link from a spline to a lathed object, loft etc so i could pull the spline around and the lathed object would update and editable text objects where i could retype the text but keep the extrusion and bevels i created...those things are most welcome and currently keep me in 3dsmax as opposed to lightwave for my graphics i create for the books i work on.

other than that lightwave is the app!....
actually my next book [soccer book] i'm going to make it in lightwave rather than max...currently i make models in lightwave and export to max but the next one i'll make the models in lighwae and stay there except for the text objects which i'll make in max and export..sort of the opposite of what i do currently...meastro makes this possible as currently my main reason for max is character studio...just need to figure out how to make a pose library in lightwave as i do this in max with bip files currently...

nurbs?...if i need tham i could use xsi but as you may know i really hate that app!
i'm sure xsi has a deal going with headache tablets!..they must sell loads as it just winds me up....nurbs ???keep 'em if it means using xsi! :D

Librarian
04-17-2005, 01:43 PM
Hmm buy Rhino3D, IMHO even mayas nurbs tools are not as good as Rhinos, yes Rhino is not cheap but then you have the full bandwidth of Nurbs tools.

LW needs other things first, but ok in 10 or 11 maybe. ;)
I agree. I donīt even care much about NURBS in LW. Not yet.
I would rather see the Subdivision/patches taken to another level before.
But thatīs just me ;)

Lightwolf
04-17-2005, 02:03 PM
I agree. I donīt even care much about NURBS in LW. Not yet.

The thing is, 90% of the code for a first implementation seems to be there. Just take the current spline patch modelling tools and make them live, as well as allowing for Layout to tesselate and it will take LW a step further.
Not that I wouldn't love to see edges and edge weights for SDS...

Cheers,
Mike

Dodgy
04-17-2005, 05:09 PM
I dunno, I'd kind of like the Autopatch to work real time (like sub d's) and that would be enough for me :)

NanoGator
04-17-2005, 10:26 PM
I dunno, I'd kind of like the Autopatch to work real time (like sub d's) and that would be enough for me :)

The nice thing about Nurbs, though, is that a boolean operation would (potentially) work right.

I played with Rhino a little bit, I can see the appeal of it. Imagine not having to worry about things like the difference between 3/4 point polys and n-gons. Hehe.