PDA

View Full Version : LW plugin that does advanced fur (from LW Price reduction thread)?



kohlrabi_croce
08-04-2005, 11:59 AM
From the the LW Price reduction thread:


Great.. LW is now $395 say,and we can get many more people to buy copies. Many of them will be students and entry level people. So you are catering to a amateur/beginning crowd. Meanwhile the high end professionals can't wait anymore for SSS, advanced fur, advanced character animation tools, multipass/layered output, advanced rendering and shading because NT can't turn around such features at that price point, so they have moved on. Actually, this isn't an assumption (except for the price), its fact up to now.

(by archiea)

My questions:

Isn't thre any lightwave plugin that does SSS, advanced fur, advanced character animation tools, and etc.?

Otherwise, does one have to have the $7000 version of maya to get this, or does the $2000 version have it?

What is SSS?

thanks,

tracy


PS what is so bad about plugins, anyway?

beverins
08-04-2005, 12:07 PM
There are quite a few LW plugins that accomplish these tasks and more. Hair is handled by the excellent Sasquatch from Worley. SSS can be handled by G2 from Worley, though there are plugins from other companies that can do this too. Occlusion is offered by a number of people, check on flay.com

SSS is the abbreviation for sub surface scattering; it is the effect of wax candle, lit by the flame and nought else - look at the wax, how the light diffuses through the material.

http://www.worley.com/G2/g2_scatter.html#startit for an example of SSS

for ambient occlusion, there are some plugins and tutorials - here's one : http://www.kevman3d.com/lightwave.asp?section=tutorials

Celshader
08-04-2005, 12:52 PM
Y'know, Maya once cost $30,000 and ran on $20,000 SGI Octane systems. When Maya dropped its entry-level price to about $400 below that of LightWave [6], did the Maya community actually worry about amateurs flooding the Maya community? I doubt it.

Does the Maya community actually worry about all the colleges today that teach their students Maya, flooding the market with cheap Maya labor? I doubt it.

If you're after mega-bucks and the thrill of knowing software priced beyond the reach of mere mortals, learn to program Renderman shaders. Everyone else, use whatever gets the job done.

*used LightWave + Sasquatch to handle ankle-length wigs earlier this year* :)

kohlrabi_croce
08-04-2005, 01:24 PM
Thanks, guys. I put that in my list of plugins to get.

What about Messiah: Studio for the advanced animation?

Celshader
08-04-2005, 01:43 PM
Master LightWave's built-in character animation tools before considering a third-party package. Spend money only on what you need. I bought Messiah and got a free upgrade to Messiah:Studio, but I never did learn it, because none of my work demanded it. I still don't know if it's good or bad software -- it's just not something I need right now.

That said, some folks like Messiah. I also keep hearing good things about MotionBuilder.

Others use Maya as a character animation plug-in for LightWave. They model in LightWave, animate in Maya, render in LightWave. Flay.com might have information on Maya<->LightWave tools.

kohlrabi_croce
08-04-2005, 01:59 PM
Celshader]Master LightWave's built-in character animation tools before considering a third-party package. Spend money only on what you need. I bought Messiah and got a free upgrade to Messiah:Studio, but I never did learn it, because none of my work demanded it. I still don't know if it's good or bad software -- it's just not something I need right now.

Thanks, I just wanted to know about possiblilites for the future.


That said, some folks like Messiah. I also keep hearing good things about MotionBuilder.

Wow, it's about $4000. Er, maybe not.....


Others use Maya as a character animation plug-in for LightWave. They model in LightWave, animate in Maya, render in LightWave. Flay.com might have information on Maya<->LightWave tools.

Thanks, I checked it out. I guess I would go with messiah, when the time comes.

tracy

hrgiger
08-04-2005, 02:40 PM
I agree with Celshader on using Lightwave's animation tools first. The last thing you should do is get into the mindset that buying a program that is focused on character animation will make you a better animator. Yes, messiah is a great animation program with lots of advanced features but it is really my opinion that generally, they are geared towards more advanced users who get to a point in Lightwave where they just need a little more focus in their toolset.

Lightwolf
08-04-2005, 02:53 PM
When Maya dropped its entry-level price to about $400 below that of LightWave [6], did the Maya community actually worry about amateurs flooding the Maya community? I doubt it.
Actually, they did. The same goes for XSI and all of the high end discreet systems ;)

...they should worry more about competition though (this goes for all apps), not about pricing.

Surprisingly, the only software that didn't change the pricing the past few years is still number one in the market...

And to get back on topic: Only worry about alternatives once you feel you've "outgrown" the native toolset, or need other, specific, capabilities.

Using the native toolset has the advantage of teaching you all the tricks instead of pushing buttons (to an extent).

Cheers,
Mike

archiea
08-04-2005, 10:40 PM
From the the LW Price reduction thread:


(by archiea)

My questions:

Isn't thre any lightwave plugin that does SSS, advanced fur, advanced character animation tools, and etc.?

Otherwise, does one have to have the $7000 version of maya to get this, or does the $2000 version have it?

What is SSS?

thanks,

tracy


PS what is so bad about plugins, anyway?



yes, I have SAS. its great but it has its limitations, and some problems with interpenetrations. There are also some rendering limitations that can be fixed with some cleaver compositing. What I was looking for was better integration into LW... like what happens if youw ant a character to have sand or snow in their hair? I;m curious if LW's particles can be "assigned" to SAS' hair... but I beleive the manner that hair is rendered in LW may limit that...

archiea
08-04-2005, 10:54 PM
There are quite a few LW plugins that accomplish these tasks and more. Hair is handled by the excellent Sasquatch from Worley. SSS can be handled by G2 from Worley, though there are plugins from other companies that can do this too. Occlusion is offered by a number of people, check on flay.com

SSS is the abbreviation for sub surface scattering; it is the effect of wax candle, lit by the flame and nought else - look at the wax, how the light diffuses through the material.

http://www.worley.com/G2/g2_scatter.html#startit for an example of SSS

for ambient occlusion, there are some plugins and tutorials - here's one : http://www.kevman3d.com/lightwave.asp?section=tutorials


Again, I have G2, and its very useable, especially with the recent Fprime update. However these advanced shaders should have been part of LW considering its reputation for its renderer. This way you wouldn't have had to wait for Fprime 1.5 to use be able to view the G2 shaders. I'm not knocking Worley.. They have provided so many solutions especially during the slower times of LW development. But consider the costs: g2, sas and Fprime bring up even the current $800 price of LW to $2200. Considering that LW JUST got reduced to $800, its actually brought up the costs to $3000. Still half the price of Maya unlimited, but thats not really apples to apples.

Celshader
08-04-2005, 10:57 PM
Again, I have G2, and its very useable, especially with the recent Fprime update. However these advanced shaders should have been part of LW considering its reputation for its renderer. This way you wouldn't have had to wait for Fprime 1.5 to use be able to view the G2 shaders. I'm not knocking Worley.. They have provided so many solutions especially during the slower times of LW development. But consider the costs: g2, sas and Fprime bring up even the current $800 price of LW to $2200. Considering that LW JUST got reduced to $800, its actually brought up the costs to $3000. Still half the price of Maya unlimited, but thats not really apples to apples.

Why do you use LightWave for your work, archiea? What kind of work do you do?

archiea
08-04-2005, 11:27 PM
Y'know, Maya once cost $30,000 and ran on $20,000 SGI Octane systems. When Maya dropped its entry-level price to about $400 below that of LightWave [6], did the Maya community actually worry about amateurs flooding the Maya community? I doubt it.


Actually, they did. I remember the day. But that wasn't the main point of my argument. It was that at that pricepoint, how quickly can NT turn around features and remain competative without having to rely on worley
to keep us up to date.

Maya at least has two targets with complete and unlimited. My concern was that Newtek was going for complete and put unlimited on the backburner.... :eek:



Does the Maya community actually worry about all the colleges today that teach their students Maya, flooding the market with cheap Maya labor? I doubt it.


yes. Because now can hire students who at least know whee al the buttons are. For some producers, thats all it takes to be a maya guru.



If you're after mega-bucks and the thrill of knowing software priced beyond the reach of mere mortals, learn to program Renderman shaders. Everyone else, use whatever gets the job done.

*used LightWave + Sasquatch to handle ankle-length wigs earlier this year* :)

Why is it that when I question NT price reduction people understand it as me wanting to pay $20,000 for LW? No. What i'm saying is that I'm concerned about LW's future development speed at that pricepoint. I mean.. it makes LW a tremendous vale even as it stand right now at 8.3. But value goes out the wayside when you are trying to deal with interpentration issues with feathers on a character.

I do agree with your assessment on the animation tools, or for that matter any aspect of LW.. use whats there first.. try to master them. And try to be clever with solutions, i.e. tricks in the compositing stage can add tremendous production value to your shot without the render hit.

What I'm saying is that I'd pay more for a version of LW that featured a more refined and cutting edge. Similar to what Maxon is doing with their app.. I'd hate to be stuck with just the feature set of the $695 version, when for $2200 more you can have a large suite. Now I'll argue that LW has about 5 of the 8 "advanced features" availble in the $3000 version of C4D, but if you really need the other 3, is $2200 really that much when you are working at that calibur? Now if NT can deliver the goods of a 3K package for $800.. along with the refinement (which C4D has quite well), well then... thats real value. For the record I think they can, because thats been their reputation for the most part. Its just been a bit slow as of late, but for good reasons..

Hey i'm of the school that if a short done in HASH rocks.. then it rocks!!! But of that Rocking short is plagued with aliasing issues and other artifacts inherent sometimes with HASH, to some its worth it to pay more for better quality.

archiea
08-04-2005, 11:32 PM
Yes, messiah is a great animation program with lots of advanced features but it is really my opinion that generally, they are geared towards more advanced users who get to a point in Lightwave where they just need a little more focus in their toolset.

Yes, and thats EXACTLY what i;m talking about.. Imagine me and HRgiger agreeing!! Now if you did need a the refinement of messiah.. especially before 8 was available, would you pay more for it? isn't it better if it was integrated into LW so that us mac users aren't left out in the cold? Would you be against there being a version of LW called Pro or something that offered such a refinement at an extra cost?

Celshader
08-04-2005, 11:41 PM
So, archiea, why do you use LightWave?

archiea
08-05-2005, 12:08 AM
Why do you use LightWave for your work, archiea? What kind of work do you do?

I had used LW in broadcast since 1.0 alongside compositing. I switch to compositing fulltime because (a) I earned way more as a compositor than a LW artist and (b) no one took LW seriously at that time, despite what I rendered.

because of my exposure to 3D from LW I;ve always handled the 3D heavy compositing project. As a result I was exposed to alot of high end features and workflows form the various 3D communities. Now that i'm returning to 3D both professionaly and personally (as in personal film projects), my evauluation of LW is in that regard. It hasn;t stopped me from using it, but I really have to consider where my time and energies go, considering that much of it professionaly has to go with maya/renderman. It wasn't my choice. On the flipside, last summer I used the newly arrived 8 particle dynamics on a film. Nothing too complex. I experiencd alot of stability issues. I was using it on a modern mac, so I'm not sure if that was the reason. But it really aggravated the situation.

As an example, being the cel shading goddes that you are (MD too), what do you thing of C4d's sketch and toon module? it cost more, but at least its available. But thats my point, the option is there should you have a project that desires it... or even if you just want to add more functionality for your clientele...

hey i've found your tuts especially in MD really helpful, and have found your inventive uses for LW inspiring. So don't take my criticism's of LW personaly, considering how much work you have done in it. I still go to the LA user group meetings when I can because I enjoy the community and the tips... I just want to see LW mature a bit more. Somne might say why don;t I just leave, and/or use C4d since I can't shut up aboutit (see, hrgiger, I saved you a post!!! :tongue: ) I still have alot invested in LW, but I'm considering it...

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 02:43 AM
yes. Because now can hire students who at least know whee al the buttons are. For some producers, thats all it takes to be a maya guru.
Tell me all about it, I know some of them ;)

XSI is gearing that way too. Until last year you could be quite sure that an XSI person knew his tools. XSI people were rare, expensive, but knew what they're doing. I guess Foundation will change that...

Then again, that is also a problem related to the person actually hiring.

Cheers,
Mike

parm
08-05-2005, 02:57 AM
The other possibility of course. Is that the Newtek marketing strategists, have calculated that more revenue can be generated by lowering the price of Lightwave and expanding its user base.

Newtek have after all, made it very clear that they are committed to innovation within this product. But innovation is expensive, the money has got to come from somewhere. I certainly don't see why lower cost should mean lower quality. To you and me Lightwave just comes as a DVD, and Newtek have to sell as many as possible.

Personally I believe that making 3d software more accessible to a wider user base, will attract artists who would not normally consider using CG. If so we might begin to see some really interesting things happening in the medium.

Parm

Gui Lo
08-05-2005, 04:27 AM
But innovation is expensive, the money has got to come from somewhere.

We hear this alot but we have most of the developement team with histories of innovative programming which they sold for very little or allowed people to use for free.

NewTek has always done great innovation for a very low price.

I would call Fprime innovative and a must have plugin yet it is sold at a low price.

I've seen the snobbery first hand(like some). On some apps it is enough to know the very basics and blame the poor quality images on the use of the wrong renderer or not enough time to "finess" the image. These are the 3d jokers who say that they use such and such an app and expect to be treated like a "true" professional. They spend $thousands to learn the app and expect a big salary while all the while just able to do the basics.

Ouch! out of rant mode.

Gui Lo

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 04:31 AM
I would call Fprime innovative and a must have plugin yet it is sold at a low price.
Absolutely... and a must have tool.

Then again, while I consider it "cheap", it costs roughly 50% of the base app that covers so much more. So, in absolute values it is a steal, in relation to the host bloody expensive ;)

Cheers,
Mike

hrgiger
08-05-2005, 05:16 AM
Yes, and thats EXACTLY what i;m talking about.. Imagine me and HRgiger agreeing!! Now if you did need a the refinement of messiah.. especially before 8 was available, would you pay more for it? isn't it better if it was integrated into LW so that us mac users aren't left out in the cold? Would you be against there being a version of LW called Pro or something that offered such a refinement at an extra cost?

I wouldn't say we agree on it exactly. Messiah is not for all users and there is no need to integrate it into Lightwave. It was once a Lightwave plug-in and now it is a stand-alone program and to my knowledge there are no real compatability issues between the two. At the cost of a single license of Messiah and the now reduced cost of Lightwave, it is easier then ever to own the tools you need between the two programs.

And yes, I see no need for a LW Pro edition. Lightwave was from the beginning, all about professional tools affordable to the artist. I don't see that changing anytime soon. It doesn't say anything about the features that will or won't make it into Lightwave. Just because it doesn't have an elitest price structure, doesn't mean it won't see any advanced features. It seems to me that Newtek has successfully restructured the program to allow innovative new features to be brought and changed the pricing of Lightwave to expand their user base significantly to bring in additional revenue.

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 05:38 AM
Lightwave was from the beginning, all about professional tools affordable to the artist. I don't see that changing anytime soon. It doesn't say anything about the features that will or won't make it into Lightwave.
But those are connected. If you expect a pro tool to include a decent hair solution (as an example) is LW then a professional tool for the artist if it doesn't include it (heresy, I know)?

Then again, I think knowing the limits of your app is a part of the profession, as is knowing where to look to get a problem solved (well, usually your customers problem ;) ).
Cheers,
Mike

hrgiger
08-05-2005, 05:56 AM
But those are connected. If you expect a pro tool to include a decent hair solution (as an example) is LW then a professional tool for the artist if it doesn't include it (heresy, I know)?

Then again, I think knowing the limits of your app is a part of the profession, as is knowing where to look to get a problem solved (well, usually your customers problem ;) ).
Cheers,
Mike

Hi Mike. My point was that just because Lightwave is an affordable price, doesn't mean that advanced tools like hair and displacement painting wont' every make it into the toolset. Whether one person wants to call it a "pro" tool is debatable but for me personally, I believe it is. Besides the countless number of professionals who use it for film, broadcast, print, etc...I would say that just because some tools aren't out of the box like Sas and G2, still puts having all of those tools at a price less than or comparable to other apps that can do the same things out of the box. I say it's all about preference of workflow.

Gui Lo
08-05-2005, 06:05 AM
I'm sorry but I don't get this cost "relative to the base app" stuff.

Why should it be relative, apart from they are both paid in money?

I got it because it would save me loads of time and I could afford to get it. I never measured it up to the base app.

I don't measure my software relative to my computer or my vid card to my motherboard.

Please explain why we need to relate stuff?

Gui Lo

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 06:06 AM
Hi Mike. My point was that just because Lightwave is an affordable price, doesn't mean that advanced tools like hair and displacement painting wont' every make it into the toolset.
True, but for some there is an important difference between "will make it" and "is there" - playing the devil's advocate here.

Besides the countless number of professionals who use it for film, broadcast, print, etc...I would say that just because some tools aren't out of the box like Sas and G2, still puts having all of those tools at a price less than or comparable to other apps that can do the same things out of the box.
At least we've got that "all you'll ever need out of the box" out of the way ;)

I'm not sure I agree about the lower price either... Even XSI is quite cheap at any level if you add up what's included ... if you rely on those features that is (I don't at the moment, for me LW is quite sufficient).

I hear you with the number of pros ... then again, how many leading edge productions were created with LW in the last couple of years? (And yes, customers sometimes are aware of the hype). Sin City is the only one that comes to mind here... with at a third of it being LW, showing that it can keep up in certain areas (also showing that other apps are just as capable).
I'm talking leading in terms of "Wow" factor, not in terms of price/performance btw...

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not a die hard LightWaver since 1991 for nothing ... but there are a lot of sides to it.

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 06:11 AM
Please explain why we need to relate stuff?

Because that is what we do all the time?

Psychologically there is a big difference between spending 1000$ for an app an 1000$ for third party stuff, than spending 2000$ for an app and 0$ for third party stuff... Or even 5000$ for the app and 1000$ for third party software.

Then again, there are people that like to pimp up their cars with parts that cost more than the initial car as well ;)

But you are right, if it saves you time, look at your rates and see how much extra it earns you, then decide if you want to buy it. I guess that goes for all software and hardware... Which is relative again, relative to your rates that is ;)

Cheers,
relatively, Mike

JML
08-05-2005, 07:44 AM
saslite doesn't have a lot of option but I think it's pretty good..
you can do nice stuff with it and it comes with LW.
it's only if you need really advanced features that you need to get sasquatch...

just my 3 cents..

JML
08-05-2005, 07:48 AM
XSI is gearing that way too. Until last year you could be quite sure that an XSI person knew his tools. XSI people were rare, expensive, but knew what they're doing. I guess Foundation will change that...


just on a side note, I go to a few forums and website, and every time, XSI people seems to be 2% of 3d community.. It looks like a ghost software..
usually it looks like the order for most popular in 3D are: max,maya,lightwave,C4d, and far behind Xsi..

could be wrong of course, but it really seem that way..

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 07:49 AM
it's only if you need really advanced features that you need to get sasquatch...

Like multi-threading or network rendering? Or using it on objects with more than 64K polygons?
I'd see Sas-lite as a teaser or workeable demo, enough to add "hair/fur" solution to a feature list, but not more really.

I don't mind paying for SAS if I need it, but if a hair/fur solution is included out of the box, it should also support other out of the box features (see above).

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 07:52 AM
just on a side note, I go to a few forums and website, and every time, XSI people seems to be 2% of 3d community.. It looks like a ghost software..
usually it looks like the order for most popular in 3D are: max,maya,lightwave,C4d, and far behind Xsi..

could be wrong of course, but it really seem that way..
I think this is quickly changing though ... especially with the mod tool out etc...
But you're right, currently XSI users are in the same rare category as Houdini users: Usually very qualified and expensive.
Btw, it does depend on the country as well, it is easier to find good XSI users in Germany (and they are rare enough) than to find decent LWers...
On the other side, if you look at some of the shops in London, there are some outfits that rely heavily on XSI.
Cheers,
Mike

JML
08-05-2005, 07:59 AM
Like multi-threading or network rendering? Or using it on objects with more than 64K polygons?
I'd see Sas-lite as a teaser or workeable demo, enough to add "hair/fur" solution to a feature list, but not more really.

I don't mind paying for SAS if I need it, but if a hair/fur solution is included out of the box, it should also support other out of the box features (see above).


I agree,

I did not know saslite could not render on network.. does sasquatch render on network?


what's houdini ? ;)

Lightwolf
08-05-2005, 08:02 AM
I did not know saslite could not render on network.. does sasquatch render on network?

Yes it does, and it doesn't tell you to go away if you have more than one render thread active either ;)


what's houdini ? ;)
Erm, the coolest app for VFX work, hands down?
I mean, people go crazy about nodal shading within LW now, while Houdini was completely nodal from version 1...
Not for everyone and not for every task though...
Cheers,
Mike

kohlrabi_croce
08-05-2005, 01:05 PM
Psychologically there is a big difference between spending 1000$ for an app an 1000$ for third party stuff, than spending 2000$ for an app and 0$ for third party stuff... Or even 5000$ for the app and 1000$ for third party software.


I've been checking things out a little more , and you know what? To get "maya hair," "maya fur," and "maya cloth," in Maya (plus a couple other things), you have to buy the unlimited version! you have to pay the $7000. Come on, getting LW and a few worley plug-ins at $400 to $500 a piece is a much better deal. Also, I understand Maya does even have its own native renderer, right? So you have to buy that too. Then, I also found out that the biggest customers of Messiah: studio are: Maya users, because it's easier!
Yep, that's the biggest share of pmG's market.

I dunno, maybe Maya has more kinds of plug-ins available, but geez how many people can afford $7000 plus how many more thousands for all those plug-ins?

so with all due respect to archiea, maybe his perception of things is a tiny bit warped?

tracy

cholo
08-05-2005, 05:25 PM
I like to have plug ins as an option and an inexpensive base system. Why should I pay 2K bucks for lightwave pro so that it includes some extra features if I only need one of them? Also, plug ins allow me to choose my workflow. It's always better to have 4 plug ins that achieve the same thing in a different way and choose the one that suits your needs instead of a single embedded way to do it and be forced to live within it's limitations. Anyway, I bought my first copy of lightwave for 350 bucks (3.5 the first "unplugged" Lightwave that came with no toaster) so I say what's with the pricing structure of the last 8 years? hehehe.

Gui Lo
08-05-2005, 06:59 PM
Because that is what we do all the time?

No, that's what you do all the time!
The price of software by different companies that cannot be relative to each other. LW will not do the jub of plugins at any price so the prices cannot be relative. I look at the price and determine if I can afford the dollars or not.




I guess that goes for all software and hardware... Which is relative again, relative to your rates that is

No it is not relative to my rates. Frankly that's peposterous.
When I but the plugin or upgrade I count the $ it will save or the jobs it will allow me to take.
If a plugin is more expensive than my monthly expenditure in $ then I need to save up. Again I count the $ not whether it is 60% or 110%.


Gui Lo

Lightwolf
08-06-2005, 04:40 AM
No it is not relative to my rates. Frankly that's peposterous.
When I but the plugin or upgrade I count the $ it will save or the jobs it will allow me to take.
If a plugin is more expensive than my monthly expenditure in $ then I need to save up. Again I count the $ not whether it is 60% or 110%.

But isn't your monthly expenditure as well as your saving related to your rates, and thus the amount of $$$ a plugin can save you?

Depending on your rates shaving off an hour of work can be worth anything from 20$ to 200$ or whatever...

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
08-06-2005, 04:45 AM
I've been checking things out a little more , and you know what? To get "maya hair," "maya fur," and "maya cloth," in Maya (plus a couple other things), you have to buy the unlimited version! you have to pay the $7000. Come on, getting LW and a few worley plug-ins at $400 to $500 a piece is a much better deal.
If you only need that, yes. Then again, Maya Cloth is something that you really can't get for LW anyhow, and to get up to Maya Unlimited in terms of included features you'd shell out close to the same amount in LW ... if you could get an appropriate plugin in the first place.

I do prefer the module approach of buying hat I need as well... but if an option is simply not available for any money you have to make other choices...

One more reason I guess is the state of the current SDK... I hope 9.0 will change a lot in that regard. Other apps sometimes make it so much easier to develop for (meaning you can concentrate on the actual task, not on handling LW). A good example is SniperPro for C4D which (while not as fast as FPrime) provides interactive rendering but, unlike FPrime, doesn't have to reverse engineer half of the rendering pipeline to work.

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
08-06-2005, 04:46 AM
It's always better to have 4 plug ins that achieve the same thing in a different way and choose the one that suits your needs instead of a single embedded way to do it and be forced to live within it's limitations.
Staying on topic... so how many hair/fur option are there for LW?

Cheers,
Mike

Celshader
08-06-2005, 04:46 AM
As an example, being the cel shading goddes that you are (MD too), what do you thing of C4d's sketch and toon module? it cost more, but at least its available.

I admire the range of C4D's Sketch & Toon, but not enough to drop $1000+ on a copy of C4D + Sketch & Toon. Nothing I do requires Sketch & Toon. No one's called me up with a project that requires Sketch & Toon.

Buy only what you need. If I ever need Sketch & Toon, I'll buy it. Until then, my money's better invested in artbooks and drawing classes.

Gui Lo
08-06-2005, 05:12 AM
But isn't your monthly expenditure as well as your saving related to your rates, and thus the amount of $$$ a plugin can save you?

Like I said they are only related in terms that they are both money.

If it will pay for itself in the fact it saves me time(and by time I mean gives me more time with the missus) then I will buy it(if I have the $). So it is not down to whether it increases my rates 20% this quarter or generates 15% more income than the last financial year.

It is purely down to the $ figure and not whether it relates to the cost of the base app, or the position of Saturn.

Gui Lo

archiea
08-06-2005, 05:44 AM
I've been checking things out a little more , and you know what? To get "maya hair," "maya fur," and "maya cloth," in Maya (plus a couple other things), you have to buy the unlimited version! you have to pay the $7000. Come on, getting LW and a few worley plug-ins at $400 to $500 a piece is a much better deal. Also, I understand Maya does even have its own native renderer, right? So you have to buy that too. Then, I also found out that the biggest customers of Messiah: studio are: Maya users, because it's easier!
Yep, that's the biggest share of pmG's market.

I dunno, maybe Maya has more kinds of plug-ins available, but geez how many people can afford $7000 plus how many more thousands for all those plug-ins?

so with all due respect to archiea, maybe his perception of things is a tiny bit warped?

tracy

Mental Ray is a standard renderer for maya since the last version I believe. they offer a stand alone version for additional features.. somein LW, some not. Renderman for maya is also being offered as a stand along product.. again.. there for those who need it..

Again, maya's 7K price tag wasn;t being proposed as a price point for LW. Quite the opposite.. my point was if NT original price point of $1600 was needed to sustain its development, instead of lowering it..

The messiah plug in offers a specific and stream lined task. Some people will pay more for that option. Again thats my point.. not to limit our options IF lowering the price of LW might do that. Chuck has assured me otherwise. The feature list from 9 looks impressive. Add to that the conversion of the mac platform to intel and hopefuly the port for NT won't be such a task, or for the plug in developers in future versions. Messiah's market share is irrelevant..or for that matter the claim that many mutli-app studio model and render in LW, but animate in Maya. There ae so many varibles.. for instance perhaps the animators are more versed in maya and their pipline supports the conversion.. or a studios custom tool set is based on maya because of the nature of maya's customizations. again too many varibles make a claim, so why bring up conjecture like this?

archiea
08-06-2005, 05:48 AM
I like to have plug ins as an option and an inexpensive base system. Why should I pay 2K bucks for lightwave pro so that it includes some extra features if I only need one of them?
.
So don't.. thats the point,, it would be an option....



Also, plug ins allow me to choose my workflow. It's always better to have 4 plug ins that achieve the same thing in a different way and choose the one that suits your needs instead of a single embedded way to do it and be forced to live within it's limitations


Look at DF and c4d.. they offer a modular approach... So as to whether the fur or advanced shaders come from worley or newtek, it a decision as to what suits you.



. Anyway, I bought my first copy of lightwave for 350 bucks (3.5 the first "unplugged" Lightwave that came with no toaster) so I say what's with the pricing structure of the last 8 years? hehehe.

3D prices must be like realestate then....

archiea
08-06-2005, 05:55 AM
I admire the range of C4D's Sketch & Toon, but not enough to drop $1000+ on a copy of C4D + Sketch & Toon. Nothing I do requires Sketch & Toon. No one's called me up with a project that requires Sketch & Toon.

Buy only what you need. If I ever need Sketch & Toon, I'll buy it. Until then, my money's better invested in artbooks and drawing classes.


Jen, thats great. What about other artist that may desire that additional functionality? IF NT offered it for $350 more.. like they did hypervoxels back when, why not have it available for others? hence the modular approach to C4D's scaled product or even DF's structure. How does offer more features to customers who need more and are willing to pay extra for it affect you? Its like saying NT offers sas light with 8.5, but worley won't offer it the full sas for $500 because jen said she doesn't need it or want it..

UnCommonGrafx
08-06-2005, 07:15 AM
Arichea, me believes you missed the point.

I think she's saying,

No one has hired me to use XYZ software; they HAVE hired me to do toon-type work, though, which I have been able to provide with LW. No need to buy. More time to create would be nice...

Sketch and toon is the direct result of a company/group seeing the need. We have'em, too, if you look hard enough. ;) NewTek seems to have heard enough to include a sketching tool for us in the next version. Seems they saw the sketching on the wall, too. $395, for use in a comfortable paradigm is a lot better than the "start from step one + a few thousand for..." scenario.


I never bothered to learn saslite for exactly the reasons stated here: it should support network rendering if it's included; otherwise, it's not part of the 'full' solution. Maybe that kicked dead horse'll be left alone one day.

Lightwolf
08-06-2005, 07:57 AM
I never bothered to learn saslite for exactly the reasons stated here: it should support network rendering if it's included; otherwise, it's not part of the 'full' solution. Maybe that kicked dead horse'll be left alone one day.
Hm, I actually have and was quite surprised about the lack of network rendering in the end. Since it was only for a couple of stills, and the problem with high poly counts could be worked around, it was o.k.
I haven't had much need for third party plugins during the past decade. Particle Storm we got before PFX was included and we never used Particle Storm / Napalm ever since.
We purchased FPrime for obvious reasons because it is worth every cent... We also got Taft because of Hoser and the remendous time it saves compared to the built-in tools that can be adapted to do ropes/chains or (in our case) cables/cords. Also because my head hurt from banging it against the wall trying to create the same effect using built in tools...

Cheers,
Mike

archiea
08-06-2005, 12:44 PM
Arichea, me believes you missed the point.

I think she's saying,


Sketch and toon is the direct result of a company/group seeing the need. We have'em, too, if you look hard enough. ;) NewTek seems to have heard enough to include a sketching tool for us in the next version. Seems they saw the sketching on the wall, too. $395, for use in a comfortable paradigm is a lot better than the "start from step one + a few thousand for..." scenario.


I never bothered to learn saslite for exactly the reasons stated here: it should support network rendering if it's included; otherwise, it's not part of the 'full' solution. Maybe that kicked dead horse'll be left alone one day.


Sorry, friend, but it seems to me that many are missing my point of a scalable product. How some would pay more for more advanced features now, not months, if not years after the competitors....

UnCommonGrafx
08-06-2005, 01:51 PM
Me thinks you are because that's EXACTLY what we've got. Users buy what they want; NewTek gives us all a core to work on.

I think they have a lot of fish to fry and [9] is gonna be a ponds worth. If you are intimating that either myself nor others in this thread would not welcome more, for fiduciary gain, I think you are mistaken. I am saying that there are already solutions for the very scaleable LW today. Just not sold by NewTek.

But they are doing the Borg, as we type. :compbeati :agree: :question:
:2guns: competition :twak: :twak:

Celshader
08-06-2005, 03:12 PM
Jen, thats great. What about other artist that may desire that additional functionality? IF NT offered it for $350 more.. like they did hypervoxels back when, why not have it available for others? hence the modular approach to C4D's scaled product or even DF's structure. How does offer more features to customers who need more and are willing to pay extra for it affect you? Its like saying NT offers sas light with 8.5, but worley won't offer it the full sas for $500 because jen said she doesn't need it or want it..

Folks who desperately need Sketch & Toon right now can always buy C4D + Sketch & Toon as an alternate renderer for LightWave, since C4D can open up LightWave scene files. They should check out the free unReal (http://d-creation.sakura.ne.jp/plugin.htm) plug-in first, though. They should also consider G2's NPR (http://www.worley.com/G2/g2_artmode.html#startit) abilities. Both unReal and G2 are far cheaper than a C4D Sketch & Toon solution.

Buy what you need, not what you "want." Sasquatch has been available for years, but I never bought it until January 2005. I bought it in January 2005 because I needed it for something Saslite could not do: ankle-length wigs. Until that point, I did not need it, so I did not buy it.

Artists who "need more and are willing to pay extra for it" are more than welcome to migrate to a more expensive software package if a LightWave solution somehow fails them. Nothing chains an artist to any one software package.

archiea
08-06-2005, 03:13 PM
Me thinks you are because that's EXACTLY what we've got. Users buy what they want; NewTek gives us all a core to work on.


Plug-in are not the same as fully integrated feature sets in the form of modules. Like getting MD and Impact to work compared to how H&S dynamics are both integrated now. I think people are just being argumentative, because what I was proposing should be completely transparent to them. If they like LW as it is, fine, pay the $795. If you want more avaiable NOW and INTEGRATED into the app without having to wait for SDK updates, etc etc, then you can have those features NOW as well for an additional price. Yes there are plug in now that do this and that blah blah blah. but you are trying to sell me on the plug-in workflow of pre-v8 like MD and Impact, while i'm trying to sell you on the integration hard and soft body dynamics in 8. Imagine if that was available two years ago at an extra price by NT? Imagine if Hypervoxels wasn't available until it was integrated into 6? Plenty here seemed happy that NT made it available when they did...


Now is someone just going to reply that they didn't need hypervoxels at the time it was released just to be argumentative? Fine, there was no gun to your head to purchase it. Buy why limit what can be available to advanced users if they can afford a high end tool set?

JML
08-06-2005, 03:33 PM
since LW is now 800, they should do a special package to have sasquatch and G2 features integrated in LW for 1500.
(and upgrade being 595 instead of 395 for example)

archiea
08-06-2005, 03:47 PM
Folks who desperately need Sketch & Toon right now can always buy C4D + Sketch & Toon as an alternate renderer for LightWave, since C4D can open up LightWave scene files. They should check out the free unReal (http://d-creation.sakura.ne.jp/plugin.htm) plug-in first, though. They should also consider G2's NPR (http://www.worley.com/G2/g2_artmode.html#startit) abilities. Both unReal and G2 are far cheaper than a C4D Sketch & Toon solution.

Buy what you need, not what you "want." Sasquatch has been available for years, but I never bought it until January 2005. I bought it in January 2005 because I needed it for something Saslite could not do: ankle-length wigs. Until that point, I did not need it, so I did not buy it.

Artists who "need more and are willing to pay extra for it" are more than welcome to migrate to a more expensive software package if a LightWave solution somehow fails them. Nothing chains an artist to any one software package.

Yeah, but jen, I was talking about the module which is like $500 to say that if it were a module for LW. G2 is $500, but its really an all around lighting & shading system not a specific cel shader.

Again I think people are just being argumentative...

What I have been prosposing for two threads is this:
$795 LW (its current features considered core features)
$150-$500 worley plugins for those who want it.
$0 all the free plugins and lscripts that are out there
(ok, hold on to your hats.. this is where things get different)
$150-$500 for high end modules from NT.

So in other words, nothings changed... just more stuff for people who want it.

You don't want or need the high end modules from NT.. fine. More power to you. meanwhile, if someone just prefers to how Nt does Fur or does advanced toon shading because its integrated into the interface with no limitiations from SDK shortcomings, GREAT, you can have those too..

Maybe NT just sees it more economical to have one price point to LW. Maybe C4d's modular approach is a bad business model. Who knows about the economics. The point was to not limit LW's growth in the area of advanced feature sets if the new $795 price is going to do that. A side bar was the advantage of modules compared to plug-ins in the area of integration and avoiding SDK limitations. Perhaps LW new core after 9.0 will eliminate that problem the way Apple's move to intel may obliterate many platform disparities from mutli-platform aps like LW and the plug-ins...

archiea
08-06-2005, 03:49 PM
since LW is now 800, they should do a special package to have sasquatch and G2 features integrated in LW for 1500.
(and upgrade being 595 instead of 395 for example)


See.. thats what i'm talking about... :thumbsup:

But jen doesn't need them, so we shouldn't :tongue: (I'm just teasin' jen....)

Celshader
08-06-2005, 04:01 PM
Me, I'd rather have all the upcoming super-advanced features from NewTek as standard with the $795 LightWave package, instead of having to pay extra.


Maybe NT just sees it more economical to have one price point to LW.

They probably don't, considering that the new "Inspire" will cost $195 (http://www.newtek.com/inspire3d/)...

I'm not being "argumentative," I'm being honest. If a LightWave solution doesn't work for you right now, move onto something else. I used to be far more passionate about software; now I use LightWave 'cause it does what I want and I can earn a good living from it. I won't argue folks into keeping something they don't want to use.

archiea
08-07-2005, 01:51 AM
Me, I'd rather have all the upcoming super-advanced features from NewTek as standard with the $795 LightWave package, instead of having to pay extra.


Oh, c'mon jen thats the whole point to my argument.. Of course I;d like all those feautes at $795... Can NT give all those features at that pricepoint around the same time as their competators? How realistic is it to expect it so?




They probably don't, considering that the new "Inspire" will cost $195 (http://www.newtek.com/inspire3d/)...


Yeah, but its easier to strip down your currently developed software and sell it at a lower cost. c4d made their original product the new base product and went "up" from there. For some, compared to the tools that are out there, the $795 LW is the inspire version....




I'm not being "argumentative," I'm being honest. If a LightWave solution doesn't work for you right now, move onto something else. I used to be far more passionate about software; now I use LightWave 'cause it does what I want and I can earn a good living from it. I won't argue folks into keeping something they don't want to use.

I'm not passionate about software, and yes I have moved on of sorts. but I do have alot invested in LW. And I will criticize its pacing because of it. Nor did I say that i didn't WANT to use LW, its quite the opposite.. the accessability of the features that are there is its strength. Too bad a skin and muscle system isn't there considering how accessable it would probably be. I think a $795 price point would push such a featue way into the future to the point where many would "out grow" LW. My argument is to make those features available ASAP to those who pay extra.. with them eventually becoming part of the entry price at a later date as they did with with hypervoxels..

BTW, who is this person who you are "arguing" with who you claim that they don't want to use the software? Because I know it wasn't me. Its just so interesting how combatant people here become when one criticises the software. So I ask, who is the one passionate about software here?

Lightwolf
08-07-2005, 03:49 AM
The point was to not limit LW's growth in the area of advanced feature sets if the new $795 price is going to do that. A side bar was the advantage of modules compared to plug-ins in the area of integration and avoiding SDK limitations.
Which goes back to parts of my old argument... if the SDK was more advanced you could get better integrated third party tools and be happy with that. However, advancing and documenting the SDK takes time (...and money). I do hope things improve with 9.0, because the SDK support throughout 8.x was truly abyssmal to say the least.

Perhaps LW new core after 9.0 will eliminate that problem the way Apple's move to intel may obliterate many platform disparities from mutli-platform aps like LW and the plug-ins...
Apple's move won't obliterate any platform disparities, except for the fact that developers can buy one box and dual boot it to develop for both platforms. It won't make ports per se any easier or hard though, and they still will be ports.
9.0 is a different issue, and I truly hope the SDK gets the attention it deserves (and had before during 6.x and 7.x).
After all, we all profit from it. The easier/better it is to develop, the more free and commercial high quality tools we can choose from...

Cheers,
Mike

Celshader
08-07-2005, 09:01 AM
Oh, c'mon jen thats the whole point to my argument.. Of course I;d like all those feautes at $795... Can NT give all those features at that pricepoint around the same time as their competators? How realistic is it to expect it so?

I have faith in LightWave's development. :)

kohlrabi_croce
08-07-2005, 11:16 AM
Yeah, but its easier to strip down your currently developed software and sell it at a lower cost. c4d made their original product the new base product and went "up" from there. For some, compared to the tools that are out there, the $795 LW is the inspire version....


Ok, I accept that LW might not be quite as up to snuff as, say, C4d with all the modules. I read this conversation on the modo forum, which was rather interesting:

http://tinyurl.com/8487n



I'm not passionate about software, and yes I have moved on of sorts. but I do have alot invested in LW. And I will criticize its pacing because of it. Nor did I say that i didn't WANT to use LW, its quite the opposite.. the accessability of the features that are there is its strength. Too bad a skin and muscle system isn't there considering how accessable it would probably be. I think a $795 price point would push such a featue way into the future to the point where many would "out grow" LW. My argument is to make those features available ASAP to those who pay extra.. with them eventually becoming part of the entry price at a later date as they did with with hypervoxels..


You say that having software that relies on plugins is not as good as software that has it all integrated. However, even Maya does not have it
all integrated. They have tons of plugins too, including one for muscles and skin. It's not an "integrated" feature, even at $7000.

tracy

hrgiger
08-07-2005, 11:52 AM
Oh, c'mon jen thats the whole point to my argument.. Of course I;d like all those feautes at $795... Can NT give all those features at that pricepoint around the same time as their competators? How realistic is it to expect it so?


I agree with Jen on this one. I have faith in the direction that Lightwave development is headed towards. Yes, there was disappointment in the eight release, but I'm not sure what anyone really expected after the old developers left and new developers were brought in. But since that time, the updates have been aggressive all the while, the core was being re-engineered. Not like the modo developers going dark for a few years while they came up with a product. LW9 I believe, is going to make a lot of people happy, including me. And I was one of the ones disappointed with LW8.

Having different versions of Lightwave for beginner, midrange, advanced, etc.... is not only a terrible idea, but it is also not Ligthwave. If that really bothers you, there are plenty of other companies that are willing to take all that extra money off your hands for really not that many more features.

archiea
08-08-2005, 02:04 PM
I have faith in LightWave's development. :)


You had to use the other "F" word, didn't ya? :tongue:

archiea
08-08-2005, 02:07 PM
Having different versions of Lightwave for beginner, midrange, advanced, etc.... is not only a terrible idea, but it is also not Ligthwave. If that really bothers you, there are plenty of other companies that are willing to take all that extra money off your hands for really not that many more features.


Do you even read my post before you reply to them? :rolleyes:

archiea
08-08-2005, 02:10 PM
Apple's move won't obliterate any platform disparities, except for the fact that developers can buy one box and dual boot it to develop for both platforms. It won't make ports per se any easier or hard though, and they still will be ports.
9.0 is a different issue, and I truly hope the SDK gets the attention it deserves (and had before during 6.x and 7.x).
After all, we all profit from it. The easier/better it is to develop, the more free and commercial high quality tools we can choose from...

Cheers,
Mike


Didn't Steve say (this is steve we're talking about, so the reality distortion field may be on full) that if you code in Xcode, that porting on Mac intel would be far easier? I;m talking after NT does the mac intel port and continues decelopment in Xcode...

hrgiger
08-08-2005, 02:33 PM
Do you even read my post before you reply to them? :rolleyes:

Of course. It wasn't really necessary to read all of your posts though because you've said the same thing over and over again in them. You want extra features for those people willing to pay extra for it, and keep Lightwave current for those who want to pay the $800. Got it. What about my post made you think I didn't read yours?
What you're not getting is that Newtek isn't about power users vs. base users. They're about providing high quality tools at a good price. They've been saying it for years and will probably continue to do so. You seem to think that Newtek won't be able to bring us advanced features by lowering their price. There is no basis for this theory. As if Newtek charged more money, these features would just magically appear or they would use the money to go buy them off the shelf somewhere.
What you're ignoring is that Newtek has hired several new developers in the last several months, re-written the core of the app, entirely replaced the raytracing engine for a 2.5X+ speed increase, brought modeler and layout closer together, and still managed to lower the price of a new seat of Lightwave by $700. You' also keep ignoring the roadmap set out by Newtek that has shown that by re-engineering the app they way they have made it easier to bring such features into Lightwave in the future. Perhaps even some of the features you are complaining about.
Sounds like they might be doing something right. Stranger yet, perhaps they even know what they're doing.... :rolleyes:

Mebek
08-08-2005, 03:25 PM
If NT started developing its own integrated hair/fur, SSS, interactive renderer, and everything else, then it would make Worley a competitor, instead of a company with a solid relationship with NT.

And besides, think about this - all the dynamics that are integrated with LW are plugins too - they're developed by NT sure, but they're plugins. Meaning that theoretically anyone could make them and have them be fully integrated. We just need to see the SDK opened up a bit, and then we'll see what could constitute a "Lightwave Pro" that is LW + SAS + G2 + FPrime and whatever else you want. And this would also keep Worley in business as well as NT. All the people who know Sasquatch wouldn't have to re-learn another plugin interface to achieve a near-same effect.

But I'm also sure that down the road we'll eventually see NewTek's Fur_FX plugin on the object render properties. They just have to take things a few at a time, because besides money, it also takes time to develop new things. Until then, if I need it I'll buy Worley's stuff. With all the money I'm saving by not throwing my hands in the air and buying another program, it'll be a piece of cake.

kohlrabi_croce
08-08-2005, 06:41 PM
well, I am suprised to say I think I will forgo the upgrade to LW9 and vue 5,
despite the fabulous savings, and go for the student version of softimage xsi, and get worldbuilder pro instead of vue 5 infiite. I will be learning 3ds max in school anyway.

Lightwolf
08-09-2005, 03:18 AM
Didn't Steve say (this is steve we're talking about, so the reality distortion field may be on full) that if you code in Xcode, that porting on Mac intel would be far easier? I'm talking after NT does the mac intel port and continues decelopment in Xcode...
I was refering to the fact that the Apple move to intel will not make it any easier to port Windows/Intel stuff over to OSX/intel. (The only exception is hand optimized x86 assembly code, which is rare enough and won't run on a PowerPC).
The move to XCode will at least make it cheaper for developers to port (no more expensive and dead CodeWarrior you need to buy), basically a miniMac would do...

Cheers,
Mike

Celshader
08-09-2005, 07:57 AM
well, I am suprised to say I think I will forgo the upgrade to LW9 and vue 5,
despite the fabulous savings, and go for the student version of softimage xsi, and get worldbuilder pro instead of vue 5 infiite. I will be learning 3ds max in school anyway.

Buy the software that best fits your needs. :) Since your school teaches MAX, though, maybe MAX would be a better choice?

kohlrabi_croce
08-09-2005, 10:25 AM
Buy the software that best fits your needs. :) Since your school teaches MAX, though, maybe MAX would be a better choice?


Well, I might be able to get away with doing my homework at home on a program of my own choice, like I did with video production. Thank you
though :).

tracy

cholo
08-09-2005, 10:29 AM
Let's not forget that while bigger corporations charge more for their software, they also have a knack for flushing money down the drain. The public owned ones are just going for profit all the time, so most of the money will not be put to work in improving the app. The only thing that matters to those companies is the price of their stock. Then you have the whole CEO corporate extravaganza, overseas job exports, maximizing shareholder return, advertising, etc... and here you have NewTek, an efficient, passionate team full of ideas commited to their product. This makes a difference. Don't underestimate how far your dollar can go with these guys. :)

archiea
08-09-2005, 01:15 PM
What you're not getting is that Newtek isn't about power users vs. base users. They're about providing high quality tools at a good price. They've been saying it for years and will probably continue to do so. You seem to think that Newtek won't be able to bring us advanced features by lowering their price. There is no basis for this theory. As if Newtek charged more money, these features would just magically appear or they would use the money to go buy them off the shelf somewhere.


No basis? What do you mean? Cut your income in half an see if you can maintain your standard of living.

True, 3D is a commodity now, and lowering the price does offer it to users to whom the price was a barrier. SO yes they can increase their income IF their user base expands. from what I hear they have gone through their current inventory of Vue copies.. which is a great sign. But keep in mind though how sophisticated even new users are these days, how now there are more organized and structured learning centers for 3D and VFX are. There is alot of competition with all of these PLE and Intro versions. I'll tell ya, thats what hooked me. And you still can't get a discovery edition from NT.




What you're ignoring is that Newtek has hired several new developers in the last several months, re-written the core of the app, entirely replaced the raytracing engine for a 2.5X+ speed increase, brought modeler and layout closer together, and still managed to lower the price of a new seat of Lightwave by $700.


What you are ignoring, my friend, it that these are all press releases, not software. Even 8.5 isn't out yet. Was I happy to hear this? Sure! Was it important for NT to state? Of course! Was I happy to hear two years ago about a 3Ghz G5, Of course I was. What these have in common is that they don't exist yet. You have to bear in mind that promises, while important, isn;t the same as a delivered product and features.




You' also keep ignoring the roadmap set out by Newtek that has shown that by re-engineering the app they way they have made it easier to bring such features into Lightwave in the future. Perhaps even some of the features you are complaining about.
Sounds like they might be doing something right. Stranger yet, perhaps they even know what they're doing.... :rolleyes:

OH, I'm certain NT knows what they are doing: Broadening their user base.. between the lowered price and the vue deal, you push alot of seats out, as well as upgrades. I mean this whole announcement serves as a big advertsiement to get NT more revenue by selling us a great deal on Vue and by offering a road map. Completely legit and fine. Count my upgrade in there as well. They have delivered in the past, even with a few bumps on the road. Still, I'd pay $500-$1000 more to have RIGHT NOW the high end features that I have stated above, as opposed to a year and half from now (in ver 9.5 or v10).

I'd rather NT be selling LW on how cutting edge its features are, like the way HDR really reeled in alot of new high end users, rather than how much of a bargain it is and how many free apps you can get with it... I think this is the basis of where my philosphy is different from the others here. i.e. "i'm happy with what LW has now" or "I don't need that high end feature right now so why pay for it"

Perhaps NT is upon the cusp of their development cycle where their investment in personel and resources is about to pay off, and their recent history of a slower development cycle is about to end with the full steam they seem to be charged with. I sure hope so... I'd hate LW to behind the pack for too long and I'd love to see how NT would implement some of the stuff I posted considering their track record (straighforward app and very usable features)

archiea
08-09-2005, 01:22 PM
If NT started developing its own integrated hair/fur, SSS, interactive renderer, and everything else, then it would make Worley a competitor, instead of a company with a solid relationship with NT.

And besides, think about this - all the dynamics that are integrated with LW are plugins too - they're developed by NT sure, but they're plugins. Meaning that theoretically anyone could make them and have them be fully integrated. We just need to see the SDK opened up a bit, and then we'll see what could constitute a "Lightwave Pro" that is LW + SAS + G2 + FPrime and whatever else you want. And this would also keep Worley in business as well as NT. All the people who know Sasquatch wouldn't have to re-learn another plugin interface to achieve a near-same effect.

But I'm also sure that down the road we'll eventually see NewTek's Fur_FX plugin on the object render properties. They just have to take things a few at a time, because besides money, it also takes time to develop new things. Until then, if I need it I'll buy Worley's stuff. With all the money I'm saving by not throwing my hands in the air and buying another program, it'll be a piece of cake.


The notion of the redundancy in NT having a feature that is well developed already as a plug in is true. My point was more that this development would be under NT so that it would not be limited by SDK issues. But more to the point: Time time time. Yes everything takes time.. and time is money.. Feature films have alot of money to put into alot of parallel labor to cut down the time it takes to do a feature. Which again to my point does less money(LW new price point) equal more time needed for features? i.e. features that people may want now being two years down the road...

archiea
08-09-2005, 01:34 PM
I was refering to the fact that the Apple move to intel will not make it any easier to port Windows/Intel stuff over to OSX/intel. (The only exception is hand optimized x86 assembly code, which is rare enough and won't run on a PowerPC).
The move to XCode will at least make it cheaper for developers to port (no more expensive and dead CodeWarrior you need to buy), basically a miniMac would do...

Cheers,
Mike
So are the steps needed to port as such: Convert apps like LW to universal binaries.. this being the biggest step that requires stuff to be in Xcode. Beyond that how difficult is it to develop and app or plug-in for the two platforms... compared to how it is now?

archiea
08-09-2005, 01:36 PM
well, I am suprised to say I think I will forgo the upgrade to LW9 and vue 5,
despite the fabulous savings, and go for the student version of softimage xsi, and get worldbuilder pro instead of vue 5 infiite. I will be learning 3ds max in school anyway.


Just curious, though... I can understand yoru decision for 3ds Max since your school offers it. but what made yoru decision to forgo LW9 and go for XSi?

kohlrabi_croce
08-09-2005, 01:36 PM
True, 3D is a commodity now, and lowering the price does offer it to users to whom the price was a barrier. SO yes they can increase their income IF their user base expands. from what I hear they have gone through their current inventory of Vue copies.. which is a great sign. But keep in mind though how sophisticated even new users are these days, how now there are more organized and structured learning centers for 3D and VFX are. There is alot of competition with all of these PLE and Intro versions. I'll tell ya, thats what hooked me. And you still can't get a discovery edition from NT.

3d software can't be a true commodity, like wheat or corn, because of brand name recognition. Brand name recognition can even go against reality, because
of people's perceptions that don't keep up.

archiea
08-09-2005, 01:38 PM
Let's not forget that while bigger corporations charge more for their software, they also have a knack for flushing money down the drain. The public owned ones are just going for profit all the time, so most of the money will not be put to work in improving the app. The only thing that matters to those companies is the price of their stock. Then you have the whole CEO corporate extravaganza, overseas job exports, maximizing shareholder return, advertising, etc... and here you have NewTek, an efficient, passionate team full of ideas commited to their product. This makes a difference. Don't underestimate how far your dollar can go with these guys. :)

That is very true, and NT has proven as to how trim a company they are.

Celshader
08-09-2005, 01:39 PM
...you still can't get a discovery edition from NT.

No, but Safe Harbor sells it for $3, and you don't have to give NewTek all your contact information for it:
http://www.sharbor.com/products/NTKN0300061.html

hrgiger
08-09-2005, 01:55 PM
No basis? What do you mean? Cut your income in half an see if you can maintain your standard of living.



What I mean is that you can't say with any basis that reducing the cost of Lightwave has necessarily cut the amount of revenue they are taking in. And I can't say with any basis that they are taking in just as much if not more. But I'm guessing they must be thinking they can increase their market share by lowering the price of the software. I do think it gives the other apps a run for their money that fall within the same price range (i.e.Cinema 4D, Maya complete, XSI foundation, etc...)

Lightwolf
08-09-2005, 02:02 PM
So are the steps needed to port as such: Convert apps like LW to universal binaries.. this being the biggest step that requires stuff to be in Xcode. Beyond that how difficult is it to develop and app or plug-in for the two platforms... compared to how it is now?
Actually it is the other way around:
Convert the current code to compile on the Mac under XCode (the current code is CodeWarrior, which has a slightly different OS API and produces binaries that aren't compatible with XCode. Basically, you can't combine an XCode app and CW plugins or vice versa. So NT will probably have to recode parts of their OS specific base libraries to make LW run under XCode, then all developers will have to recompile ... more on the last bit later).
Once you're on XCode, you can easily produce universal binaries. (Except if parts are written in assemble/machine language, which is processor architecture specific). Another issue are binary files, but that is easily done. (x86 and PowerPCs store binary values differently...).

As long as a plugin only uses functions provided by the LW SDK, porting it will be no easier and no harder due to the switch. In this case it should just be a re-compile. The advantage with XCode being that the compiler is free while the dying CodeWarrior costs money...

If a plugin uses OS specific functions, the port will also be just as hard as it was before, unlike the previous case a re-compile won't do, you have to find the matching OS specific functions in the other OS and port them. An example of that seems to be Worley's custom user interface.

I hope that makes it a bit clearer... (I really do ;) ).
Cheers,
Mike - who wishes an XCode based LW would be here now, because he doesn't wants to spend money on CW...

P.S. Apparently there is a really hacky way to port from the PC to the Mac using an 680x0 emulator like basilisk on the PC in conjunction with free developer tools from Apple (I think Sensei mentioned that)...Those plugins are compatible to the current version of LW on PowerPC only and will fail on XCode (like all others) and intel processors.

Celshader
08-09-2005, 02:28 PM
...I'm guessing they must be thinking they can increase their market share by lowering the price of the software.

Between Nodal, Advanced Subpixel Displacement, N-Gon support, unlimited render nodes and improved OpenGL, LightWave 9's going to be one attractive render package for Maya folks who can't afford additional licenses of Mental Ray. Plus, they can use LightWave for modeling, too!

Earl
08-09-2005, 02:33 PM
No basis? What do you mean? Cut your income in half an see if you can maintain your standard of living.
NewTek hasn't cut their income in half. You forget that a large portion of NewTek's (LW) income is generated from the vast userbase when they upgrade. Since the upgrade price hasn't changed, I would be willing to bet that a large portion of their money flow also hasn't changed.

Of course, no one really knows except NewTek.

archiea
08-09-2005, 03:29 PM
NewTek hasn't cut their income in half. You forget that a large portion of NewTek's (LW) income is generated from the vast userbase when they upgrade. Since the upgrade price hasn't changed, I would be willing to bet that a large portion of their money flow also hasn't changed.

Of course, no one really knows except NewTek.


Thats also a good point. Also interesting that the many who argued my point are upgraders here... so the price reduction doesn;t affect them unless they want to purchase additional seats. But one of my earlier arguments was also the "impression" that that price sticker gives....

Celshader
08-09-2005, 03:35 PM
...But one of my earlier arguments was also the "impression" that that price sticker gives....

In a world full of lavish Lamborghinis and fancy Ferraris, a market will still exist for cheaper Scions and the Ford Focus.

archiea
08-09-2005, 07:36 PM
In a world full of lavish Lamborghinis and fancy Ferraris, a market will still exist for cheaper Scions and the Ford Focus.


I'd be happy with the balanced performance of a Boxter.. no need to bring in the big guns. Much better than being stuck with a "Focus" just because the general consensous "I just need a car to get me from point A to B". Thats why Ford has everything from a Focus to a $125K GT. By the logic here, many would deem $25K Mustang GT owners as elitist just for wanting some V8 power... let alone the Cobra or the above mentioned $125GT, when a Focus "will do".

My fear is that LW had the Corvette features for the price of a mustang. Will the new price of a focus leave us driving around in a focus?

I swear.. some of youz act like you've taken a vow of poverty along with your LW licenses!!! :tongue:

Celshader
08-09-2005, 08:19 PM
My fear is that LW had the Corvette features for the price of a mustang. Will the new price of a focus leave us driving around in a focus?

Hey, if Silo can deliver big modeling features for $109 (http://www.nevercenter.com/silo/labs/), and Hash can deliver great character animation features for $300 (http://www.hash.com/products/am.asp), an $800 LightWave should be fine.

kohlrabi_croce
08-09-2005, 08:36 PM
I'd be happy with the balanced performance of a Boxter.. no need to bring in the big guns. Much better than being stuck with a "Focus" just because the general consensous "I just need a car to get me from point A to B". Thats why Ford has everything from a Focus to a $125K GT. By the logic here, many would deem $25K Mustang GT owners as elitist just for wanting some V8 power... let alone the Cobra or the above mentioned $125GT, when a Focus "will do".

My fear is that LW had the Corvette features for the price of a mustang. Will the new price of a focus leave us driving around in a focus?

I swear.. some of youz act like you've taken a vow of poverty along with your LW licenses!!! :tongue:

well, you convinced me.....ok, along with my own research. I've seen the opinion expressed, on a different vendor's forum, that while one is a student,
one should absolutely take advantage of the chance to own and learn a high-end package. It's fine to say "buy only what you need," but then you have to define need very carefully.

Celshader
08-09-2005, 08:54 PM
well, you convinced me.....ok, along with my own research. I've seen the opinion expressed, on a different vendor's forum, that while one is a student,
one should absolutely take advantage of the chance to own and learn a high-end package. It's fine to say "buy only what you need," but then you have to define need very carefully.

I need to earn money and work all by myself on personal projects (http://www.celshader.com/gallery/lore/) for a reasonable price. As an individual artist who values her independence, LightWave fits my current needs best.

If it helps you find work in the future, XSI's used in at least three houses out here in Los Angeles -- Omation, Stan Winston Digital, and Computer Cafe. 3DS MAX dominates the video game industry, but I've only encountered it once at a studio -- at Super 78.

archiea
08-10-2005, 03:45 PM
No, but Safe Harbor sells it for $3, and you don't have to give NewTek all your contact information for it:
http://www.sharbor.com/products/NTKN0300061.html

Thats the first time I;ve heard of that.. and I'm sowewhat immersed in the LW community. How about someone who isn't?

Maxon and Alias have their demos right on the front page. XSI takes a little digging. Newtek has nothing on their page. Kudos to Safe Harbor for doing so....