PDA

View Full Version : Opinion on Sasquatch



joeldberry
08-09-2005, 09:38 AM
Okay, I hear it on both sides: Sasquatch is terrible, and Sasquatch is awesome. I am really confused. From what I have seen in demos, tutorials, etc., Sasquatch is pretty powerful as a hair/fur solution. But some say "Shave and a Haircut" blows it away (not that you can get S&H for Lightwave) So, what's so bad about Sasquatch?

hrgiger
08-09-2005, 10:18 AM
The only bad things about Sasquatch are the following:

Sasquatch is not a true volumetric effect so Sas hairs do not show up in reflections or respond to raytracing in general.

No automatic guide hairs (although, I would argue that you get more control by setting up your own).

It's $500.

On the plus side, it renders very fast and it is high quality and is easy to setup.

JCG
08-09-2005, 10:54 AM
I have Shave and a Haircut for LW from when it was still being sold and now I have saslight.

Visual Quality
The quality of the rendered hair is, I would say, exactly the same. When rendered at the same low AA and monocolor as saslight allows, they look the same. I've had a chance of playing with the full Sasquatch at a part-time job and, when you use the betterAA and extra hair color settings that Sasfull allows, it looks just exactly as good as Shave with all its good settings. The only little difference in quality is that they both can show some feathering of the tips on certain conditions and shave needs a bit more AA to eliminate it than sasq.

Speed
Sasq is much faster. Not like "30% faster" kind of faster, like 28 seconds in Sasq vs 5 and a half minutes in Shave. (At least that's how it was in the last LW version of shave)

Styling
For sasq, you create hair guides as 2 point poly chains in modeler. You can use all the LW modeler toolset to shape your guides. For Shave, you get a separate program that creates all the hairguides automatically as IK chains. The Shave interface has a lot of tools for manipulating the guides one by one, in groups, or by vertex. It makes it extremely fast to get something very usable but tweaking can be a bit frustrating, since moving one vertex can move all the others (they're IK linked) and a mistake in the collision sphere size can cause you to have to start over.
I can see this being a controversial point since different people will feel more at home with one approach or the other.

Grooming
The hair surface controls in sasq and shave (kink, curling, etc) are basically the same.

Shadows
They both require shadow mapped spotlight lighting -only- for cast shadows.

Dynamics
Fur dynamics are good in both.
Sasq has no long hair dynamics but it allows you to use LW's dynamics on the hair guides. Shave has its own dynamics engine, specifically tailored for 3D hair. The only problem is that you have to create collision spheres instead of the strands colliding with the actual geometry.

Price
Shave was $99 when I bought it and it offered not only unlimited updates but also extra applications like a free Lipservice! Saslight is free with LW7+ but the extra features of the full version are quite necessary, most notably, the better AA settings.

Support
From what I've heard, both respond extremely quickly to questions and offer real answers to problems. I actually had to email Joe Alter once and WHAM the complete reply swooshed right back!
Shave offered constant updates for free. I must have gotten at least 20, including the extreme versions. Now then, when he stopped offering updates, he really stopped!!!

Extras
Shave offered great geometry instancing, saving the final, generated hair as geometry, an optional volumetric version, a tornado/duststorm generator and a great lipsynching app. I don't know if Sasq full comes with any extras. I haven't saved enough for it yet.

EDIT: Ouch! Sorry! Typed too slow and it was already answered! >_<;;;

Celshader
08-09-2005, 11:26 AM
Okay, I hear it on both sides: Sasquatch is terrible, and Sasquatch is awesome. I am really confused. From what I have seen in demos, tutorials, etc., Sasquatch is pretty powerful as a hair/fur solution. But some say "Shave and a Haircut" blows it away (not that you can get S&H for Lightwave) So, what's so bad about Sasquatch?

I didn't need a hair/fur plug-in for years, so I didn't buy one until a freelance project demanded it in January of this year. I needed to create and animate ankle-length wigs. Since Sasquatch was the only advanced LightWave hair plug-in available for purchase in January 2005, I bought Sasquatch.

Fortunately, Sasquatch was well-worth the money. It took a week to get up to speed, but it did the job and did it well. I'm happy with my purchase.

Hoopti
08-09-2005, 11:35 AM
True Sasquatch does have it's limitations, the major of which has already been addressed, which is the need for lighting changes to accomodate it. While I appreciate the above, the comments about Saslite don't really lineup with Sasquatch. Saslite is a very basic hair/fur/grass system incorporated into the program realisitically to compete against other systems and provide a free advertisement for Worley.

I use Sas for more than that. It's invaluable to me in Arch/Previz for the grass structures, and another of other approaches as well.

Having worked with it for a while, the interface has become intuitive for me. Sas, like a number of Worley's plugins, because of the complexity of the menus, which is necessary because of the power of the plugins. Sas is kind of a point and shoot where Sasquatch allows you so much freedom and flexibility.

I hope this helps.

Hoop

Earl
08-09-2005, 11:35 AM
Okay, I hear it on both sides: Sasquatch is terrible, and Sasquatch is awesome. I am really confused. From what I have seen in demos, tutorials, etc., Sasquatch is pretty powerful as a hair/fur solution. But some say "Shave and a Haircut" blows it away (not that you can get S&H for Lightwave) So, what's so bad about Sasquatch?
I don't know if this has changed, but Shave was not available on the Mac for a long time, while Sasquatch is dual-platform. For some LW users, that right there is a deciding factor.

joeldberry
08-09-2005, 12:59 PM
Thanks for the responses.

I hope one day (maybe soon, with the new Lightwave core architecutre and SDK architecture) Sasquatch will be based on volumetrics so you can get true reflections, etc. That would be the end all, from what it sounds like -- then Sasquatch would be all you need... I am still using SasLite, but wanted to get some opinions before I plunged into purchasing Sasquatch.

Thanks again,

jdb