PDA

View Full Version : OSX only features for future Lightwave updates.



Ade
07-13-2003, 09:15 AM
Beams latest post got me thinking, Apple has many technologies that they either use or created and make them easiest used via OSX. Lightwave does feel like an emulated pc app and there arent too many optimised for Apple features.
Some ideas maybe wanky, some may be valid, feel free to add by including the topic it falls under.

I would like to compile some either cosmetic or functionable features only could be achieved via OSX:

networking:
1.Rendezvous
2. IP over firewire screamernet support.
3. Intergration of screamernet and Remote desktop.
4.Airport extreme support (if none)

Functional:
1. Layout uses progress meter in dock to display percentage of rendering/load times like photoshop does.
2. Portable rendering engine (small to fit on renderfarm macs and can run via network.
3. Modeller+Layout activate each other the same effect used in Panther user switch login, thus reducing a second window pane and just one icon in dock BUT retaining the 2 apps feel (just a thought)

Application:
1.Support for Pixlet.
2. Quartz extreme for UI redraws and presentation.
3. File preview system same as Panther finder (and like Photoshop has where u can see thumbs)
4. Tightest HDRI intergration with FCP4.
5. Viper intergrates more with Open GL, maybe we can get realtime display of sas?

drclare
07-13-2003, 01:43 PM
How bout support for dual processors for all lightwave features, like motion designer, particles, etc.

js33
07-13-2003, 10:21 PM
It made more sense for LW to have a common code base back in the days when it ran on SGI, SUN, Amiga, PC and Mac but now it only runs on PC and Mac so I don't see why it has to remain that common anymore. I think it should have two versions. One Mac and one PC that are optimized for each platforms abilities. If only there could be a common plugin format that would run on both platforms then the programs could kinda go their seperate ways and still be the same if you follow me.

Cheers,
JS

Beamtracer
07-14-2003, 12:12 AM
Is there any reason we can't network render with Airport Extreme/WiFi/IEEE 802.11g now? I may be wrong but I also can't see why Screamernet wouldn't also work with Firewire IP.

It's not a matter of getting support for Quicktime Pixlet in particlular, but getting Lightwave support for 16bpc Quicktime in general. Lightwave can currently only input or output 8bpc Quicktimes. Once Lightwave supports 16bpc Quicktimes that'll automatically enable Pixlet, Microcosm and any other 16bpc codecs.

Rendezvous would make everyone's lives much easier.
So would multiprocessor support for all of Lightwave (not just some of it).

Red_Oddity
07-14-2003, 02:46 AM
Why on earth would you want to render to Quicktime (doesn't work well with net rendering and if your computer crashes there's a large change your QT file is f-ed up aswell...)

Just use image sequences and import those in Quicktime (or AfterFX or Shake (does FCP import image sequences already?)) and then save as Pixlet or whatever...

Jimzip
07-14-2003, 05:26 AM
Red_Oddity, I render to Quicktime every time I render an animation. I agree with you, I've had crashes and corrupt movies, (Not to mention much heartache:( )
but I think that rendering out into images for small movies is slightly annoying. Our teacher said it's a good way to go about it, putting all the images together later, but for small things I just can't see the point. For final renders, yeah it's a must tho..

(Where was I going with this post? Eh, whatever..)

Jimzip:D

Ade
07-14-2003, 06:09 AM
Nice avatar jim hehe

drclare
07-14-2003, 02:22 PM
Yeah, fcp will import image sequences. And since fcp 4 supports 32bpc imagery you can import hdr image sequences. That's the way to go.

toby
07-14-2003, 03:03 PM
I agree that rendering to quicktime for animation previews and such is fine, but certainly you wouldn't need them to be 16bpc for that... it doesn't seem like 16bpc qt's should be a priority

Beamtracer
07-14-2003, 03:57 PM
I'm not denying the benefits of rendering to image sequences. There are other times when Quicktime can be useful.

Not all renders are networked.
Not all renders take a long time.
Sometimes inputting Quicktime can be useful.

If you have some video that comes from an editing or compositing application. You want to run it through Lightwave just to pass it through one of the image filters. Render time is relatively short, so you don't need to network render.

In this particular case, to translate the existing QT video to an image sequence is an unnecessary step.

Another case where QT is useful: When your render is not networked, and you want to output to a compositing application. QT should be used in addition to image sequences. If your render fails, then you use the image sequence. If your render works OK, then you use the QT and destroy the image sequence that was there for a backup. This can be a time saver (and a space saver).

So, if there are long network renders then image sequences are better. Quicktime still has its usefulness, and if we're going to have Quicktime then it should be fully supported. Support for 16bpc QT is important.

DaveW
07-14-2003, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by Ade


I would like to compile some either cosmetic or functionable features only could be achieved via OSX:

networking:
1.Rendezvous
2. IP over firewire screamernet support.
3. Intergration of screamernet and Remote desktop.
4.Airport extreme support (if none)


I don't see why that couldn't all be done cross-platform. There isn't rendezvous on Windows but there are already network renderng apps for LW that do the same thing. NewTek just needs to make a good cross-platform render controller.

I don't quite understand the other stuff though. For Firewire and Airport extreme networks, shouldn't that just work like a regular network? I've used Airport on PC's to do network rendering, I don't see why it can't be done on OSX. And what does OSX remote desktop do or not do that XP's doesn't, and how would it integrate with Lightwave? Shouldn't you just be able to start remote desktop and control LW (and any other app) without any work on the part of LW? What exactly does NewTek need to do here?



Functional:
1. Layout uses progress meter in dock to display percentage of rendering/load times like photoshop does.
2. Portable rendering engine (small to fit on renderfarm macs and can run via network.
3. Modeller+Layout activate each other the same effect used in Panther user switch login, thus reducing a second window pane and just one icon in dock BUT retaining the 2 apps feel (just a thought)



The progress meter would be really cool. I don't know what you mean about the portable rendering engine. Isn't that what screamernet is? The Moderl/Layout activation sounds interesting, you want to have that rotating cube transition when switching between the two? Is that going to be part of Panther that any app can make use of it or is it something only Apple can do? For the single icon thing, you can write a very simple batch file in Windows (just two lines of text, each containing the path to the LW shortcuts in quotes) to lauch both together. There should be a similar way in OSX.



Application:
1.Support for Pixlet.
2. Quartz extreme for UI redraws and presentation.
3. File preview system same as Panther finder (and like Photoshop has where u can see thumbs)
4. Tightest HDRI intergration with FCP4.
5. Viper intergrates more with Open GL, maybe we can get realtime display of sas?

Pixlet is going to be part of Quicktime right? So LW should automatically see it. If not then you can render to image sequence.
Quartz Extreme uses OpenGL right, so how is that different from what LW is already doing? What would Quartz Extreme add? NewTek does need to speed up window drawing but they shouldn't need to use Quartz Extreme to do that. For the thumbnails, they shouldn't need Panther for that. I assume it works the same on a Mac, but in Windows you can either use the default open/save window (which has a thumbnail view) or the VBrequestor which has an icon view; the VBrequestors icons show a thumbnail if one is available. What NewTek needs to do in this case is add thumbnail support for lwo's, but that should work on any OS, including current releases of OSX.
I like any idea that involves improving viper :) I'd love to see realtime displays of Sasquatch fur along with everything else (HV, procedurals, transparency, ect). It should be possible with newer video cards and pixel/vertex shaders.

drclare
07-15-2003, 12:13 AM
How bout support for aiff files in layout. I don't use audio that much for syncing, as im sure many don't, but it would still be nice. That way if we ever do need audio on our timeline we won't have to export aiff files to wav first. It's just a pain.

Red_Oddity
07-15-2003, 02:50 AM
What? Clicking twice in Quicktime Pro to convert a audio file is too much hassle?
My friend, you ARE spoiled...:D

Zarathustra
07-15-2003, 10:15 AM
Well, AE6 will support PSD layer sequences so add that to the argument of image sequences versus quicktimes.

A Mac-optimized LW has been a dream for some time. Now add a Mac-64bit-optimized LW.

Beamtracer
07-15-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by Zarathustra
Well, AE6 will support PSD layer sequences so add that to the argument of image sequences versus quicktimes.

A Mac-optimized LW has been a dream for some time. Now add a Mac-64bit-optimized LW. Layered PSD sequences will be useful. You'd better purchase an array of new hard drives though.

Using Lightwave's PSD export plug-in to export 16bpc PSD frames with Alphas, it already runs at 8MB per frame (at standard broadcast video size). If you render at 50 or 60fps then you quickly get yourself into terrabyte file sizes.

Now multiply that by the number of layers you have.

Zarathustra
07-15-2003, 03:56 PM
Firewire drives are pretty cheap.

The potential for multipass manipulation of animations is big.

You're the quality guy, Mr 16bpc. How could you not want this?

Ade
07-16-2003, 07:55 PM
Firewire over IP is easier to setup than a crossover connection.
Apple released Firewire over IP to developers which I have used, it is now GM in Panther which i also have.
Its a worthy asset, expecially when gigabyte ethernet is expensive yet FW800 isnt.
Sooner or later FW will be just as fast and more cheaper. If apple gets FW over IP matured by then it will be good for all of us and we will have one free etehrnet port spare to share internet between two macs. I also think FW cables are able to be a longer length without loosing bandwidth unlike LAN?

fxgeek
07-17-2003, 08:18 AM
I've just written an article on the subject of Mac only features in Pro software:

http://www.thomas-fitzgerald.net/mt_test/archives/000023.html

mbaldwin
07-17-2003, 10:36 AM
thomas,

nice article.

thanks for the read.

-m.