PDA

View Full Version : Silo, Modo, Hexagon? Which one is best?



Intuition
02-17-2006, 11:05 AM
I already use Zbrush and most of my regular modeling is done in Modeler

But I have a copy of Modo and downloaded Hexagon last night. I also was considering giving Silo a shot.

Does anyone here use any/all these products so you can recommend one to me more then the others?

My Goal is to have a nice all in one modeling package.

I would like to create great subD meshes for both organic and mechanical objects and if I want greater fine details I'll take my organic stuff into Z-Brush for final touches.

Any and all thoughts appreciated.

Captain Obvious
02-17-2006, 12:18 PM
I haven't tried Silo or Hexagon yet, but I really like modo. The learning curve was not a curve so much as it was a horizontal line. One of these days, I'm going to give both Silo and Hexagon a try, but I've been too lazy so far.

harlan
02-17-2006, 03:45 PM
Even though I have a certain level of disrespect for the company; I have to say that business is business and Modo kicks some modelling ***!! Silo and Hexagon are both great modeling apps as well, but I really prefer Modo myself.

Hexagon, while very powerful, is a little gimmicky in my opinion. Not gimmicky in terms of functionality or power, rather in it's interface and workflow methodology.

Silo is fantastic and right on par with Modo in terms of power, capability, and workflow. The main reason that I'd recommend Modo over Silo is the 'vertical' progression of Modo as it slowly becomes a full featured app (including painting, texturing, fast high-quality rendering, etc...). I do dislike the interface in Silo, but like Modo, it too can be customized to your own liking.

hope that helps.

KillMe
02-17-2006, 03:48 PM
well not a modo fan here - numeric input into the tools was hmmm jsut not as smooth as it is in lightwave - the only thing i really want from modo in lightwave is the viewport performance - but hoping lw 9.x cycle will fix that

hrgiger
02-17-2006, 03:51 PM
This thread is itchin to get deleted. Newtek has rules about the promotion of competitors products on their forums.

Why wouldn't you just continue to use modeler if you already own it? I think with Lightwave 9 supporting normal maps for Zbrush 2, what else do you need? I think there will be a lot of great additions to modeler over the 9.x cycle as well too, especially considering a few of the developers they've hired who excel in that area.

The above mentioned package seems very nice but like harlan, I have to say I don't have much respect for the developers...

Intuition
02-17-2006, 04:05 PM
I apologize to Newtek for any misunderstanding.

Didn't mean any harm. I was only trying to figure out if there is a better program for workflow. If I go to Silo, hexagon or Modo forums you knwo the kind of Bias I would get there right?

So, I figure I would see what people thought.

I do continue to use Modeler but there are some things in Modo and Hexagon that are very streamlined for mesh and subD editing. Yet I haven't used them very much.

Maybe I'll go ask Subd Model forums so I wont spark any trouble.

....feel free to delete . ;)

mattclary
02-17-2006, 06:44 PM
If I go to Silo, hexagon or Modo forums you knwo the kind of Bias I would get there right?


Many on those fora would scoff that you thought you could get unbiased opinions here, but, as you see, you can. M*d* is the only one of those I've tried and it's OK, but I would rather stick with LightWave. It's interface is all new-fangled and all, but I prefer the spartan feel of LightWave.

Snosrap
02-17-2006, 08:58 PM
- the only thing i really want from modo in lightwave is the viewport performance -


Only one? I want at least two. Ha! Ha! I do hope that NT takes a serious look at "dodo" and see that it has some decent things going for it. I did download the demo and liked very much some of it's functions and features. I'd like NT to put in the option of having some kind handles or manipulators to be able to model in the perspective view with more precision. Also I liked how you could change the action centers in "dodo. Lightwave has "Translate Plus" that will scale or move an object on various axis and normals, but it's really a kludge and this functionality should be built into most of the common tools. Right now that's my biggest gripe about LW, you can do almost anything you want, but the tools are scattered all over the place and not streamlined. With that being said I have all the faith that the new dev team is aware of these issues and many others and I understand it's going to take time to clean things up. I look forward to the ride, because when it's all said and done LW is just plain fun to use. I think LW needs to evolve, not change. I like it now, and see no reason to drop it. I just want what everyone wants, a better LW.


Cheers Snos

ercaxus
02-17-2006, 10:31 PM
I already use Zbrush and most of my regular modeling is done in Modeler

But I have a copy of Modo and downloaded Hexagon last night. I also was considering giving Silo a shot.

Does anyone here use any/all these products so you can recommend one to me more then the others?

My Goal is to have a nice all in one modeling package.

I would like to create great subD meshes for both organic and mechanical objects and if I want greater fine details I'll take my organic stuff into Z-Brush for final touches.

Any and all thoughts appreciated.
I think you should go with zbrush, because it's simply a different world and it can do some real super cool stuff. It's not (mainly) a polygon modeler.
For a poly modeler I would stick with Lightwave. They all can do make/cut/divide poly etc. it's all ui and workflow. New dev-team is working on layout apparently, but wait till they get their hands on modeler's UI . I believe it's going to be "the" best modeling package out there.:rock:

AdamAvenali
02-17-2006, 11:35 PM
I already use Zbrush and most of my regular modeling is done in Modeler

But I have a copy of Modo and downloaded Hexagon last night. I also was considering giving Silo a shot.

Does anyone here use any/all these products so you can recommend one to me more then the others?

My Goal is to have a nice all in one modeling package.

I would like to create great subD meshes for both organic and mechanical objects and if I want greater fine details I'll take my organic stuff into Z-Brush for final touches.

Any and all thoughts appreciated.

i basically do the same exact thing, and from my experience i feel that zbrush and lightwave work very well together. i only have other experience in max, so i am not too informed of the other packages, but since i've gotten used to the going to and from zbrush with lightwave i have found no reason to change my ways :thumbsup:

Mylenium
02-18-2006, 02:05 AM
The above mentioned package seems very nice but like harlan, I have to say I don't have much respect for the developers...


M*d* is the only one of those I've tried and it's OK, but I would rather stick with LightWave. It's interface is all new-fangled and all, but I prefer the spartan feel of LightWave.

Why am I not surprised to hear such statements from you? This is really getting pointless.

Mylenium

cagey5
02-18-2006, 02:34 AM
Time to delete all this nonesense before it kicks off for me..

mav3rick
02-18-2006, 02:36 AM
buying modo was my biggest cash throw 2 years ago.... never used it for anythin serious due very bad stability...

Nemoid
02-18-2006, 03:24 AM
They are 3 good modelling packages.

Modo has a strong Lw inheritance so that if you're used working in Lw is a good choice . 101 was unstable, due to the reported problems with Nvidia drivers. but 102 was stable.

Silo is good as well. its not so elegant as Modo, but has high customizability to suit your workflow better. it is rewritten in this period , to support even better features like sculpting tools ala Zbrush.(but i'd not compare to ZB power) another good thing is it's cheap.

Hexagon is a sort of Modoish app, but introduced things like real history, for example, and other great tools as well. well thought as a modeler, but like harlan says, a bit gimmicky in its workflow and behaviour. not so "fluid"


I think Modo is superior because it is more elegant, more fluid workflow and behaviour, and brought in painting and rendering too.It will become a complete package.
ts not that you find ALL of state of the art modelling features in Modo, but it seems to be very well thought as a base structure, so it could develop very well in time.

Silo and Hexagon will remain pure modelling apps.
So, if you're a pure modeler you will have no prob using them.


Zbrush is a different beast. it brought the artistic approach to 3d through clay like modelling, and 2.5D painting. innovative app, very far from traditional approach, yet efficient and well coded too. Not everyone likes its workflow and UI, but it works well. It is the perfect companion for all traditional 3d apps.

Yog
02-18-2006, 05:21 AM
As you already have access to two of the programs and there is a free trial of the third, you are really in the best position to see what suits you.

Of the three I really prefer Modo. That said I fully aknowledge that the other two are very good apps in their own right, it's just that when I demo'd them I prefered the workflow of Modo. Something that is individual to each person.
I also think Modo has more legs than the other two, meaning that it was concived to be expanded into areas other than just modelling.

Yes there were some initial stability issues with Modo 101, but patches 102 and 103 have made it a very stable app. I use it most days, and can't remember the last time I had a problem (possibly not since 102 was released).

For the price range you are looking at I might also suggest XSI-Foundation. There is no diference in it's modelling tools compared to XSI-Advanced (and very little difference in the animation rendering tools), and whilst it isn't quite as good at organic modelling as Modo (possibly comparable to Silo tho), I would rate it as a better hard body modeller.

It really is a buyers market for 3D programs at the momment, so it pays to shop around.

Captain Obvious
02-18-2006, 05:31 AM
buying modo was my biggest cash throw 2 years ago.... never used it for anythin serious due very bad stability...
I recently bought modo, and while I'm hardly impressed by the stability (it has crashed a couple of times), it's definitely a LOT more stable than LW8 ever was for me. ;)



When it comes to discussions like these, I don't think NewTek should do anything about them. Hexagon, modo and Silo are all great applications, but they cannot replace Lightwave. If you own Lightwave and buy any one of them, it's because you want a different tool for modeling. You'll still have to use Lightwave for the actual animation and rendering. I don't see why NewTek wouldn't want you talking about Zbrush or BodyPaint, and I don't see the problem with this discussion either.

hrgiger
02-18-2006, 07:07 AM
Why am I not surprised to hear such statements from you? This is really getting pointless.

Mylenium

Um, check your quotes. I only said one of them.

If you feel like you can respect someone who abandoned the software that you were counting on to be developed that's great. But not for me. I gave credit where it was due, but that's where the love stops.

Nemoid
02-18-2006, 07:15 AM
It is a constructive discussion and software is software.
Lw is a good and complete app, and if you need different apps for modelling there's plenty of them with those 3 ones and beyond.



M*d* is the only one of those I've tried and it's OK, but I would rather stick with LightWave. It's interface is all new-fangled and all, but I prefer the spartan feel of LightWave.


These are personal preferences too, and also a more flexible UI will suit better when you'll have animation in that app, because the environment will be one, through one UI.
Its a different choice from Lw ne where we have 2 apps and 2 UIs

cresshead
02-18-2006, 10:26 AM
you may want to add in wings3d too...it's FREE!
and yeah xsi is a capable modeler with a history stack, though you would be wise to go n get the digital tutors intro to xsi to get the most out of your learning curve with the app.

GruvSyco
02-18-2006, 10:47 AM
If you feel like you can respect someone who abandoned the software that you were counting on to be developed that's great. But not for me. I gave credit where it was due, but that's where the love stops.
I take it you still work the very first job you ever had, no need for change?
Fact is, for whatever reasons, people move on from one job to the next. Sometimes it's money, sometimes it's creative issues or creative control, sometimes they just need a change and sometimes they even change industries completely.

Back to the original topic.
I love Silo. Lack of subd n-gons has been a real sore spot with me in regards to LW. I like working on a subpatched/subdivision mesh but in LW when you start cutting into geom with tools like add edges, the geometry would pop and disappear. Once I started playing around with other apps, I started to see advantages of different workflows. I started playing around with Wings and loved the viewport manipultaion stuff but really missed being able to do detail out modeling. Silo was the answer to that.

hrgiger
02-18-2006, 11:55 AM
I take it you still work the very first job you ever had, no need for change?


It's a little different. I don't take my whole division with me when I leave a job. Besides, I never said what they did was wrong, but I don't have to agree with them or like them for it.

Kurtis
02-18-2006, 12:05 PM
Please keep this thread civil, or it will be closed.

mav3rick
02-18-2006, 01:09 PM
[QUOTE=Captain Obvious]I recently bought modo, and while I'm hardly impressed by the stability (it has crashed a couple of times), it's definitely a LOT more stable than LW8 ever was for me. ;)


and i have to admit lw is far more stable than modo wiull ever be... try model ANYTHING with splines in modo... look i own modo and i am not satisfy customer specially cause i was one of 1st PREORDERERS that ordered modo after siggraph 2 years ago and when modo 201 came to preorder we THE FIRST GUYS that pay for somethin that was not eaven in final stage and not eaven have demo to try we were not able to buy upgrade for some nice upgrade price .
If u compare LIGHTWAVE price as FULL SOLUTION for modeling render and animate to somethin called POLYGONAL MODELER it is shame to ask money they ask for it eaven if it is "STATE OF ART CODE".
I didnt update 201 and i will not i will rather give my money on lw since they showed a progress with lw9 and i look forward for this agressive UPDATING of solid package.

Captain Obvious
02-18-2006, 02:30 PM
try model ANYTHING with splines in modo
Oh, yeah, the spline tools in modo need a serious upgrade. They're also getting one: 201 has completely reworked spline tools. Supposedly, they've gone from "useless" to "pretty darned neat". ;)

As for being a "satisfied customer," I paid $595 for modo 103 + free upgrade to 201. I don't think that's very bad, considering what I'm getting. Now, I agree, that's a lot of money for just a modeler, but with the painting, texturing, baking, rendering, etc, in 201, I feel it's a rather good deal. I model much faster in modo than in Modeler, and all in all, I have a feeling I'll be fairly content with my purchase once 202 is out (I never put my faith in version n-point-zero). I still like Lightwave, and I will keep on using it. If NewTek improves Modeler enough, I might switch back to 100% Lightwave. We'll see... Anyway, if you're not happy with modo, then don't buy 201 and stick entirely with Lightwave. I don't think anyone will think less of you because of it (nor should they). If you think it's a shame that they ask for as much money as they do for "just a modeler," don't buy it. That's your choice to make.

Also, I have a problem with what you said about LW being more stable than "modo will ever be." You cannot know this. Perhaps modo will, in the future, be the most stable 3D app on the market. Or, then again, perhaps it won't. The important thing is that you cannot know what will happen, so comments like that one are unfounded.




Kurtis:
I'll try my very very best to keep everything civil! The fact that you didn't lock the thread yet makes me a very happy person. :thumbsup:

Elmar Moelzer
02-18-2006, 02:55 PM
Well, I dont know about Modo and it being state of the art code, from what I have seen they still have the problems with Subpatch UV- distortions, e.g.
If NT can make a fix with LWs so called "old" vertexmap code, why couldnt the Lux guys do it for the "totally rewritten" Modo?
Maybe things are not always as shiny and new as a new UI- toolkit makes them look like.
I am also wondering where Modos SDK is so far...
Without a good and solid SDK (which still has to be seen) Modo is totally not interesting for me.
CU
Elmar

toby
02-18-2006, 03:18 PM
Modo may have a serious problem... 3DSMax with VRay is making a killing, taking great advantage, of Lux's delays in bringing out their full app. Considering that their next release still doesn't include animation, they may be too late to the party.

Yog
02-18-2006, 04:02 PM
Modo may have a serious problem... 3DSMax with VRay is making a killing, taking great advantage, of Lux's delays in bringing out their full app. Considering that their next release still doesn't include animation, they may be too late to the party.Whilst I own and use MAX+Vray and think Vray is the dogs whatsits for rendering, I don't think it is really fair to compare a $800 plug-in tied to a $3500 base package to Modo. I certainly don't think the combo will attract the casual purchaser like you suggest.

If anything is going to take market share away from Modo, it's XSI-Foundation. Mind you, Foundation is such a rediculously cheep price for a program with so few omittions, it takes market share away from everyone else, including LW.

Intuition
02-18-2006, 04:21 PM
Wow, Thanks for all the replies guys :D

I wanted to clear up that My Lightwave to ZBrush workflow is good and is now much more improved due to recent events ;)

So why have a seperate modeler then Newteks modeler?

Well, its a matter of sped up workflow. If I am making a car it seems that some tools in modo or Silo work faster then others then say trying to make t in z-brush. WHere as Z-Brush organics are 2nd to none. Yet, Modeler is completely capable of what these other programs are as well but sometimes with just a few more clicks.

Its a matter of time spent vs software capabilities.

I now have tried all 3 and have figured out Silo and Modo are the best so far. Hexagon is a little tricky but I can see more possibilities depending on the model type.

There is a new factor to the comparison equation being added to this list that may nullify the need for any of them......but we don't talk about that right now. ;)

But I am trying to exploit all of its new features as fast as I can. Might be able to stay in the stable after all.

:D

AbnRanger
02-18-2006, 04:51 PM
I tested all of them as well. I liked modo the best, but I would never pay them $700.00 for what they are offering. Way to over priced:thumbsdow
Not with 201. With the texture paint features (no need to buy Body Paint 3D or Deep Paint 3D) and simplified UV's...I can see plenty justification for those that want the fastest modeling application available, plus the extra goodies.

Captain Obvious
02-18-2006, 05:05 PM
Well, I dont know about Modo and it being state of the art code, from what I have seen they still have the problems with Subpatch UV- distortions, e.g.
Fixed in 201.




I am also wondering where Modos SDK is so far...
Without a good and solid SDK (which still has to be seen) Modo is totally not interesting for me.
Due for release some time after 201.




Modo may have a serious problem... 3DSMax with VRay is making a killing, taking great advantage, of Lux's delays in bringing out their full app. Considering that their next release still doesn't include animation, they may be too late to the party.
Errr, how do you figure that? Vray alone costs almost as much as modo (more if you take advantage of the current "special price"), and 3dsmax is pretty expensive. Besides, modo isn't supposed to compete with 3dsmax or Lightwave or Blender or XSI or whatever. At least not yet. Currently, it's a modeling application (and a darned good one, if I may say so). In 201, it will also do rendering. They don't mean that everyone will (or should) use 201 for rendering, since it still can't do animations, but I'm fairly sure that it's a good workflow enhancer for many people. Especially considering you can bake things like global illumination and normal maps pretty quickly in it.

201 won't be the 3D app to end all 3D apps, but the additions they've made (painting, rendering, etc) is a great addition even if you don't do final rendering in it. Whether or not a potential modo "301" or whatever with animation and all that will be able to compete with the big-name applications is anyone's guess. We'll just have to wait and see, won't we? :)

mav3rick
02-18-2006, 06:01 PM
captain

i dont see anythin wrong with my post all i want to tell is i am not ready to use HALF NAKED solution application that can do this but cant do that and that is crashing a lott.. i cant make my work pipline suffer due some issues like i mention for splines. and again i cant be waiting software rewision to make workin spline and than to pay for somethin i should have in v 1.0
and why dont i get free update to 201 if i ordered 101 on 1st day of preorders after siggraph finished (stupid me).
if modo will not kill luxo it surely will be luxology marketing....... sorry if i sound angry but i dont see reson to contiue support this kind of tool that progress really slow... if they have so called new NEVER SEEN fresh clean code that can compile for all OS's in same time why it take them so long to make working modeler? it passed more than year and we still wait functional 201 that will probable come at siggraph this year wich means it is 2 years after initial 101 version of modo.... if newtek continue this agresive refreshing of lw i am more than sure we will catch all of popular tools that other aplications have for decades (sorry NT team had to put some courage words at the end..)

ok at end of post i apologize for my english and sorry if i hurt any modo users but hey i am potential one also but too bad modo didnt get a chance to attract me.

toby
02-18-2006, 06:09 PM
Actually I'm thinking in terms of studios needs - I forgot to make that distinction. If an app isn't used in production studios it remains a much smaller app, never gets past hobbyist/freelance status. I agree that the cost of Max is ridiculous, even when LW was $2500, considering the sloppy code and poor workflow - but for studios the renderer is a lot more important.

I think Max/Vray may have grabbed half the potential studios by the time Nexxus is ready.

toby
02-18-2006, 06:19 PM
... if newtek continue this agresive refreshing of lw i am more than sure we will catch all of popular tools that other aplications have for decades
Hey that's a good point ( although 'decades' is too strong an exaggeration ) LW seems to be making strides as fast as Modo now, maybe faster. If they gave the renderer a good kick in the pants they could dominate again.

AbnRanger
02-18-2006, 06:32 PM
Actually I'm thinking in terms of studios needs - I forgot to make that distinction. If an app isn't used in production studios it remains a much smaller app, never gets past hobbyist/freelance status. I agree that the cost of Max is ridiculous, even when LW was $2500, considering the sloppy code and poor workflow - but for studios the renderer is a lot more important.

I think Max/Vray may have grabbed half the potential studios by the time Nexxus is ready.Compared to Maya Unlimited and XSI Advanced, Max 8 is an exceptional deal.
Now, if Lightwave adds a full-featured Hair/Fur system and implements a new (perhaps a new Auto-Rigger) Animation system (or incorporates Messiah) that compares well with Max's Character Studio, Maya's and XSI's advanced Character systems (for not much more than the current asking price)...along with the additional improvements they already have planned...and perhaps a fresh new look...they will invite a great deal of attention, and can quickly be right back among the leading pack.
I think v9 is an earnest step in that direction...and have confidence that they will make some enormous strides within the next 2 point releases.

Snosrap
02-18-2006, 09:18 PM
I think NT is feeling pretty confident in what they have in store for LW. Otherwise I think they would have closed this thread, which so far I applaud them for not doing. However I do think that they should have every right to do so. That's why I'm feeling really good right now about my investment in LW, they must have some good things up their sleeve. I salute you NT.

Snos

Stooch
02-18-2006, 09:40 PM
implements a new (perhaps a new Auto-Rigger) Animation system (or incorporates Messiah)

So far i havent seen anything that even touches messiah for animation. I feel that LW would stand to gain ALOT from a move like this.

and we arent just talking animation either, there is some incredible rendering tech involved as well.

colkai
02-19-2006, 03:25 AM
So far i havent seen anything that even touches messiah for animation. I feel that LW would stand to gain ALOT from a move like this.
I "upgraded" from the Motionbuilder PLE for animation purposes, but I'd dearly love LW to provide some serious updates to the animation area that would make all that bouncing files around and recharacterising a thing of the past.

As it stands now, MB is just so much easier to use for CA than LW for many apsects. I agree that beefing up this side of LW would be a huge plus point.

Yog
02-19-2006, 04:55 AM
As it stands now, MB is just so much easier to use for CA than LW for many apsects. I agree that beefing up this side of LW would be a huge plus point.As long as NT don't neglect other areas of LW such as modelling and rendering, as they did when they concentrated on character animation almost to the exclusion of all other areas in the 7.x and 8.x development cycles.
I think this upset a lot of people.

colkai
02-19-2006, 06:20 AM
Always a tough call and I certainly don't envy them.
There can be a very vocal minority that make it sound like the must-have new feature is the one they want. Doesn't neccesarily follow though that it is the same feature most requests have been made for. Such is the nature of software development, a fact I'm all too aware of personally.

I don't think anyone doubts that the new team faced a daunting task having to re-write LW and advance it, (or bring it up to date, or stop it lagging so far behind, depending on who you are talking to).

As for the whole "what packages" thing, being a skinflint and not able to write off expenses against a studio, I looked at Silo and Wings3D & Blender.

Silo looks very cool and is very cheap, as for Wings3D, well you can't exactly argue with the price. :p
I have Wings and Blender on my PC but familiarity with LW means I can probably get things done faster in LW than utilising what may be a better option in other software. If it takes me time to learn the other package, that time, for me, can be better spent just getting on with it in LW. Not to say it may not be worthwhile investing some "learning time" at some point mind you.

Of course, there are exceptions, like Blenders fluids, which HV's just can't come close to at present. Once again, you can't argue with the price of the package either. ;)
Another reason I tend to stick to freeware, ever since POVRAY, it can be the free packages that have some uber-cool stuff as much as the "big boys", which always has, and always will, impress the heck outta me.

Mylenium
02-19-2006, 07:30 AM
Well, I dont know about Modo and it being state of the art code, from what I have seen they still have the problems with Subpatch UV- distortions, e.g.
If NT can make a fix with LWs so called "old" vertexmap code, why couldnt the Lux guys do it for the "totally rewritten" Modo?

I'm really disappointed with you. C'mon, this is small time nitpicking and if nobody else, I at least would have expected you to be better informed. If you're not even reading feature anouncements for competing apps, why even bother to become part of this discussion?


I am also wondering where Modos SDK is so far...
Without a good and solid SDK (which still has to be seen) Modo is totally not interesting for me.
CU
Elmar

Huh? So you're telling me if you are looking for a good modelling app you cannot use it because you cannot write a plugin for it? That is a strange logic and completely ignores the fact that just like in LW you already can extend functionalities in modo with Perl and LUA scripts. Of course at one point anybody would want an SDK, be it just for reasons of speed, but by all means I wouldn't consider it a necessity for 90% of the users.

Mylenium

Mylenium
02-19-2006, 07:52 AM
Modo may have a serious problem... 3DSMax with VRay is making a killing, taking great advantage, of Lux's delays in bringing out their full app. Considering that their next release still doesn't include animation, they may be too late to the party.


Actually I'm thinking in terms of studios needs - I forgot to make that distinction. If an app isn't used in production studios it remains a much smaller app, never gets past hobbyist/freelance status. I agree that the cost of Max is ridiculous, even when LW was $2500, considering the sloppy code and poor workflow - but for studios the renderer is a lot more important.

I think Max/Vray may have grabbed half the potential studios by the time Nexxus is ready.

How quickly people forget... VRay 1 was full of glitches and bugs and it is simply unfair to compare the current version against a newly incepted renderer. In all honesty, I don't see why VRay should be superior per se. All implementations for other apps or the standalone version progress at a crawl and as long as VRay is an MAX exclusive product, I don't see any point in even making assumptions about whether Nexus will be too late or not. I know enough people that for the he_ll of theirs lives could not be convinced to use MAX and they will certainly be gald to have yet another option once modo 301, 402, 503 or whatever brings them high-quality, speedy and easy to setup rendering.

Making assumptions about the lack of animation being the death modo, is similarly moronic. It does absolutely not reflect the overall market structure. There is much more demand for dull arch-viz, tech-viz, design-viz, print design and other static stuff than there will ever be for animation and FX. Again, I know a lot of people who will rejoice of getting an ultra-fast renderer just for that without having to resort to trickery and workarounds as with LWs renderer (e.g. use FPrime) or wait entire days for their hi-res renders to finish. The same with architecture bureaus - many of them have MAX/ VIZ, but all they do is slap in ther ACAD files and do quick still renders to show their clients.

If modo (or whatever app) can fill that niche to some extend, why not? It's simply a diffewrent strategy and as Luxology always point out, at this point they don't have any intention of even competing with certain apps. They are just providing a very specialized tool to complement others, not replace them. That may change in the future, but we'll all have to see. The other way around nobody can predict where LW will be in a few years.

Mylenium

colkai
02-19-2006, 09:08 AM
I find it odd that people complain about LW not having an open enough SDK for third parties yet the fact that Modo has no SDK at all is dismissed as irrelevant.
That it currently has no animation facilities is not seen as a limitation, as there is the strong belief that it isn't essential, if at all needed? Yet failures in LW's C.A. tools are leaped upon with excitement.

Assumptions on releases not yet devised, let alone released, seem to be they are bound to be superior in many aspects to other current packages.

Would it therefore be fair to give other packages this same leeway?
Would people "forgive" Lightwave such ommissions?
Would they be prepared to assume the new development of LW will produce superior results?
I'd wager they would not.

James Edwards
02-19-2006, 10:07 AM
Once you have CA tools you open yourself up to end user scrutiny. I'm pretty sure Lux are aware of this and that's why they haven't rushed to provide them. I'd prefer to wait till they are good and ready and then judge them for having had the proper amount of time to implement. As it stands now, it's pretty dumb to heap abuse on them for not having CA or animation tools. Why aren't you doing the same for Wings3d and Silo too then?

LW has CA tools right now. Do the math.

James Edwards
02-19-2006, 10:12 AM
Anyone who bought Modo for spline modeling and is complaining about its lack of spline tools is on their own as far as I'm concerned. Modo was never marketed as a spline modeling solution. It even says on page 1 of their marketing page that it is a POLYGONAL modeler. If you followed their forum postings you'd have seen that they are also making significant efforts towards providing more spline support for those who have been asking. If you haven't, well then you deserve to look silly, same way you do for expecting to get a free update to 201 from the 101 release, which was um... well over a year ago? Get real.

Yog
02-19-2006, 10:26 AM
I find it odd that people complain about LW not having an open enough SDK for third parties yet the fact that Modo has no SDK at all is dismissed as irrelevant.
That it currently has no animation facilities is not seen as a limitation, as there is the strong belief that it isn't essential, if at all needed? Yet failures in LW's C.A. tools are leaped upon with excitement....

Would it therefore be fair to give other packages this same leeway?

Would people "forgive" Lightwave such ommissions? No, but they might equally forgive other modelling only packages like Silo, Wings or Hexagon, that also don't have an available SDK, although Modo does also support the Perl scripting language, unlike the others.

The developers of Silo have stated that they will eventually be aiming for rendering and animation, but I don't see people decrying them for not having those features now either :stumped:

It's important to compare like for like.


Would they be prepared to assume the new development of LW will produce superior results?
I'd wager they would not.As most of the new LW development team are relatively un-tested, (outside the plug-ins they previously wrote for LW), I would say it would be foolish to wager either way.
LW8 seemed to be about NT buying in assets, both in the form of code and people, so I consider it nothing more than a "holding" release, we'll see what LW9 brings, as IMHO it will be the first new version of LW since ver-9.

colkai
02-19-2006, 10:31 AM
As it stands now, it's pretty dumb to heap abuse on them for not having CA or animation tools. Why aren't you doing the same for Wings3d and Silo too then?
Perchance you mis-read my comments.
At no point did I "heap abuse", I merely stated that, if missing tools were not seen as a problem in one package, then by logic, it would be unfair to complain about another package for the lack of other tools. If one package is to be derided for it's lack of say CAD tools, but another defended for it's lack of C.A. tools, it would be unfair.
Either each package is to be complained about equally, or the complaints relevance becomes diminished as it displays a bias.

This was the point I was trying to get across, albiet, unsuccessfully.

colkai
02-19-2006, 10:33 AM
we'll see what LW9 brings, as IMHO it will be the first new version of LW since ver-9.
Err, you been at the grog? ;)

Yog
02-19-2006, 10:39 AM
Err, you been at the grog? ;)Yeah, yeah, laugh it up bird boy :foreheads :beerchug:
Ok, so I meant LW7.:stumped:

James Edwards
02-19-2006, 10:48 AM
The last edit I made didn't seem to go through, but it was an attempt to steer more towards the original post and provide a less biased answer. The gist of it was that I don't feel any of those packages are the best at everything. Each one does something better than the rest. Hexagon has decent spline tools from what I've heard and seen, Silo is probably the best organic modeler of the bunch, and modo has better LW compatibility and brings a more modern approach to polygon modeling into your LW toolset. In short, they are all great tools and make great compliments to your LW toolset... or any other full package for that matter. That is what all of them aim to do currently.

colkai
02-19-2006, 10:53 AM
Yeah, yeah, laugh it up bird boy :foreheads :beerchug:
Ok, so I meant LW7.:stumped:
Hehe, gertcha. :p
Actually, you know I kinda agree there, I also see LW9 as the first real "re-incarnation" of LW since 6.5/7.
I think what happens in the '9' cycle will be very decisive for many people.

colkai
02-19-2006, 10:56 AM
The last edit I made didn't seem to go through, but it was an attempt to steer more towards the original post and provide a less biased answer. The gist of it was that I don't feel any of those packages are the best at everything.

Agreed, for me for example, the fluid dynamics in Blender are astounding, especially when you consider it's free. I don't think LW can come close to this yet, with HV's being too blobby. However, it's not the easiest package to get into, whereas Wings seems easier to wok with on edges.

Elmar Moelzer
02-19-2006, 11:02 AM
Hey Mylenium!
Well I must have missed that feature in 201 (which has only been announced so far and is not out yet).
Still wondering how well it will be working. Last time I talked to someone from Lux, I was told that "it is technically impossible" ;)

The SDK was meant to be out a long time ago and has been postponed ever since. I will believe that there is ever going to be an SDK when I see it.
And I said that an application without an SDK is useless for ME (!), one reason is because a big part of our business is development and customization of and for 3d- apps meanwhile.
Modos scripting may be nice, but it does not allow me to do the things I need.
CU
Elmar

James Edwards
02-19-2006, 11:03 AM
Yeah, I guess I'm saying that after having done this 3d thing for over a decade now, I've not found a single package that does everything I want. But as an artist I feel I owe it to myself to try software if it might help improve my process in any way. 3d is a very technical medium. Far more technical than it needs to be. With new software and new hardware comes new advances to how we do our thing. To ignore these things out of bitterness or personal agendas only hurts you as an artist. Modo for instance will offer 3d painting in a LW compatible format in version 201. That alone makes it worth the purchase and addition to my LW toolset. The rest is just icing on the cake. Silo 2 will offer true mirror modeling without a seam or instancing required, plus some medium resolution zbrush-like sculpting tools. Again that will make that app worth having if you cannnot afford Zbrush or don't like its UI. Those are just quick examples too. Doing your research into another tool would probably reveal more reasons that justify adding it to your toolset. They are all just tools afterall.

Elmar Moelzer
02-19-2006, 11:27 AM
Hey James!
I aggree, looking at other tools is a good thing. I am not counting software that is not out yet though, since I am usually waiting to read some feedback from other users before I buy it.
CU
Elmar

Earl
02-19-2006, 11:47 AM
I will be the first to admit that I'm a huge fan of LightWave and NewTek. However I have tried many other 3d modeling programs (though not Hexagon yet), and personally I feel they're all very capable - modo included.

In your situation, Intuition, I think you're in a fine position as is. You currently have a top-notch modeler native to LightWave. There may be some cool tools the others have that LW Modeler doesn't, but truthfully would you use those often? Because no matter how compatible a program may be with LightWave there are going to be hoops you have to jump through and those may in fact take up more of your time than whatever time you save using the relatively few workflow speedups in the other programs. modo appears to be the most compatible with LightWave, but even that is a near one-way workflow, because as soon as you start texturing in LightWave you'll risk losing that or crashing modo if you go back to edit the mesh in modo. And that's only going to get worse considering that LW is getting a nodal shading system that modo certainly won't support for a while (if ever).

In my opinion, it's just not worth the hassle unless you need something like ZBrush where the toolset is vastly different for a vastly unique type of modeling/mesh. Modo/Hexagon/Silo don't really offer that, so between those three and Modeler, you're better off sticking with a 100% compatible workflow inside LightWave itself. You've pre-ordered the upgrade to v9, correct? If so, then your Modeling toolset will only improve with the 9.x cycle and the compatiblity with ZBrush will get much better with the improved support outlined in the v9 feature list.

On a side note, not directed at anyone here: I know of a couple people personally who felt they could improve their modeling by switching from one very capable program to another, only to find that it was their own skill level that was holding them back - not the program. And instead of taking all that time to learn a whole new program, they could have used the time to improve their modeling skill set in the original program and been in a lot better position overall. I'm not saying this is the case with you at all :D or anyone else here, just simply throwing it out there for thought.

Mylenium
02-19-2006, 12:09 PM
modo appears to be the most compatible with LightWave, but even that is a near one-way workflow, because as soon as you start texturing in LightWave you'll risk losing that or crashing modo if you go back to edit the mesh in modo. And that's only going to get worse considering that LW is getting a nodal shading system that modo certainly won't support for a while (if ever).

In my opinion, it's just not worth the hassle unless you need something like ZBrush where the toolset is vastly different for a vastly unique type of modeling/mesh. Modo/Hexagon/Silo don't really offer that, so between those three and Modeler, you're better off sticking with a 100% compatible workflow inside LightWave itself.

Mmh, I'm not really sure if that's going to happen. Admittedly, we're still in early Beta for LW 9, [Comments violating the Non-Disclosure agreement for LightWave v9 Open Beta Removed by the Moderators.]

As for the workflow issues - well, I don't see them as such. I only start texturing once I'm done with my modeling and I would assume that a lot of users could adapt to this type of workflow if they only wanted. This notwithstanding, one can also safely assume that it's in their own interest if Luxology work on maintaining and improving compatibility with LW, so things might look much better on this end in the next release(s).



On a side note, not directed at anyone here: I know of a couple people personally who felt they could improve their modeling by switching from one very capable program to another, only to find that it was their own skill level that was holding them back - not the program. And instead of taking all that time to learn a whole new program, they could have used the time to improve their modeling skill set in the original program and been in a lot better position overall. I'm not saying this is the case with you at all :D or anyone else here, just simply throwing it out there for thought.

Well, it certainly has made my life much easier using modo over Modeler. Where I've been spending hours fixing screwed microbevels made with Rounder (that's one thing, you could not blame on the most untalented modeler as much as you tried), all it takes in modo is some simple edge bevel. It's not perfect all the time, either, but so much more reliable than getting Rounder's error messages and not knowing what to do to get rid of them :D .

Mylenium

Intuition
02-19-2006, 12:18 PM
So much insight going on here.

Well, I am happy to say I may not need an external modeler after all.

A certain set of new parameters has made it just as easy to the things in Modo and Silo now at home.

First rule of fight club...

;)

toby
02-19-2006, 12:45 PM
How quickly people forget... VRay 1 was full of glitches and bugs and it is simply unfair to compare the current version against a newly incepted renderer. In all honesty, I don't see why VRay should be superior per se. All implementations for other apps or the standalone version progress at a crawl and as long as VRay is an MAX exclusive product, I don't see any point in even making assumptions about whether Nexus will be too late or not. I know enough people that for the he_ll of theirs lives could not be convinced to use MAX and they will certainly be gald to have yet another option once modo 301, 402, 503 or whatever brings them high-quality, speedy and easy to setup rendering.

I'm not saying VRay is better than modo, nobody knows that, you can't even texture in modo yet. Modo 201 IS late, just ask anyone, and nexxus is taking much longer than anticipated, there's still no estimate of it's release - meanwhile studios are getting excited about VRay, the way they were excited about modo a year ago.



Making assumptions about the lack of animation being the death modo, is similarly moronic.

Ok - wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? This thread is hanging by a thread, if we don't keep this cool they'll close it.

I did not say that, I said "I think Max/Vray may have grabbed half the potential studios by the time Nexxus is ready." I'm predicting that they might lose their chance to sweep the industry, and have to share it instead. I hope I'm wrong, because I think Max sucks. Actually if VRay's stand-alone renderer works out soon ( it's beta right now ) that'll be even more trouble for nexxus.

Mylenium
02-19-2006, 01:19 PM
I'm predicting that they might lose their chance to sweep the industry, and have to share it instead.
...
I hope I'm wrong, because I think Max sucks. Actually if VRay's stand-alone renderer works out soon ( it's beta right now ) that'll be even more trouble for nexxus.

I think you should try to work out the differences between Nexus as a development platform and modo as an application created on that platform. That aside, the question you are forgetting to ask is if the development path/ strategy is really what Luxology might want. They could just as well cleverly focus on other markets (such as the entire print industry is) where there is no distinct preference for and a lot of frustration with all of the current 3D tools, no matter who makes them, because they are not specifically tailored to the needs of a pre-press operator/ illustration artist. Once they have done that and have the funds and technology it wouldn't be all that hard to branch out and sneak up from behind on other apps.

I also don't think that VRay is that great a danger in terms of business. It may work perfectly in combination with MAX, but it has yet to be proven how well it can integrate with other tools. That said, it's one thing if many "big" studios use it and make it their shining beacon (mostly, because they have dedicated rendering TDs), but it's a completely different story for the remaining 80% little companies that most of the time look for integrated solutions that can cover their entire workflow. Those companies simply don't want to and can't afford to use the top tool for every part of the pipeline and would settle for compromises. In reality this means that most of them use one main 3D app and just one special tool that they urgently need for some special tasks, but never does it mean that they have a plethora of virtually every 3D tool on the market.

Even if you limit your considerations to MAX, I'm sure that there is at least 50% of the users that never even bother to evaluate other render engines because the built-in one is good enough for them (especially with MentalRay now being part of that). The other 50% are split up between finalRender, VRay and Brazil and whatever other solutions may exist, so in terms of market presence even VRay is just one among many and far from dominating anything.

That said, it's of very little relevance of how the future Nexus-based renderer will be received by one part of the audience (the big studios), because on the other end it could just gain a healthy market share on other grounds. If the situation really wass that dire as you make it sound, programs such as Real 3D, Truespace, Animation Master, Carrara and others would long have disappeared, but no, many of them are in better shape than ever, even without a highend renderer or other highend features.

Mylenium

toby
02-19-2006, 02:34 PM
You're still exaggerating what I'm saying, of course it's not 'dire', again, I said they 'may' have to share the market instead of sweeping it. I don't see what relevance your claim that 'well maybe they don't want to sweep the industy' has, we all thought they were going to make a big splash and I'm predicting that it may be too late to do so. That's all. But of course they'd rather have a big chunk of the industry than just be as popular as Carrera, and so would their investors.

And of course I'm not referring to people for whom their current renderer is 'good enough'. I'm talking about companies and people who want to improve their product. Why would we talk about people who aren't going to upgrade anyway??

And you must realize that smaller companies, even in different niches, consider what bigger companies are using, especially if they're award-winning. How many times have you heard a managers comment "how come we're not using Maya"? Unlike maya, max/vray works well for smaller companies.

Mylenium
02-19-2006, 11:04 PM
You're still exaggerating what I'm saying, of course it's not 'dire', again, I said they 'may' have to share the market instead of sweeping it.

Huh? So what? They are just going to be yet another company making a program. What's wrong with that? Sorry to burst your bubble, but these are no longer the good old times where one single app can dominate a market or sweep it. It would be foolish to even attempt such a thing while Alias, Autodesk, Mental Images and other big players are around. If they can prove their renderer is going to be great in terms of quality and usability, then they will enough customers to sustain development and pay their people, and from a business standpoint that's all that is required on their end. Everything else is a bonus and should the day come when in the end credits of big movies it says "Proudly made with modo" instead of Maya, XSI or LightWave, I'm sure they won't complain, but for the time being it's definitely not their primary goal.


I don't see what relevance your claim that 'well maybe they don't want to sweep the industy' has, we all thought they were going to make a big splash and I'm predicting that it may be too late to do so.

I never made such a claim. Please use correct quotes, if any. I just said their strategy might be completely different from anything you are implying and everybody else is predicting.



That's all. But of course they'd rather have a big chunk of the industry than just be as popular as Carrera, and so would their investors.



And you must realize that smaller companies, even in different niches, consider what bigger companies are using, especially if they're award-winning. How many times have you heard a managers comment "how come we're not using Maya"? Unlike maya, max/vray works well for smaller companies.

And they can't do that by focusing on other markets first? Give them some credit, they are not fools. There is some serious money to be made in the markets I'm constantly refering to, and while the animation and FX industry where you work in may be all shiny and attract a lot of media interest, on a business level it is not the decisive factor.

The number of seats of any program sold to such facilities is minor compared to other sales. It may look good on your reference portfolio to say "Digital Domain uses VRay" but why should it compell anyone to believe that VRay is the renderer he really needs for his work when in reality he is just doing quick & dirty arch-viz for private homes? In that case as well as many others you'd have to convince a potential customer on other grounds.

You are also wrong in assuming that smaller companies necessarily look for guidance by looking at big facilities. In many cases the deciding factor is word-of-mouth propaganda from one company to the other or the need to co-operate with other small companies and have a unified workflow. If they really looked at ILM or DD, they'd all be using Maya for years, but so far that hasn't happened.

On top of that, the situation is quite different in every region of the world and the US way of doing things simply does not work over here in Europe. The 3D business may be buzzing in the US, but it is still in a somewhat sleepy state here. Companies are careful with investments and have other priorities than the ones across the pond. It's as simple as that.

Mylenium

toby
02-20-2006, 03:01 AM
Oh my god this is STUPID. You're arguing for arguments' sake, and splitting hairs just so you can say may prediction is inaccurate. I corrected you in that I don't think this is going to kill Modo, but look at this - you didn't change your tune one bit. You changed the argument from "you're dead wrong" to "well so what?" just to keep the barking going.

Well gee whiz, maybe you're right, maybe they don't want to be the solution to all the vfx houses that are looking for a better all-in-one program. Maybe they planned to delay the release of nexxus until no one was excited about it anymore and found alternatives. Maybe they know something I don't, that it's bad for business to have award-winning media made with your software, maybe the smart thing to is Beta test with studios like Digital Domain, release articles like "Digital Domain Enhances Pipeline with Luxology modo." then DUMP the big studios and try and sell one copy each to a million small shops by praying for 'word of mouth' to sell their product, while other packages dominate industry news. Maybe it's really profittable to work on a scripting language and an SDK for freelancers who "slap in their ACAD files and do quick still renders to show their clients". Should they market to pre-schoolers maybe? Some of them will be doing 3D in a few decades, get them started early!

No insult intended to small shops, of course they want your business, but this "maybe they don't want the big studios' business" is utterly stupid.

Mylenium
02-20-2006, 03:43 AM
Maybe they planned to delay the release of nexxus until no one was excited about it anymore and found alternatives.

Heh? Did they ever announce a fixed release schedule? No! You can't be late for an appointment you never made, can you? Why don't you complain about LW being late, if it suffers from similar delays?



Maybe they know something I don't, that it's bad for business to have award-winning media made with your software, maybe the smart thing to is Beta test with studios like Digital Domain, release articles like "Digital Domain Enhances Pipeline with Luxology modo." then DUMP the big studios...

You're not making sense. They haven't dumped anyone and are actively co-operating with DD, Disney and others as far as I know.



No insult intended to small shops, of course they want your business, but this "maybe they don't want the big studios' business" is utterly stupid.

Again, you're not making much sense. I'm ceratin their long term strategy is aimed at getting into this market as well just for the prestige of it, but you cannot feed your kids from nice words and Emmy or whatever awards, can you? From a mere business point it's completely irrelevant to even have a single copy of your program in one of those big facilities if you can sell thousands to other users outside of that circle. Why should they focus all their attention to provide a toolset for a very limited part of a much bigger market and squander resources just to satisfy their ego? The fame of Maya and the others is just a side effect of them having been picked over other apps for certain productions, nothing more and all that happened because of businees decisions, not personal preferences. You cannot sit back and say "I wanna be famous tomorrow", especially not when you're running a business, so why should Luxology even attempt any such thing?

Mylenium

Captain Obvious
02-20-2006, 10:32 AM
I find it odd that people complain about LW not having an open enough SDK for third parties yet the fact that Modo has no SDK at all is dismissed as irrelevant.
Simple. The complaints about LW's SDK concerns rendering, shading, texturing, that sort of thing. modo doesn't do any of these at the moment, so I don't see the problem. If modo did have an SDK right now, what would you do with it?



Modo does also support the Perl scripting language, unlike the others
And Python, come 201...



Well I must have missed that feature in 201 (which has only been announced so far and is not out yet).
Just announced? Well, you're certainly not very up to date. ;) Considering the amount of demo videos posted by Luxology, I'd say it goes above and beyond just a product announcement.

colkai
02-20-2006, 11:09 AM
Simple. The complaints about LW's SDK concerns rendering, shading, texturing, that sort of thing. modo doesn't do any of these at the moment, so I don't see the problem. If modo did have an SDK right now, what would you do with it?
Off the top of my head, write a plugin for modelling as with other packages.
After all, LW Modeller has plenty of SDK based plugins, seems logical to assume Modo would benefit from the same sort of thing. Unless by the same logic, one could say that there was no need for LW's modeller to have any SDK functions as it did not do rendering and shading. Not that it would make any sense to say that of course as having an SDK limited only to one aspect of a program would be, well, limited. :p

Therefore, I would assume that if and when an SDK for Modo does arrive, users would expect modelling functions to be catered for. In which case, is it not logical to assume such a facility would be useful now?

Seems a lot of the arguments are that what Modo does not do is not a problem, which I just find kinda weird. Other packages are oft critisized for not only what they fail to do with their current functionality, but just as often for what features they lack, with Modo, it just strikes me that any features or capabilities it lacks are not considered a problem.

I suppose I'd just like to think such a "positive" stance on a software packages ommissions could be applied across the board.

Captain Obvious
02-20-2006, 11:22 AM
Off the top of my head, write a plugin for modelling as with other packages.
After all, LW Modeller has plenty of SDK based plugins, seems logical to assume Modo would benefit from the same sort of thing. Unless by the same logic, one could say that there was no need for LW's modeller to have any SDK functions as it did not do rendering and shading. Not that it would make any sense to say that of course as having an SDK limited only to one aspect of a program would be, well, limited.
Okay, fine, you have a point about that. But since 201 will be a rather significant change from 101, the SDK would be dramatically different as well. Rather than spending time making one SDK and then breaking all the plugins by the next version, they just scrapped the first SDK. I don't think it was the wrong decision.

toby
02-20-2006, 11:55 AM
Heh? Did they ever announce a fixed release schedule? No! You can't be late for an appointment you never made, can you? Why don't you complain about LW being late, if it suffers from similar delays?

Splitting hairs again.



You're not making sense. They haven't dumped anyone and are actively co-operating with DD, Disney and others as far as I know.

Exactly. They want the big studios' patronage.

I'm not wasting another second on this inflated argument.

Mylenium
02-20-2006, 12:03 PM
Seems a lot of the arguments are that what Modo does not do is not a problem, which I just find kinda weird. Other packages are oft critisized for not only what they fail to do with their current functionality, but just as often for what features they lack, with Modo, it just strikes me that any features or capabilities it lacks are not considered a problem.

I think that has a lot to do with the way it's being marketed/ promoted. It was promoted as a modeling-only tool from the start and though other technologies were shown at SIGGRAPH, it was always pointed out that they wouldn't be ready for inclusion in the next release. I think this gave users a kinda realistic overview what they could expect and what they couldn't.

In addition to that, they have found a good balance for being innovative without re-inventing the wheel or focusing to much on a certain clientel as for instance ZBrush does on character design/ modeling - modo is a very generic modeler suitable for many kinds of work. You have to give it to them - some functions are just so **** useful yet seemingly simple to implement, you can only wonder why nobody has come up with that earlier and how you could live without them before modo.

Mylenium

Mylenium
02-20-2006, 12:06 PM
Splitting hairs again.

Nope, just stating facts that you with your fanboyish attitude chose to ignore. Anyway, I think I'm too tired of this and will gracefully ignore anything from now on.

Mylenium

colkai
02-20-2006, 12:25 PM
I think that has a lot to do with the way it's being marketed/ promoted. It was promoted as a modeling-only tool from the start and though other technologies were shown at SIGGRAPH, it was always pointed out that they wouldn't be ready for inclusion in the next release. I think this gave users a kinda realistic overview what they could expect and what they couldn't.
Yeah, really this is what it boils down to for me, that people are very laid back about Modo not being all things to all people. If it is missing something, it's no big deal. The assumption is, it'll arrive when it does and it'll do what it does and benefit of the doubt is very much given.

I just wish such a logical and level-headed attitude was given elsewhere instead of rabid complaints over "essential" items that make a package "suck" because they *should* be in there and are not. I should know better of course, history has proven otherwise so I doubt the future holds much different. :p ;)
Ahh, would that not be sweet if it was?

Mylenium
02-20-2006, 12:44 PM
I just wish such a logical and level-headed attitude was given elsewhere instead of rabid complaints over "essential" items that make a package "suck" because they *should* be in there and are not. I should know better of course, history has proven otherwise so I doubt the future holds much different. :p ;)
Ahh, would that not be sweet if it was?

Well, I wasn't always like that either and pretty much was just as bad as a certain person in this thread, but hopefully I'm not just getting older but a more leaned back and maybe even wiser. If you may remember some of my older threads, you can clearly see what a spitfire I was. It's just that I've learned to restrain myself instead of winding myself up about things I cannot change.

Regardless of this, I still have a very critical view on LW and could put my finger on many things (which, I assume, you wanted to implicate at some level), but since I'm not as actively participating in the LW 9 Beta as I might want, I know I don't have a right to complain this time. That's the big difference.

Mylenium

Yog
02-20-2006, 01:17 PM
Off the top of my head, write a plugin for modelling as with other packages.
After all, LW Modeller has plenty of SDK based plugins, seems logical to assume Modo would benefit from the same sort of thing. Unless by the same logic, one could say that there was no need for LW's modeller to have any SDK functions as it did not do rendering and shading. Not that it would make any sense to say that of course as having an SDK limited only to one aspect of a program would be, well, limited. :p.It's amazing what you can do with Perl scripting http://www.archvisuals.co.uk/ :D
Some of those movies are very cool for a program without an SDK :boogiedow

colkai
02-20-2006, 01:55 PM
It's just that I've learned to restrain myself instead of winding myself up about things I cannot change.
I hear you, it's something I am trying myself, trouble is, one always has to fight that "grumpy old man" just sat at the back of my mind waiting to give *his* thoughts on the matter. ;)

Ramon
12-26-2006, 03:22 PM
getting back to the modeling apps discussion,
I would just like to say, I love translate plus but, it's a pain to set it up every time.
If LW had things like "translate plus" much easier / faster to access and set up or at the very least, change the default settings to what aspect of translate plus that you want to use most like instead of moving along the normal, you most all the time wish to slide along the poly's edge or face, that should be facilitated (Max and silo both have things like this that make it so easy to do that).

Also, if LW could have an option for viewing manipulator handles for selections, that would be real nice. 3DS Max has handles that you can use for example, to scale on just 2 axis if you wish. Try to do that in LW.

t4d
12-26-2006, 06:40 PM
Modo is a great modeler and a huge step up from LW in all deptments

BUT i must add for the last few months I've done more and more modeling in XSI IT's just Super ( but totally different to LW /modo workflow ) but well worth learning..

Intuition
12-26-2006, 08:11 PM
Oh jeez, you guys dug up this old post eh?

Heh, well I've since decided on Modo 202 and use it often. XSI is also pretty neat for modeling as well. This is not to say that LW modeler is any slouch. Modeler is still really capable and is a nice enough foundation to totally be up to par with any poly/nurb modeling app. It only needs some UI and workflow improvements, which we may see during the 9.x cycle.

cresshead
12-27-2006, 09:08 AM
Silo, Modo, Hexagon?
i'd add in lightwave, max, xsi and maya too.

well best modeler..Hmmm...best at modeling what?

lightwave is cool but suffers from ''button-itus'' ie too many text buttons and tabs to navigate thru..but if you can manage to remember most used shortcuts it's quite quick to model with...also not history or stack like maya/max which is a bit annoying sometimes.

silo..not used it much but it looks okay...

hexagon 2.1..used it a little for painting/displacement painting..not bad but a bit clunky/buggy..still was VERY cheap!

modo..not used it...though it's quite expensive it has some features coming online in the nr future..no history/stack though like maya/max

maya...looks capable..not used it but have been watching several modeling videos with maya [3dbuzz]...no editable sub d modeling [phantom points]
not tried it as yet time will tell when i start to have a play with the ple version

max...quite capable though same with maya no plantom point editing...seems pretty similar to maya in capabilites possibly a bit better...

xsi...looks okay..i only ve xsi 4.2 and have not spent much time with it really...the modeling side looks quite capable and you do have a history to fall back on/use..

they're all quite capable...depends on which workflow you'd prefer and what pricepoint your prepared to pay for...

Lewis
12-27-2006, 10:07 AM
I'd really like to see some kind of modeling "contest" here :). Let's say we all model some object in different packages with Video capture (Camtasia or something other) and we upload that to FTP ans see which one is fastest/better and which one suffers from user not being well trained or adopted to software interface/tools :D? Maybe that will solve this mistery for some users :).

Happy holidays to all no matter what app you use :).

SplineGod
12-27-2006, 10:50 AM
That would also depend on a lot of other factors such as how good the artist is, How well each artist knows each package etc etc etc.
Most of these apps have demo versions. Thats still probably the best way to determine how well each app works for each artists workflow. :)

Lewis
12-27-2006, 11:23 AM
I know that Larry, that's why i suggested it :). Give me good modo modeler and silo modeler (one that community think is good or he think it's faster than in other 3-4-5 apps) and we will test it then :). I'd gladly offer my screen capture dor modeler if we get to mutual agreement of what to model :). You could represent LW modeler in spline patching for instance ;) :D.

theo
12-27-2006, 11:38 AM
Call me bizarro but is it only me or is it a filament's width less than strange to be discussing modelling apps on the website of a phenomenal modelling app.

Weird....plain weird.

Intuition
12-27-2006, 11:41 AM
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=13731

Thats my Scoprion model I made for the Ghost Whisperer TV show.

The render images in that thread are rendered in Modo although I do have a Lightwave conversion that was rigged and animated in Lightwave.

Since Modo has a native Lightwave saver there is no problem getting things to match up except for the SSS which was achieved in Lightwave using the newest Chanlum shader.

I originally modeled UV'd painted and output this in 3 days. It would probably only take me about 5-8 hours now but I was learning the UV unwrap and paint tools in Modo so I took my time and played around with different UV unwrap methods and paint techniques in Modo.

Intuition
12-27-2006, 11:51 AM
Call me bizarro but is it only me or is it a filament's width less than strange to be discussing modelling apps on the website of a phenomenal modelling app.

Weird....plain weird.

I do agree and have stated that Modeler is no slouch.

I used modeler for 11 years and in teh last year tried all the different modelers out there. I'd say that Modo feels weird at first coming from Modeler but after a week you break old habits and find out that modo has many effective workflow speedups that surpass modeler in almost every aspect.

The only thing is that Modeler could be made to be just as fast, if not faster, then modo since all the functions are already there and the UI just bungles them up and the fact that Modo, although powerful, has a larger memory usage footprint then Modeler which means that Lightwave's modeler is a slimmed down no nonsense, will run well on any computer app.

At Eden we can crash Modo quite a bit. I'd say we don't crash modeler very much at all. Yet, I can't say anything about the 9.2 OB modeler since there is the NDA but I can say it is shoring up the slack nicely so good news for LW Modelers all around. :D

Still, Modo keeps me loving it. I will say that I still open up modeler for certain things even though I have Modo. Only one who is fully up to speed in both apps can see which tool would be better for a given situation. Even with Modo added to me toolbox I can't say I would ever stop using good ol modeler. Its just a no nonsense toolbox that can get the job done.

Lewis
12-27-2006, 11:53 AM
Like I said Intuition, only true test would be VIDEO capture of whole model/process :). When people say 3 days that can be many things. Sometime i model 2 hours by day and sometime i model 15 hours by day :). I was doing some hi-poly stuff recently and i didn't go to sleep for 37 hours (twice in 15 days period) :). BTW Scorpion looks great :).

Intuition
12-27-2006, 12:16 PM
Hey Lewis, I was basing my days on the 8 hour day at work.

Thanks for the comments on the Scorpion. Modo is a permanent part of my toolbox. :D

It really got me sucked back into modeling much more then in recent years.

With all the options on the table for modeling I think everyone can find an app they are comfortable with. So everyone wins, except those who hate burning up the wallet fiber. :D

OOps forgot to mention...Isn't camtasia kind of pricey?

cresshead
12-27-2006, 12:34 PM
simplest way is to google fight it out!

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=modo&word2=lightwave

max 9.0 1,490,000
xsi 6.0 81,500
maya 8.0 186,000
lightwave 9.0 20,500
silo 1.4 653,000
modo 203 1,420,000
cinema4d 1x 34,800

of course if you just use the first names...

max vs maya....

max 451,000,000 results
maya 52,600,000 results

okay not exactly scientific!...but fun!

Lewis
12-27-2006, 01:37 PM
Yes cresshead we could try it this way also ;).

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=luxology&word2=newtek

Earl
12-27-2006, 02:04 PM
How about...

NewTek Lightwave VS Autodesk Maya (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=%22autodesk+maya%22&word2=%22newtek+lightwave%22)

Ramon
12-27-2006, 03:22 PM
Hey Intuition,
Nice Scorpion model!
Since you said that you tried a lot of modeling apps, did you try Silo? If so, did you like it and how does it compare to Modo?
Thanks

Snosrap
12-27-2006, 11:31 PM
Modos render engine is just fantastic! The Shader Tree on the other hand is questionable, I cannot figure that thing out. LWs camera manipulation rocks compared to modo. Also I can model way faster in LW than modo, but that might be related to not spending enough time in it. LW just feels better for some reason. Customer service at Luxology IMO is poor. I have e-mailed them many times looking to get my boxed version with manual, but so far after 6 months still no promised manual. I think a manual would help me figure out that Shader Tree, but oh well Ive got LW.

Cheers
Snos

Sensei
12-28-2006, 12:00 AM
Modos render engine is just fantastic! The Shader Tree on the other hand is questionable, I cannot figure that thing out. LWs camera manipulation rocks compared to modo. Also I can model way faster in LW than modo, but that might be related to not spending enough time in it. LW just feels better for some reason. Customer service at Luxology IMO is poor. I have e-mailed them many times looking to get my boxed version with manual, but so far after 6 months still no promised manual. I think a manual would help me figure out that Shader Tree, but oh well Ive got LW.

Did they answer just once? E-mail problems are very common these days.. It's getting insane..

My suggestion - try different e-mail account not in the same domain as 1st e-mail.. or phone them..

Snosrap
12-28-2006, 12:17 AM
Did they answer just once? E-mail problems are very common these days.. It's getting insane..

My suggestion - try different e-mail account not in the same domain as 1st e-mail.. or phone them..

Yeah, I've e-mailed and have received e-mails several times from Immanuel Martin at Luxology. He tells me that a David Tracy handles the upgrades and will getting in touch with me. I suppose I need to track down this David Tracy and see if he can help me.

Thanks
Snos

SplineGod
12-28-2006, 12:59 AM
Maybe you could ask Immanuel to get David to get in touch with you since they work at the same place. :)

cresshead
12-28-2006, 05:20 AM
maybe tap him on the shoulder or bump his chair?:)

Captain Obvious
12-28-2006, 12:12 PM
Modos render engine is just fantastic! The Shader Tree on the other hand is questionable, I cannot figure that thing out.
If you want to, I might be able to help out. Skype me, or something ("silund").

Safe Harbor
12-28-2006, 01:09 PM
Snos, did you buy it directly from them or from a reseller?

Snosrap
12-28-2006, 06:00 PM
Snos, did you buy it directly from them or from a reseller?

Directly from Lux.

Snos

Ramon
01-20-2007, 09:43 AM
I think NT is feeling pretty confident in what they have in store for LW. Otherwise I think they would have closed this thread, which so far I applaud them for not doing. However I do think that they should have every right to do so. That's why I'm feeling really good right now about my investment in LW, they must have some good things up their sleeve. I salute you NT.

Snos

Well to be honest, they shouldn't only be confident, they should already have modeling improvements out already.
3DS Max has had these modeling advantages over LW for some time now. I use 3Ds Max 9.0 at work and let me tell you, I would salute you Newtek much more if these things would be implemented:
1. THE CUT TOOL is FAR superior to LW's. It's so interactive and allows you to do multiple cuts on the poly face and not only to edges or points as with LW's "add edges".
2. SCALE ON TWO AXIS! How simple eh? In Max it's so fast, easy and intuitive! You don't have to "set up" the operation either - you just drag the triangle between (x&y) (x&z) (z&y) etc. on the selection's gizmo and scale to your content. It's so fast!
Can you even SCALE on 2 axis in LW at all? If so, then please disregard that and let me know how please. Oh and before you answer, I'm not talking about smooth scale. That moves polys along it's normals but does not constrain the movement to two axis.
3. Modeling with a perspective background image. Max let's you do that and match the real world camera's lens setting (mm) etc with the one in Max so that you object has the same pespective as you photo's. This allows you to match your photo's subject so that you can model accurately instead of eyeballing things - particularly when the subject is quite complex.

The only thing that I can't stand about 3DS Max is it's disgusting material editor. LW's texture layers in the Surface editor blows Max away! LW's is logical and makes sense, Max does not.

cresshead
01-20-2007, 11:00 AM
1.agree max is VERY cool
2.h key for stretch...rh click, hold down contrl key as well and drag in a diagonal at the strart...you 2d rescale now works..
though this only works in ortho views...as lw doesn't have a local mode...we're talking about modeler here too not layout.
3.agree max is very cool

Ramon
01-20-2007, 12:39 PM
1.agree max is VERY cool
2.h key for stretch...rh click, hold down contrl key as well and drag in a diagonal at the strart...you 2d rescale now works..
though this only works in ortho views...as lw doesn't have a local mode...we're talking about modeler here too not layout.
3.agree max is very cool

I'm glad that you see the same needs for LW as I do.
About #2; Thanks for that.:) I'll have try that but none the less, it would be much better to have the option for using gizmo manipulators. This would have the added benefit of being able to use it in the perspective so that your perspective window can be maximized.

Lewis
01-20-2007, 02:21 PM
Guys - did MAX9 finally got SELECT loop on polygons and points or still need to buy plugin to do that like in MAX 8?? I know it works on edges and then can be convert to poly/point selection but that's PITA :).

cresshead
01-20-2007, 02:47 PM
to convert a edge loop to a poly loop is hold the controlkey down then press polygon selection button....hardly a p.i.t.a. is it?...same with points....

and will lightwave ever get a border tool?

max and lw ARE different and we can all find examples of each not measuring up to the other if we really want to...pointless really.

Ramon
01-20-2007, 08:56 PM
max and lw ARE different and we can all find examples of each not measuring up to the other if we really want to...pointless really.

Well, you know, only for the purpose of making LW better.

Hey Lewis! What's up man? How have you been? Long time no "read" from you. I really like your member #- 777:thumbsup:

cresshead
01-20-2007, 10:04 PM
yeah quite true...never hurts to look at what others are doing and then either copy or better still improve on another's tools..

radams
01-21-2007, 12:30 AM
Hi Intuition & All,

Have any of you checked out MudBox ?

http://www.mudbox3d.com/whatismudbox.html

Since we are chatting about modelers...

I too look forward to seeing where NT plans to take LW's toolset...and to see if Layout and Modeler will be more integrated...

I also would like to see more Arch viz and Product based workflow solutions...based on LW...

Cheers,

jin choung
01-21-2007, 01:07 AM
i'm ruther disappointed that mudbox's price point is so high. if it was in the $300 range, i would have gotten it straight away. modeler only apps seem overpriced when they break $300 imo....

i have silo and it's probably going to be the displacement paint solution for me.

jin

Lewis
01-21-2007, 04:09 AM
to convert a edge loop to a poly loop is hold the controlkey down then press polygon selection button....hardly a p.i.t.a. is it?...same with points....


YES i know that, but idea/logic that I MUST be in EDGE mode and select loop there and convert with CTRL+click on icon is PITA to me - doesn't have sense in my head :). I just don't get it why i can't have same select loop in POINT and POLY modes if is already coded in EDGE modes:). When I'm working on polys I'm working on polys and i don't want to convert edge selection to polys. That way we can do it in LW too but it's annyoing to me in MAX. So i guess sellections are still same "old" MAX 8 :). Thanks for info :). Plese don't go in FALME war LW vs MAX. I was just interested about this option i know max have good sides too :).

Lewis
01-21-2007, 04:11 AM
Well, you know, only for the purpose of making LW better.

Hey Lewis! What's up man? How have you been? Long time no "read" from you. I really like your member #- 777:thumbsup:

Hi Ramon !

Yeah i've been busy with modleing/rendering and i did't post much :).

My member 777 comes from my car license plate :). Till rencently (i moved so i had to change it) my car had OS 777 OS licence plates and as you know I'm a car guy ;).

Ramon
01-21-2007, 01:05 PM
Hi Ramon !

Yeah i've been busy with modleing/rendering and i did't post much :).

My member 777 comes from my car license plate :). Till rencently (i moved so i had to change it) my car had OS 777 OS licence plates and as you know I'm a car guy ;).
Cool man! I'd love to see some of your new work!:thumbsup: