PDA

View Full Version : surpasses official discontinued...



archiea
08-11-2006, 01:43 AM
Not sure if this was posted here, but its unfortunate....

http://sps.polas.net/sps/News.htm

"24.07.2006

Surpasses 1.0 is no longer available for purchase. I decided to discontinue sales as I do not work as plugin developer anymore and there is no further development planned. Current users can still ask for support if they need help. I got information that Surpasses doesn't work with Lightwave 9.0. I'll look into a patch when I have a chance, I cannot give any date though. Thank You all for interest in Surpasses!"

I never got a chance to try it as there were no mac versions, although one was thought to be planned. .. However, its functionality is needed.

NT, anyway to roll this into a 9.x release of LW? especially the channel editor for multi pass output? thanks...

GregMalick
08-11-2006, 02:21 AM
Yes, Very sad.
I kept waiting for a better Euro/Dollar ratio but now it's history. :grumpy:
Now it looks like a good thing I waited since it may not be fixed for LW9.

I totally agree that this functionality would be awesome if :newtek: integrated it in LW9x.

Dodgy
08-11-2006, 02:44 AM
What kind of funcyionality would you want from such a plugin?

archiea
08-11-2006, 04:27 AM
click on the product tour and you will get a general idea...

http://sps.polas.net/sps/ProductTour.htm

In general, the GUI was a nice presentation of streamlining LW functions, like the scene properties demo.

Specifically the channel editor, the demo near the bootm of the page... where one can specify the different outputs for the different shading channels (diffuse, specular, etc..)

if one could expand this to allow LW to output a single render into individual lights, and then each light having a channel for its properties (spec, diffue, etc), it would parallel alot of what the AOV passes do for renderman.. and allow for alot of manipulation in the comp. Its alo tlike render buffer export on steroids... with full float support.

Phil
08-11-2006, 05:23 AM
If he's not selling it any more and is not planning to do much with it, I wonder if he'd opensource it... It would at least give folks a fighting chance to update it and avoid him having to deal with the problem in future.

T-Light
08-11-2006, 05:24 AM
That's a shame.

Maybe we will get something like it from LW's new core. Fingers crossed.

UnCommonGrafx
08-11-2006, 06:13 AM
Jim, Jay,
Please buy this code. Please integrate it into LW, with all the features from the request section on said topics of buffer output and pass rendering.
And lastly, please have someone re-code it into a .p so that it's MUCH faster.

I just hope he gives us an update for 9. Sigh, more tech leaving ... (looks at his shave dongle)

Bog
08-11-2006, 06:52 AM
That's a shame. You can fudge a fair amount of what Surpasses offers using the Photoshop PSD Exporter in the Effects > Processing > Add Image Filter panel (so saving out mattes, separete channels like spec and shadow and the like), but Surpasses did seem to do it quite nicely, and the Splitting function would be a time-saver.

Bytehawk
08-11-2006, 07:48 AM
a per light pass is super cool, I haven't figured out to do it native in LW without splitting up the scene in different parts.

GregMalick
08-11-2006, 09:50 AM
Jim, Jay,
Please buy this code. Please integrate it into LW, with all the features from the request section on said topics of buffer output and pass rendering.
And lastly, please have someone re-code it into a .p so that it's MUCH faster.

I just hope he gives us an update for 9. Sigh, more tech leaving ... (looks at his shave dongle)
I would think that someone who is no longer programming would sell the source for a reasonable price to :newtek:

This is an LScript? I'm amazed.
The SDK is so much faster (about 6 times by my experience) and has so much more capabilities. And less bugggy too. I've had my LScripts fail due changes at virtually every release (even point releases). I hardly consider using it anymore.

UnCommonGrafx
08-11-2006, 10:40 AM
Made me go look: YUP!

paulhart
08-11-2006, 11:06 AM
I sent an email to Pawel Olas, expressing my sadness at this change. I was wanting to get Surpasses for version 9, and would love to see it incorporated into Lightwave. It amazes me what one programmer with LScript can do, why would it be so hard to compile this and make it native to Lightwave?? Don't get it. I have his TreeDesigner, and some other plugins that are great. Newtek, acquire the source code!! for all of his plugins Character Rigging, Surpasses, TreeDesigner, Fire & Smoke, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have several of your plugins and recently recommended them, along with some of the other related plugins to colleagues on the forums. Visiting your site I noticed no recent updates, and then in a separate thread I saw that Surpasses is no longer being developed, and that you are no longer doing plugin development. Sad to hear, I know that people change their direction. Is it possible to sell the source code, trade it away, allow someone else to carry on your fine work. I would hate to see the efforts you have started end. I would love to see Lightwave incorporate your fine tools... Dreaming....??
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Paul

archiea
08-11-2006, 12:32 PM
That's a shame. You can fudge a fair amount of what Surpasses offers using the Photoshop PSD Exporter in the Effects > Processing > Add Image Filter panel (so saving out mattes, separete channels like spec and shadow and the like), but Surpasses did seem to do it quite nicely, and the Splitting function would be a time-saver.


I;m not sue of the PSD exporter supports float output.. it may only be 16bit, but I haven't used it in a while...

archiea
08-11-2006, 12:35 PM
a per light pass is super cool, I haven't figured out to do it native in LW without splitting up the scene in different parts.


Yes, you figure it should come for free with a single render, and output eachlight separate, then then channel out the lights to individual diffuse/spec/reflection pass... however I think that the reflections resolve differently whenm separated like that.

GregMalick
08-11-2006, 12:41 PM
PaulHart,

Let us know if and how Pawel responds.

thanks 8/

Bog
08-11-2006, 02:23 PM
*thinky*

Gawd, it'd be so cool to have something like this that could save nodal functions out branch-by-branch. That'd really help to learn what the little blighters do.

MooseDog
08-11-2006, 09:35 PM
pawel olas did not do surpasses, that was lucas pazura (sp?). two different folks.

it would be bada$$ though if pawel was able to purchase the code for surpasses though as his plugins, as noted above, rock! (tree designer etc etc).

GregMalick
08-11-2006, 10:08 PM
PaulHart,

Let us know if and how Pawel responds.

thanks 8/

pawel olas did not do surpasses, that was lucas pazura (sp?). two different folks.

it would be bada$$ though if pawel was able to purchase the code for surpasses though as his plugins, as noted above, rock! (tree designer etc etc).
It ought to be even more interesting to see how Pawel responds. ;D


just kidding... you got keep laughing through the tears.

umstitch
08-12-2006, 04:46 PM
tis sad to see surpasses dive, a layering system for animation and multipass rendering in lw would be welcome:lwicon:

paulhart
08-14-2006, 11:42 AM
I wrote to Pawel Olas about Surpasses, not realizing that he wasn't the author. I have several of Pawel's plugins and was considering Surpasses also. He was kind enough to respond to me. Please support his plugins, they are excellent, TreeDesigner, Fire, etc. I have quoted some of his response below...
Paul
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Surpasses were created by my friend Lukas Pazera and I'm not
responsible for their development. Excellent addition to LW. ..
(Regarding my plugins)..I'll probably update them for LW9 if necessary...

--
Pawel Olas

jeremyhardin
08-14-2006, 12:02 PM
What kind of funcyionality would you want from such a plugin?
in answer to dodgy's question...as well as feeding the discussion at the CG talk thread, "HOW TO IMPROVE LIGHTWAVE: Rendering in Passes (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=392680)", I wrote this suggestion:

In order for rendering in passes to be properly implemented, a new heirarchial system of parameters needs to be implemented. By 'parameters' I mean everything from translation to surface properties. If the higher grouping structure doesn't have a specification on a parameter, the item defaults to the next highest specification. (i.e. if none of the heirarchies specify a different color, the item's individual parameter for color is used).

So you've got individual parameters.
Then Group parameters (which override individual parameters).
Then Layer parameters (which override group parameters).
Then Partition parameters (which override layer parameters).
Then Pass parameters (which override scene level parameters).

So your scene file contains one pass with one partition, one layer, and no groups by default. Group and Layer parameters are intended to extend across the scene. But partition parameters are unique to passes. In other words, if an object is going to be visible in one pass but hidden in another, it would need it's own partition to hide/show it for that pass.

You should then be able to add unlimited passes within that one scene. Each pass would have it's own render time and rendered output, so Ambocc passes and Foreground, Background, Depth, Character matte passes could all be contained in one scene file. Within the passes you could override surface properties to be only diffuse or only specular. You could override scene level items like light position or alter animation on a per-pass basis (by animating translation override).

Then include the option to output as many of the channel buffers as you like as well. So you don't have to have 20-30 individual scene files for one scene. If the camera moves, you're not forced to update 20-30 pass scene files. It's one file. It still renders each pass individually, but it's a lot more organized and bearable.

...if my suggestion were implemented, the objects selected coud be placed into their own partition for an Ambocc pass (called ambocc_objects or whatever). then, the partition could have a surface override that resurfaces only the objects in the ambocc_objects partition in the Ambocc pass of the same scene. So no new object saving is necessary. Same with shadow density. You could clone the Ambocc pass, rename it Castshad, then create partitions with objects casting shadows and objects receiving shadows. The casting shadows partition could have matte object overrides or be hidden to rays; the receiving shadows partition could be resurfaced to have their alpha density be controlled by the shadow buffer. Again, no new objects saved, each pass would have it's own rendered output, and all in one scene file.

The ideal for me is one scene, no object copies, and multiple image sequence outputs. This would be ideal because, depending on the case, i typically have 1 pass per character (unless i have more than 5-10 characters), a foreground environment pass, a background environment pass, an object id pass (for object specific color correction), any fx passes, a shadow pass, and an ambient occlusion pass.
sometimes an rgb pass where my I change my scene to a grey and light the scene from 3 major directions, each light being red, green, and blue respectively. this let's you isolate each 'light direction' in the comp and color correct accordingly.

and in LW, it's good to try to render any hair in it's own pass, since Sas hair is such a ***** to light.

zareh
08-15-2006, 05:42 AM
very well articulated. Having a system like that in Layout would be awesome!
At the simplest level I'd like to see separate layers where objects in the layer have their own Z-Buffer and will not intersect objects in the next layer. Think of doing an aiplane cockpit with controls etc. and then flying over a very large terrain. The Z-buffer resolution is used up for the terrain and the polygons in the cockpit keep poping in and out. If we had separate layers, one for the terrain and one for the cockpit, this wouldn't happen. As you indicated it would be great for each layer to have it's own render output, buffers, AA settings etc.
Best Regards,
Zareh:lightwave