PDA

View Full Version : Older LightWave versions?



ShawnStovall
08-17-2007, 12:52 AM
I'm just curious to see what people think... I, for one, would love to have access to all the past releases(the ones that weren't tied to Video Toaster anyway).

Phil
08-17-2007, 01:12 AM
To what end? I imagine that if you have a pressing need for an older version, a quiet word with customer service will get you up and running, but I don't think this is an appropriate mechanism to address bugs that affect significant numbers of people.

If it's just for nostalgia reasons, customer service might also be able to help, but I think you'll quickly find the older versions to be painful to work with on all fronts. I've used pretty much every version since 4.0. I don't miss any of them really, although continue to miss Steamer (and look how many people have asked for Steamer to be restored to us, without success).

colkai
08-17-2007, 03:37 AM
My 5.6 no longer works with my dongle, keeps telling me my license key is invalid.
Now I'd actually like it to be running again as some of my old scenes are still 5.6 dependant as they use Steamer.

So for sure, I'd love to be able to have the download & key available in my area.

nukemodular
08-17-2007, 03:50 AM
yeah this would be nice...i remember some scenes i rendered with naturefx in lw 7.5...these scenes rendered with any newer vers. donīt look as good as they did in 7.5...they got some nasty outlines...

Steamthrower
08-17-2007, 05:28 AM
For nostalgia's sake, why not?

And for registered users who have already bought a Lightwave version, why not make all previous versions free for them? It'd not only help in compatibility (working with others who own 6.0, using ancient assets) but it'd be fun to run what they ran in 1997.

Lew
08-17-2007, 05:39 AM
Could be a great marketing tool. People who are thinking about any 3D program could down load a free two back version and try it out. If they had any fun and/or talent, I bet they would be buying the latest and greatest.

Phil
08-17-2007, 05:50 AM
My 5.6 no longer works with my dongle, keeps telling me my license key is invalid.
Now I'd actually like it to be running again as some of my old scenes are still 5.6 dependant as they use Steamer.

So for sure, I'd love to be able to have the download & key available in my area.

If you are running a USB dongle, you need to ensure that the parallel port dongle drivers are installed.

5.5 was the first version to introduce license.key, so it could also be that your dongle ID changed due to swapout when the USB keys came out (7.0, perhaps?).

kremesch73
08-17-2007, 11:05 AM
I think 6.5 would be a nice little freebie; stripped of it's need for a dongle, of course. Then I could play with it at work on my breaks, and go back to playing with the latest at home. Heck, I could even get my son to play with it since he's starting to show interest and maybe even get him hooked. It would certainly bring in new customers if they enjoy using it.

On the other hand, it might not be a bad idea to come out with a PLE version of the latest and greatest like Vue6 and Maya, allowing the user full functionality but constraining their creations only to the PLE version and watermarking renders.

I like the 6.5 version idea best though, for selfish reasons. But a PLE edition might benefit Newtek for marketing reasons.

colkai
08-17-2007, 11:32 AM
I like the XSI mod thing, 65K polys is enough to really play with, it was enough to tempt me to actually download it, which is more than I can say for teh Maya PLe or the previous XSI demo.

Mind you, downloading and using are 2 different beasts, time time time. ;)

kremesch73
08-17-2007, 12:27 PM
:D The XSI mod got me hooked on XSI as well (even though I don't find it as intuitive to use as LW, it's still fun to play with). I'm not really big on time-limited demos since I never really have the (limited) time to play with them to see if I like them, which seems to be the way things are going for many. So, I have a tendency to pass them up, which is why I find myself more partial to the newer trend of PLE and game-mod versions instead. I also find myself more partial to the companies that offer them (it shows incentive and removes that 'snobbish' feel from them - not that I'm saying they're snobbish).

So, once again: I don't think it would hurt Newtek to release something to play with that didn't limit a person to 400 points or vertices or whatever the heck it is (been a while since I scratched my head over forgetting about my dongle), but kept it limited enough to protect their own interests - 6.5 still comes to mind, of course, since, compared to today's standards, it's almost like a gamers mod... hint, hint...

Titus
08-17-2007, 12:27 PM
I like the XSI mod thing, 65K polys is enough to really play with, it was enough to tempt me to actually download it, which is more than I can say for teh Maya PLe or the previous XSI demo.

Mind you, downloading and using are 2 different beasts, time time time. ;)

Houdini apprentice is even better, you can make a complete project with it, the only defference is the file format can be read only by another Houdini Apprentice, and the render image file format is watermarked but you can render to their propietary format that can be used in their compositor.

I just don't think is a good idea to show older versions of the program to potential users, instead show the state of the art.

ShawnStovall
08-17-2007, 08:05 PM
why not make an earlier version free ?

like 6.5 or 5.6 ?

Thant is what I meant.:)

Extent
08-18-2007, 07:47 AM
I always thought that would be an awesome thing, but free to the world, not just current LW owners. 5.6 is so outdated now I can't imagine anyone using it in a serious production pipeline, but the effect on the enthusiast market could be great, at least as a modeler. With the changes happening and planned in 9.x maybe even 6.x or 7.x?

frantbk
08-18-2007, 09:45 AM
Why stop at 5.6? go all they way back to windows/Dos 3.x version. Windows XP should run it in protected mode. Four point zero or early would be nice to have, just to see the difference in advancements.

Steamthrower
08-18-2007, 11:29 AM
Titus made a good point about not showing old versions to potential buyers. But making old versions available to registered LW customers is another thing.

cresshead
08-18-2007, 07:50 PM
older versions for registered commercial users?.YES
older version as a freeby [fullly working]...maybe...but limit it to 6.0 or 6.5/7.0 and ONLY make it available via a VERY robust marketing campaign...say run it as a freeby only available from 3D world magazine with a offer to upgrade to 9.3 at a discount...BUT stck in there a whole wodge of training videos to make the offer REALLY tempting...maybe even get the community on board with a special model/scene pak for the promo that showcases stuff like babylon 5, star trek and battle star galactica within the promo....

giving it away with no marketing campaing would be a total waste....you need to PROMOTE 'lightwave''...with the freeby AND the upgrade offer to 9.3

you need to demonstrate

arch design,
film
tv
games
product design
web...

get the idea?

Mr Rid
08-19-2007, 06:33 AM
5.6 is so outdated now I can't imagine anyone using it in a serious production pipeline, ...

Am surely the last to do so.

I still love what I could get out of HV and Steamer that I can not get in any subsequent versions- smooth smoke and hazy clouds that often rendered faster than 7.5 (didnt compare after that).

Some demo shots from 5.6 days still fool interviewers- they never realize this is all CG (matchmoved, 10mb) http://www.box.net/shared/static/t2hxgep3ev.mov


Other things I missed about 5.6:

-Render a wireframe preview while LW is minimized or go do something else in an overlapping interface.

-It wasnt until v9 that you could FINALLY render the camera passing thru a volumetric voxel as you could in 5.6.

-Had alpha options for HV- none, add or replace.

-Rotate Path.

-Clear Motion.

-Could zoom in to HV and Steamer preview windows. (I wish Viper had this or a limited region particularly for tedious volumetrics).

-Could have Linear and TCB on one keyframe.

-Limited Region at least showed % values. (Have needed to enter LR values).

-There was a neat little preview thing in HV that few knew about where you could click in the texture window and cycle thru views of a histogram, clip, & greyscale of your texture, then could ctrl+L-click to see a brief animation of your effect speed.

-Load more than one object at once into a layer in Modeler.

-Ability to apply displacement maps to baked particles (as with Particle Storm).

-I prefered being able to move/rotate/scale an item and have it stay put while I go move/rotate/scale other items without Autokey on.

-5.6 displacements dont always convert correctly into subsequent versions- Fractal Bumps in particular.

-One displace bug that is in all versions after 5.6 is that local Fractal Noise displace moves around as you rotate the mesh it is applied to. It is not always easily detected (tore my hair out trying to figure out why an old 5.6 scene was not lining up right) unless you parent the camera to the mesh as you rotate it- the displace undulates mysteriously.

Glendalough
08-19-2007, 07:50 AM
Some demo shots from 5.6 days still fool interviewers- they never realize this is all CG (matchmoved, 10mb) http://www.box.net/shared/static/t2hxgep3ev.mov



Hi Mr Rid,

Must say, nice shot, animation (please don't say those figures are Posers!). Pretty interesting your take on Lightwave 5.6, just wondering though, one thing:

This animation is really dark and I've sort of collected early Lwave animations all over the web and they are all dark, even the ones that go into using sort of flat models to create a 2D effect. I started working professionally in around version 7 and had the same trouble with darkness which some people would notice, it wasn't a big deal and was easily fixed but began to notice this was really the biggest consistent problem with 3D animations.

Even as recently as a few years ago with the Mr. Incredible movie you could see parts here and there were really just a bit too dark. This has all pretty much disappeared in the past few years, in Cars this was not a problem anywhere.

Glendalough
08-19-2007, 08:14 AM
About the poll. I think this would be a great idea, especially as Lightwave has such an interesting past.

Making a version free to the public is a different idea. As cresshead says it would hinge on a marketing campaign. This seems a bit scary, I think the present 30 days fully functional demo is the best in the industry (Lux the only other that does this).

Had a go at 5.6 a few months ago and was astounded at both how advanced and how backward it was. I think version 6 is just too good, the render quality anyway, to be giving away. But also people might start jumping on all it's faults and it could cause more bad publicity than good.

But, maybe giving 5.6 away free would be okay, as this would be 10 years ago and so there is no way people could fault it. Being simpler, it is also more reliable. It would be of historic interest as well.

But also it could be very useful for children learning 3D, I can't think of a better version of any program for this. It has simplicity and the lack of unnecessary options for the beginner which helps them to concentrate on the job at hand.

cresshead
08-19-2007, 09:07 AM
I believe that 5.6 would be a great historical give away but hardly anyone would use modeler in 5.6 as it's a 'dinosaur' in regards the perspective view...
you'd need version 6.0 at least to get people to actually use modeler...layout is a different thing...5.6 would be okay for layout.

we've currently got m*d* on offer over at daz3d with version 1.03
we've had bryce5.5 recently as a freeby
in the past cinema 6.0ce was a give away with a upgrade promo
plus world builder and poser..we currently have xsi mod tool as a freeby.

as for 30day demo's

xsi has 30 day demo
3ds max 30 day demo
3dsviz 30 day demo
modo 30 day demo
mudbox 15 day demo

so time out demo's are quite prevalent

also
houdini has a ple version
maya has a ple version
vue has a ple version
motion builder ple

Glendalough
08-19-2007, 09:24 AM
I believe that 5.6 would be a great historical give away but hardly anyone would use modeler in 5.6 as it's a 'dinosaur' in regards the perspective view...as for 30day demo's

xsi has 30 day demo
3ds max 30 day demo
3dsviz 30 day demo
modo 30 day demo
mudbox 15 day demo

so time out demo's are quite prevalent

also
houdini has a ple version
maya has a ple version
vue has a ple version
motion builder ple

I thought the modeler was good in that you had to use all 4 viewports which helps one see what is happening. I know the new perspective is more advanced, but it is also a bit harder when in comes to absolute accuaracy.

Don't know much about it, but are you sure all these versions of 30 day demos have no strings attached about say saving things etc.

I know the PLE version of maya is just a complete insult to customer, really turned me off anyway, such a waste of time.

cresshead
08-19-2007, 10:05 AM
Don't know much about it, but are you sure all these versions of 30 day demos have no strings attached about say saving things etc.

yeah all 30 days fully working just be aware that they are .0 releases so version9.0, you'll never get a patch release as the demo or a point update as a relseased 30 day demo...

viz used to be a 15 day demo but they extended it to 30..so if your looking at max then my advice would be to run the viz demo first then the max demo as viz ''IS MAX'' but with no deformable bones and no animated modifiers or particle systems...you'l then have 60 days to evaluate max.

also worth hoarding demo versions... either as they come out or from past magazine discs as you could run max8 then max 9 demos..and viz 2007 and viz 2008...giving you a total of 120 days to fully evaluate 3dsmax's tools.
as an example. [viz saves and loads .max files btw]





I know the PLE version of maya is just a complete insult to customer, really turned me off anyway, such a waste of time.

well i can see where your coming from regards the viewport watermark and it only using 1 cpu plus the ple file format but i've bought the 3dbuzz maya fundamentals training disc and will be using ple maya to go thru it...the great thing is it doesn't timeout so i'm not ''pushed'' to find time to learn it...i can do it at my own pace...so i'll put up with watermarks in shaded views [watermarks are NOT in wire views]

a note on housini's ple version..it does use a special file format but if you BUY houdini..they will convert ALL of you ple created scene for you to houdini's format so you can use it in your purchased version...if you find you want to buy it.

Titus
08-19-2007, 11:36 AM
Some demo shots from 5.6 days still fool interviewers- they never realize this is all CG (matchmoved, 10mb) http://www.box.net/shared/static/t2hxgep3ev.mov

You're my new hero :D. I fell in love with LW when it was 5.5, the quality of the render was amazing at that time.

ShawnStovall
08-19-2007, 11:37 AM
This Steamer... tell me more...:eek:

zapper1998
08-19-2007, 11:50 AM
good old steamer...yah miss it

Glendalough
08-19-2007, 12:38 PM
yeah all 30 days fully working just be aware that they are .0 releases so version9.0, you'll never get a patch release as the demo or a point update as a relseased 30 day demo...



That's interesting about all those 30 day demos. I have more than enough with Lwave, Modo, Blender and soon Zbrush to keep under control!

Know you're a real Max fan, they use it here alot (in Ireland at moment), must be the Cad relationship. I just thought the Maya PLE was really bad PR, but of course Maya is for big studios unless you are good at programing. (Actually, this may not be that true, but people like me tend to think that way)

That Houdini really looks interesting but life is too short -DAMN!

cresshead
08-19-2007, 12:46 PM
all apps are irritating...just that some give milder headaches than others!
i can tollerate lightwave,vue, max and z brush more than most others!

Mr Rid
08-19-2007, 01:38 PM
Hi Mr Rid,

Must say, nice shot, animation (please don't say those figures are Posers!).


... Since I came up with the idea of adding a freefall sequence to a low budget movie, it had to be done in a few weeks so I matchmoved clips from different movies for the motion. I had modeled the C-123 from an earlier project, and cobbled a human figure together quickly from 3 different Viewpoint models (would have prefered Poser:) ), like the flight suit was modified from an astronaut suit. Going from normal to wind-whipped hair using geometry was a trick, but parachutes were the main challenge.




This animation is really dark and I've sort of collected early Lwave animations all over the web and they are all dark, ...

Am not sure what you may be refering to, but the reason this sequence is dark is that it took place at night. The original scene was actually much darker although looked fine on film. I lightened it a lot after seeing how dark some interviewer's video monitors were kept and could not see some shots at all (note to demo makers). So it winds up resembling the odd look of day-for-night shooting.

All shots Ive ever worked on for TV or film pass thru precise level processing, monitored by several people where there is no propensity for dark shots. But you never know who may be authoring the DVDs. Blockbuster handled several direct-to-video movies I worked on and did a horrible job with one level setting for the entire movie so all night or underwater shots were ridiculously dark.

Trulsi
08-19-2007, 02:13 PM
I voted for. But I see there could be a problem in that if a lot of people actually would use it, lw forums here and there could be filled up with questions regarding the old lightwave versions.

Glendalough
08-19-2007, 03:27 PM
Am not sure what you may be refering to, but the reason this sequence is dark is that it took place at night. The original scene was actually much darker although looked fine on film. I lightened it a lot after seeing how dark some interviewer's video monitors were kept and could not see some shots at all (note to demo makers). So it winds up resembling the odd look of day-for-night shooting.

All shots Ive ever worked on for TV or film pass thru precise level processing, monitored by several people where there is no propensity for dark shots. But you never know who may be authoring the DVDs. Blockbuster handled several direct-to-video movies I worked on and did a horrible job with one level setting for the entire movie so all night or underwater shots were ridiculously dark.

Maybe dark isn't quite it, maybe more like flat tones, or MOST of the tone range seems to be at the darker end of the spectrum, gamut, whatever the word is.

But as I said, this problem seems to have slowly disappeared over the past few iterations and years in Lightwave and other programs.

http://www.archive.org/details/Walk2001

This is the film I was thinking of made in 5.6 and even though most of it is half 2D it still has this darkness thing (?)

Mr Rid
08-19-2007, 10:23 PM
You're my new hero :D. I fell in love with LW when it was 5.5, the quality of the render was amazing at that time.

Spinny light rigs & Real Fresnel and you were all set. Still have v4 shots on the demo, and would not be embarassed to have some from v3.

5.6 was the last stable version until recently. LW has been very crashy in production for years. The stench of v6 at a distance literally kept me from ever doing more than opening it once. Even though v7 was out, I supervised a 245 FX shot project insisting that everyone stick with v5.6 since we knew it worked. 7.5 was bareable. v8...zzzzz. Been growin old here NT.

Was curious to quick compare an old 5.6 spinny light scene-

Spinny lites rendered in 5.6, medAA- 7min 2sec
49534

Final Gather rendered in 9.3, medAA- 9min 15sec
49535

cresshead
08-19-2007, 11:13 PM
i still have 5.6 installed on an old dell....Hmmm...intersting stuff!

Mr Rid
08-27-2007, 03:57 AM
Some nice old 5.6 HV clouds I came across.

by Jim Perry- 1mb
http://www.box.net/shared/static/ay0hjjj8kx.mov
by myself (23 hrs per frame)- 3mb
http://www.box.net/shared/static/x4ymx09o7r.mov
by Dennis Greenlaw- 9mb
http://www.box.net/shared/static/7h19v1j1d6.mov

Glendalough
08-27-2007, 05:09 AM
FAR OUT!

They still look "dark" to me. Does no one know what I'm talking about?

Mr Rid
08-27-2007, 04:13 PM
FAR OUT!

They still look "dark" to me. Does no one know what I'm talking about?


Your monitor maybe? :-) Ive been told that QT gamma is significantly different on Macs than on PCs. But again, two of these shots are at night so they are suppose to be dark. That first one was actually much darker on film.

Here's how dark some shots originally were for film.

SP00
08-27-2007, 06:07 PM
I feel like saying yes, but I think the legacy issues would be a problem as they progress with new versions of Lightwave. Then again, they could take all legacy issues out of LW9.3 and streamline it, then if you need to run old stuff, just download the old version.