PDA

View Full Version : Other 3D apps and why



newtekker04
06-20-2006, 09:36 AM
Alrighty. I've been through the forums enough to notice that quite a number of users here use a variety of apps for 3D work. I only use Lightwave for my work, and may even expand my toolset if I knew why others do.

So, what else do you guys use? Maya, Modo, Max, XSI, ZBrush, Cinema 4D,...and what makes them good?

ravantra
06-20-2006, 02:21 PM
When I start a job from scratch I use either LW or Sketchup to get the initial modeling done. I use sketchup for most rectilinear architectural work and then export to LW. If it's something more complicated I just use LW.

I also use AutoCAD but ONLY because almost all initial plans and designs are given to me in that format. I will do as much as I can in ACAD and export to LW or Sketchup.

Signal to Noise
06-20-2006, 02:55 PM
I use XSI for rigging and other character stuff. I also like it's interface, very similiar to LW, imo.

I plan to buy ZBrush purely for its organic modeling features.

I bought Cinema4D ages ago but never use it.

I use AutoCAD & Microstation @ work. I'll rely on that for accuracy to get 2D architectural drawings and the like into LW.

I also use Mirage (2D work), Vue Infinite (learning still), DFX+ (compositing), Photoshop (duh!).

For all other stuff I pretty much stick w/ LW.:)

ravantra
06-20-2006, 03:16 PM
AutoCAD is great for accuracy but not so good for modeling. You can use it as a modeler but really bogs down when poly counts get large.

Sketchup is very fast and extremely easy to model with. Accuracy is good. Very easy to use. I taught an Architect in the office who has trouble even sending email to model in one day and created a decent model.

t4d
06-20-2006, 07:43 PM
XSI, messiah, ( Much better rigging and Character animation workflow when the job needs it )
Modo 201, ( Nicer modeling and Painting, )
Zbrush ( Displacement painting )

All of the above Lightwave has not got, So i used them for those jobs
most of it comes back into LW to render.

Skinner3D
06-20-2006, 07:49 PM
Lightwave is my favorite program that I am working with.:lightwave The other that I am working with is Maya and that is because my higher ups require it. I found Lightwave to be excellent at the modeling aspect of it. I also really like the setup in both Modeler and Layout. Maya is really good at the dynamics parts of things, ie particles, hair, water, watershaders. I think it might be Maya that they use for the human to computer input for movies. Like when they have a stand in for a robot and the actor is covered in those special camera tags. I am not sure about this though. It really depends on what you are used to and what section of the 3D world interests you the most.

newtekker04
06-20-2006, 09:41 PM
I've read a little about Zbrush. Is it purely for modeling displacements or is there more to it?

How would you compare XSI's CA ability to messiah's?

Exception
06-20-2006, 09:42 PM
Like when they have a stand in for a robot and the actor is covered in those special camera tags. I am not sure about this though. It really depends on what you are used to and what section of the 3D world interests you the most.

Its called motion capture, and its available for all 3d applications, but mostly through stand alone equipment and software.

t4d
06-20-2006, 10:46 PM
I've read a little about Zbrush. Is it purely for modeling displacements or is there more to it?

How would you compare XSI's CA ability to messiah's?

you can organical model in Zbrush to the same level as you do in LW BUT it has the workflow logic of a alien eatting weird muchrooms :stumped:
Some Great artist pull top level work out of it But for me it's just a painter due to the logic.

XSI is a more advanced then Messiah
But messiah Has simple K,I,S,S charm that goes along way
in XSI you can build Muscles on top of bones and skin on top of Muscle type systems, in Messsiah you can fake it in half the time. ( tho you can fake in XSI too but you have more options )

XSI has a Amazing advanced auto rigger, that builds a rig that's fully intergrated in XSI workflow.
Messiah has no Autorigger but you can transfer/edit rigs with ease PLus rigging and animation is fast, easier to learn and has "most" of the big boy options of Maya and XSI.

Both have all the options to make Toon rigs that are mindblowing !!

Wickster
06-21-2006, 01:23 AM
I use maya, zbrush and motion builder because my school says says i'm required to use them. i take my models home and work on it lightwave though.

i'm learning maya, zbrush and motion builder because i'd like to expand my software knowledge. but LW is still my tool of choice.

Yog
06-21-2006, 06:21 AM
Universal truth, no software is perfect, all have different strengths and weaknesses.

In the past if Lightwave lacked a feature you were missing, you would buy a plug-in if it were going to be cost effective.
These days for similar money you can often buy complete 3D packages.

3dworks
06-21-2006, 08:09 AM
for my architectural models, i'm using autodessys formz as main modeling application, with all its embedded CAD features (layers, symbols, etc) and excellent LWO output. of course, i love to use LW modeler, too - especially for more 'organic' shapes...

then, i'm also a veteran user of EIAS (electric image) with it's superfast and excellent 'camera' render engine. i've always looked at LW as a similiar renderer as EIAS - they both share the same kind of 'photographic' image quality. unfortunately, there's nothing like fprime for it, so LW took over for the more complex tasks, lately - render times at he same quality are still long even with fprime (not even speaking about the native LW renderer), but the scene setup times are extremely reduced now, which after all is the bigger time factor, at least when doing stills. i also should say that i'm more than happy with the LW workflow and all the little 'extras' in terms of features, especially when looking at LW9...

i also own a copy of C4D 8.5 which is only used for object browsing/ model conversion...

cheers

markus

Rayek
06-21-2006, 05:00 PM
Mainly I use Lightwave, Hexagon, Cinema4d 8.5, BodyPaint3D, PimTools (beta) and MotionBuilder. It depends on the job what app I choose to use. Often I'll switch apps if a specific task is faster to perform that way. So I like the dynamic spline modelling in Hexagon. Anything with UV-texturing & texture painting: Bodypaint. Realtime 3d-export: PimTools. Conversion of 3d data is done with Accutrans.

Cinema4d has a great object manager and modelling history, so I tend to use that for design items.

I'm still using MotionBuilder for animation, but Autodesk's "freelancer friendly" policy means I'll have to give up using that in the near future. Anyone know what char-animation app might be good enough to replace it? (and not too expensive?) I'm thinking about Messiah, but have had some real problems with M:animate and c4d in the past and gave up on that. Now that I'm using Lightwave, it might be a solution again. Any thoughts on that?

Captain Obvious
06-21-2006, 05:24 PM
Other than Lightwave, I use modo. The renderer is pretty good, and I wub the shader tree. Also, being "workable" on a 1.6GHz G5 with a Radeon 9800 Pro with 4,500,000 subpatches is pretty impressive, I think. :thumbsup: Lightwave on the same computer is utterly unworkable after about a million ordinary polygons...

I'm also going to start using Blender. One of these days! (We'll see when I actually get around to it.)

newtekker04
06-21-2006, 11:34 PM
I've wondered about BodyPaint and DeapPaint. Are they really a good value, or can you manage fine with Photoshop? I use Photoshop for most of my texture work, though I haven't done to much organic painting yet. Doesn't Zbrush work as a 3D painter too? I don't know much about Hexagon.

Modo can handle poly counts that well? Cool. Is that a result of a better OpenGL implementation on the Mac? Of course, Newtek said that OpenGL will be smoother on the Mac once Apple has updated their drivers.

Captain Obvious
06-22-2006, 12:36 AM
Modo can handle poly counts that well? Cool. Is that a result of a better OpenGL implementation on the Mac? Of course, Newtek said that OpenGL will be smoother on the Mac once Apple has updated their drivers.
Well, it was pretty laggy. It was just sort of workable. I could move stuff around in full shaded mode, but it wasn't really smooth. And I did use instancing for most of the polygons, which enhances performance.

NewTek say a lot of things. Apple's OpenGL drivers are fine. The fault lies in Lightwave, plain and simple.

starbase1
06-22-2006, 02:33 AM
I don't tend to use other all up 3d packages, but there are some I use for things LW is bad at...

1. Terragen. Great for landscapes, unmatched for skies. Free to try. I am waiting VERY impatiently for the next gen release!

2. Xenodream. Not for everyone, but it's the only one I know that can do the awesome range of bizarre 3d fractals, and export them as objects.

3. Poser. Much knocked, mainly because the built in renderer is very weak, and the included figures are unimpressive. But if you use add on figures, (and the ones from Daz3d are free), and some downright wierd but very reasonably priced Renderosity stuff, export, and render in Lightwave the results are great.

Nick

t4d
06-22-2006, 02:39 AM
Well, it was pretty laggy. It was just sort of workable. I could move stuff around in full shaded mode, but it wasn't really smooth. And I did use instancing for most of the polygons, which enhances performance.

NewTek say a lot of things. Apple's OpenGL drivers are fine. The fault lies in Lightwave, plain and simple.

Not aimmed at you Captain :angel: But on the subject of Modo 201

Modo 201 is not perfect by a long shot, IT has alot of growing up to do,IMO in respect to Bugs, workflow and features
what it does, it does it well, But well it needs alittle more time in the oven really .. 202, 203 ? it may get the to where it should be
but there's been no talk of any update from lux yet ...or even a pdf manual released ?:rolleyes:

RedBull
06-22-2006, 03:15 AM
Well, it was pretty laggy. It was just sort of workable. I could move stuff around in full shaded mode, but it wasn't really smooth. And I did use instancing for most of the polygons, which enhances performance.

NewTek say a lot of things. Apple's OpenGL drivers are fine. The fault lies in Lightwave, plain and simple.

Yeah that's fairly misleading then....
Modo can't even handle 2.5Million REAL polys in the viewports on my machine.
Layout can handle well over 5Million in Layout without too much problems.
Instancing for most polygons well that's even less impressive.
HD Instance can do billions of polys too... :)

I wanted Modo201 to replace LW for a few certain tasks...
It's just not going to for a loooong time.

LW and XSI are my choice of weapons, Modo will be added to the mix
when it's capable of more than constant crashing and unworkable bugs.
Apart from that i use a Multitude of smaller tools and utilities and plugins.
And some custom plugins and tools too.

If LW's core was rebuilt, and every part of LW talked to every other part of LW, plugins worked with Fprime etc, Sasquatch with FPrime,
I simply would not need the other tools.

Unfortunatley "Parrallel Changeover" means it's likely to be years before a really different LW will manage to do those things i need it to.

colkai
06-22-2006, 03:20 AM
I use LW mainly, I've also got Motionbuilder, ('cause even a twepr like me can animate in it, even if it is all mocap modification :p).

Just got Hex2, I mean 17 quid?, Also have Wings3D on my PC and Blender, though I haven't actually Loaded them up in a fair old while as I'd rather be working in LW with what spare time I have then spending it all learning other apps.

Also have C4D-6 SE, Terragen, Vue5I and Poser3 installed, first and last from magazine cover CD's, which, being a cheapskate, is where most of my software comes from unless I get a Newtek freebie. :D

I'm hoping that if Newtek get the whole 'edge' paradigm sorted out for LW9.X I can remove quite a bit of superflous stuff from my HD. I know, most of you would holler to dump Poser right now! :p

t4d
06-22-2006, 03:48 AM
poser and daz content ROCKS don't dis a legend Man !! :D

I have something cooking in my XSI oven that will sit afew of those poser hates on there *** !! :hey:

Rayek
06-22-2006, 04:10 AM
Well, let's just say that I'm not updating my license for Cinema4D, but AM updating Bodypaint's license. Yes, you can manage with Photoshop (I've worked for years texturing with Photoshop and still use it in the process), but it's just so much more fun and precise to work with BP. Add to that the increased speed of texturing and I wouldn't want to texture anything more complex anymore without it. One of the nicer features of BP is that it doesn't care whether you paint one or multiple objects at the same time. Try that in Photoshop! For example, it's possible to smear a splatter across several objects, each with different textures, in a street scene.

The plugin in Lightwave makes it really very simple to use. "Click" and your model is sent to BP. "Click", and UV's are automatically created. Perhaps some adjusting of the UV's, and you can paint away, if necessary with more than one channel at the same time and see the rendered effect while painting in realtime. It fully supports PSD files and will recognize most Photoshop plugins.

Deep Paint is way more expensive and not as flexible or easy to use. If in doubt, you might download the trial version of Bodypaint.

Zbrush works like a 3d painter as well, but it's workflow is entirely different. Some people swear by it, others can't get used to it. I'd advise you to download the trials of both apps and have some fun.

Cheers,

R

safetyman
06-22-2006, 05:18 AM
Thomas -- you've peaked my interest :) What do you have coming? Tell me tell me tell me tell me.

t4d
06-22-2006, 05:20 AM
It's only half done Give me afew more days and You'll be running over to the daz site to buy some stuff . but untill then you'll have to wait..:hey:

& You could do it in LW 9 I'm just using XSi cause I can:)

Captain Obvious
06-22-2006, 05:28 AM
Modo can't even handle 2.5Million REAL polys in the viewports on my machine.
I'd try it, but my current machine is an iBook... :p



Instancing for most polygons well that's even less impressive.
HD Instance can do billions of polys too...
With HD Instance, they're not visible in the viewport, and you can't place them manually. I took a 30,000 polygon car (subpatches) and cloned out 150 of them, without using bounding boxes, and it was still workable. I know it's not the same thing as viewing real, uninstanced polygons, but Lightwave saw similar performance with one car model... LW's Mac OpenGL needs some work, to put it lightly.


And no, I am by no means saying that modo is perfect. I don't mean to start a whole new modo-versus-Lightwave thing here. I'm just saying that the better viewport performance is much of the reason I use modo for modeling instead of Lightwave.

RedBull
06-22-2006, 03:55 PM
I'd try it, but my current machine is an iBook... :p

With HD Instance, they're not visible in the viewport, and you can't place them manually. I took a 30,000 polygon car (subpatches) and cloned out 150 of them, without using bounding boxes, and it was still workable. I know it's not the same thing as viewing real, uninstanced polygons, but Lightwave saw similar performance with one car model... LW's Mac OpenGL needs some work, to put it lightly.


And no, I am by no means saying that modo is perfect. I don't mean to start a whole new modo-versus-Lightwave thing here. I'm just saying that the better viewport performance is much of the reason I use modo for modeling instead of Lightwave.


That's cool, your first post just gave the impression that MODO handles 4.5Million subpatches.... Which in my opinion, it should be able to but can't even come close without instancing, or MPD. LW and XSI can handle an amazing more amount of REAL polys than Modo can. Instancing in Modo is handy.

I still like HD Instance, i can place millions of clones with a bounding box preview in Layout without problems. Rendering billions of polygons.
The only difference is, LW can hold the real geometry i'm cloning too.

I just wish Viewport performance was as good as LW on the PC.
And indeed at low poly counts, it's much snappier than Modeler.
As soon as the polys climb, Modo crawles, while XSI and Modeler just keep on going. XSI just keeps on going, and going and going. :)

Bog
06-22-2006, 05:06 PM
Yog said it: No software is perfect.

In 12 years of doing every kind of 3D animation under the sun, LightWave has consistently been the least globally imperfect toolset. I use other software to bridge gaps:

Maya has better rigging and dynamics by a *LONG* shot.
XSI has some sweet tools
Being able to use 3D Studio makes my Muggle clients more comfortable.

*shrugs*

I love LW with my heart. But I am realistic - it's strong almost everywhere (dynamics, I'm looking at you) and it's the most complete solution to most tasks. If I need anything else, I go elsewhere.

It's not a thing.

Captain Obvious
06-22-2006, 05:11 PM
If I need anything else, I go elsewhere.
Arrr!

Bog
06-22-2006, 05:13 PM
It's rare, Obbo. So freakin' rare it's not a thing.

newtekker04
06-22-2006, 08:21 PM
Well, let's just say that I'm not updating my license for Cinema4D, but AM updating Bodypaint's license. Yes, you can manage with Photoshop (I've worked for years texturing with Photoshop and still use it in the process), but it's just so much more fun and precise to work with BP. Add to that the increased speed of texturing and I wouldn't want to texture anything more complex anymore without it. One of the nicer features of BP is that it doesn't care whether you paint one or multiple objects at the same time. Try that in Photoshop! For example, it's possible to smear a splatter across several objects, each with different textures, in a street scene.

The plugin in Lightwave makes it really very simple to use. "Click" and your model is sent to BP. "Click", and UV's are automatically created. Perhaps some adjusting of the UV's, and you can paint away, if necessary with more than one channel at the same time and see the rendered effect while painting in realtime. It fully supports PSD files and will recognize most Photoshop plugins.

Deep Paint is way more expensive and not as flexible or easy to use. If in doubt, you might download the trial version of Bodypaint.

Zbrush works like a 3d painter as well, but it's workflow is entirely different. Some people swear by it, others can't get used to it. I'd advise you to download the trials of both apps and have some fun.

Cheers,

R

That's exactly what I'll do. Thanks for the lengthy description.:thumbsup:

To all: On the subject of a secondary app, is XSI an all around better package than Maya and Max? Just out of curiosity, does XSI have a fluid and hair system? How does Mental Ray compare to LightWave's renderer?:stumped:

Captain Obvious
06-22-2006, 08:34 PM
is XSI an all around better package than Maya and Max?
Better is subjective and hardly quantifiable.



How does Mental Ray compare to LightWave's renderer?
Everything from "really well" to "horribly," I'd bet, as with everything else! For complex global illumination, mental ray seems to have a significant upper hand. For other things, I don't really know..

RedBull
06-22-2006, 08:58 PM
To all: On the subject of a secondary app, is XSI an all around better package than Maya and Max?

It depends on your needs, and your objectives.
But in general, XSI is the benchmark for all others to aim for.


Just out of curiosity, does XSI have a fluid and hair system?

Tricky question. XSI Essentials and Advanced both have Particles/Dynamics
Ageia PhysX and ODE implentations. XSI Claims it has Fluids, but it doesn't....
NO N-S solver or LBM CFD are included with XSI Essentials or Advanced.
(And for that price it REALLY should)

Only XSI Advanced contains "Hair" which is an internal Avid port of Shave and a Haircut. Which is the industry standard for Hair in 3D.


How does Mental Ray compare to LightWave's renderer?:stumped:

Mental Ray has been playing catchup to LW's renderer for years.
It's now surpassed it for the majority of things.

It's generally faster (not always) and it's much more configurable...
So you can change 1000 settings which can make a differerence to quality and speed.

Mental Ray in XSI is much better than the slightly older/slower version that Max and Maya use.

LW is much easier to just load an object and get nice looking renders quickly.
You can't do that in XSI or MR. It takes far more patience.
LW also has the advantage of Unlimited Network Render Nodes:

t4d
06-22-2006, 10:23 PM
I can't compaire XSI to Maya or Max
I run XSI Ess XSI has a $80 hair plugin now ( the full blown ahair system comes in XSI ADV cost $6000 ) make this third party one Extremely good value

Well I found the fluid in XSI ess to be Super
Hardbody one word "realtime" another WOW !!
Gator Only in Ess and ADV is just amazing everything in the video's is True

Mental ray is Just Freaky !!!!! in all sorts of ways
It's extremely powerful !!! the stuff 3D dreams are made of
BUT and a Big BUT is there's a huge amount to learn to get what you get out of LW with afew clicks and once learnt you go far beyond LW9 and Modo 201

MR is alot faster then LW 9 and Modo in all areas BUT the skills to get the speed out of it has to be learnt as well.
Maybe that's why studio use it so much ?

for me I point oven everything out of XSI to LW & render with Fprime and LW that team has some super workflow and output.:thumbsup:

t4d
06-22-2006, 10:25 PM
Mental Ray has been playing catchup to LW's renderer for years.

I disagree with that But I'm no Mental ray guru so I'll just say I disagree :)

newtekker04
06-23-2006, 04:53 PM
Hmm, so what's to the MR engine that needs so much configuration to get great results? Also, how comparable is a mental ray GI render to, say, a LW 9 GI render? Anyone want to test this? Render the exact same scene with LW 9 (can be a small image) and MR. I'm still relatively new to CG, but I know a photo-realistic image when I see one, and LW does a pretty sweet job.:)

newtekker04
06-23-2006, 05:01 PM
I run XSI Ess XSI has a $80 hair plugin now...

Dare I ask how this compares to Sasquatch?

Gotta admit, FiberFactory is looking pretty sharp.
http://www.binaryartsinc.com/FiberFactoryIV.htm

Bog
06-23-2006, 05:08 PM
Renderman is basically a shader programming language. You write code to control the behaviour of surfaces, of lights, of everything. It's the difference between Windows and a no-GUI install of Unix. (Well, in LW's case the difference between a finely-tuned Workbench install with MagicWB and a load of nice extras and Unix).

This goes... oh, hold on. Mental Ray.

Heh. Sorry.

*koff*

ANyway... Fibre Factory is polygon based, creating geometry for each individual hair. Sasquatch is some kinda clever RAM-easy instancing jobbie with built-in physics for flexion and wind and stuff.

So: Fibre factory makes brilliant pine trees, whereas Sas can make convincing three-hair-type fur.

RedBull
06-23-2006, 06:18 PM
I disagree with that But I'm no Mental ray guru so I'll just say I disagree :)

Hehe, no you are correct to bring that point up.
reading it back my comments were not as i really meant to put them.

There are a few areas of usage that Mental Ray has targeted LW's succsess.
LW when Allen was programming it, did have some of the industries first and best implentation of several things. Mental Ray added them after LW did.
Specifically i can remember HDRI support arriving late to MR.

But these days, XSI and MR on a technical level, are the industry leaders these days... (Modo definately has a great physical model, and likely superior Physical based Model at the moment.)

It's really Max, Maya and Softimage, that had to include Mental Ray just to be competitive with LW's out of the box renderer.

Maya in particular was really on a feature witch hunt, and they could not develop their Scanline renderer to compete with LW, so they had to include MR. Which in comparison to the XSI implentation is still lacking.

MR does have the advantage with programmable shaders and motion blur
in particular, and is by far the most flexible renderer.
Personally and like yourself, i still use LW Fprime for it's simplicity.

t4d
06-23-2006, 07:01 PM
Hehe, no you are correct to bring that point up.
reading it back my comments were not as i really meant to put them.

There are a few areas of usage that Mental Ray has targeted LW's succsess.
LW when Allen was programming it, did have some of the industries first and best implentation of several things. Mental Ray added them after LW did.
Specifically i can remember HDRI support arriving late to MR.

But these days, XSI and MR on a technical level, are the industry leaders these days... (Modo definately has a great physical model, and likely superior Physical based Model at the moment.)

It's really Max, Maya and Softimage, that had to include Mental Ray just to be competitive with LW's out of the box renderer.

Maya in particular was really on a feature witch hunt, and they could not develop their Scanline renderer to compete with LW, so they had to include MR. Which in comparison to the XSI implentation is still lacking.

MR does have the advantage with programmable shaders and motion blur
in particular, and is by far the most flexible renderer.
Personally and like yourself, i still use LW Fprime for it's simplicity.

That's Cool :thumbsup: Glad you didn't take me on that one :thumbsup:
I understand the HDRI thing but personaly just using Mental ray it just feels so much more..

But I use LW cause it's so easy to uses, But I know mental ray has SO much that i really don't know how to uses yet So that the only reason I disagreed :)

as for what has Mental Ray got that LW hasn't .,. well again I'm no guru
But EVERYTHING is Nodes you can just click on a shader and the script for that shader comes up and you can edit the code for that shader.

Being nodes everything can be connect to anything else YES lw 9 has this now but from what i tested XSI mental Ray has more open with more options
AND more complex ( lw 9 has a nicer easy workflow but with anything that makes it easy, some controls are lost ) not a problem really cause one of the cool things about LW is it's easy to use and get Great renders out of it.

Mental Ray doesn't care about user firendlyness it's just want to be able to do techically anything.

AS for Modo Yeah I love the real worlld lights but not a fan of the shader tree for me you have a nice simple surface panel like LW 8 or you have a full blown nodes system like LW 9, XSI
what Modo done with the shader tree is Half way between and well it's just not right yet..

RedBull
06-23-2006, 08:14 PM
Yeah, reading the Mental Ray SDK, it's amazing how amazing MR is.
Also amazing just how much info is available to programmers of it.
The MR SDK is likely larger than the whole LW SDK combined.

Scary and cool.....
But yeah for me MR can be overkill for many things.

Choices are good.

newtekker04
06-23-2006, 08:54 PM
Renderman is basically a shader programming language. You write code to control the behaviour of surfaces, of lights, of everything. It's the difference between Windows and a no-GUI install of Unix. (Well, in LW's case the difference between a finely-tuned Workbench install with MagicWB and a load of nice extras and Unix).

Renderman is amazing. (Hulk and Kong are still the best CG I've seen come from it.) But that begs the question: if mental ray is so customizable with its SDK and shaders, what can Renderman do that a modified MR implementation cannot? Forgive me if I'm asking too many questions. I just want to learn stuff:stumped:

t4d
06-23-2006, 09:09 PM
Dare I ask how this compares to Sasquatch?

Gotta admit, FiberFactory is looking pretty sharp.
http://www.binaryartsinc.com/FiberFactoryIV.htm

it's very good I've only done light testing so far
there's an new update that come today So I'll play with it some more
I would not have any problem using it for a real job with what I've seen so far. the workflow is pretty cool

t4d
06-23-2006, 09:23 PM
Renderman is amazing. (Hulk and Kong are still the best CG I've seen come from it.) But that begs the question: if mental ray is so customizable with its SDK and shaders, what can Renderman do that a modified MR implementation cannot? Forgive me if I'm asking too many questions. I just want to learn stuff:stumped:


there's a guy I have worked with Locally who's a hondini & Pixar renderman guy
it's all very techical but his basic reason for using Pixar VS mentalray Was it's alot easier to write Shaders for Pixar then Mental ray

he went into afew other reasons but they went straight over my head LOL :D

But He added If you paid me to uses MR he would have no problem BUT he prefer's Renderman.

This guy was a Render GURU handling Render jobs for Features etc.

RedBull
06-23-2006, 11:09 PM
Renderman is amazing. (Hulk and Kong are still the best CG I've seen come from it.) But that begs the question: if mental ray is so customizable with its SDK and shaders, what can Renderman do that a modified MR implementation cannot? Forgive me if I'm asking too many questions. I just want to learn stuff:stumped:

Renderman is great, Mental Ray is great, LW is great....
They are all fairly decent renderers in their own right.

As T4D mentioned shaders and RML are one reason, but there are many others. MI have seen ease of use and shaders as a problem for them and have already implemented new shader language models. MetaSL and MetaMill should be released soon.
http://www.mentalimages.com/2_4_mentalmill/index.html
These guys are definately pushing the envelope.

VFXTalk has interesting interview where the head of Mental Images,
http://www.vfxtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5816

"Renderman has quite a strong share of the feature film market. Now that machines are getting faster and 64 bit machines are almost standard, and GI is becoming more attainable, do you see mental ray taking over Renderman seats in the future?

RH: Yes, of course. mental ray will be the rendering software in the majority of all professional feature film rendering pipelines. We are working closely with our OEM partners on making this happen."

I tend to agree with his outlook, with XSI, Maya, Max, Houdini and other products integrating MR, it's become the new industry standard, that PRman has been for film. Mental Queue will also become standard in large studios.

MR 3.5 adds a Physical based model, like Modo and Maxwell.
And 3.6 sounds quite amazing, 3D tool development is being accelerated at the moment. (from the big guys) i don't think PRMan will keep up.

It can be hard for NT to keep up with a whole 3D program, while all the others only need to work on core and function of Model and Animation tools. MI do all the render development on the Renderer.

PS. T4D have you rendered any fluids i can see in XSI, or do you know of any examples.?
There is no CFD solver like Realflow or Blenders LBM Solver in XSI.
There is the equivilant to Particles, HV and HVDeformer, from my experience.

t4d
06-24-2006, 12:27 AM
PS. T4D have you rendered any fluids i can see in XSI, or do you know of any examples.?
There is no CFD solver like Realflow or Blenders LBM Solver in XSI.
There is the equivilant to Particles, HV and HVDeformer, from my experience.

Yeah XSI doesn't have a Full blown Liquid solver like Realflow, Maya or Blenders that i know of :stumped: ( could be wrong )
what I've used and worked with, is just XSI's particle and HV more of a expanded HV thing

you uses a Liquid Particle system and then add Liquid Hyper Voxel thing ( whatever it's call in XSI )

I just got much better results in XSI then LW doing water running out of a tap and washing over a hand it worked really well ,
I've tried the type of thing in LW and well... it didn't really get anywhere untill i come to Huge Particle numbers VS render time issue:stumped:
XSI seemed to get useful very quickly without errors or Odd HV/particle or redner time issues..

hrgiger
06-24-2006, 06:59 AM
Well, I only use Lightwave for 3D content right now but if the character tools don't improve significantly during the 9.x cycle, I may be adding Messiah:Animate or XSI to my toolset.

newtekker04
06-24-2006, 10:23 AM
Well, I only use Lightwave for 3D content right now but if the character tools don't improve significantly during the 9.x cycle, I may be adding Messiah:Animate or XSI to my toolset.

That's exactly the way I plan on going, too. I figure that if Lightwave shapes up its CA tools very soon, I can do fine with just LW. However, if we have to wait until, say, v.10, I might want to pick up messiah myself.:agree:



XSI is a more advanced then Messiah
But messiah Has simple K,I,S,S charm that goes along way
in XSI you can build Muscles on top of bones and skin on top of Muscle type systems, in Messsiah you can fake it in half the time. ( tho you can fake in XSI too but you have more options )

I wouldn't have the dough for XSI, but according to t4d, messiah does a pretty comparable job.

hrgiger
06-24-2006, 11:11 AM
I wouldn't have the dough for XSI, but according to t4d, messiah does a pretty comparable job.

You can get XSI foundation for $500 if you weren't already aware.

ColinCohen
06-24-2006, 12:10 PM
You can get XSI foundation for $500 if you weren't already aware.

I'd be very careful of choosing FND. XSI embeds models in the scene file, and the only way you can propagate changes made to a model throughout all the scenes that access it is by means of something called "referenced models," which is not included in FND.

newtekker04
06-24-2006, 01:48 PM
You can get XSI foundation for $500 if you weren't already aware.

Hmm, no, I wasn't aware of that. I was on the site a while ago and saw one for something like $7000. That must be the advanced version. Do know if foundation is crippleware or does it handle its own?


I'd be very careful of choosing FND. XSI embeds models in the scene file, and the only way you can propagate changes made to a model throughout all the scenes that access it is by means of something called "referenced models," which is not included in FND.

So, does this mean that I'd have to reimport my model into a scene whenever I've made changes to it or is it more complicated?

Yog
06-24-2006, 05:33 PM
So, does this mean that I'd have to reimport my model into a scene whenever I've made changes to it or is it more complicated?Being an intergrated application, you don't have to export/import models to make changes, just hide the other objects (or not), then go to the modelling (or other relavent) tab, make changes and be on your way.
If you absolutely feel that you need to export then import a model into an existing scene, then you can use Animation Mixer, XSI's NLA system. Not to be confused with LW's Motion Designer, which is more of an alternative way of working, Animation Mixer is more of a complimentary workflow which is more of a boon than an alternative. Just use one button to save all the model's animation to a file and aply it to anything with a similar bone system.
With the Animation Mixer you can save almost anything motion related, whole rigs, partial rigs, single poses for pose to pose animation, morph level animation, point level animation, particles, dynamics, or just about anything else.

t4d
06-24-2006, 07:53 PM
referencing is something LW has not got,
You can uses XSI fnd Just like LW, XSi referencing you can reference a rig ,animation or model scene file, reference them to a scene and start working
you can then load up the referenced scene, change stuff and all the scenes using that scene will also change ( you can get REALLY complex scenes going on and work in teams on the same scene that why XSI FND can read REference scene but not create them.)

as for replacing models well XSI fnd does that the same as LW

I have XSI Ess 5.11 NOW for me the big things XSI FND is missing is
Hardbody, Composer, Gator, Check the XSI site for details

NOW honestly Messiah is the best value in my opinion for a LW'er
Simple because is easier to learn ( much quicker to get productive )
and has prebuild CA workflow ( but you have the learn how to rig Easy it was a 2 day job for me )

XSI you have to build your CA workflow ( there's alot you get with the AutoRig But there's even more ) BUT it's alot harder to learn then Messiah.

Easy ride to a new tool Messiah.

Hard ride more options XSI alot more to learn and really
It's a BIG Job to get usefull with XSI

I use both due to i have clients that want me to rig and animate in LW Messiah & XSI.

3d24lightwave
06-24-2006, 08:09 PM
I use only Lightwave, cause I want to use that program inside out and side ways.

t4d
06-24-2006, 10:22 PM
I've been a Lightwave user for 7 years :lwicon: :lwicon: :lwicon: :lwicon: :lwicon: :lwicon: :lwicon:
I know it inside out, side ways AND back to front :thumbsup:

SplineGod
06-24-2006, 10:45 PM
Newtekker,
Ive used LW since before it was ever called LW back when it was an Amiga only app. I would say that I do know it inside and out, backwards and forwards and sideways. :)
Ive used it for so many things Ive lost count including some large CGI character based productions at several studios. Ive had little reason to have to use much in the way
of other apps. I do use other apps when it is a requirement to get paid. :)
I was going to also ask how much character rigging and animation youve done in the past.

ColinCohen
06-25-2006, 07:10 AM
referencing is something LW has not got,
You can uses XSI fnd Just like LW, XSi referencing you can reference a rig ,animation or model scene file, reference them to a scene and start working
you can then load up the referenced scene, change stuff and all the scenes using that scene will also change ( you can get REALLY complex scenes going on and work in teams on the same scene that why XSI FND can read REference scene but not create them.)

as for replacing models well XSI fnd does that the same as LW


LW doesn't have referenced models, because it doesn't need referenced models -- the models reside outside the scene.

And if you can't create referenced models (that is, if you only have FND), reading them does you no good.

I repeat, if all you have is FND, there is no way of automatically propagating changes made to one model throughout all scenes it resides within.

t4d
06-25-2006, 09:18 AM
Yeah You right there ColinCohen
I haven't used XSI fnd for over a year since i go XSI Ess

I was thinking Fnd would have have a way But looking at XSi ESS
Without full referencing any weights etc edited by XSI wouldn't transfer to other scenes unless you saved them out and then replaced them inside every scene that used that asset.

you could do it, But a workaround like that is not the best way you want to spend your days....

newtekker04
06-25-2006, 10:35 AM
Newtekker,
Ive used LW since before it was ever called LW back when it was an Amiga only app. I would say that I do know it inside and out, backwards and forwards and sideways. :)
Ive used it for so many things Ive lost count including some large CGI character based productions at several studios. Ive had little reason to have to use much in the way
of other apps. I do use other apps when it is a requirement to get paid. :)
I was going to also ask how much character rigging and animation youve done in the past.

Fair question. My experience with rigging and animation (or strictly CA) is rather shallow at this point in my 3D career. Right now I animate/model as a hobby but intend to do so professionally one day. I've set up some pretty basic character rigs and animated them with IKBoost (hardly ever used any traditional IK within LW). The only reason I thought about using messiah one day is that I've read some pretty good things about it and I'm not certain how much involvement is required to do similar stuff in LW. I love challenges and I love to learn, but I do value being the most productive with my time (cause life is short, right:D). If there are other packages that streamline the creation process, I naturally become interested. I guess another reason I've been leaning towards another app is because it seems the general consensus is that LW's CA system is lacking in comparison to the other big wigs.

pooby
06-25-2006, 11:04 AM
If you just want to practice character animation, you can set up simple working rigs in LW without too much difficulty.
I wouldn't totally dismiss LW.. Its good enough for getting started and practising the fundimentals of animation. Not the most intuitive to set up, but it works.
I'd recommend learning the 'traditional' IK in LW- It's not very difficult really. you could learn it in a couple of hours and you'll need it for certain parts in rigs.

There's no question that LW's animation and rigging is a long way from where it should be, and other packages are far ahead, but then, seeing as we have been promised a big update in this area, it might be worth holding on, practising with what's in there right now, and seeing what the future holds.

That's what I would do if I didn't have to have the best tools immediately.

t4d
06-25-2006, 01:52 PM
If you just want to practice character animation, you can set up simple working rigs in LW without too much difficulty.
I wouldn't totally dismiss LW.. Its good enough for getting started and practising the fundimentals of animation. Not the most intuitive to set up, but it works.
I'd recommend learning the 'traditional' IK in LW- It's not very difficult really. you could learn it in a couple of hours and you'll need it for certain parts in rigs.

There's no question that LW's animation and rigging is a long way from where it should be, and other packages are far ahead, but then, seeing as we have been promised a big update in this area, it might be worth holding on, practising with what's in there right now, and seeing what the future holds.

That's what I would do if I didn't have to have the best tools immediately.

I agree IF it's just a partime Thing, Learn what you have

RedBull
06-25-2006, 07:15 PM
I guess another reason I've been leaning towards another app is because it seems the general consensus is that LW's CA system is lacking in comparison to the other big wigs.

I think the point i would make here is don't go and buy and use a new tool or workflow, for a certain aspect (CA) just because of the "general consensus"
says it's better.

For me the best way of learning is to push and know the limitations, and why they exist. This gives you much better appreciation and understanding of why those limits and problems exist, and why and when to avoid them.

As mentioned unless you have already mastered and have become limited
by the current CA architecture, there is little or no benefit to using another tool to acomplish the same task.

In a few years the Next big application may have even better tools..
(nobody wins in playing leapfrog) just like Maya did to Messiah, and XSI has done to Maya. Unless you are fluent and well versed in one disipline, there is little reason to move to another... (speaking from experience)

I Love XSI, and it's the most technical accomplished and artist friendly tool of all of the major 3D applications.

However it's not perfect, and my XSI licence and maintainance cost a LOT of money and i find myself still using LW and Fprime way more than XSI.
There are numerous reasons for that. Some obvious and others not.

I still use LW for 80% at this stage, even stuff XSI can do better, LW does more easily. I often bag LW and praise XSI, but i still love the robustness and no-fuss attitude LW offers me. I can't give it up easily.

I notice a lot of people compare XSI Advanced to Lightwave...
A lot of people will rubbish LW. One wonders if it were such a crap peice of software, how they could even compare any of it's features to XSI Advanced.

Having said that LW8.x cycle was saved only by FPrime for myself, i would of personally spent a lot more time in XSI, if it were not for Fprime.

Now i'm just dribbling..... :)

newtekker04
06-25-2006, 08:11 PM
I think the point i would make here is don't go and buy and use a new tool or workflow, for a certain aspect (CA) just because of the "general consensus"
says it's better.

For me the best way of learning is to push and know the limitations, and why they exist. This gives you much better appreciation and understanding of why those limits and problems exist, and why and when to avoid them.

As mentioned unless you have already mastered and have become limited
by the current CA architecture, there is little or no benefit to using another tool to acomplish the same task.



Nicely put - and I completly agree.:agree: By saying "general consensus," however, I wasn't holding that as a deciding factor in adding another app to my toolset. That was just something I've gathered from reading the numerous threads and opinions spread throughout this forum and elsewhere. Essentially, with my experience, I really shouldn't even be talking about another package when I haven't even fully exploited the one I have.:screwy: As far as I'm concerned, Lightwave does everything I need and more. However, as I mentioned, if another app was capable of better results in an area that LW needed improvement, then I would look to that to "complete the package."

Lightwave is the first 3D package I've ever owned and I'm glad it's the one I have.:) The main reason for starting this thread was just to learn from others why they choose the tools they do. Special thanks to everyone for their input so far.:thumbsup:

RedBull
06-25-2006, 09:28 PM
Lightwave does everything I need and more. However, as I mentioned, if another app was capable of better results in an area that LW needed improvement, then I would look to that to "complete the package."

I think that's exactly why people tend to look at other tools, not because they need or want them, but because others have told them they do.

You'll need what you need when you need it, otherwise you'll spend the whole time seeing what can be. Rather than doing would could be.


Lightwave is the first 3D package I've ever owned and I'm glad it's the one I have.:) The main reason for starting this thread was just to learn from others why they choose the tools they do. Special thanks to everyone for their input so far.:thumbsup:

After 10 years of usage, there are areas of LW that aren't moving at the pace that i need it to, so i outsourced for those bits in the same way i would for a particular plugin or helper tool. But it was many many years before my skillset was better than my toolset. And even now, not that often.

And for anything but full time employed professionals, i actually think LW and the odd plugin is more fun and usable than most of the competition.

In 5 or 6 years, you should be on this forum often complaining that LW doesn't do this or doesn't do that... Thats when you look for the tools..

I'm also glad i chose LW over 3D Studio at the time....
It was the unpopular choice to go against a 3DS centric universe.
I'm so glad i had to be different to all those erm... people....

I mean i could be a Max user right now, (shudders at thought)
Autodesk were so impressed with Max, they bought Maya instead... ;)

Glad we could help, it's brought up some good old LW memories and experiences or when i myself was a young person..... (i think i was a young person) :)

t4d
06-25-2006, 10:59 PM
LW with standard IK is a good way to learn rigging and Character animation
But ( only if you have the money tho )
Messiah is still a better option if you want to learn Rigging and CA Right now ( again only if you can throw money around ) and if you wait LW may get the goods ??

the reason I say this is
most people would learn Messiah IK and rigging quicker
there's no workarounds or tricks or real bugs or odd things you have to work out, no workarounds and no Complex setups to get around Limits in the system

the messiah rigging process is straight forward & everything works and works well and nothing breaks !!

also over here in LW land you have people who prefer
skelegons Vs Layout bone creation
You have IKB Vs standard
you have weightmaps Vs hold bones AND learning to mix them

IN lw you have alot more to test & find your own workaround and finding your own logic to deal with all that, more options yes But you don't get a Better rig or workflow from it.

PLUS if you learn Messiah moving XSI, maya or whatever will be easier because your already dealing with the advanced stuff

Messiah's system just works and in the end you have a much better rig and Ca workflow. that is better for newbies and Pro alike :thumbsup:
And it's CHEAP !! :D

SplineGod
06-26-2006, 12:26 AM
Fair question. My experience with rigging and animation (or strictly CA) is rather shallow at this point in my 3D career. Right now I animate/model as a hobby but intend to do so professionally one day. I've set up some pretty basic character rigs and animated them with IKBoost (hardly ever used any traditional IK within LW). The only reason I thought about using messiah one day is that I've read some pretty good things about it and I'm not certain how much involvement is required to do similar stuff in LW. I love challenges and I love to learn, but I do value being the most productive with my time (cause life is short, right:D). If there are other packages that streamline the creation process, I naturally become interested. I guess another reason I've been leaning towards another app is because it seems the general consensus is that LW's CA system is lacking in comparison to the other big wigs.

I would suggest that if you dont know how to character animate that you wont know character animation equally as well in any app. Its something that takes years to really hone. LWs got some great tools in it for character animation but theyre just tools without the character animation experience to make them shine. A good animator can do well with a good rig setup in just about any app. Ive done a lot of character work in LW over several years and i work with many others who animate in Maya, LW or whatever without many problems provided they have a decent rig. A good friend of mine has animated for Disney, Don Bluth, Werner Bros, Sony Imageworks and others over the last 18 years. He started out as a tradition Cel animator. He has told me many times that he likes animating in Maya but also likes animating in LW.
I would save your money and hone those CA skills in a package that you already have and is quite capable. :)

These days I see more and more places looking for people who can do more then one thing. Even CA touches into some areas where knowing a good
all around package is a big advantage. Its better IMO to really Master one app then spreading yourself all over several apps. Its really easy to get caught
up in the hype over all these apps. Its already difficult to focus and master that one app let alone many. I do a lot of freelance work as well as studio work.
I hate limiting myself because it also means not only losing money but also losing out on opportunities by only knowing one or two things. Most studio gigs
these days are limited in duration and has changed in just a few short years. This means that many artists have to supplement those studio jobs with
freelance work in between. LWs always been an excellent workhorse app for me at least. I can do many things in it and do them quickly. The fact of the matter
is that when you freelance you have to learn to be extremely cost effective, quick and efficient. LW fits very very well into that situation. :)

t4d
06-26-2006, 01:21 AM
I hate limiting myself because it also means not only losing money but also losing out on opportunities by only knowing one or two things.

then why limit yourself to only Lightwave when most studios in your area uses Maya, XSI, Messiah, Max ??

Software is very VERY cheap if your a working Freelancer ??

the whole CA area in LW has Problems
why not learn Something that doesn't have any problems at all ?
and get the bonus of opening up your job Options ?

colkai
06-26-2006, 03:06 AM
For me the best way of learning is to push and know the limitations, and why they exist. This gives you much better appreciation and understanding of why those limits and problems exist, and why and when to avoid them.

Agreed, I'd also add, unless you "understand" C.A. (not the tool, the process itself), won't matter what you use, it'll never look stunning. I only need to look back at my first walk-cycle attempt in MotionBuilder (A program dedicated to C.A.) to prove that. ;)


I notice a lot of people compare XSI Advanced to Lightwave...
A lot of people will rubbish LW. One wonders if it were such a crap peice of software, how they could even compare any of it's features to XSI Advanced.

Ahh, but they are only saying what LW DOESN'T have in comparison. :devil:
Mind you, the yearly maintenance licenses are one thing I'll happily live without, some of us aren't rich enough to just throw money around. ;)

If you're not doing this as a paying gig where every purchase can be "written off" against you're next project, then use what you have. If you want to "invest in CA", I'd suggest getting some books with your money, buying the "Animators survivial Guide", Tim Albees book and, (if you can get it), "The illusion of life" by the Disney animators. I'm sure there are others, but these will help you learn, regardless of not having the "latest and greatest tools".
Some of us do, even though it goes against the 'general consensus'.

Mind you, I take that to everything, after all, I drive a Skoda, not a Merc. ;)

t4d
06-26-2006, 03:44 AM
Yeah agree and specially with Richard Willams Animators Survival Guide
the best Character animators book out there by Far


But for LW I think Jonny Gordens Books (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1556222548/102-9577977-4083346?v=glance&n=283155) are the best
Solid fast workflow simple logic that works for LW really well :thumbsup:

colkai
06-26-2006, 03:51 AM
Aye, agreed, must admit, was thinking really of all the 'trad' books. I have a couple of others but I can't remember their names off the top of my head.

I was well pleased with getting the illusion of life, found it in a 'value' bookstore, only cost me 7 quid! :D

(Downside, weighs a frikkin' ton so not easy to read. ;) )

t4d
06-26-2006, 06:07 AM
(Downside, weighs a frikkin' ton so not easy to read. ;) )


LOL :D
Yeah I got the same book Too hard cover's look cool :cool:
But It's not too cool to sit and read :stumped:

Maybe there's a workaround :dance:

colkai
06-26-2006, 06:32 AM
There is indeed, sit at a table and read it, lots of space for your coffee mug then too! :)

t4d
06-26-2006, 06:41 AM
There is indeed, sit at a table and read it, lots of space for your coffee mug then too! :)

LOL :D I Bow to the master :bowdown:
Table & a Cup of :caffeine: Simple things are often the best :thumbsup:

But I sit at a desk all day I prefer to read in bed or on a lounge ??
is there a plugin ??

Wonderpup
06-26-2006, 06:52 AM
I think the argumemt that because someone lacks experience in CA the weakneses in Lightwave's solution don't matter is wrong. An experienced person could more easily workaround these problems where a less experienced person could not. So for someone trying to learn CA the more intuitive and transparent the software, the more they will learn- rather than spending time tripping over the tools themselves.

I have done (simple) CA with lightwave, and been happy with the results, but it was a rather nerve wracking experience- so many aspects of the workflow seem to follow obscure rules and conventions that even now are not well documented- I felt like I was defusing a bomb, at any moment the whole job could blow up in my face.

pooby
06-26-2006, 08:02 AM
The CA and rigging weaknesses do matter a lot.. I'm happy that it's got a lot of coverage on the forums lately. I'm sure Newtek are in no doubt that it's in need of very serious work.

But I think that seeing as Newtek are about to focus on it, If someone's just practicing or experimenting with CA then it might be worth sticking around to see what they come up with rather than jumping to something else before properly trying LW.

I can see the other side though. Starting with LW could put someone off rigging and CA entirely. It's very frustrating.

colkai
06-26-2006, 08:14 AM
LOL :D I Bow to the master :bowdown:
Table & a Cup of :caffeine: Simple things are often the best :thumbsup:

But I sit at a desk all day I prefer to read in bed or on a lounge ??
is there a plugin ??
You can ask the missus to hold the book for you, but I wouldn't fancy your survival span if you did. :p

SplineGod
06-26-2006, 10:35 AM
then why limit yourself to only Lightwave when most studios in your area uses Maya, XSI, Messiah, Max ??

Software is very VERY cheap if your a working Freelancer ??

the whole CA area in LW has Problems
why not learn Something that doesn't have any problems at all ?
and get the bonus of opening up your job Options ?

I dont consider using mostly LW as limiting myself. The beauty of LW is that its an all around powerful app. Its a great workhorse app. I can do just about anything with it and Ive rarely ever been forced to use something else because I couldnt do it in LW. Again the name of the game when doing freelance work is being cost effective. A huge part of that is having a tight, streamlined workflow. Adding multiple apps into my pipeline definately wouldnt make it any faster.
As I said , its hard enough to master one app let alone trying to determine if Im having problems that stem from bugs in those apps I dont know or that I simply dont know the app well enough. Everytime another app is added into the mix it may solve some issues but invariably it introduces other issues.

The vast majority of character work I do isnt something where I have to model, texture, rig. light and animate gollum. That was a massive TEAM effort for a reason. MOST character work out there isnt anywhere that complicated. More complex character work I see done is always a team effort. When doing freelance work its usually something that has to be done quickly. I dont have a problem rigging in character animating in LW because I know it well. Lots to be said for knowing something well.

I dont use XSI or Messiah because out here I dont see them used much. I dont use them for my work because I know LW a lot better and everything I need to do is in the one app. If someone wanted to pay me to use them I wouldnt hesitate in the slightest. So far nobody has... :)

newtekker04
06-26-2006, 10:47 AM
I would suggest that if you dont know how to character animate that you wont know character animation equally as well in any app. Its something that takes years to really hone. LWs got some great tools in it for character animation but theyre just tools without the character animation experience to make them shine. A good animator can do well with a good rig setup in just about any app.

Very true, indeed. However, I wasn't really refering to my inability to animate, but rather using the best tools available to learn. I think you're a great example of someone who really takes Lightwave offroad and puts it through its paces. As I mentioned before, I love to be challenged, and if learning proper techniques in LW is just that, than that's cool. I will admit, though, that I am a bit of a perfectionist, and even if I'm still new to something, I like to know that I have the best resources to do the best I'm capable of.



Messiah is still a better option if you want to learn Rigging and CA Right now ( again only if you can throw money around ) and if you wait LW may get the goods ??

the reason I say this is
most people would learn Messiah IK and rigging quicker
there's no workarounds or tricks or real bugs or odd things you have to work out, no workarounds and no Complex setups to get around Limits in the system

the messiah rigging process is straight forward & everything works and works well and nothing breaks !!


This is primarily the reason I was leaning this direction. If possible, why not learn using the best tools available? Personally, I like the reassurance of knowing that if my animations aren't turning out, I can't blame the software. If messiah does a smashing job, why not use it to learn?


I think the argumemt that because someone lacks experience in CA the weakneses in Lightwave's solution don't matter is wrong. An experienced person could more easily workaround these problems where a less experienced person could not. So for someone trying to learn CA the more intuitive and transparent the software, the more they will learn- rather than spending time tripping over the tools themselves.

Exactly the way I feel.:agree: Like I said, why not learn using the best tools available?:thumbsup:

pooby
06-26-2006, 11:01 AM
In that case, if you have the money and you want a considerably better CA toolset now I would choose XSI over Messiah.
The extra power will be worth the time invested in learning it.

t4d
06-26-2006, 11:52 AM
In that case, if you have the money and you want a considerably better CA toolset now I would choose XSI over Messiah.
The extra power will be worth the time invested in learning it.

Yeah but there is alot more to learn in XSI..

Personally I find Messiah fun to uses, there are afew little things it can't do and it's more expression based ( with helpers to give you direction abit like Relative in LW 9 ) they aren't too many simple Motion plugin you just drop on to things like XSI or LW, But it's a easy system to dig into

XSI is more like walking on board the star ship enterprise :D
IT can do anything, take you anywhere, but you have the read the warp drive Manual then there's the command console manual just to start the thing.:D once you learn the Logic it helps ALOT and you learn much quicker
but there's a big first step there !!

but For me I purchased all of Joe's Messiah CD's (http://www.cafepress.com/messiahtuts) But have only checked the odd feature to learn how to uses this or that, messiah just give you a feeling you can work it out. plus there's alot of LW logic in there.

XSI well I've purchased Books, CD's, Download video training, Official and unoffical stuff. IT's the best 3D program I feel, Because I love learning new stuff and XSI there's alot to learn and you'll always be learning
You have nicer less expressions workflow ( more self writing expressions that you build off on ) but the whole system is more complex = more powerful

the only negative thing I can say about XSI
is it's such a BIG job to learn the options are endless... one day you may rig something up then 2 days later you think of a completely different way that's heaps better and it works !!

for me endless options are a Major positive but to a new guy It may be abit too much to jump into first off. ( i purchased My XSI ess 4.0 licence second hand From such a guy )

if you havn't done 3D before, XSI may just give you a headache.:stumped:

others may have different opinion here tho.
I've enjoyed every step of learning XSI :)

RedBull
06-26-2006, 06:07 PM
XSI is more like walking on board the star ship enterprise :D
IT can do anything, take you anywhere, but you have the read the warp drive Manual

It doesn't really.. :), XSI does not do geometry displacements in the viewports
it relies on MPD, or a 3rd party hack to fake it. (this annoys me)

It's particles and dynamics are FAR inferior to others such as Maya/Houdini,
and even Hypervoxels in some areas. It doesn't have true fluids.

Even basic stuff like say Taiki or Skytracer, Volumetric plugins like Infinite Plane. Try making an animated displaced ocean, surfaced and rendered
in half an hour...... XSI can't do it....

It doesn't paint or do Zbrush or Modo or Hexagon style painting.
The Modeler is not as complete or as competent as LW.
Shadertree is just as complex and time consuming as other Nodal/Tree based approaches (LW Nodal) which slows down my surfacing a lot.
The cost is substansial and the maintainance contracts suck.
Does not offer unlimited render nodes.
MR region tool, is not as good as Fprime/G2.

As a procdeural nut, LW has the best procedurals of any application.
(well in the layer system it does, Nodal will obviously have less)


the only negative thing I can say about XSI
is it's such a BIG job to learn the options are endless... one day you may rig something up then 2 days later you think of a completely different way that's heaps better and it works !!

Yeah flexibility and versatility always come at the cost of simplicity and speed though. So while XSI offers a multitude of work options, they also slow you down. Having only option is sometimes good becauses it forces you to work to a specific plan. This is one of LW's strengths..

The more i use XSI/Modo/Maya the more i realise this.
"It's the same thing that makes it great, that makes it not so great"

Other programs like Digital Fusion, (for which iv'e been using since 3.0)
offer an awesome workflow and amazing power and flexibility
But i'll be ****ed if i can't use AfterFXPro to do stuff quicker and more easily.


others may have different opinion here tho.
I've enjoyed every step of learning XSI :)

I really like XSI, it's the most technically accomplished of the main 3D applications and XSI Essentials is fairly well priced, (apart from MC)

But it's far from perfect, you go to the XSI forums or anywhere else and there is only praise for it, mainly from the same people who were praising Maya 2 years back, and Max 3 years before that.

I agree for the most part it's technically great, and it's hard to fault in comparison to all the others, but it does have it's faults.

I don't do CA at all these days so XSI only gets used for things LW fails at.
I personally would likely use Houdini's new muscle system, and rigging for future CA work. I wouldn't likely even bother with XSI for CA.
I do think XSI is suited to a studio enviroment more than freelancers.

Anyway enough of this discussion, back to the grind.

t4d
06-26-2006, 09:07 PM
YEAH Agree with everything !!::thumbsup:

I had to learn Darktree to get procedurals i wanted in XSI still miss my IFW and all the other Cool LW stuff..

particles and dynamics are better in Maya/Houdini ( I hear )
but they are alot better then LW's

XSI 3D painting has been worked on since Version 2 Now heading into V 6 they may let it out of the Office one day ??:stumped:

unlimited render nodes are also coming Talking to the XSI guru on the 3D love tour. max has got MR unlimited render node ( tho they are abit cripped )

But yeah I Agree with everything !! ::thumbsup:

newtekker04
06-26-2006, 09:38 PM
OK, I finally looked into this maintenance cost deal (unaware of what it was) and...what the? $1799 USD for support and keeping your software up to date? Sure XSI is technically more advanced than a lot of the other programs out there, but you also spend a bundle for the software alone. Sheesh, I'll use XSI as soon as I can afford Face Robot.:D And besides, I really would only use XSI for character stuff. No sense in purchasing extra features that I don't need or where LW already delivers.

Back to messiah briefly:

If I wanted to do some really cool facial expressions, with enough time, patience, and setup, could Lightwave do something like this:

http://www.projectmessiah.com/x4/images/BoxController.gif

or this?

http://www.projectmessiah.com/x4/images/LucyFace_With_Bones_04.gif

I'm not looking for an excuse to buy messiah or turn away from LW:devil: ; I just want to learn all the facts I can.:D

newtekker04
06-26-2006, 09:45 PM
Shadertree is just as complex and time consuming as other Nodal/Tree based approaches (LW Nodal) which slows down my surfacing a lot.


Glad you brought nodes up, because I've been meaning to ask: are they beneficial/productive/sweet/cool feature/hindering feature/ yada, yada? (I'm still awaiting my upgrade.) From the videos, they seem to streamline the surfacing process. Or am I out to lunch on this...:stumped:

t4d
06-26-2006, 09:53 PM
You can do all of that in :lwicon:
the joysticks can be created manually with expression
Exsample of it here on my t4d Demo rig (http://www.thomas4d.com/T4D_Fred_Demo_Rig.zip)

OR uses a plugin called Joytrol (http://kvaalen.com/jt/)

the face bones can be done in LW with RV Rig Tools (http://www.topix.com/reevan/spine/)

but they are ALOT different....

jasonwestmas
06-26-2006, 09:54 PM
OK, I finally looked into this maintenance cost deal (unaware of what it was) and...what the? $1799 USD for support and keeping your software up to date? Sure XSI is technically more advanced than a lot of the other programs out there, but you also spend a bundle for the software alone. Sheesh, I'll use XSI as soon as I can afford Face Robot.:D And besides, I really would only use XSI for character stuff. No sense in purchasing extra features that I don't need or where LW already delivers.

Back to messiah briefly:

If I wanted to do some really cool facial expressions, with enough time, patience, and setup, could Lightwave do something like this:

http://www.projectmessiah.com/x4/images/BoxController.gif

or this?

http://www.projectmessiah.com/x4/images/LucyFace_With_Bones_04.gif

I'm not looking for an excuse to buy messiah or turn away from LW:devil: ; I just want to learn all the facts I can.:D


Looks like you could do that with 3rd party joytroll, morph track, maestro, or mimic. Out of the box: endomorphs/ and or parenting bones systems/ weightmaps. Considering all the tools that work with Lightwave, it has a hundred and one options as well.

SplineGod
06-26-2006, 10:19 PM
Newtekker,
Nodes do not make surfacing easier IMO. They just give you more
options and more depth. They can become very complicated very quickly which is why Im glad Newtek left the standard Layers method of surfacing.

Setting up a facial rig with bones like that is a very easy in LW.
Here was a quick example I did in a few minutes. My example
is done with IKBoost and RV_Muscle.
http://www.3dtrainingonline/examples/face_rig.mov

Setting up facial rigs in LW whether using bones or endomrophs or both is easy.
IKBoost really simplifies the process tremendously.

jasonwestmas
06-26-2006, 10:24 PM
SG: your link is broke I think. I was so disappointed :( :)

Captain Obvious
06-26-2006, 10:38 PM
http://www.3dtrainingonline.com/examples/face_rig.mov

He missed the ".com" part of it.

don_culbertson
06-26-2006, 10:38 PM
SG: your link is broke I think. I was so disappointed :( :)

try http://www.3dtrainingonline.com/examples/face_rig.mov

Don

[Edit] Sorry CO, you beat me posting!

newtekker04
06-26-2006, 11:38 PM
Newtekker,
Nodes do not make surfacing easier IMO. They just give you more
options and more depth. They can become very complicated very quickly which is why Im glad Newtek left the standard Layers method of surfacing.

Setting up a facial rig with bones like that is a very easy in LW.
Here was a quick example I did in a few minutes. My example
is done with IKBoost and RV_Muscle.
http://www.3dtrainingonline/examples/face_rig.mov

Setting up facial rigs in LW whether using bones or endomrophs or both is easy.
IKBoost really simplifies the process tremendously.


Awesome demo.:thumbsup: How is the muscle plugin added to the rig? Tell me more about this plugin...:stumped:


You can do all of that in
the joysticks can be created manually with expression
Exsample of it here on my t4d Demo rig

OR uses a plugin called Joytrol

the face bones can be done in LW with RV Rig Tools

but they are ALOT different....

Thanks for the info. I played around with your setup (*ahem* seem to be missing some sort of plugin, however:hey:) I'm learning a great deal from this thread.:thumbsup:

RedBull
06-26-2006, 11:55 PM
YEAH Agree with everything !!::thumbsup:

I had to learn Darktree to get procedurals i wanted in XSI still miss my IFW and all the other Cool LW stuff..

particles and dynamics are better in Maya/Houdini ( I hear )
but they are alot better then LW's

XSI 3D painting has been worked on since Version 2 Now heading into V 6 they may let it out of the Office one day ??:stumped:

unlimited render nodes are also coming Talking to the XSI guru on the 3D love tour. max has got MR unlimited render node ( tho they are abit cripped )

But yeah I Agree with everything !! ::thumbsup:

Yeah.... I'm also not happy at the moment XSI will not work on my 64bit machine, the Licence Manager detects TCP/IP as not installed. (crap!)
So i have it on my 32bit machine only. (amazingly the OGL is still faster than any 3D program i have on my far superior 64bit machine..... :)

XSI just reaks of money, you can tell a Billion dollar company even from a multimillion dollar company. Anything XSI needs or wants, i have no doubt Avid have the money and programmers to do anything better than anyone else in 3D. The OGL speed alone makes every other application look stupid.

XSI is gathering momentum, Maya was yesterday and XSI is tomorrow.
The fact that Autodesk accquired Alias, means more and more studios will leave Maya for XSI.... This has,and is already happening.
I also notice a lot more 3rd party tools becoming more popular with XSI.

Yes Darktree is important for myself, when using XSI as well...

If Newtek were smart they would of written a Nodal Simbiont for LW9.
This would of instantly given Nodal 1000's of free procedurals.
The DTE is free and could of easily been made for Nodal, by NT.

Yeah PhysX is really cool for XSI dynamics, i use it a lot.....
But HV defiantely has some advantages and dynamite is cool too.
Alias did a lot of work on making the best dynamics for Maya though.
But XSI and LW are easier to achieve common FX on, than Maya.

I doubt that XSI will get unlimited rendernodes.
Autodesk is a much bigger customer to MI, than that of Avid.

Autodesk would likely benefit from unlimited nodes, far more than XSI.
XSI being very studio based, would make far more money from extra node licences. So i don't think MI or Softimage, would consider this as a business model. If they did it would be Advanced version only and i imagine only if the next Max/Maya or Maxya gave a fully unlimited MR nodes first. But time will tell.

Newtekker04:

There is no doubt that any node based approach will always offer more power and flexibility, at the sacrifice of speed and simplicity. (it's just the rules!)

For most things i prefer layer based systems, and in fact it's still one reason
why LW is used so much for myself (it's faster than XSI's shadertree).
(shudders to think of Photoshop nodes)

But for really big jobs or if i have time the extra functions of a node approach, allow for greater flexibility... dealing with lots of surfaces and objects well a node based approach may be better.

I have no doubt, if i was in a competition on a stage with a Maya and XSI artist using LW, and we had a simple challenge to surface some glass bottles or make some clouds, add some clip mapped trees, make an explosion or a host of other things. I would whip, embarras and shame the XSI and Maya guys at those kind of tasks.

Needless to say if myself and T4D and Maya artist were in a rigging or CA challenge, that situation would be reversed. :)

t4d
06-27-2006, 12:42 AM
RedBull- I got the same Error Installing XSI on my Win 64 bit machine Well worth the extra effort XSI 64bit is a MAJOR step up
I sent you a PM for the link :thumbsup:

newtekker04- Sorry there I'll fix that and upload a new one tonight
( it's not a big one just resave the file and the error will be gone :thumbsup: )

LW users can talk about this features being like that features
but most of us working artist are using other apps for a reason..:)
and others push LW for they own reasons...:screwy:

Yes LW can do it But again you'll learn the art of CA easier if you uses the best tools. ( again only if you have the money to do it )

jasonwestmas
06-27-2006, 12:55 AM
Yes LW can do it But again you'll learn the art of CA easier if you uses the best tools. ( again only if you have the money to do it )

More about money, and community to me. Of course having the absolute latest tech doesn't hurt but that is more secondary for most people I'd say. I think I just reworded exactly what you said. :P

t4d
06-27-2006, 01:44 AM
hey The LW community is Great and it's Lightwave's biggest asset
Messiah's community is just as good too but alot smaller

XSI is very Pro

it's funny in LW threads you always get people jumping in saying
"this features sucks" some reply with "but you can do this" , then others point out that workaround problems,.. Flame war starts, no real point is made.. except LW does have problems and it depends on how much work you can do to get around it.

in XSI threads you have people doing the same thing "this feature sucks"
it only take 2 or 3 reply before a pro comes in and says
"do it like this.../ the setting for that is here..."
thread is stopped dead. there's always a way to do it in XSI..
( well except for the points Redbull made )

BUT sometimes it harder to get that pro reply.

SplineGod
06-27-2006, 07:17 AM
Awesome demo.:thumbsup: How is the muscle plugin added to the rig? Tell me more about this plugin...:stumped:


Install the RV tools. RV muscle is one of the plugins. Its very simple... just add it to the bone you wish to be a muscle bone.I can pretty much set up a facial rig as fast as Ive seen it done in Messiah. Since LW is a full app I can also quickly create corrective endomorphs and tie them to the behavior of any of the facial bones. :)

jasonwestmas
06-27-2006, 08:28 AM
in XSI threads you have people doing the same thing "this feature sucks"
it only take 2 or 3 reply before a pro comes in and says
"do it like this.../ the setting for that is here..."
thread is stopped dead. there's always a way to do it in XSI..
( well except for the points Redbull made )

BUT sometimes it harder to get that pro reply.

Yes, that would be nice to get that absolute feature that was designed for that specific purpose. The thing with lightwave is that many of the tools are cross compatable, meaning that one feature/tool can be crossbred with other features/ tools. Kinda like I've been hearing with the node editor, it creates a huge amount of flexibility but causes a great deal of confusion for where to go to get that 'special look'. So in that respect, I don't think too many other packages have that going for them at this point, the others are much more rigid in application. Lightwave COULD USE some more rigid attributes added to it's backbone so that there is less guess work. That I know for sure.

t4d
06-27-2006, 09:35 AM
jasonwestmas LOL That's Really Funny !!
You really need to see XSI or messiah work then look back at LW before making those types of comments ..

XSi has ALOT less modeling tools then LW Yet can easily keep up with LW
( LW has a advanage of LOT's of Odd third party plugins like nuts and bolts and LW cad etc But XSI all the tool are interactive & you can uses animation operators as Modeling tools )

XSI rigging system has maybe the same amount of plugin/tools LW has as well
But Hundreds more options in each tool and it truely is open for connecting anything to anything else Including render tree nodes. ( everything single thing has a envelope button !!! ) LW has only a small part of it's comments with Envelope buttons ( plus you can setup and control all plugins with script in XSI )

How do you do FK IK blending in LW

how to do you have one object deform another objects with both working off the same IK chain ?

how do you set the order a expression or a operator works ( before IK, same time or after IK ?? )

All can be done in XSI with afew simple clicks and what is created never breaks.

the fact is in LW things can't be connected to anything else and THIS IS lw biggest problem That Jay and the crew I HOPE are working on.

Sorry to laugh but it is pretty funny if you have seen XSI or messiah or Maya or Max or houdini etc in action..

jasonwestmas
06-27-2006, 10:35 AM
Heh, heh, I guess I was thinking more about modeler and the surfacing tools. Sorry, I wasn't trying to challenge you or anything and I do appreciate your experienced feedback. I started with LW7.0 so I do know little about how far the CA tools have come. Using IK booster with regular IK is much better than some other FK/ IK setups I've used in max and maya. BUT that was a while ago. As for the other problems you pointed out, I'd have to agree.

By Rigid, I was talking about a prescribed look or way of doing things that seems to me more apparent in programs like Max. Maya, a little less so (I've never used XSI). This sense of rigidness is just a limiting thing that can be good or bad depending on what you want. Lightwave, since 7.0 feels just 'all over the place' as far as where to do things in the interface and which setup/tool to use. This again, is not necessarily a bad or good thing but I think that 'prescribed way of doing things' isn't so obvious in lightwave. Maybe in a professional studio it is but that is something I haven't been involved in. In a way that's an advantage because I'm free to explore new methods in each release which lightwave has let me do. In other ways it isn't advantageous not to have worked with a large group of artists because they know the quick prescribed methods! Probably could take this convo elsewhere hehe.

t4d
06-27-2006, 10:50 AM
Hey jasonwestmas Glad you didn't take it badly, it just tickled me =)

I do see your point about Max tho it had a VERY plugin feel to it ( I used Max 2->3 )
Plugins that really dressed up Basic commands to build them up in to easy to use things, but ended up Ripping the real control out of it.

LW doesn't do that, you build alot of things up and get more control then a Max plugin. I do see your point there:thumbsup:

But XSI and messiah are different things
Max is in need of a major rewrite from what i hear, it's good Lightwave's has already started =)

Potemkyn
07-20-2006, 03:09 PM
I'm using 3D Max, version 5.1 - 'cause that's what they have here. I've asked for the upgrade to 8, but they want an evaluation done. Part of that includes comparing 3D Max to other software packages.

I have looked around at Softimage, Maya, and now Lightwave. Are there any out there who came from Max to Lightwave? If so, how was the learning curve?

:hijack: well, sort of hijacked...


Thanks

Po~

lilrayray77
07-20-2006, 07:07 PM
XSI is very Pro

in XSI threads you have people doing the same thing "this feature sucks"
it only take 2 or 3 reply before a pro comes in and says
"do it like this.../ the setting for that is here..."
thread is stopped dead. there's always a way to do it in XSI..
( well except for the points Redbull made )

BUT sometimes it harder to get that pro reply.


It almost sounds like you are saying lightwave is not the slightest bit pro? :D Anyway I agree with what jasonwestmas is saying. 3D apps can be compared to high and low level programming languages. Lightwave is a lot like a low level language. High level languages have many/most of their functions predefined. Although it may be easier and faster, the flexibility and power is yanked away. Lightwave is the same, sometimes things might be a little harder to do then some apps, and may take a little longer (though lightwave has a nice workflow) what you get out is utter power. XSI seems to give you one way to do something, and that's how it is to be done. That doesnt meen it isnt a great toool though. And also it seems like you went from saying that XSI animations ar far superior to lw's to saying XSI (and its user base) are far to lightwave (and its userbase). Anyway the choice of one's app is particular to that person, and what may seem 'the best' to one person may not to another.

anyway, don't trust me, I know nothing! :D

jasonwestmas
07-20-2006, 07:22 PM
I'm using 3D Max, version 5.1 - 'cause that's what they have here. I've asked for the upgrade to 8, but they want an evaluation done. Part of that includes comparing 3D Max to other software packages.

I have looked around at Softimage, Maya, and now Lightwave. Are there any out there who came from Max to Lightwave? If so, how was the learning curve?

:hijack: well, sort of hijacked...


Thanks

Po~

I learned max and lightwave at the same time. I was learning max in school and teaching myself lightwave. It was Max 5.1 and Lightwave 7.5c I think. At the time it was easier to learn how to rig in Max than lightwave esp. when I used the skin or physique modifier with the CS biped plugin. Talk about a rigid setup though, even back then max felt rigid, lightwave did not even though learning various rigging setups was a real pain. Now in LW9 I find it easier and more effective to setup a character than it was in Max 5.1. Maybe some of the more experience animators would say no, stick with Max5 for animation, but considering the oldness of max5 choosing LW9 for Characters is a no brainer. If you are doing something else then LW9 should be able to do it and learning it is just as easy as picking up any other 3D tool if not easier.

mjcrawford
07-20-2006, 07:49 PM
I have Maya 7 and Lightwave, and while I think that Lightwave is not as good as Maya in some respects (rigging and animating) I like the fact that for under $1k you can get a package that can do it all.. maybe not as easy as some.. but there is nothing you cannot do in Lightwave with enough time and talant. Lightwave may not shine in any one catagory, but (and I have not played with XSI) it also does not suck at anything! it is a good solid modeler, animator and renderer in one box for less than almost any other 'pro' package. but what do I know? I am just a newbie.:lightwave

colkai
07-21-2006, 03:13 AM
I agree with what jasonwestmas is saying. 3D apps can be compared to high and low level programming languages. Lightwave is a lot like a low level language. High level languages have many/most of their functions predefined. Although it may be easier and faster, the flexibility and power is yanked away.

You know, this is a great analogy, I've never thought of it that way, but you're right.
When you look at all the "pro" articles, they are littered with, "we used ...>scriptname<.. to code our own >toolname<". Now, not saying you can't code in LW at the moment, just not to that level, sorta 4GL vs C++ kinda thing.

As to what sort of 'language' LW will be when the LW9.X cycle is done, we will have to wait and see. Meantimes, I'm trying to wrap my head around some new "code libs" in LW9 .0 :p

Potemkyn
07-21-2006, 08:59 AM
Thanks for the note, Jasonwestmas. Last week I asked if they could buy Max 8 upgrade, looks like I've got a qualified yes from one party, and no from the other. I'll likely inform them that we can get Lightwave 9 for about $500.00, I'm sure to get raised eyebrows from that comment.

I'll let you know how this pans out.


Po~

mouse_art
07-21-2006, 12:28 PM
LW/XSI and some little other tools.

LW: modeling/texturing:procedurals/bake/render.
PO
XSI:UV mapping/for other tasks all RT stuff that LW has not(yet). arr i forgot the FX Tree.(handy)

Omar.M
07-21-2006, 02:16 PM
I use LightWave now..but sure looking forward for learning Modo and Maxwell..
Modo has a special modeling tech and its fun to work with, the renderer is incredibly fast...and Maxwell looks amazing for rendering and realistic images..
I would try XSI but Im a Mac user!!

Defiance
07-24-2006, 09:29 PM
Lightwave is a lot like a low level language. High level languages have many/most of their functions predefined. Although it may be easier and faster, the flexibility and power is yanked away.

Lightwave is still a high level "language". Low level is Houdini, where you can literally program using the nodes system. Your output can be completely procedural.