PDA

View Full Version : The Future !!!!



Vision1
05-18-2007, 10:05 AM
i have seen a few software company's that are trying to create a platform that have state of the art program code in it

letís say for example

Mudbox and modo

They are doing this because this way they can enhance the software very fast

Wel I know that is what Newtek is also trying to do but can they make it ???
other software companyís arenít standing still ya know

so I would like to know how newtek thinks to outperform the rest in the future (the rest is moving fast)

would like to know how you guys think about this .

jasonwestmas
05-18-2007, 11:19 AM
Lightwave is being rewritten as we speak.

Whelkn
05-18-2007, 12:03 PM
I like beans. Do you like beans?

OOZZEE
05-18-2007, 12:38 PM
i like beans and bananas.... neverko, does your avatar have any offspring ?

mudbox has it's good points but too expensive compared to ZBrush for what you get.

i think NewTek know how we feel but they need to start impressing us and wow-ing us with cool features.( not that it's not a good app already, but advancements are being made faster in other apps as mentionned.)

time will tell....

lilrayray77
05-18-2007, 12:53 PM
I think we all need to take a break and give Newtek some time to really improve lightwave before we start acting as if it isnt going anywhere. The improvements already have been amazing. I can't wait to see what the next cycle has to offer.

About zbrush... just upgraded yesterday and holy crap! Working on 20-30 million polys with no speed decrease, it is astounding!!! I almost pity skymatter. They created such a hype only to be shot down within months of their release.

SplineGod
05-18-2007, 12:57 PM
Modo has been in development a long time and still lacks features that even blender has. Mudbox hasnt been in development as long as Zbrush but is improving as well. Lightwave has and is making big improvements. It boils down to whether or not youre patient enough to wait it out.
Right now its a buyers market. Theres so many cheap apps now that are quite powerful and its possible to move files back and forth.

Exception
05-18-2007, 01:03 PM
I like beans. Do you like beans?

:gotpics:

prospector
05-18-2007, 01:07 PM
It boils down to whether or not youre patient enough to wait it out.
I can out wait a snail

LW is moving just right, not too much to learn at each point release, but enough new stuff to keep it interesting.

Vision1
05-18-2007, 01:13 PM
yes they did a fantastic job on lightwave but the market is moving so fast.

@ the beginning i never thought that modo would develop so fast.
i don't mean it'a a better app but it develop very fast.

a close eye on company's like these is needed because they are after the same market as lw and that is fast and easy modeling

Newtek wants to innovate again and that is a difficult goal if you aks me

hope they have some secrest left in the newtek labs :D

Lightwolf
05-18-2007, 02:06 PM
Modo has been in development a long time and still lacks features that even blender has.
Hah... but isn't that true for almost all of the 3D apps on the market, old or new? ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Gary Wales
05-18-2007, 02:29 PM
Everyone knows that a banana is really a herb.

Lightwolf
05-18-2007, 02:44 PM
Everyone knows that a banana is really a herb.
Only when you're younger than 14, then you know it is actually a vegetable ;)

(Unless you are a real geek and will discover it as handily packaged food when you're in your mid thirties).

Cheers,
Mike

Dexter2999
05-18-2007, 03:28 PM
I'm pretty slow on the learning curve. I am reasonably happy with Newteks progress. It doesn't have to be the Swiss Army knife of 3D. I like that it keeps playing nice with other apps that people have decided to focus on in the modeling and sculpting aspect. They are putting some effort into the render and CA solutions which is really smart.

I still have my nit-picking things even as a beginner that irk me but overall you can't beat LW for the bang for the buck....unless you really like Blender which I couldn't look at for more than three hours.



'Nanners am good.

Captain Obvious
05-18-2007, 04:30 PM
I use Lightwave a good 8-9 hours per day, and certainly not because someone forces me to or anything of the sort. At the end of the day, Lightwave is still a good application for a lot of things.

flakester
05-18-2007, 05:05 PM
Having used Softimage 3D up to V3.9, XSI for a bit and Max before LW, I've gotta say that LW gives best performance vs price.

You don't have to empty your wallet bolting on extra modules once you've laid out on the 'basic' version - it's all there! Ok, fprime is a much recommended 'extra'! :thumbsup:

The developments in LW since I've been using it are ~aprettyprettygood~ to say the least - NewTek listen to their users, this much shows.

Not only are bananas handily pre-packaged (darn nice) food, but they're also excellent to write on with a biro, at least in their unpeeled state! - Sorry, no pics.

flakester.

KevinL
05-18-2007, 08:09 PM
Everyone grab some C++ and just start slapping that killer integrated 3D, Video editing, motion graphic, audio post, DVD authoring, debt free, super search engine application together. My estimate is no more than 6 months should be required. I think a price point of $434.12 is appropriate.

Don't you? :)

Lightwave works for me!
Kevin

PS I have never coded anything harder than my PIN. That is why I am so sure this is reasonable.

Disclaimer: the preceding was firmly tongue in cheek, inspired by beans and a never ending amusement at the interesting variants of don't ya thinks :)

sammael
05-18-2007, 08:40 PM
From the progress lately with 9 and then 9.2 I suspect we are headded to a place where LW will generally be considered a 'high end' app again give it a couple of years but yeah thats my thoughts. Theres some realy awesome stuff hidden within these releases, a couple of things which I suspect LW does better than any app out there. Bring it on NT.
For the past couple of years I have always had the thought in my mind 'should I be spending my time learning another 3D app?' ... no more the vile thought is gone and I am excited for the future.

Nicolas Jordan
05-18-2007, 10:01 PM
I think Lightwave development is progressing at a nice pace. 9.2 has been pretty solid for me so far. :) I am also looking forward to Painting tools that are expected to be added to Mudbox this year.

Chris S. (Fez)
05-18-2007, 10:06 PM
Lightwave 9.2 feels completely crippled without Surpasses. My vote for the most underrated LW plug-in EVER.

Newtek, please provide us with a similar native solution for scene/render-pass management. Better yet, BUY the Surpasses code and integrate it into the core...

Surrealist.
05-19-2007, 02:23 AM
It's interesting I was reading animation magazine and they interviewed the guys who were behind Mudbox.

They were talking about how innovative it was to just have a modeling app as a stand alone without anything else. Like "how refreshing it is to just use it as a modeling tool and that's it. Straight forward and simple."

Funny how things have come full circle with mudbox and zbrush as well as others being just modeling tools. And the fact that now this is the way to approach workflow.

I like what I have heard and seen from both packages. Looking forward to what NT has in store.

Lightwolf
05-19-2007, 02:26 AM
Everyone grab some C++ and just start slapping that killer integrated 3D, Video editing, motion graphic, audio post, DVD authoring, debt free, super search engine application together.
Working on it. However, due to unforseen trends in the industry the release date has been pushed back to 2023.

But we will support super easy to use SSS ;D

Cheers,
Mike

SplineGod
05-19-2007, 04:37 AM
Lightwave 9.2 feels completely crippled without Surpasses. My vote for the most underrated LW plug-in EVER.

Newtek, please provide us with a similar native solution for scene/render-pass management. Better yet, BUY the Surpasses code and integrate it into the core...

I agree. Even blender has a built in node based compositor. :)

Steamthrower
05-19-2007, 06:53 AM
From the progress lately with 9 and then 9.2 I suspect we are headded to a place where LW will generally be considered a 'high end' app again

As far as I am concerned, there are five 3d animation apps used by pros:

3ds Max
Maya
Cinema 4d
Houdini
...and Lightwave

But is LW the least? I think not. Think about it: it's used in Battlestar Galactica, Stargate, and a swift look at the Newtek project list includes almost every major blockbuster within the last decade.

3ds Max isn't as well rounded as LW, Houdini is prohibitively hard.

pixelinfected
05-19-2007, 07:33 AM
Modo, after 6 years of developing and the experience from lw developing is a disappointing application for its price, i saw the new video where they introduce animation, and i'm two time disappointed, be cause an old friends of mine, do the work of keyframe animation on parametees like them in a night on its application (to be honest my friend is a little genius, and now work like superdeveloper in pixar from 1997).and they did it in an year...

Mudbox seems an innovation against a zbrush 2 (that was a 2004 tech) but after zbrush 3 (i reiceved it yesterday) is a very crap and slow application, be cause zbrush smokeit in every part of modelling, without talking of texturing, shading and rendering capability that mudbox not have...
and it cost more than zbrush....

innovation is a total revolution of way to do something, like zbrush 2 ...
not a small rewriting of way, like mudbox.

anyway, lw way seems good, lw9.2 is a good update, and i see a bright future to lw.

i use many application at work, lw-cinema4d-maya-zbrush etc and some speed pipeline of lw are incomparable with other applications.

Nicolas Jordan
05-19-2007, 10:18 AM
Zbrush3 looks to be a great step forward in sculpting and painting. As a Mudbox user I am happy Pixologic is pushing the envelope with Zbrush3 because it will drive Skymatter to work harder at developing it's technology. Skymatter already has plans for 3D painting in Mudbox to be released sometime this year. Mudbox still needs more features. The main reason I picked Mudbox was because of it's work flow and it's promising approach to sculpting. The only reason Skymatter formed and made Mudbox was because it's developers had used Zbrush extensively and knew there was an easier more intuitive way to work. Those are some brave souls over there at Skymatter going up against sculpting giant Pixologic. :)

cresshead
05-19-2007, 10:51 AM
As far as I am concerned, there are five 3d animation apps used by pros:

3ds Max
Maya
Cinema 4d
Houdini
...and Lightwave

But is LW the least? I think not. Think about it: it's used in Battlestar Galactica, Stargate, and a swift look at the Newtek project list includes almost every major blockbuster within the last decade.

3ds Max isn't as well rounded as LW, Houdini is prohibitively hard.


Hmm

what about>?

xsi> ?
messiah>?
electric image>?

as for 'max not being as well rounded'...i beg to differ

max is VERY well rounded, i've used it since 1999 [started with version2.5] and found it to be able to turn it's hand at anything and do a great job be it character animation with biped or bones keyed or motion captured...hair and fur now built in..cloth built in radiosity built in...ies lighting, dwg import, game shaders in the viewport, mental ray, v ray, brazil, scanline, light tracer, radiosity renderer, final render busy ray renderer, several toon renderers....max can do film, tv, games architectual viz, product pre viz, medical and space....well i think you get the idea...

and have you seen/tired polyboost....simply stunning...

z brush is amazing too btw
...so is Vue
and endorphin is wow but expensive!

Captain Obvious
05-19-2007, 11:05 AM
a bunch of black-and-white halftruths
What the heck are you talking about? :confused: modo, a disappointing application? It's, in my opinion, one of the best polygon modelers out there.

Mudbox may or may not be as "good" as Zbrush, but at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is how productive your tools make you. That means which is "best" is largely a matter of personal opinion.

alifx
05-19-2007, 11:21 AM
What the heck are you talking about? :confused: modo, a disappointing application? It's, in my opinion, one of the best polygon modelers out there.

Mudbox may or may not be as "good" as Zbrush, but at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is how productive your tools make you. That means which is "best" is largely a matter of personal opinion.

:agree:
that's right

Vision1
05-19-2007, 11:37 AM
What the heck are you talking about? :confused: modo, a disappointing application? It's, in my opinion, one of the best polygon modelers out there.

Mudbox may or may not be as "good" as Zbrush, but at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is how productive your tools make you. That means which is "best" is largely a matter of personal opinion.

that's the problem

as far as i know lightwave (professional) is used because it was good at modeling and rendering.

now that modo is build form the ground up it can develop fast
i don't know if newtek can improve the things in time

jasonwestmas
05-19-2007, 11:55 AM
In time for what? Dinner?

theo
05-19-2007, 12:03 PM
(Unless you are a real geek and will discover it as handily packaged food when you're in your mid thirties).


I hate it when other intelligent peoples inadvertently reveal my inner and, in this case, outer workings.

Blasted Litewolph!

Vision1
05-19-2007, 12:17 PM
In time for what? Dinner?

no supper :D

no i mean to stay in the race

cresshead
05-19-2007, 12:51 PM
race?...oooh what's first prize?:)

people don't buy 'what's going to be' they buy what is....lightwave ''is'' a full 3d app that can and does deliver great output be that modeling, rendering, animation, for special effects work or full 3d scenes

i never have purchased 'hype' as it seems to leak from the box by the time you get it back home ready to be unpacked and used in realworld useage.


lightwave maybe getting better in future ...still right now lightwave can deliver what most people want from it by the either simple application of their braincells or by brute force cunning and liberal use of some mistical magnetic crystals being spead in a symbolic pattern upon the studio floor...:D

flakester
05-19-2007, 01:26 PM
race?...oooh what's first prize?:)

A: A banana-guard for us thirty-something geeks!! :p

Seriously, you're right about the hype leaking from the box of some apps.... and on LW being an app you can use to get what you want.
It works bang-on for the most part, for the other part - I just learn what the foibles of certain things are, and then work within those constraints.

Personally, my crystals are laid out in the shape of a blue crocodile, riding a unicycle whilst eating a knickerbockerglory. Must get more crystals!!

flakester.

Captain Obvious
05-19-2007, 03:45 PM
that's the problem

as far as i know lightwave (professional) is used because it was good at modeling and rendering.

now that modo is build form the ground up it can develop fast
i don't know if newtek can improve the things in time
I have licenses for modo and Lightwave with FPrime and Kray. I always end up modeling in modo and rendering in FPrime. That should tell you something. ;)

jasonwestmas
05-19-2007, 04:32 PM
I have licenses for modo and Lightwave with FPrime and Kray. I always end up modeling in modo and rendering in FPrime. That should tell you something. ;)

That lightwave has more rendering features than Modo and Fprime is closer knit with lightwave than Kray?

Vision1
05-19-2007, 04:42 PM
race?...oooh what's first prize?:)

people don't buy 'what's going to be' they buy what is....lightwave ''is'' a full 3d app that can and does deliver great output be that modeling, rendering, animation, for special effects work or full 3d scenes

i never have purchased 'hype' as it seems to leak from the box by the time you get it back home ready to be unpacked and used in realworld useage.


lightwave maybe getting better in future ...still right now lightwave can deliver what most people want from it by the either simple application of their braincells or by brute force cunning and liberal use of some mistical magnetic crystals being spead in a symbolic pattern upon the studio floor...:D

maybe you are write but if so why does zoic use modo then ???

and hype does work.. have you seen the transformer trailer. we don't know if it is a good film but we gone whatch becaus it looks good and the trailer look good

flakester
05-19-2007, 04:51 PM
Your point is one quarter there.....

You may watch the film once at the cinema - and maybe buy the DVD afterwards if the film is good.

Watching a hyped film that turns out to be bad is not the same as spending £600 - £3,500 on software that cannot do what you need it to, or software that you have to fight with with at every stage of your process.

flakester.

Vision1
05-19-2007, 05:09 PM
Your point is one quarter there.....

You may watch the film once at the cinema - and maybe buy the DVD afterwards if the film is good.

Watching a hyped film that turns out to be bad is not the same as spending £600 - £3,500 on software that cannot do what you need it to, or software that you have to fight with with at every stage of your process.

flakester.

that's correct yes if it turns bad you don't wanne watch it again but if it is good you gonne watch it again and buy it so the hype works because you want to know if it is good or bad

Captain Obvious
05-19-2007, 05:15 PM
That lightwave has more rendering features than Modo and Fprime is closer knit with lightwave than Kray?
That is one possible, and indeed reasonably accurate, interpretation.

flakester
05-19-2007, 05:27 PM
that's correct yes if it turns bad you don't wanne watch it again but if it is good you gonne watch it again and buy it so the hype works because you want to know if it is good or bad

£4.50 vs £3,500 for a one time wonder - I know which one I'd wanna spend!

Truth is, the majority of the apps out there are routinely used for games, print, films.... etc.. A lot of it is down to user preference, and in some cases just spending a little time learning 'how' a particular part of a programme likes to be used.

Chances are that no programme is going to please 100% of it's user base 100% of the time - every app has the bits that it doesn't do so well.

One year, app 'X' will be 'The best in the industry' - next year you'll have people moaning about some facet of it, and how it doesn't compete with app 'Y' - which has now become flavour of the month. It's cyclic.

It's a good job that nearly all (could be wrong here!) of the big players have demo versions or Discovery/PLE types - so that we don't have to be crippled by hype or erroneously (sp?) good reviews.

flakester.

Vision1
05-19-2007, 05:42 PM
£4.50 vs £3,500 for a one time wonder - I know which one I'd wanna spend!

Truth is, the majority of the apps out there are routinely used for games, print, films.... etc.. A lot of it is down to user preference, and in some cases just spending a little time learning 'how' a particular part of a programme likes to be used.

Chances are that no programme is going to please 100% of it's user base 100% of the time - every app has the bits that it doesn't do so well.

One year, app 'X' will be 'The best in the industry' - next year you'll have people moaning about some facet of it, and how it doesn't compete with app 'Y' - which has now become flavour of the month. It's cyclic.

It's a good job that nearly all (could be wrong here!) of the big players have demo versions or Discovery/PLE types - so that we don't have to be crippled by hype or erroneously (sp?) good reviews.

flakester.


you have answered it already...

you say £4.50 vs £3,500 for a one time wonder - I know which one I'd wanna spend!


and you say that most big players have a demo version so i don't have to spend anything to know if it is good or bad but the hype works because i want to find out of it is good or bad. if i don't try the app i don't know if i want to you use it

gerry_g
05-20-2007, 06:27 AM
Well put it this way, I sit there in Modo and and hit 'B' for Bevel and no matter how many times I use it I cannot stop marveling over how it don't screw up, I keep thinking to myself that's impossible the one in LW almost never works right.

HanJobSoSlow
05-20-2007, 07:00 AM
Well put it this way, I sit there in Modo and and hit 'B' for Bevel and no matter how many times I use it I cannot stop marveling over how it don't screw up, I keep thinking to myself that's impossible the one in LW almost never works right.


Agreed -But This forum is for praise - please dont mention how excellent other products are (or bevelling) in public.

Thank you :D

Dexter2999
05-20-2007, 07:34 AM
Agreed -But This forum is for praise - please dont mention how excellent other products are (or bevelling) in public.

Thank you :D


Now, that's funny.:D

Captain Obvious
05-20-2007, 09:41 AM
Well put it this way, I sit there in Modo and and hit 'B' for Bevel and no matter how many times I use it I cannot stop marveling over how it don't screw up, I keep thinking to myself that's impossible the one in LW almost never works right.
Try selecting an edge or a vertex or even a material and hitting the same 'B' key, and marvel at how they have ONE tool that bevels ANYTHING, instead of fifteen tools that sometimes work and sometimes don't.

Chris S. (Fez)
05-20-2007, 01:08 PM
Try selecting an edge or a vertex or even a material and hitting the same 'B' key, and marvel at how they have ONE tool that bevels ANYTHING, instead of fifteen tools that sometimes work and sometimes don't.



Yep. Modeling is way more fun when you only have to remember a few hotkeys. Given the many requests for consolidation in recent years, I am confident we will see a tidying up of Modeler's toolset sooner rather than later.

theo
05-20-2007, 01:53 PM
Yep. Modeling is way more fun when you only have to remember a few hotkeys. Given the many requests for consolidation in recent years, I am confident we will see a tidying up of Modeler's toolset sooner rather than later.

It's not just for fun Fez, it's critical that redundancies within Modeler be slashed into nothingness to expedite and establish a far more fluid and rapid modeling process, which propels productivity and efficiency into the sweet black world of higher profits.

Agreeing with you here... just agreeing a bit more aggressively.

Chris S. (Fez)
05-20-2007, 02:14 PM
Agreeing with you here... just agreeing a bit more aggressively.

...and more eloquently I might add ;).

The brutal truth is that it presently more or less pains me to use Modeler. My old hotkey finger reflexes, developed from years of daily Lightwave use, are practically dead.

Given that I still render the majority of my work in Lightwave I am positive I would revert back to modeler for many of my modeling chores, if only I could mirror my Modo/Max hotkeys/pie menus.

Stooch
05-20-2007, 08:38 PM
...and more eloquently I might add ;).

The brutal truth is that it presently more or less pains me to use Modeler. My old hotkey finger reflexes, developed from years of daily Lightwave use, are practically dead.

Given that I still render the majority of my work in Lightwave I am positive I would revert back to modeler for many of my modeling chores, if only I could mirror my Modo/Max hotkeys/pie menus.
technically lw does have pie menus. ctrl>shift click. (mmb lmb rmb) you can customise these menus and in modeler i deck them out with all my tools, you really fly using this method. give it a try. i really dont see that as lws weakness.

HanJobSoSlow
05-20-2007, 09:01 PM
give it a try. i really dont see that as lws weakness.

i agree - its the bugs and lack of clever and or working tools.

Chris S. (Fez)
05-20-2007, 10:58 PM
technically lw does have pie menus. ctrl>shift click. (mmb lmb rmb) you can customise these menus and in modeler i deck them out with all my tools, you really fly using this method. give it a try. i really dont see that as lws weakness.

I think the Modo pie menus provide a more gestural modeling experience and feel more fluid than the menus in Lightwave and Max. I use those menus all the time in Layout though!

I personally prefer hotkeys and a focused set of pie-menus. ie. L selects a loop but alt+L pops up a pie menu of Loop related tools.

Digital Hermit
05-20-2007, 11:22 PM
Maybe Lightwave should buy Modo as their modeling application. I mean since these guys already know each other... :D

Heh - Don't slap me to hard!

DH

jr_sunshine
05-21-2007, 08:46 AM
This is hilarious... and ironic. The thread title is "The Future!!!" and the talk has been about Modo. :thumbsup:

gerry_g
05-21-2007, 09:07 AM
But how do you know Lightwave won't best Modo when it's revamped and rebuilt, at least it has pretty open SDK and as a result a massive third party library of plugins, Modo has neither of these things.

gerry_g
05-21-2007, 09:09 AM
Well yes Modo has a pretty good macro's and scripts library before you correct me, but that's it

pooby
05-21-2007, 09:41 AM
To compare fairly one has to consider these two things

What can modeller do that Modo can't
What can Modo do that modeller can't
then, which is the nicer to use.

I don't use Modo, I use XSI for modelling, but I know of a good number of LW users that swear by Modo.
come on... It's BOUND to be better than LW for modelling.. It's been designed from the ground up by the team who made LW in the first place.

Modeller is simple and easy, which isn't such a bad thing, but I think that LW's future is modelling in Layout. There's no point wasting time on developing tools for 2 apps when you can concentrate on the one with all the power.

oDDity
05-21-2007, 09:48 AM
Is this the latest news then? All apps have flaws?
Yes, even maya unlimited is replete with quirks and bad design elements that have to be circumvented. Just because it's expensive still doesn't make it perfect.
There is a long list of things that modeler needs to improve, just like any user of any app has a long list of things they like changed and improved.

KillMe
05-21-2007, 09:49 AM
you know i bought modo when it first came out thinking exactly that - how could it be worse than lw modeler when tis the same guys who wrote it

but you know what i was wrong

they changed the most annoying things - viewports - they rotate the oposite way as the lw ones do - minor you think but damn it i find it annoying as hell - beveling? it goes the wrong way too - what is this - feeling they had to distance themselves from lw so changed all the basic little things - forcing you to unlearn what is all but insticntive knowledge

then there was the weird version of the numberic panel that wouldn't "pop" to my last settings - i had to activate it =/ and the weird hitting undo twice to undo a single action ( frustrating in the extreme )

end result i have modo sitting on my shelf and since the first reformat i did since buying it its never gone back on my system

now i dont doubt its imroved since version 1 and some of the new tools demod in vids looks sweet - but my experiances tell me that its very much a matter of taste - some people like apples some like oranges - likewise some like lw modeler , some like modo

Vision1
05-21-2007, 10:10 AM
well i think if we talk about other software is a good thing because we can discuss the things we like or don't like.

the things we like we hope they wil make it sometime in lightwave. but as newtek said: we want to innovate
so they must not just copy a feature but make it better.

a few things that i realy like about lightwave and i hope they will continue in the future are:

- lightwave will start very quickly so we don't have to wait 1.5min before we
can do anything (like some other apps)

- lightwave has a big viewport you can work in(most apps have standard
small viewports because al the other space is used for icons or info

wel about the interface hmm i realy like what is done here http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/lightwave%5Fvx/index.html

not all of it because when i see the picture with the freak in it i think the bottem takes to much space (viewport is small)

(to all) would like to know how you think about it

Captain Obvious
05-21-2007, 11:28 AM
they changed the most annoying things - viewports - they rotate the oposite way as the lw ones do - minor you think but damn it i find it annoying as hell - beveling? it goes the wrong way too - what is this - feeling they had to distance themselves from lw so changed all the basic little things - forcing you to unlearn what is all but insticntive knowledge
You're just making stuff up. The viewports rotate the same way as they do in Modeler, and you can even turn off the tumbling. There's a preference for which way the bevel goes.



but my experiances tell me that its very much a matter of taste - some people like apples some like oranges - likewise some like lw modeler , some like modo
And you just went "this orange tastes awful, I think I'll stay with apples" and didn't think about peeling it before you ate it.

Dexter2999
05-21-2007, 11:30 AM
I think that picture is okay.It does present LW with a more modern look while preseving the no icon style that LW users have come to know.
The bottom part isn't neccesarily too big. The scene editor and graph editor need more space.

Perhaps if the tabs were minimized until you clicked one. Upon clicking a tab the window would dynamicaly resize. This could be every bit as frustrating as having your window covered by a pop up menu for all I know.

Intuition
05-21-2007, 11:59 AM
Eh, Mudbox is not moving fast, it's not innovative and it's already obsolete. Beaten to a bloody pulp by the innovative program it set out to clone.

Next.

I love my Mudbox but I am still awaiting my Zbrush3 email, else I could expand on your statement. ;D

SO many things are out there for people to choose from. I am up to date on all 3d software except Maya. I am still using 6.5.

I just did XSI6 around Xmas and 3d max9 in early may. Both rounding down to interface differences that generally funnel back out to Mental Ray. ALthough Mental Ray is getting much easier to use and renders a lot faster and nicer lately. I mean, did you see the starcraft 2 trailer?... Yah, I have been getting my hands on Max and XSI a bit more lately.

Modo is just the Roxxorz maximuz in modeling. It doesn't do well in stability with 300,000+ polygons that are all textured and the shader tree gets really messy at times. Yet despite its drawbacks I save tons of time in modo over other modeling apps.

Blender I haven't tried for awhile.

Lightwave is getting back up there and with 9.2 is getting really powerful again. The "setup-to-final render" times for animation one can get with Lightwave is not found anywhere else. That I am 100% certain of. It is where Lightwave leads the pack.

Modo can render alot faster and with 301 looks to take a piece of Lightwave's market in general 3d work. Yet, Lightwave has such a huuuuuge 3rd party support like Infinimap that lets me load GB images at no RAM hit and of course F-prime which will secure its use in our TV production line for years to come.

No matter how you approach your 3d, Lightwave can get you what you need really fast. :tongue: ...and, I mean the setup for network rendering si verys imple as well.

Damn, I hate sounding like a marketing guy. :devil:

Yes, its a buyers market. We are in good times for 3d.

Intuition
05-21-2007, 12:11 PM
Oh, forgot to add.... Have you seen the 9.2 gallery? I mean its comparable to any other software's gallery. Lightwave is looking good.

Battlestar Galactica looks great.

The 300 looks great.

Ghost whisperer season finale anyone?

The Lost finale looks great... Or rather you will see it will look great on the air.

;)

Lightwave's making its marks.

jasonwestmas
05-21-2007, 12:13 PM
. . . what!? Starcraft 2?

Chris S. (Fez)
05-21-2007, 12:21 PM
ALthough Mental Ray is getting much easier to use and renders a lot faster and nicer lately. I mean, did you see the starcraft 2 trailer?... Yah, I have been getting my hands on Max and XSI a bit more lately.

Wow...thanks for the heads up. That trailer is startlingly sweet :bowdown: . You happen to have any links/info on its production?

theo
05-21-2007, 12:27 PM
I love my Mudbox but I am still awaiting my Zbrush3 email, else I could expand on your statement. ;D

Z3 iz schweet. Chuckle...even though it has been released with more than its fair share of creepers.

oDDity
05-21-2007, 01:41 PM
I don't understand what the problem is. If you like x app more, then buy that and use it as well.
According to a recent thread about what freelancers here charge for work, it seems most of you don't get out of bed for less than £3000.00, so just one job would pay for Lw, modo, zbrush and mudbox, with change left over.
Problem solved.

hrgiger
05-21-2007, 03:19 PM
Ummm, starcraft....

Intuition
05-21-2007, 04:03 PM
Is this the latest news then? All apps have flaws?
Yes, even maya unlimited is replete with quirks and bad design elements that have to be circumvented. Just because it's expensive still doesn't make it perfect.

In the world of 3d, truer words have never been spoken. :thumbsup:


I have my quirks with all of them to be sure, and I also agree with your cost analysis. Which is why I have so many 3d apps. I buy what helps me get the job done. On the Lightwave forums I try to be fair in my opinion on Lightwave. I try to be speak positives and negatives under the light of further Lightwave improvement. I believe Neverko does this very well in general. :hat:

Vision1
05-21-2007, 04:03 PM
I think that picture is okay.It does present LW with a more modern look while preseving the no icon style that LW users have come to know.
The bottom part isn't neccesarily too big. The scene editor and graph editor need more space.

Perhaps if the tabs were minimized until you clicked one. Upon clicking a tab the window would dynamicaly resize. This could be every bit as frustrating as having your window covered by a pop up menu for all I know.

yes i really like what i saw i think newtek should take a look at it :thumbsup:

if they build in a few config files to choose from it would be very nice.

even better is when you install lightwave for the first time you can choose from a few layouts (of couse you can change them later if you want).

i know some apps can have big viewports but i have to change them manually but damn that's not what i want i want to start right away


a nice thing about popups is because more and more video cards support 2 screens it would be nice to have a option that they are not docked and can be moved to screen 2 (big view port on screen 1 and all my information on screen 2)

Vision1
05-21-2007, 04:19 PM
ohh and another thing

some how i think that a user interface should always be made with of by an artist and not by a programmer

Lightwolf
05-21-2007, 04:24 PM
some how i think that a user interface should always be made with of by an artist and not by a programmer
Please... no, I'd want something logical ;)
A user interface should be made by a designer... whether that person is a graphics oriented person or a programmer doesn't make a difference as long as there is a decent design process.
The styling is a different matter...

Cheers,
Mike

adamredwoods
05-21-2007, 04:53 PM
Interfaces are critical to applications.

Just imagine if Blender had a good interface. The playing field would be leveled! :D

Ztreem
05-21-2007, 05:10 PM
A user interface should be made by a designer...


:agree:


The styling is a different matter...


I don't agree, they are connected so the design is very important even for the styling, it depends though, what you mean with styling?

Lightwolf
05-21-2007, 06:20 PM
I don't agree, they are connected so the design is very important even for the styling, it depends though, what you mean with styling?
Wether there are bevels or not and what gradient there is on the shiny buttons, colour schemes, that's what I mean by styling. How the UI is drawn but now what is drawn.
Basically anything not directly connected to functionality - because of that reason. Functionalit goes directly into workflow, and you wouldn't want a pixel pusher to design that now, would you? (Yeah, I'm a pixel pusher at times too).

Cheers,
Mike

Ztreem
05-22-2007, 02:30 AM
Bevels and gradients doesn't effect the workflow that much, but on the other hand other graphical elements do, so to get a nice interface that feels like a whole. I think the designer should work out the workflow and design that includes the gradients and stuff. This is my opinion, though.

Lightwolf
05-22-2007, 03:06 AM
I think the designer should work out the workflow and design that includes the gradients and stuff. This is my opinion, though.
I just think in general both skill sets don't mix and match very well.
The UI designer must know the users inside out, be extremely familiar with the (various) workflows as well as suss out how to streamline them.
Most of that goes beyond the (required) skills of a basic graphics designer. UI design is a lot of bean counting and very, very little glamour (that's why they tend to start on scraps of paper and go hand in hand with use cases for the app). You don't want to Photoshop screen design dummies if the functionality isn't there, that's a waste of time.
In the end it is analogous to rendering out stills of an animation where the story hasn't been written, or designing a website where the structure of the content hasn't been finalized yet.

Cheers,
Mike

Ztreem
05-22-2007, 03:13 AM
I was more thinking of an intercation designer than a graphic designer, interaction designers is like a industrial designer focusing on interfaces. So they know how to make a good interface and with the research they done of the users and they also know the graphical side of the job. So no need for a graphic designer at all. :)

Lightwolf
05-22-2007, 03:23 AM
I was more thinking of an intercation designer than a graphic designer, interaction designers is like a industrial designer focusing on interfaces. So they know how to make a good interface and with the research they done of the users and they also know the graphical side of the job. So no need for a graphic designer at all. :)
I suppose we're on the same track then.

Mind you, I do like Matts suggestions, especially because he has put a lot of thought behind how things work.

Cheers,
Mike

hrgiger
05-22-2007, 04:05 AM
This is why I think customization is key. Becauase even the best UI designer isn't going to come up with my perfect interface. We need the option to change what doesn't work with us. We should be able to change the layout of not only the order the buttons come in as we do now, but also the location of the panels and their operation (including things like fly-outs and rolling tabs, things like that).

Ztreem
05-22-2007, 04:16 AM
I suppose we're on the same track then.

Mind you, I do like Matts suggestions, especially because he has put a lot of thought behind how things work.


Yep, I think we are on the same track. I also like Matts suggestion and it's because it's well thought out and at the same time it looks good.


This is why I think customization is key. Becauase even the best UI designer isn't going to come up with my perfect interface. We need the option to change what doesn't work with us. We should be able to change the layout of not only the order the buttons come in as we do now, but also the location of the panels and their operation (including things like fly-outs and rolling tabs, things like that).

I think this is what a good UI designer would come up with. A good UI design let you customize the UI after your needs, but at the same time keep everything together so it feels like a whole. So ten customized UI layouts feels like LW and not like ten different apps. That's good UI design in my opinion. It's all for the users.

cresshead
05-22-2007, 04:26 AM
for the future of modeling in lw newtek should have a good long stare over at what the max plugin polyboost offers...to be fair the writer of polyboost had a good long stare over at lightwave modeler before he made his tools but he also invented a fair few of his own which are just 'off the scale' in workflow and the warm fuzzy feeling you get when you use it!

take a gander:-

http://www.cmlcreative.com/Videos/PolyBoost2_video.avi


for character rigging and animation newtek may have a browse over at
CAT from softimage, or puppetshop http://www.lumonix.net/puppetshop.html
maybe also automatron http://www.lotsofrobots.com/automatron/Automatron_FS.htm

always good to a have a loot around to see what other people are doing for tools in 3d programs.

Lightwolf
05-22-2007, 04:28 AM
I think this is what a good UI designer would come up with. A good UI design let you customize the UI after your needs, but at the same time keep everything together so it feels like a whole.
Which is why you actually need a good UI programmer, otherwise the whole thing will fall apart after the initial design ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Ztreem
05-22-2007, 04:59 AM
Which is why you actually need a good UI programmer, otherwise the whole thing will fall apart after the initial design ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Of course, The designer just do the concept then the programmer has to realize the concept, but if they have a good communication both under the design phase and under the programming phase it shouldn't be a problem.

hrgiger
05-22-2007, 05:11 AM
Yes, polyboost looks really nice. The two big things I would really like to have from there is to draw poly lines onto an object and have it average between the surrounding polygons (to maintain curvature on your object which bandsaw does not do) and also to draw polygons that conform to an underlying mesh. Good stuff.

cresshead
05-22-2007, 05:14 AM
re polyboost the border tool is drop dead amazing..love it!...i'm just using the demo currently but it's very nice!...just wating for z brush 3 update to arrive and see how it's re topology compares to polyboost.

zbrush 3 looks amazing btw..

KillMe
05-22-2007, 05:21 AM
You're just making stuff up. The viewports rotate the same way as they do in Modeler, and you can even turn off the tumbling. There's a preference for which way the bevel goes.

i am talking about the original modo 103 i think was the final version i ever used - things might have changed but when i last used it - the viewport moved the wrong way - in lightwave you grab the little icon thing and drag left and the modeler rotates anti clockwise - in mode it woudl rotate clockwise instead

bevel yes you coudl flip the way it moved in and out but it wouldn't switch the use of forward and back / left and right for the shift and inset settings - they stayed the same no matter what you did and it was them that is the wrong way around


And you just went "this orange tastes awful, I think I'll stay with apples" and didn't think about peeling it before you ate it.

while i cant deny what you say here - i would argue that i shouldn't have needed to peel the orrange

colkai
05-22-2007, 05:33 AM
for the future of modeling in lw newtek should have a good long stare over at what the max plugin polyboost

Oh man, that is so sweet. :heart:
That and UV tweak would make modelling so much easier. Granted of course, a lot of that power is based on wrapping on existing geometry, but even after that, there are so many cool features to it, it makes modeller look sad. :o

That video is a fine example of showing off powerful tools which are easy to use, though that polyboost interface does look a trifle scary in the amount of options on it. ;)

oDDity
05-22-2007, 06:22 AM
What exactly the the ponit of a all this whining? Talking about kewl modleing features in x app, and even kweler features in kewl plugin for x app.
You seriously expect LW to be able to keep up with with all the coolest features of every other app and plugin out there?
And if it did have all those features, you think they'd be selling it at such a cheap price?

Steamthrower
05-22-2007, 06:38 AM
Actually, loathe as I am to say it ( ;) ), I somewhat agree here with oDDity.

If Lightwave was the best features of Maya, Max, Houdini, Cinema 4D, and XSI, and was still sold for $800, there wouldn't be any Maya, Max, Houdini, Cinema 4D, and XSI!

hrgiger
05-22-2007, 07:12 AM
Actually, loathe as I am to say it ( ;) ), I somewhat agree here with oDDity.

If Lightwave was the best features of Maya, Max, Houdini, Cinema 4D, and XSI, and was still sold for $800, there wouldn't be any Maya, Max, Houdini, Cinema 4D, and XSI!

Well, that's not true at all. People would still pay more money for a more expensive app just for the fact that it was mroe expensive. People have this mindset that if they pay more for something, it must be better. But hey, people, on the whole, are pretty stupid.

As far as polyboost goes, I do think those are the kinds of tools go that could be adopted into Lightwave. As "kewl" as it looks, there are some pretty fundamental modeling tasks in polyboost that would make modeling in Lightwave much more intuitive and less painful. I've already mentioned above the few things that I think Lightwave really needs from there.

DiedonD
05-22-2007, 07:24 AM
A friend of mine once said that LW will focus around animation in future releases. I disagreed and now have a bet, to see who'll win.

But if it is really so. Then I think LW needs a lips sinc tool badly. Appart from Maestro also. And if they can't (or wont for the price) develop an automatic lips synch-er then all it takes is just some sort of linear graphic phoneme lipsynching to speed up the process.

If anything, just a graph editor for all phonemes, where you could interactively put points to phonemes on a single one for all phonemes track would be a step forward.

Heres what I was thinking. Theres the graph editor, and you move forward with arrows again. And on that single track you can apply all phonemes by just going at a morph, mind you we are still on the same one for all phoneme track, click on a phoneme, and put a starting point, middle climatic points, and ending point. And start with another phoneme somewhere inside this previos one, climax it on the middle a bit further according to what you hear, and end it accordinagly, and so on and so forth, without the Killer painstaking changes of graph editors from one phoneme to another, and imagining where they should be. No no, it should be all there.

I better make an image hold on...

pooby
05-22-2007, 07:59 AM
Newtek aren't going to add fancy specialist features when the fundimentals don't work properly. Even then, the chance of seeing any lip synch features in LW would be about 0% for at least the next 12 years.
If they were redesigning a car, you wouldn't expect them to start off thinking about the Hifi.
When they say they'll concentrate on animation, they mean constraints parameter handlers and deformers, not autoriggers and twiddly bits.

colkai
05-22-2007, 08:06 AM
You know, you say you want some power features like displayed in that plugin, and you get folks saying why. You say you don't want them and you're accused of not wanting LW to move forward.
Considering the amount of complaining about the lack of consistency and poor workflow / duplicated plugins, you'd think power tools would actually be on folks want list.

GAH! :(

DiedonD
05-22-2007, 08:20 AM
Sorry the internet is way too weak. I barely maanged to reply to this one even. Ill attach it tomorow. But just imagine graph editor and all phonemes on the channel area with different colors per phoneme. And you just click add a particular phoneme, and choose another one, add the one right nex to the previous one, and so on and so forth.

You would have all phonemes on front of you, and you wuold just go trhough the whole scene only once. But one goood time, and thats it. I dont know, I like it alot. An alternative to an automatic lip syncher the least, if that wont do it for the price of LW thats for now.

And even if some automatic Lipsynching is possible, still you would rather have all phonemes in one track to move them about, if they are incorrect at times. You would rather have them all in one track then go to one after the other, and imagine where the previous curve that you just worked on is, wont you agree.

Theres always zooming in or out for details, no need to separate phonemes on their own channel! That Idea just ruins it for Lip Synching in MM, and makes it a killer, way more difficult. All phonemes should be made available in one track so as it can be more linear, and intuitive. If its too much then you can use the graph editor track even for it. That should be easy enough to do.

alifx
05-22-2007, 09:08 AM
When they say they'll concentrate on animation, they mean constraints parameter handlers and deformers, not autoriggers and twiddly bits.

IMO pooby is right

Ztreem
05-22-2007, 09:13 AM
I also think so, we want a good animation foundation in LW that we can rely on. When we have that we can start to implement features like autoriggers and so on, one step at the time...

jasonwestmas
05-22-2007, 09:19 AM
Heck, I'd be happy with constraint perameters and vertex deformers. IKB is a great start, a new version couldn't hurt, that is if it gets proper documentation.
I don't expect lightwave to do it all. I would fix all the animation and rendering stuff first anyhow.

hrgiger
05-22-2007, 09:59 AM
Honestly, I'd be happy with fast bone deformations and vertex level animation. If that's all they gave us during the 9.x cycle, that'd be fine. Of course, I would want more but that would be a huge stepping stone.

Weetos
05-22-2007, 11:05 AM
IMHO, they need to concentrate also on the SDK. A good and SDK that gives access to every single bit of LW - This will allow third parties ( and even NT I guess ) to bring new tools in no time. Look at what people like PICTRIX or TrueArt are doing with the current SDK, and imagine what they would do if they had what they need.

my 2c

hrgiger
05-22-2007, 12:28 PM
Look at what people like PICTRIX or TrueArt are doing with the current SDK, and imagine what they would do if they had what they need.


Yes,then we could have what we need.

cresshead
05-22-2007, 12:47 PM
What exactly the the ponit of a all this whining? Talking about kewl modleing features in x app, and even kweler features in kewl plugin for x app.
You seriously expect LW to be able to keep up with with all the coolest features of every other app and plugin out there?
And if it did have all those features, you think they'd be selling it at such a cheap price?

well let me see....the polyboost plugin developer had a look at lightwave even though he was developing a 3dsmax plugin and he discovered some nice things in modeler [example:- magic bevel is in polyboost] so he made similar tools for his 3dsmax plugin...so why NOT the other way round...have a look at his tools and make similar/better ones for modeler in lightwave...

i don't expect newtek to try n implement every tool out there but they can have a look at some of the really cool ones and decide to throw a few of those in...you know add to the feature list so making lightwave look like it's ADVANCING and not just MENDING for a new version...you getting this?

Vision1
05-22-2007, 01:38 PM
ok now that there are mentioned many things it's time to go to step 2

witch of the features would you like to see first implanted and why. and then not what you wanted most but what would be wise to implant first if you look @ the 3d market today

- user interface

- modeling tools

- Animation

- Rendering

- SDK

- Other

SplineGod
05-22-2007, 01:42 PM
technically lw does have pie menus. ctrl>shift click. (mmb lmb rmb) you can customise these menus and in modeler i deck them out with all my tools, you really fly using this method. give it a try. i really dont see that as lws weakness.

Totally agree here. Some tools dont have buttons. Those can easily be created using lscript commander. An example are the IK setup commands...adding IK to specific channels. Ive got mine setup in the popup menus. I can multiselect bones and quickly add pitchIK etc to them. It greatly speeds things up. :)

Chris S. (Fez)
05-22-2007, 01:52 PM
Honestly, I'd be happy with fast bone deformations and vertex level animation. If that's all they gave us during the 9.x cycle, that'd be fine. Of course, I would want more but that would be a huge stepping stone.

Me too.

hrgiger
05-22-2007, 01:59 PM
Me too.

Word up, my smartskin brother.

DiedonD
05-23-2007, 03:09 AM
When they say they'll concentrate on animation, they mean constraints parameter handlers and deformers, not autoriggers and twiddly bits.

Heres the promisedd picture of an assumably easy to make linear and intuitive idea for a better lip synch process in LW

Now. I can assure you that if you have 18.000 (Thats Eighteen thousand) frames of heated conversation between characters, and thats only on a single chapter out of 8, and you only have LW, then its NO TWIDLY BIT AT ALL!!!

Whats with the names to my worries and wishes right there?!

We come here and expect, want and worry if it wont happen. Whos to say whose wish beats the rests and that his is what LW will really do or not?!
And I dont see you working on the upper management where they actually make decisions on what we say here!

How about I call your worries with names let me see. Nah "constraints parameter handlers and deformers" are pretty silly things to focus on. They are ammm... at the worm level of priority on NewTeks list! How do you like that?! And heres some argument too. After all whats with the "GO AHEAD MAKE A SCENE" logo if there isnt even a smallest build in linear lip synching method, with which to actually make ay SCENE per se!

pooby
05-23-2007, 04:43 AM
You misunderstand..
I'm not saying its of no value as an idea. just that it's a complex feature that, in order to work, will have to call upon a lot of component parts that will first need to be built from the ground up.

These components are what Newtek need to concentrate on first.

The nuts, bolts and ballbearings.

it MAY happen that Newtek build something like this, but don't expect it until everything is in place for it to work..
It would be an utter waste of time developing this now, and having to re-write it when they have changed the foundations of Layout later.

DiedonD
05-23-2007, 05:25 AM
it MAY happen that Newtek build something like this, but don't expect it until everything is in place for it to work..
It would be an utter waste of time developing this now, and having to re-write it when they have changed the foundations of Layout later.

It seems to me that having all phoneme morphs available in a single graph editor track, oughta be a pretty easy thing to develop. Be it weather its something that should be re-written afterwards, or develop it aswell while theyre on the go at rewritting it. An easy thing to do in both counts, so no need to await 12 years on it, not on this level of desperation.

Mind you, there is NO Lip Synch available appart from MM and Daz for LW! Theres one more that I know of and thats Lip Sync master that only offers to sell their product without trial at 900 UK pounds, and no telephone contacts available neither.

One kills you the other has bugs that makes it just not worth the 240$ by my evaluation, and the third is just not serious. So now.... How to make a talking long scene indeeed?!

Why do I think its easy? Well theres already a graph editor. And theres already a MM where phonemes are based. And them two are already interacting somewhat. Just fix the interaction part so as not only one phoneme has access to its own track, but all of them should have access to the same track, and thats it. Everything is there, its just the availability of phonemes thats abscent.

Since its easy, I guess, why wait any longer when LW desperately needs it.
Heck perhaps even some of us can make an LScript for it.

pooby
05-23-2007, 07:03 AM
Well, I would aim your ideas toward plugin developers then. There's a much bigger chance that they'll make it than Newtek.
If you desperately need it and don't want to wait, then why not animate in XSI foundation. Apart from all the other advantages, It's very easy to bang out lipsynch by dropping face poses on the timeline.
It also takes less than 10 secs to get the animation back to LW as demo'd here
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68911

DiedonD
05-23-2007, 08:15 AM
I dont want to get involved in any other app. Im only with LW regarding 3D. And want to remain as such, until Im pushed beyond my tolerate level.

Some things happend inbetween our talks. Now I see that LW has something like the thing I wanted and drawned up there. So thats good enough for me for now.

But... Still an automatic lip syncher and rigger would boost up animation in LW. So it too is important, and should line itself up on the to do list somewhere.

Thanks for the link though, I appreciate the trouble.

Dexter2999
05-23-2007, 08:27 AM
I'm still just scratching the surface of LW. For facial animation why would you use the Graph editor for phonems instead of Morph Mixer?

I have read a tutorial (or two) on the morph mixer and it just seems the more natural way to go. I realize that the Graph editor is very powerful but it doesn't seem as intuitive as the Morph Mixer.

Ztreem
05-23-2007, 08:41 AM
Why do I think its easy? Well theres already a graph editor. And theres already a MM where phonemes are based. And them two are already interacting somewhat. Just fix the interaction part so as not only one phoneme has access to its own track, but all of them should have access to the same track, and thats it. Everything is there, its just the availability of phonemes thats abscent.

Since its easy, I guess, why wait any longer when LW desperately needs it.
Heck perhaps even some of us can make an LScript for it.

Even if it sounds easy doesn't mean that it is easy, maybe it's a lot more to it than you think.

DiedonD
05-24-2007, 04:30 AM
I like graph editor better because, the phonemes, happen to coincide with the level of a tone that a character would express. For example you have the "A" phoneme, now the higher the climax point in the graph editor for that phoneme the more he opens his mouth "A" like. And its all there, visible graphically, you dont have to imagine where the previous curve was and the such. Thats why I like GE better. It even looks like a audio track in the end even.

And Ztreem, it seems I was right after all. It was easy to do what I wanted, it wasnt harder then what I thought, like you suggested, in fact Its so easy, that after a chat with my friend he just explained that you can have all phonemes available in one graph editor track after all. You just open GE and add the required phoneme morphs on it. And they are all visible there, and working throughout the scene. Pretty cool. I like it.

But having an automatic one would be better of course.

Dexter2999
05-24-2007, 04:47 AM
You just open GE and add the required phoneme morphs on it. And they are all visible there, and working throughout the scene. Pretty cool. I like it.

But having an automatic one would be better of course.

Can you do that as an Lscript?

Vision1
05-24-2007, 05:33 AM
Please... no, I'd want something logical ;)
A user interface should be made by a designer... whether that person is a graphics oriented person or a programmer doesn't make a difference as long as there is a decent design process.
The styling is a different matter...

Cheers,
Mike

ahh yes designer was the word i was looking for still i think the designer must have a graphical background.

there is still one problem. many want lightwave to integrate and many want it to leave it separated. yes i like the way it is now but i also understand that some of you want it to see integrated.


the best thing you can do if you aks me is make two buttons. 1 with modeler and 1 with layout. when you press the modeler button you will see only the buttons of modeler and when you press layout you will see only the buttons from layout. (see pictures below) and when you are in modeler mode the light and camera will automatically hide so it don't stand in you way (of course when you select them in the layer menu they automatically light up)

this way you have the best of both worlds (integrated & separated)
this way you have a clean UI :D combining this with the UI from:
http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/lightwave_vx/ and you will have a killer workflow if you ask me

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 05:51 AM
ahh yes designer was the word i was looking for still i think the designer must have a graphical background.
I suppose that's where we differ. I'd prefer somebody who thinks in terms of workflow first... which is quite rare amongst graphics oriented people.


this way you have the best of both worlds (integrated & separated)
this way you have a clean UI :D combining this with the UI from:
http://www.creactive-design.co.uk/lightwave_vx/ and you will have a killer workflow if you ask me
Integration does not automatically provide a better workflow (but if done right it surely will).

Actually, Matts design is a very good example, but the beauty of it is not the look but a lot of functionality that Matt sees behind it. We had a few discussions about that, and (Matt would be the first to admit that) - there are areas where he doesn't know how to approach them becuase he doesn't know what the current workflow is - or how a future workflow could be put into practice.

Cheers,
Mike

Dexter2999
05-24-2007, 06:04 AM
the best thing you can do if you aks me is make two buttons. 1 with modeler and 1 with layout. when you press the modeler button you will see only the buttons of modeler and when you press layout you will see only the buttons from layout.

Or you could have one button, when you are in modeler it says "Layout" and when you are in Layout it says "Modeler", and it just toggles back and forth....OH!!! and you could give it a shortcut key like uh....F12. ;)

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 06:06 AM
Or you could have one button, when you are in modeler it says "Layout" and when you are in Layout it says "Modeler", and it just toggles back and forth....OH!!! and you could give it a shortcut key like uh....F12. ;)
Lol... yeah, but what about the "Paint" or "Dynamics" modules then? ;)

...and, how could I model in context of the scene I'm in...

Cheers,
Mike

Dexter2999
05-24-2007, 06:20 AM
...and, how could I model in context of the scene I'm in...

Cheers,
Mike

Seriously, I'd like it if the perspective view (or any and all of the views, I use top, side,perspective, and camera in layout) were linked between Modeler and Layout. When I see something wrong in layout, it would be nice to switch over to Modeler and already be zoomed in on the problem.

Sorry if this wasn't your intent but the word "context" brought that to mind.

Is this a good idea, or am I still to new at this to see it's downside?

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 06:22 AM
Sorry if this wasn't your intent but the word "context" brought that to mind.

Is this a good idea, or am I still to new at this to see it's downside?
Nope sounds fine.
What I'd like to see is basically something like that, but with context I meant having (optionally) other scene items visible in the background... but in relation to the item I'm working on.

Cheers,
Mike

Dexter2999
05-24-2007, 06:25 AM
I see..sort of like onion skin? but with multiple objects?

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 06:27 AM
I see..sort of like onion skin? but with multiple objects?
More like background layers in Modeler right now.

But that's me, I like to assemble objects in Layout.

Cheers,
Mike

Dexter2999
05-24-2007, 06:44 AM
I think I see where you going with this.

How about assignable colors for the wireframes of the other objects you are viewing in the current model?

Or conversely, black and shades of grey for outside objects and colored wires for different layers of the current model?

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 06:48 AM
How about assignable colors for the wireframes of the other objects you are viewing in the current model?

Hey, you can assign them already :)

Just as a sample: imagine tweaking an (animated) steering wheel in an assembled car. The wheel will be transformed, angled, moved... but you might still want to work on it and see how it will fit in to the rest of the model.
You can of course model it in place in modeler and move the pivot point... but you can't rotate the pivot in Modeler, or change the pivot in LAyout and then come back to Modeler with the change.

There's plenty of stuff like that. I suppose I'm affected by this because I tend to model as I progress on my scene a lot.

Cheers,
Mike

theo
05-24-2007, 06:53 AM
\I suppose I'm affected by this because I tend to model as I progress on my scene a lot.


This is exactly how I work. One is almost forced to work this way if the piece is an evolving creation, the which I tend to produce a lot of.

Vision1
05-24-2007, 07:19 AM
Lol... yeah, but what about the "Paint" or "Dynamics" modules then? ;)

...and, how could I model in context of the scene I'm in...

Cheers,
Mike

as far as i know Dynamics have it own button in layout so it doesn't need a new button because it is a part of layout. and like Dexter2999 say



Or you could have one button, when you are in modeler it says "Layout" and when you are in Layout it says "Modeler", and it just toggles back and forth....OH!!! and you could give it a shortcut key like uh....F12.

you could use the second button for paint

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 07:21 AM
...you could use the second button for paint
Why limit it? why not just make the user defined workspaces? Is that a bad thing only because most other apps allow you to define them? ;)

Cheers,
Mike

alifx
05-24-2007, 07:45 AM
you could use the second button for paint

are we in a dream !!

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 07:50 AM
are we in a dream !!
Is this thread called: "The Future !!!!" ? ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Vision1
05-24-2007, 08:40 AM
Why limit it? why not just make the user defined workspaces? Is that a bad thing only because most other apps allow you to define them? ;)

Cheers,
Mike


well like Matt idea, there must be Total User Configurability and i agree on that.

but for now lightwave have 2 apps and that is modeler and layout. many people like it separated and many like it integrated.

people that like them separated say: i can concentrate on modeling in modeler and in layout on animation and this way it has a clean UI.

people that say i want it integrated say: i want them integrated because then i can animate with the model tools like points polygons etc and i don't have to switch if i must change something.

so a integrated app will need a model button so you can see only the modeling button/tools and a layout button so you can only seen the animation button/tools

if you add to many buttons you don't have a clean UI.
That's why i don't like almost any other apps UI ( haven't seen one that integrated this in a good way)

why not make a few UI configs so you can choose from them when you first install lightwave. of course you can change it later

Lightwolf
05-24-2007, 08:44 AM
so a integrated app will need a model button so you can see only the modeling button/tools and a layout button so you can only seen the animation button/tools
We're on the same line, that's what a workspace is.

Cheers,
Mike

jasonwestmas
05-24-2007, 09:27 AM
Oh man, modeling, animation, simulation shelf/modes that appear and disappear are very cool!