PDA

View Full Version : Bring back JOE!!!!



Harry Houdini
05-11-2003, 11:51 PM
Newtek needs to mend fences with Joe Alter his "Shave in A Hair Cut" Blows Away Suckwashed opps I mean Sasquatch. Sorry to have such a strong opinion about it. but I really feel it is true. Sasquatch at best looks like barbie doll hair or worse straw. Now I know things got a little heated between the two parties, but if you ask me Newtek is make the worlds largest mistake not making up with Joe. So please Do what ever it takes to get him back.

TyVole
05-12-2003, 10:06 AM
I've heard that Shave works again in 7.5b.

Harry Houdini
05-12-2003, 10:24 AM
It does but you have to jump throw some hoops to get it to work. It would be nice if it was a little more intergated into LW like it is with Maya, Softimage, and C4D. And the newer version has some really nice stuff like painting, and applying testures to the hair (which could be used for the cel shader)

hrgiger
05-12-2003, 04:02 PM
Correction. Sasquatch lite looks like barbie doll hair. Sasquatch blows shave and a haircut away. I personally sold my shave to get the full version of sasquatch.

Check out a recent keyframe magazine where Timothy Albee reviews the two programs. Sasquatch gets like a 9 out of 10 while I think shave gets a 4 out of 10.

Bytehawk
05-12-2003, 04:40 PM
with shave you can easily model the hair guides.
sas relies completely on the Lightwave toolset and thus fails in this category. Recently tried to comb sas hair :mad:

TyVole
05-12-2003, 07:31 PM
It seems to me that it's difficult to compare the two, as Sasquatch is more geared to fur while shave is more geared to human hair. But if it is to be compared, it should be done by an unbiased reviewer -- someone like CIM.

HairSpray, which should be coming out momentarily, will hopefully solve the problem with hair guides, at a price.

hrgiger
05-12-2003, 08:17 PM
Just because Sasquatch doesn't automatically make the hair guides doesn't mean it isn't specifically suited to do human hairstyles. It basically has two modes, long hair and fur mode. True, you have to make your own guides but it's so simple, it shouldn't even be an isue. The only thing I could say negatively about Sas is that dynamics are currently hard to do with long hair. You have to rely on MD which isn't good for complex hairstyles.

And just because Timothy Albee uses Lightwave, doesn't mean that his opinion is biased. He uses the same wolf model and uses Sas, Sas lite and Shave to try and achieve the same effect. I have to tell you that the Sas lite version pretty much sucked, and the shave version was better but not by a whole lot. The Sas version was beautiful. Even though Shave allows you to manipulate the hair guides, Sasquatch has a smart combing feature which is very intuitive and is as easy as clicking a box. You can for instance tell sas to comb the hair away from a surface (like the nose) and now the hair will flow naturally down the neck, onto the body, and onto the legs and it works and looks great. You can also use nulls to comb the hair in one direction or another as well as multiple nulls.
Sas also rendered faster with much better results. Shave also takes longer to setup. That isn't a biased opinion, that' s a fact.

I don't think CIM would necessarily be a good person to judge between the two. First of all, I've never seen him submit anything to the gallery so I don't know of any actual experience he has. And secondly, I can't hardly see how his opinion would be unbiased.

True, hairspray looks like a good program.

TyVole
05-12-2003, 09:31 PM
I didn't read Albee's review; but if he compared the products solely based upon putting fur on a wolf, it is not a fair comparison. This is Sas's strong suit and Shave's weak suit. Shave's strong suit is designing, creating, and animating long human hair.

While creating long hair guides in LightWave is simple, manipulating them after the fact, isn't. But I'm confident HairSpray will resolve this issue.

That smart combing feature you refered to is not going to help you with long human hair.

The only reason I suggested CIM is because is unquestionably honest, often brutally. But someone like him should be doing the comparison.

Harry Houdini
05-12-2003, 09:49 PM
Well hrgiger understand you like Sasquatch, and you are right the full version does look way better than the lite version, but that is not my point. My point is I don't like it when two people don't get along. Especially when LW is involved. There has been enough of that. LW is my chosen brush in which use to express myself. So I don't want to have to give my very hard earned money to a company that made "it" by helping kill poeple like Alias|Wavefront, and If things don't pick up for LW I am sorry to say I will. So if there is some way in which I can stop this from happening and help make LW better. I am all for it. And personal I think Joe's contribution would do help do just that.

hrgiger
05-12-2003, 09:53 PM
But that's what I'm saying TyVole. Sas excels at both human hair and animal fur. I've used both programs, and while Shave is a fine program, I'll take Sas any day. And as far as I know, Joe had said before that he would come back to a Lightwave version at some point.


Smart combing can in fact help you with human hair. Even though most people use Sas's long hair guides to make human hair, you can also use the fur mode. Check these out by Stu Aiken: http://www.worley.com/TutFiles/StuFurTut/index.html

Jimzip
05-13-2003, 12:25 AM
Soda.:)

Jimzip:D

jds580s
05-13-2003, 11:13 AM
Though I didn't have a chance to read the review it seems to me that Sasquatch would win hands down, but it's hard to compare a fully functional plug-in that is still under development to Shave which has some major issues in 7.0 and above.

Personally I'm a Shave enthusiast, but I've had to put my dongle in storage because it's no longer up to production tasks.

I agree with Harry Houdini, something needs to be done to mend the Joe Alter><Newtek thing. Joe has some brilliant ideas and it would be a shame to loose them, especially when they are now available in almost all other top packages.

Not to say anything bad about Sas, because it's a great plug too, they just have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Justin

Harry Houdini
05-13-2003, 12:19 PM
I agree with Harry Houdini, something needs to be done to mend the Joe Alter><Newtek thing. Joe has some brilliant ideas and it would be a shame to loose them, especially when they are now available in almost all other top packages.


Any clues as to how to achieve this?

hrgiger
05-13-2003, 06:29 PM
Here's a snippet of an interview with Tim Jenison (Newtek CEO) in Keyframe Magazine, issue 26:

Keyframe: How about the way the third party developers, like the plug-in developers, have been dealt with?

Tim Jenison: "Well, that's another big problem. To put it bluntly, a number of third party developers for Lightwave have been alienated in the past few years. Some of them were really alienated, to the point of becoming competitors or getting into public complaint sessions about how they were treated. Sometimes that sort of thing is inevitable in business, but it's usually avoidable. It happened too much. If you are one of those people, I owe you an apology for allowing it to happen. I think you're going to see us doing a lot better with third party developers in the future."

I take from this that probably Joe could develop another version for Lightwave if he wanted to. I don't know what kind of agreements Newtek has with Worley labs, but I'm sure there's something with Saslite being bundled with version 7. Personally, I think that Sasquatch has more potential as a program for hair within Lightwave as Worely labs is a really talented group of programmers. I expect good things from Sas2 and I wouldn't be surprised if that were next on the chopping block. And soon.

As far as what you can do with Shave and a haircut, I would just try to get as many Lightwave users as you can to email Joe and let him know you miss shave and would like to see a new version. If you show there is enough demand for it, maybe that's what he wants.

Harry Houdini
05-13-2003, 08:17 PM
OK I like the e-mail idea. It has a nice grassrootness to it. Anyone else like that idea? Or is that to much like Mr.Smith goes to washington?

Verlon
05-13-2003, 09:02 PM
I emailed Joe earlier this year about further developement of Shave for Lightwave as I like the look of shave for long hair.

His response was positive. The date he told me I should look for an new version from him has not arrived yet, but it isn't that far off either.

I do not wish to give anything more specific than this because I realize that things do change in software development, and it is not my place to commit Joe to such a deadline in a public forum.

If Joe is able to deliver as he said in the email, I am sure he will, and I am sure Shave owners everywhere will be happier. Joe was very helpful when I first bought Shave, more so than I would expect. It would be sad to lose him and his work from the Lightwave community.

Verlon

private
05-14-2003, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by hrgiger
Here's a snippet of an interview with Tim Jenison (Newtek CEO) in Keyframe Magazine, issue 26:

Keyframe: How about the way the third party developers, like the plug-in developers, have been dealt with?

Tim Jenison: "Well, that's another big problem. To put it bluntly, a number of third party developers for Lightwave have been alienated in the past few years. Some of them were really alienated, to the point of becoming competitors or getting into public complaint sessions about how they were treated. Sometimes that sort of thing is inevitable in business, but it's usually avoidable. It happened too much. If you are one of those people, I owe you an apology for allowing it to happen. I think you're going to see us doing a lot better with third party developers in the future."

I would hope that if things don't go, it's intergrated by themselves or done in house. Actually, I hope things are copied and made better inhouse. They should view Joe Alter as competition, just the same as Maya and XSI etc.

Either way, I would hope that they Newtek crew is on the same page. Mr. Jenison's comments kind of contradict Chuck's. This is what I'm referring to, as posted in another thread here:

http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3296



Originally posted by Chuck
It really is not the case that we restrict our development for the sake of third parties, as I'm sure some third party folks would be willing to attest. We do our best to make sure we regularly enhance the plugin interface so that they have plenty of power on which to build their add-ons, we're very happy when they are able to provide capabilities we have not yet had opportunity to get to in our our development priorities, but it's also the case that because a third party has created a toolset does not mean that we will avoid that area of development. We may be obligated to create a given toolset, as we have to gear our development to effectively meeting the challenges of our competitors, and we also have to keep our eyes on the cutting edge of research. We've managed a number of firsts among the professional 3D packages, and plan to very much continue in that tradition as we move forward with LightWave development.

These are conflicting in a way. So, basically, is the hair system something they "maybe obligated to create'?

Verlon
05-14-2003, 03:33 AM
They do not conflict, as I see it.....

it is simply how plugins work....

If you make a plugin so awesome that we can't live with out it, you will either be bought out or imitated if your buyout price is too high.

Just sort of how things work.


Verlon

hrgiger
05-14-2003, 07:11 AM
You have to also remember private that the statement by Tim was many months ago and the other from Chuck was recent. Tim said in the future, dealings with 3rd party developers would improve and Chuck has said nothing to conflict with that.

private
05-14-2003, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by Verlon
They do not conflict, as I see it.....

it is simply how plugins work....

If you make a plugin so awesome that we can't live with out it, you will either be bought out or imitated if your buyout price is too high.

Just sort of how things work.


Verlon

I hope that's the case. I hope many of the functionality that is available through plugins and intergrated to the core and maintained, rewritten and optimized. I'm not talking about silly stuff either, but stuff that is native in other packages that LW doesn't have. The glaring example is a dopesheet. With the statement that there will be animation improvements to LW8, if this is overlooked, I will be shocked. I also hope this is the case with the Ortho bone plugin.

There is so much to like about Lightwave. I'm hoping some of the missing links are addressed.

Chuck
05-14-2003, 08:46 AM
There really is not a conflict between what Tim had to say and what I had to say. Having to develop particular features to stay competitive is in part a distinctly different issue from other matters of treatment of third parties, and both have needed some difference in our behavior in order to avoid alienating third party developers. We've been working to remedy our approaches to third party developer relationships, and I'm very hopeful that we are making progress in this area.

private
05-14-2003, 11:26 PM
Hi Chuck!

I hope so too!

Harry Houdini
05-15-2003, 12:50 AM
We've been working to remedy our approaches to third party developer relationships


Like?

Phil
05-15-2003, 07:33 AM
This rings bells because of the Pontari / Superglow affair. Apparently it was like trying to get blood out of a stone when Matt was asking NewTek for a clue about the internal LW glow code, so that he could allow his plugin to work in tandem with the internal glow as required.

(I'd still like to see something like Superglow 2 become an internal part of LW. The in-built glow is poorly controllable for many things and lacks the ability to be handled in complex ways.
The lack of a port for Mac and the disappointing glow system in 7.5 (not much different to the glow system in 4.0, truth be told!) keeps me on x86 LW.)

What is perhaps indicative of a more fundamental problem and so is additionally worrying is that there is *still* no true WaveFilter plugin shipping with LW that matches the old release from back in the 5.6 days.
The interface support in LW is apparently lacking the ability to support much of what WaveFilter needs....if NewTek cannot respond to its own needs for plugin interfaces, what hope for the developers wishing to push things further? We've had 6.0(b),6.5(b),7.0(b),7.5(b) and in that time there has not been any move to get the whole of WaveFilter working; if that's an indication of commitment to developers' needs, I am not overly surprised people get unhappy.

(The resulting open source site for WaveFilter has seen no activity at all, but doesn't appear to be mentioned anywhere on the LW sites so it's hardly surprising.)

I'm hoping lessons are being learnt (Chuck has said so, but the results remain to be seen) and we're going to see major changes following adoption of the VT development approach and this kind of soul searching.

On a slightly different note, could NewTek do something to aid the marketing of the products of the remaining commercial developers? As examples, Dynamic Realities seem to have gone very quiet in the past year or so. Dosch Design used to have plugins, but don't appear to have any interest in the market either. Compared to the heavily active plugin market for Max et al, it's a little disconcerting to see such lack of supporting commercial activity.

mattc
05-15-2003, 10:48 PM
Phil,

DR has posted updates to Pyro, mpact and Napalm fairly regularly. So, they haven't gone quiet.

Build 42 of Napalm, for instance, had a completely new GUI which is more in keeping with Lightwave's UI.

And I've noticed alot more plugin development from other folks of late as well.

As a side note, Joe Alter did post a note to the plugin dev list looking for LW programmers....

In regards to the plugin marketing, well you could always do what Adobe do and include a PDF containing a catalogue of the commercial plugins available....of which there are plenty.

Regards
Matt - Someone who spends alot of time bitching to Chuck and William about 3rd party plugin support. :)

Lightwolf
05-16-2003, 03:18 AM
Originally posted by Phil
(The resulting open source site for WaveFilter has seen no activity at all, but doesn't appear to be mentioned anywhere on the LW sites so it's hardly surprising.)
Actually, it was advertised on all MLs back then.
I have looked at the code, too see what the problem in porting is / was, and then decided not to touch it.

Very messy, loads of mixed up stuff in there.

I agree though, volumetric objects in LW would be nice.

Cheers,
Mike

cgolchert
05-16-2003, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by Harry Houdini
My point is I don't like it when two people don't get along. Especially when LW is involved.

Which makes it even funnier when you post

"Shave in A Hair Cut" Blows Away Suckwashed opps I mean Sasquatch.