PDA

View Full Version : Lightwave 8.5



Tony3d
10-05-2005, 06:02 AM
Aside from 64 bit what other features are not valid on the Mac? Apple really needs to wake up!

Lightwolf
10-05-2005, 06:26 AM
Aside from 64 bit what other features are not valid on the Mac? Apple really needs to wake up!
AFAIK openGL Shading due to the lack of openGL 2.0 support in OSX. But that's it from what NT mentioned.

Cheers,
Mike

swpspce
10-05-2005, 09:04 AM
quiet disheartening - given that there is another "One more thing..." being announced next week.

who cares about YAiP (Yet another iPod) - it is about time that Apple come up with something a bit more substantial - like OpenGL 2.0 in X.4.3 alongside some real horsepower with a reasonable prices tag.

guess only time will tell - but maybe soon...

Captain Obvious
10-05-2005, 11:33 AM
Even Panther has OpenGL 2.0. It just doesn't have all the OpenGL 2.0 features. Most importantly, it's missing GLSL. I'm assuming the new features in 8.5 uses GLSL. Mac OS X doesn't support that as of now. Neither does it support texture maps that are not to the power of two, but I don't think that matters all that much for Lightwave.

Apple doesn't need to wake up. They make more money selling iPods than they do selling PowerMacs to 3D content creators. That said, it would be nice if they worked harder to please us.

Lightwolf
10-05-2005, 11:57 AM
Even Panther has OpenGL 2.0. It just doesn't have all the OpenGL 2.0 features. Most importantly, it's missing GLSL.
Hehe, good one... LW is a complete renderer ... it just doesn't render red ;)
Seriously though, since GLSL is a part of openGL 2.0, panther doesn't have it. It supports a subset of it, though that is something different.

Cheers,
Mike - sorry, I'm nitpicking again ;)

Captain Obvious
10-05-2005, 12:20 PM
I always add my red in post! :D

Lightwolf
10-06-2005, 01:45 AM
I always add my red in post! :D
:lol: hehe... the problem is, my compositor drops blue all the time ;)

Cheers,
Mike

3dworks
10-06-2005, 07:16 AM
Hehe, good one... LW is a complete renderer ... it just doesn't render red ;)
Seriously though, since GLSL is a part of openGL 2.0, panther doesn't have it. It supports a subset of it, though that is something different.

Cheers,
Mike - sorry, I'm nitpicking again ;)

hehe... but on the serious side, there's an excellent tool for testing your own mac's open-gl features here:

http://www.realtech-vr.com/glview/

in fact, on my ati radeon 9800 mac special edition running under osx 10.4.2 the GLSL extensions are clearly missing, but other advanced features are supported. let's hope that apple fills this gap soon!

cheers

markus

3DeeNut
10-11-2005, 12:26 PM
Maybe we shouldnt cry so much, apparently Open GL will not be natively supported in the next microcrap release of its OS software. I had heard about it on several occasions and did a little research online, apparently, Open GL will be run on top of DirectX for windows machines. Personally, ill stick with my mac / LW set up and love the complete lack of system / application crashes in lieu of features :(. I just hope microcrap does not sway the world into direct x... cause then the tears will stream.

Heh, i always force myself to remember the words of my friend.
Mac sucks absolutely... unless you compare it to anything else.

For more info on this topic, do a google search on "longhorn opengl", plenty to read. :)

http://www.huddledmasses.org/2005/08/08/opengl-in-windows-longhorn-vista/ <-- an interesting blog on the subject.

Lightwolf
10-11-2005, 12:43 PM
Maybe we shouldnt cry so much, apparently Open GL will not be natively supported in the next microcrap release of its OS software. I had heard about it on several occasions and did a little research online, apparently, Open GL will be run on top of DirectX for windows machines.
... as emulated openGL 1.5.
Hardware vendos can still supply hardware accelerated openGL drivers (and I'm sure that at least nVidia will) to support the newer versions of openGL as well.
Actually, the only real difference to how it works now is that you won't be able to use the all new glitzy Aero desktop and openGL 2.x apps at the same time... no great loss really.
Currently the openGL provided by MS is 1.1 (or 1.2 in XP?) only... still we have openGL 2.0 support due to the hardware vendors.

Cheers,
Mike

Captain Obvious
10-11-2005, 01:08 PM
Most people install Nvidia and ATI drivers instead of the shipping ones as it is, so I don't think it matters all THAT much. Not getting Aero doesn't really bother me. It seems very over-rated. There's a good reason Apple removed transparency from windows for Panther (or was it for Jaguar?). It didn't really do anything purposeful. Useless eye-candy, basically. Feh.

LSlugger
10-11-2005, 02:16 PM
Even Panther has OpenGL 2.0. It just doesn't have all the OpenGL 2.0 features. Most importantly, it's missing GLSL.

It is incorrect to say that an implementation supports OpenGL 2.0 when it does not support all of the core features of OpenGL 2.0, of which GLSL is one.

Captain Obvious
10-11-2005, 02:40 PM
It is incorrect to say that an implementation supports OpenGL 2.0 when it does not support all of the core features of OpenGL 2.0, of which GLSL is one.
Yes, yes, we've been through that already. ;) Seriously though, it was bad wording on my side.

Lightwolf
10-11-2005, 02:44 PM
Yes, yes, we've been through that already. ;) Seriously though, it was bad wording on my side.
Hey, Cap, just to remind you:
"Seriously though, since GLSL is a part of openGL 2.0, panther doesn't have it. It supports a subset of it, though that is something different." ;)
:lol:
Cheers,
Mike - pushing his luck and off to bed now :)

Captain Obvious
10-11-2005, 02:53 PM
Err, well, you see. It's all because... ummm...

...


:lightwave

LSlugger
10-11-2005, 03:15 PM
Sorry, I didn't mean to pile on. I missed the second part of Lightwolf's post as I was skimming this thread.

I went to a presentation a year and a half ago at which Randi Rost was promoting his GLSL book. GLSL is really exciting stuff, so it's been a little frustrating to see the slow progress in deployment.

Meanwhile, in Mac land, the Dashboard ripple effect seems to represent the state of the art. On the one hand, all of the current Macs have dedicated 3D accelerators. On the other hand, those accelerators are based on chips that are two years old.

Captain Obvious
10-11-2005, 03:54 PM
It's a bit odd, quite frankly. At the very low end, we have a sub $1000 12" laptop with a Radeon 9550. Try to find a that cheap 12" non-Mac with that good GPU and that low price, I dare you!

At the high end, we have... Well, what do we have? Cards that are two or three years old by default, upgradable for an insane amount to high end cards. Even if you do upgrade, you're mostly wasting it, due to the drivers. :(

I could complain about the lack of "pro" cards, but since the pro cards and Mac cards are essentially the same, hardware wise, that seems silly. Any advantage a "pro" card would offer, you could get with a driver upgrade.

But honestly, the Dashboard ripple is hardly as awesome as it gets for Apple's OpenGL. Take a look at Motion instead! ;)

archiea
10-12-2005, 03:04 PM
quiet disheartening - given that there is another "One more thing..." being announced next week.

who cares about YAiP (Yet another iPod) - .

Shareholders, thats who...

IMHO, the processor lag was the best thing to happen to apple, because it gave us all of these iApps and a great OS. The iPod is the worst because it makes Apple a successful company at the expense of Apple Computer!

archiea
10-12-2005, 03:12 PM
Even Panther has OpenGL 2.0. It just doesn't have all the OpenGL 2.0 features. Most importantly, it's missing GLSL. I'm assuming the new features in 8.5 uses GLSL. Mac OS X doesn't support that as of now. Neither does it support texture maps that are not to the power of two, but I don't think that matters all that much for Lightwave.

Apple doesn't need to wake up. They make more money selling iPods than they do selling PowerMacs to 3D content creators. That said, it would be nice if they worked harder to please us.


Yeah, this is a bit of a joke.. the powermac being "the first" 64bit computer.. with all of the stabs at Longhorn... yet windows users are using 64bit now! We have the hardware, not the software... and supposedly the OS is where apple was suppose to reign...

and now with this PPC to intel transition.. current development is paused basically for at least a year... with your fast options after that being a revision "A" intel based mac... yeah, like life wasn;t complicated enough...

That how tough it is for us end users... now imagine a developer like NT, privately owned, who's supposed to not just do the same but stay a step ahead!!!

archiea
10-12-2005, 03:13 PM
:lol: hehe... the problem is, my compositor drops blue all the time ;)

Cheers,
Mike


No no no...he's not "Your" compositor... you are "his" 3D artist.. Get it. Got it. Good! :D

Captain Obvious
10-13-2005, 01:06 AM
and now with this PPC to intel transition.. current development is paused basically for at least a year... with your fast options after that being a revision "A" intel based mac... yeah, like life wasn;t complicated enough...
I really don't think the switch to Intel will stop (or even slow down) development of Mac OS X. Since probably all of Apple's applications, frameworks, kernel extensions, etc, are developed in Xcode, developing them concurrently for both platforms should be a matter of checking a box in Xcode. Since it has been running on x86 since its inception, they do not suddenly have to do a lot of work porting it, either.

fxgeek
10-13-2005, 04:18 AM
Expect lepord to be fully 64bit

Captain Obvious
10-13-2005, 07:04 AM
Expect lepord to be fully 64bit
Definitely. They're showing the first demo at WWDC next year, according to Teh Jobs. I would not be surprised if one of the things he'll demo is fully 64-bit applications with a GUI running side by side with 32-bit applications.

djtoltz
10-13-2005, 07:13 PM
I'm not sure if this is new with 8.5, and you all may already know about this, but I stumbled upon this yesterday when I started LWSN as a background renderer to render a short animation.

When I was setting up the animation, a single frame took just under 11 minutes to render. I then set my render threads to 1 and saved the scene so I could use LWSN -3 to render it. After LWSN had been running for a while, I noticed that it was taking under 4 minutes per frame to render. At first, I thought it was something different in LWSN, but after further experimentation, I discovered that bumping up the # of render threads brought the render speed back to 11 minutes/frame, even using LWSN. Lowering the threadcount to 1 and rendering in Layout brought the render time down.

I have a dual processor G5 Powermac. I thought I'd get better render speeds by using multiple threads (multiple CPUs). The process monitor shows 200% CPU utilization with multiple threads whereas I can only get 100% CPU with a single thread, but the single thread render is still faster.

I thought, maybe it was a memory (RAM) constraint, but I can run two instances of LWSN, each with one thread, and I get about 2 times as many frames.

Do the Lightwave developers read this stuff, or do I need to post a bug report somewhere?