PDA

View Full Version : Layout/modeler combo



Stik
04-28-2003, 10:40 AM
Please combine layout and Modeler in LW8...god knows you had plenty of time...and the new upgrade wont be around for another year or so....yea I know what they said about the 3rd or 4th quarter but I've heard that before.

hrgiger
04-28-2003, 12:39 PM
You should say why you want modeler and layout combined. This one's been requested a million times. Now a million and one.

Well, actually they definately said 4th quarter and it will definately be out then. That means anywhere from 5 to 8 months at the most. Not a year.

prospector
04-28-2003, 12:55 PM
UUHHHHooooo
a modler/layout intigrate thread...something new :cool:

So I put my 2 cents in

Please DON'T combine LW 8 or any future LW

they are just so coool seperated

makes us different from the rest of the sheep in the 3D world

And just as was said on that wonderful tape when it first came out with the Amiga/Flyer,
we don't have to be like the drones of the world.

Valter
04-28-2003, 08:30 PM
I would like to see modeler+layout inside a only program like MIRAI. In Mirai you have Sculptin(modeler), animating(layout), Painting, Materials, UVEditing, 3DPainting all inside of Mirai but seem separated programs.
Will be great have both(modeler and layout) inside accessing for a Icon or tab and with independents shortcuts and cfgs of course. But with much more interativity because will be more easy to test bone deformation, controls weights and UV etc.

I love way of lw have modeler and layout separated, but I think that way like mirai works is very cool and nobody would feels diference.


later

excuse my english :(

Mylenium
04-29-2003, 12:41 AM
Everybody s...t up !!! I do not mean to be rude, but I'm really tired of this kind of discussion. It's neither a real feature request nor does it give the people at NT a real clue to what would be best for most users. I'm sure that finally they have their own ideas and will come up with something wonderful... Whatever that may be.

Mylenium

Valter
04-29-2003, 01:07 AM
hmmm... you mean wonderful like 7.5b???

jbw
04-29-2003, 08:19 AM
I agree with prospector... please don't integrate the two. I love the fact they're seperate, helps me to deal with the (main) task at hand.
Maybe I'm making assumptions here but wouldn't this be MAJOR work? I've seen loads of other requests that would see that time better spent. :)

prospector
04-29-2003, 01:24 PM
Mylenium

Your not rude..SPEAK UP !!!!!

We are trying to get the intagration thingy thread as long as the LW vs. Notepad thread was, which has now been going on for 16 months between this new site and the old site, which has now over 600 posts compared to the intagration threads that only come up to 248 on all threads.

:D :D

Valter
04-29-2003, 03:46 PM
hi all

necessarily don't need make animation in modeler viewports guys.

modeler and layout could work very fine in same program and you need select tab or icon of modeler to modele and select tab or icon of layout to animate.

I really like to have know what's bad point if join modeler and layout in only one program :confused:

thanks

prospector
04-29-2003, 09:29 PM
But thats how it is now..
hit the modeler button in layout or hit the layout button in modeler

just perfect :D

Jimzip
04-30-2003, 05:54 AM
Someone should put up a sticky telling people to not post this topic again...

Valter, I understand what you're saying, but Lightwave isn't Mirai, nor is it 3DSMax, Cinema 4D, Softimage, or Maya. It has the best inbuilt renderer out of all of them.. That says something.
Also, when I get a project, I like modeling to be a solo task, I can keep my mind on modeling without being distracted by keyframes, 'animate' and 'model' tabs, and annoying interface clutter.
Animating is the same. The model is finished, and imported into a scene with other models. It's a very logical way of doing things, saving accidental mesh changes, and like said before, you can keep your mind on the task at hand.
If you can run the two applications at once and flip between the two, just pretend that it's the same program flipping from the 'model' to the 'animate' UI. Honestly, it doesn't take long to switch apps...

Jimzip

Valter
04-30-2003, 10:14 AM
Originally posted by prospector
But thats how it is now..
hit the modeler button in layout or hit the layout button in modeler

just perfect :D


Originally posted by ROBMAXWELL in CGTALK FORUM
Everyone has an opinion about Modeler and Layout as two seperate Apps.

Some like it the way it is, while others yearn for tighter integration. I see the pros and cons for each.

So what is the solution? Look at Softimage. It has different modules for modeling and animation. When modeling, you dont' have the animation menus in the way, and vice versa. All you have to do is hit a "tab" on the panel for modeling or animation, and your object or animation stays intact without the need to import/export. Just the stuff you don't need is hidden so as not to add clutter.

Simple solution that makes everyone happy!



Originally posted by CMAN in CGTALK FORUM
That's a great idea. It basically means an UberHub - everything translates back and forth between without worry. Things like skelegons would update in Modeler if you changed the rig in Layout, etc.


topic is this
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=58968&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

Chris S. (Fez)
04-30-2003, 10:40 AM
Layout and Modeler are like two imprisoned lovers tapping out communications on a common wall. Lovers can communicate only so much through concrete. Having been separated so long, they are both unbelievably horny. Let's tear down the cruel concrete wall that is the HUB so that these two lonely, lost Lightwave souls can get it on!

Chris S. (Fez)
04-30-2003, 10:41 AM
OK, excuse the contrived allegory. You like the idea of the HUB? Fine, I like it too, but only the IDEA. I think anyone who says they are satisfied with the HUB in its current incarnation is either being belligerant, suffering from a sad lack of vision, or has a much faster computer than mine.

Peace. :)

prospector
04-30-2003, 12:46 PM
Dunno

Modeler on 1 screen and layout on the other
rework in modeler
click on the layout screen
2 sec or less later it's updated

seems fine to me

running 1.8 GHz

amorano
04-30-2003, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by Mylenium
Everybody s...t up !!! I do not mean to be rude, but I'm really tired of this kind of discussion. It's neither a real feature request nor does it give the people at NT a real clue to what would be best for most users. I'm sure that finally they have their own ideas and will come up with something wonderful... Whatever that may be.

Mylenium

SO then don't read it, and definately don't keep it bumped to the top with statements made for flame wars.

Move along, nothing to see here.

cresshead
04-30-2003, 10:08 PM
"SO then don't read it, "....yup so right..if you don't like the conversation..don't start talking about it!..trying to shut people up!!!..

merging layout n modeler?...i think it would be the only logical move..
to re enlighten people just why was modeler and layout separate in the first place???

two reasons..
1.each application was written by different people.
2.memory considerations on the amiga

1..Hmmm...seeing as the people who invented the applications are now probably taking a "back seat" to lightwave 8 development it would be prudent to merge them.

2.we don't have lightwave 7.5 on an amiga anymore...and memory is very cheap in large quantities...

would you say that maya,softimage3d, softimage xsi, houdini, 3dsmax and cinema 4d have all got it totally wrong with intergration?...

I think that NOT having intergration would be a defining moment for lightwave 8.

with all the great things that lightwave has achieved so far and could be in the future I believe that without lightwave evolving
it could be a real problem with new users being put off buying
lightave 8 as it would seem SO alien compared to all the other 3d apps.

I do realise that there is a substantial userbase with lightwave but you need to grow the user base as well as keep what you have already...it's a difficult balance i know but seeing as quite a few artists run several 3d apps [i use max/lightwave] maybe it really is time to fuse them together...there would be many benefits and not that many drawbacks with a "tab" U.I or a modular U.I. like maya or softimage..don't go down the 3dsmax route for U.I as on simple scenes max is great but on large scenes max bloats out under it own weight.

well that's my opinion for what it's worth!

steve g

prospector
04-30-2003, 11:41 PM
would you say that maya,softimage3d, softimage xsi, houdini, 3dsmax and cinema 4d have all got it totally wrong with intergration?...

Having tried them all for at least 1 hour...YES



not that many drawbacks with a "tab" U.I or a modular U.I. like maya or softimage

that's what it is now...little button on the top right of screen.

Modeler/layout

Valter
05-01-2003, 01:17 AM
Prospector this little button on top right of screen is basically a shortcut to another program. Is not better way to make a fine interativity. LwHuB interactivity is not so good than other 3d apps.

It can work very fine to you, but is not to me and others around. Unfortunately LWHUB is not 100% in lw7.5.

But I can say a thing. I would be happy if lw modeler had a good interaction between geometry and bones. This way I could fix geometry before animate to work fine.

later

cresshead
05-01-2003, 04:34 AM
from "prospector"
<Having tried them all for at least 1 hour...YES >

well I don't think an hour's testing of ANY 3d app can give you a real insight to either the general feeling of the app or the U.I/workflow.

for new prospective users of lightwave 8 who might be trying out the demo and comparing it to say maya5ple or cinema8 [which are both in the same price guide] lightwave would seem quite odd in that it runs 3 applications [layout,hub,modeler] to get the job done compared to maya or cinema8...it definatley looks to be a 3d app that's doing it "its way" and so isolates itself from the pack..which could be good or bad depending on the time the new user has in lightwave whilst trying to decide wether to buy it or not.

one the big selling points of lightwave is the gallery of fantastic images available and also it's upfront use in cgi shows like roughtnecks & jimmy neutron.

however nowdays lightwave is up against maya5 complete with 4 renderers which include mental ray and a flash capable cartoon renderer plus maya's high status in film..maya's own achilies heal is that everyone generally agrees it's a difficult app to master and used to have a slow/poor renderer...they fixed that with maya 5 though...and i think that the merging of layout/modeler would help prospective users to lean toward lightwave more and not put a doubt in their minds with the 3 app thing we currently have.

lightwave already has neat modeling tools and a great renderer it just needs better workflow and animation/rigging tools and a good overhaul of the interface to find al of those cool tools.

steve g

prospector
05-02-2003, 07:36 AM
Actually I thought 1 hour was too much time.

With LW I was making things (Albeit boxes and globes, and other simple things) and doing small but marvilous animations (for a beginner), right out of box and no manual reading first.

With the other programs it almost takes that long to figure out the silly icon thingys.

maby it is the UI that makes LW easier...dunno

Just LW was easier to learn.

As for the HUB...
weither it is seperate as in LW or intigrated as in the others, there still has to be some kind of interactive communications between the modeling and animating sections of any program.

LW shows this communications port, the others don't, but it is still there.

As the Hub is refined more and more it will seem more and more seemless between modeler and layout and this is a good thing.

And Newtek could make 1 program .exe that automatically starts both layout and modeler (which the others do automatically), but what would be the point?

All that really needs work is to make tools that work for both ends, which would be easier than making a tool that is intigrated into the program and could potentially cause the program to be full of bugs just by being there, and not by being a plug-in tool that would only bring troubles if that particular tool is used.

Chris S. (Fez)
05-02-2003, 12:37 PM
"As the Hub is refined more and more it will seem more and more seemless between modeler and layout and this is a good thing."

I would agree if it was not apparent to me that the HUB has hardly been refined since the release of six. Again, I LIKE the HUB workflow. I like having Layout open on one monitor and Modeler open on another. But the interaction between these two environments leaves a lot to be desired.

The separated environments not only offer Lightwavers some unique advantages over other programs, they also offer unique disadvantages. As long as Lightwave does not lose any of the unique advantages, why not nullify the disadvantages by integrating the code? If Newtek can nullify the disadvantages with some sort of super-HUB, so be it, but I have serious doubts given the degree of integration offered so far.

DigiLusionist
05-02-2003, 11:00 PM
Boy, I hope LW isn't integrated in version 8, cause then my testicles would recede into my body and shrivel up, and my brain would hurt really, really bad from all that darned multi-tasking I'd be forced to do.

**curling up in a ball, patting the back of my neck**

I fear change...

rick_r
05-07-2003, 09:00 AM
Originally posted by prospector
Dunno

Modeler on 1 screen and layout on the other
rework in modeler
click on the layout screen
2 sec or less later it's updated

seems fine to me

running 1.8 GHz

I think that's the ideal set up for LW. Dual 1Ghz. G4 here with hot tea in my cup thank you.

loebek
05-07-2003, 11:49 AM
dont combine them together.

In the aspect of ergonomy you will have much more buttons to click at in one screen? I loved to play with max back in the old DOS days. I could use max them, I cant use it know without a lot of time in my hand.
asume you need to learn/teach that software.
you can concentrate on modeling or layouting

I will go further and ask if you can make a third program: :D surfacer!
:D

cu
loebek

cresshead
05-07-2003, 11:57 AM
no one so far has offered the most logical solution....
merge layout and modeler into "the hub"!

Hmmm..neat n small!

having at first being on the merge camp, i'm starting to think that a proper connection [updated hub] and unified feel to layout AND modeler is the way to go...

the thing is that layout simply has to "get with it" n join the this century with undo's and clean up some workflo issues such as moving some of the render settings from the camera in to the render dialog area to mention just one example.

steve g

loebek
05-07-2003, 11:59 AM
http://wepwawet.wuffpaws.org/images/virtualpc1600x1200.png

cresshead
05-07-2003, 12:25 PM
....ohh 3d studio!....when 16mb ram was "out there" along with a 512kb ram video card.

I'm also thinking that newtek may just [could be..] add aura to lightwave so you can paint your 3d models!....so you'll have a super hub or a modular app...

not long now...well..3 months or so til we see what they are up to!

steve g
:rolleyes:

Doug Nicola
05-07-2003, 07:49 PM
No No NO! PLEASE don't "integrate" LW! I just got through downloading and using Maya's 4.5 learning edition. I spent about 2 hours using it and then about 2 hours recovering from my headache created by looking at about 4000 little icons and three dozen panels all over the place.

I am now in total awe and greatly greatly appreciative of just how intuitive LW really is. Sure it has it's quirks (sometimes lots of quirks) but it is truly a work of art, to create amazing works of art. I really can't see any great benefit in trying to cram so much into one workspace.

Just make the Hub more reliable, beef up the character toolset (KeyTrak rocks, HINT HINT), and I'll be super happy!

BTW, I also took some time to look at renders from mental ray featured on the maya site, and what LW can do without even really trying just makes that stuff look pathetic.

Again, I've only been using LW for a couple of months, but have learned and created so much and so fast that I've just been having a blast. I could see spending at least a couple of months just trying to learn an interface like maya's, let alone creating anything.

As for the LightWave VX idea, most of that functionality can be assigned very cleanly using hot keys WITHOUT shift.

I have F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, and F8 for the scene, graph, surface, image, backdrop, volumetrics, compositing and processing panels. One press and it's there, one press and it's gone (except graph, he still owns F2).

Also, lower case o, b, l, c and p for Objects through Properties. Again, super fast and clean. Oh yeah, TAB makes my toolbar come and go, so instant full screen.

One more setup I love: Lower case z and x for move and rotate, and then keys a, s, d for selecting/deselecting X,Y,Z and H,P,B. Super fast and works like a charm!

And I'm also using Meni's layout config, which is intuitive, simple and clean.

Oh yeah, don't forget ctrl-shift LMB/MMB/RMB for three more totally customizable menus, right at your fingertips!

Speaking of fast, maybe I was missing something but maya's scene playback was so absurdly slow compared to what I get out of LW, that I would totally cry if I had to work with it.

Anyways, enough of my love letter to LW. I could go on and on, but I'll just say WAY COOL! :cool:

DigiLusionist
05-08-2003, 01:19 AM
In order to properly animate an object in Layout, you must first make sure it's properly modeled.

Having LW separated into two apps whose underlying code is not unified has resulted in serious workflow issues that should be addressed.

Having a Hub hasn't fix the problem, as is obvious to anyone who does more than just use LW to render stills.

It is for this fundamental reason I believe LW needs to have unified code. Whether the app retains two separate interfaces is not the issue. With a unified code, the interface could be customized however the artist wanted.

j3st3r
05-08-2003, 08:38 AM
Hey...

I had problem with this duality, and always have...My Platoon character had 390MB of textures...Even if HUB was running, both app had the textures loaded. That means, that 780MB of memory occupied...

That`s a serious disadvantage...

I would be happy if hub works properly...

Doug Nicola
05-08-2003, 10:42 AM
Right DigiLusionist! I wasn't clear about what I said. Having used LW a lot for things other than stills, especially setting up useful rigs, it is totally clear that LW REALLY needs a more unified code structure. What I like is the clean interface, and the ability to focus on the task at hand.

What is clear from my limited, characted-focused work so far is that getting models-bones-maps etc all working together more smoothly, with a unified code structure, would be a great improvement! And this would allow all kinds of further customization.

The Hub really can't be a powerhouse if it is limited by the underlying code. Who knows, maybe this is the upcoming workflow improvement Chuck mentioned...

faulknermano
05-09-2003, 06:07 AM
"Unified code."

i agree with that. layout or modeler could just be tweaked to provide several advantages for modelling and animating, but the underlying code will be unified.

now i dont know exactly what i'm saying, but it sounds good.

:D

Doug Nicola
05-09-2003, 12:20 PM
faulknermano, I thought you were a programmer, or are you just being silly? I have a whole tab in layout dedicated to your stuff... I really like PViewGN and use it about every couple of minutes. It's even got its own hot key.:D

Anyways, unified code is a pretty clear concept in programming. To take one of the more obvious examples, right now it looks like skelegons and bones live in very different code. There is a translation module that goes one way into layout. Now while this is a programming trick that even has its own design pattern, it's also a programming trick that's meant to bridge code modules that are NOT already unified (designed together to work together).

A unified bones code object might work differently in modeler and layout, but the functions would all be in one object, or in several objects working closely together. They would be objects which are specifically designed to work together, not strangers communicating with bridge modules.

Another example: When I go to set bone rest length in layout, I get an unchangable format like 0.0016 with no units attached. But everything like this in modeler has units attached that can be changed. Again, not unified because the code is not unified.

Unifying all of this kind of stuff in LW might be a large (huge?) task of code refactoring, but it would be absolutely worth it.

faulknermano
05-09-2003, 01:09 PM
faulknermano, I thought you were a programmer, or are you just being silly? I have a whole tab in layout dedicated to your stuff... I really like PViewGN and use it about every couple of minutes. It's even got its own hot key.:D

i'm a script-writer. not a real programmer.

i stay clear of what i dont fully understand. i've been proven stupid too many times that, when it comes to programming, listen first before firing off my mouth. so the above was just a quick retreat / disclaimer. :D


Anyways, unified code is a pretty clear concept in programming. To take one of the more obvious examples, right now it looks like skelegons and bones live in very different code. There is a translation module that goes one way into layout. Now while this is a programming trick that even has it's own design pattern, it's also a programming trick that's meant to bridge code modules that are NOT already unified (designed together to work together).

A unified bones code object might work differently in modeler and layout, but the functions would all be in one object, or in several objects working closely together. They would be objects which are specifically designed to work together, not strangers communicating with bridge modules.

Another example: When I go to set bone rest length in layout, I get an unchangable format like 0.0016 with no units attached. But everything like this in modeler has units attached that can be changed. Again, not unified because the code is not unified.

Unifying all of this kind of stuff in LW might be a large (huge?) task of code refactoring, but it would be absolutely worth it.

you see here i would have stopped at the first sentence. unifying code is a nice idea. probably use the same set of algorithms? i dont know.. you have code, then you have interface to THAT code? when i mean interface i do not mean UI (or USER INTERFACE). i mean the interface by which lightwave performs its duties. it's a big task from a development standpoint.

asking for a 'unifying code' is great. but that's just a pat answer. how is the code going to be implemented? will the interface live up to the code? will the user interface hook seamlessly with the API? etc etc.. i'm afraid i do know enough to make a suggestion about how newtek programmers do their code, or what language to use. i defer to guys like amorano who have more professional programming experience. i dont agree with them, though, because i still dont know what they're talking about. :p

Doug Nicola
05-09-2003, 02:26 PM
Oh yeah, this could be a HUGE task, like I said. I've programmed C++ for five years and have boatloads of books that I'd like to get rid of on this very subject. And right this has nothing to do with the look of the UI.

It has everything to do with the design of what's going on behind the scenes. I've owned, and followed, LW from 5.5 on, even though I almost never used it until 7.5. I remember a big whoop-dee-doo when 6 came out that the code design was more object-oriented, so now this would allow quicker feature development, tighter integration etc.

This is a step, I don't know how major, towards what I'm talking about. I'm not being flip by any stretch of the imagination. I worked in one software company with some absolutely brilliant, totally quirky code, written by a self-taught teenage genius, that was so good it allowed them to practically own their market for 10 years. But other new companies were coming out with stuff that was freshly engineered and very flexible. My old company was looking at exactly what I believe NT may be looking at with LW. How to transform this great stuff, make it much more robust, but without loosing our special edge?
Of course it's not easy, but it can be done.:)