PDA

View Full Version : blender aheda of the game



Juancho00
02-19-2008, 02:10 AM
Hi guys,

I was really excited to find out that the next blender implementation will include a mesh deform option for character posing, wow

newtek, if they have it I want one too!! :D

http://www.blender.org/development/current-projects/changes-since-245/modifiers/

http://graphics.pixar.com/HarmonicCoordinatesB/paper.pdf

lardbros
02-19-2008, 02:24 AM
Hi guys,

I was really excited to find out that the next blender implementation will include a mesh deform option for character posing, wow

newtek, if they have it I want one too!! :D

http://www.blender.org/development/current-projects/changes-since-245/modifiers/

http://graphics.pixar.com/HarmonicCoordinatesB/paper.pdf

Hmmmm... if only!! We need the revamped Character animation tools before this is even thought about, looks great though

Dodgy
02-19-2008, 03:32 AM
If metalink was dynamic instead of needing a clothfx, that'd be like that.

hrgiger
02-19-2008, 04:12 AM
So blender is chock full of these great features and it is free. My question is, what's wrong with it? What are the problems with it? I've been looking at XSI for some time but maybe I should look at Blender and save myself the money?

Dirk
02-19-2008, 04:16 AM
My question is, what's wrong with it? What are the problems with it?

Last time I checked, the GUI was somewhat like torture.

eagleeyed
02-19-2008, 04:22 AM
Hmmm, I must admit I have been looking to Blender, unfortunately I am starting to not see the hope I once did with LW, and am having doubts, so I have been looking at other packages. Blender is installed on my Ubuntu installation, I am going to see what 9.x brings though until I make up my mind.

Something that keeps bringing me back though is the render quality of LW compared to Blender, it still just plain looks better in my opinion via looking at the 9.2 LightWave User Community Video and the 2006? SIGGRAPH Video for Blender.

Matt
02-19-2008, 04:57 AM
You can have all the best features in the world, but if the UI makes them in-accessible to all but a select few, who seem to get on with it. What's the point?

Personally, I just _can't stand_ Blender's interface.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 05:10 AM
You can have all the best features in the world, but if the UI makes them in-accessible to all but a select few, who seem to get on with it. What's the point?

Personally, I just _can't stand_ Blender's interface.
Too bad, since it's not that bad. For the unitiated no worse than LW - which also only grows on you by use and perseverance.

And if you end up working faster once you've learnt it then you would in an interface that is easier to approach initially there's nothing wrong with it, is there?

Just imagine we didn't have keyboards, only on-screen displays to tap with the mouse. Maybe easier initially... but a keyboard offers a learning curve that is worth it.

Cheers,
Mike

starbase1
02-19-2008, 05:20 AM
Too bad, since it's not that bad. For the unitiated no worse than LW - which also only grows on you by use and perseverance.

And if you end up working faster once you've learnt it then you would in an interface that is easier to approach initially there's nothing wrong with it, is there?

Just imagine we didn't have keyboards, only on-screen displays to tap with the mouse. Maybe easier initially... but a keyboard offers a learning curve that is worth it.

Cheers,
Mike

Fair comment - I think that back when I was starting LW in 5.6, it was the hardest application to learn I'd ever attempted, not helped by the awful docs, (which I am happy to say have come on in leaps and bounds since then).

Blender does have a certain reputation for being as user friendly as a cornered rat though...

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 05:55 AM
Fair comment - I think that back when I was starting LW in 5.6, it was the hardest application to learn I'd ever attempted, not helped by the awful docs, (which I am happy to say have come on in leaps and bounds since then).
Hehe, funny. I still think the 5.6 docs were the best organized ever.

Blender does have a certain reputation for being as user friendly as a cornered rat though...
How many of the complaining people have read docs that are at least close to what LW offers?

Cheers,
Mike

Matt
02-19-2008, 06:03 AM
Too bad, since it's not that bad. For the unitiated no worse than LW - which also only grows on you by use and perseverance.

If it's not _that_ bad, how come everyone moans about how _bad_ it is!!!!!! ;)

Sure any package may make more sense if you've never used anything else before, but not exactly helping those who have are they?

It just seems to be designed by programmers, for programmers. Most 3D artists are not programmers.

Vujaka
02-19-2008, 06:21 AM
Not everyone is..anymore. It used to be, but the interface is hardly terrible anymore.

IMHO Most interfaces take some orientation to get used too. And at least the help doc is better now too.

Iain
02-19-2008, 06:23 AM
After tinkering very lightly with Blender for a few years now, I agree that once you get used to the UI, it does kind of make sense.
It's just different from everything else.

I still feel like I've come home when I switch back to LW but I reckon Blender isn't far away from being taken very seriously. It just needs all that functionality tightened up a bit.
In fact, a lot of developers seem to put it before apps like LW for export consideration.

What I find quite exciting at the moment is the way Blender can export quite easily to a render engine like Indigo (also free) to produce amazing, Maxwell-like results.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 06:27 AM
If it's not _that_ bad, how come everyone moans about how _bad_ it is!!!!!! ;)
But they don't. People that don't know it complain - and you can blame the training material for that - plus the willingness of people to actually spend time learning it.
After all, it's free, you didn't pay for it, why bother learning it then?
However, if you do plunk down cash for an app... you learn it, even if the GUI sucks. Your much more likely to invest your time if you invested your cash.

Sure any package may make more sense if you've never used anything else before, but not exactly helping those who have are they?
Try Maya, Max, Houdini, even C4D or anything really - you'll have the same problems.
Getting savvy in any of them requires time, especially if they are targetted as pro apps - because they just offer so much under the hood and need to be flexible.

It just seems to be designed by programmers, for programmers. Most 3D artists are not programmers.
I disagree. 90% of GUI is design is pure logic - and understanding the desired workflow. (gratuitous car analogy omitted)

We're talking about a field here (3D) with no established workflows whatsoever - resulting in tons of different workflows. There's probably more pipelines out there than artists, resulting in many different UI approaches.
Just because it doesn't fit you doesn't meant that it is bad by itself.

Now, if we start dissecting into bits like consistency, learning curve, efficiency once you master it... then we might get somewhere (and depending on the criteria it will make some commercial offers look a lot less appealing as well).

Cheers,
Mike

Anti-Distinctly
02-19-2008, 06:28 AM
I have made several serious attempts to use Blender and always end up giving up. I'm relatively new to cg anyways, so I'm up for trying anything out - particularly if it's free.
Blender has a lovely feature list that appears to outweigh lightwave, but when ever I try to use it I find that it's quite inflexible in certain areas. e.g. I wanted more control over my particles than I had in LW so I looked at what was available in Blender. I may not know how to use them, but I looked at the docs and videos available and it was severely limited.
I've said this before, but Blender's interface is fine and I actually find it very versatile as you can set up the screen in any way you like - but it's the workflow that is awful. I know I'd be used to the LW way of doing things, but just trying to texture something is a royal pain. I've found this kind of thing every time I've had a serious attempt at using it.

The renderer pales in comparison to LW also and is no where near as fast. Is it tightly integrated with the YafRay renderer, but again, it's not the fastest, though it has some good features.

Titus
02-19-2008, 06:33 AM
Last time I checked, the GUI was somewhat like torture.

It's getting better with time. There was a moment in history when Blender didn't have an undo button or menus, just shortkeys and the "hotbox".

Is not a fair comparison IMO. Being an open source app they can include complete open sourced programs (like Bullet for realtime dynamics) as new features. To do this NewTek has to license commercial libraries, of course they also can get open sourced libraries with a BSD license, just what Apple did with the OS X core.

starbase1
02-19-2008, 06:47 AM
Hehe, funny. I still think the 5.6 docs were the best organized ever.

You are serious?!?!

The index was utterly useless - if it did not appear on a button, seems it wasn't indexed at all! And nothing like a help file provided, so no option to search...



How many of the complaining people have read docs that are at least close to what LW offers?

Cheers,
Mike

For a more postive comparison, I absolutely loved the Hexagon documentation, the little built in anims of the modeling tools in action really help...

Matt
02-19-2008, 06:48 AM
I disagree. 90% of GUI is design is pure logic - and understanding the desired workflow. (gratuitous car analogy omitted)

I agree, but sometimes programmer logic and artist logic can be totally different!

But you're right, there is no one package that has got it bang on, otherwise everyone would adopt that way of working!

Titus
02-19-2008, 06:59 AM
How many of the complaining people have read docs that are at least close to what LW offers?

Cheers,
Mike

I'm not complaining but in my experience Maya SDK docs are way better.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 07:03 AM
The index was utterly useless - if it did not appear on a button, seems it wasn't indexed at all! And nothing like a help file provided, so no option to search...
Help file, search, back then?
I read the user manual once and then kept the reference manual next to my keyboard for the next few months. I did find it to be well organized though and never had problems finding what I was looking for, especially since just about everything was explained well.
The current index is no better by the way, plenty of stuff missing. And I paid extra for printed docs (not much of a fan of on-line docs to be honest).

Cheers,
Mike

Matt
02-19-2008, 07:03 AM
Who reads docs these days? Video tutorials are the way forward! :)

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 07:04 AM
I'm not complaining but in my experience Maya SDK docs are way better.
Sorry, I meant Blender docs.
The Maya SDK docs are o.k. - even though parts of the SDK just plainly suck (GUI)...

Cheers,
Mike

Titus
02-19-2008, 07:07 AM
I disagree. 90% of GUI is design is pure logic - and understanding the desired workflow. (gratuitous car analogy omitted)

I disagree too, because there's no innovation in most apps. I believe GUI design goes far pure logic, actually a friend of mine has a master in interface design. Let's take Maya's hotbox and gestures as an example, this is a step beyond of anything you could find on the normal workflow in the rest of the programs, and it takes an innovator to come with the idea.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 07:08 AM
I agree, but sometimes programmer logic and artist logic can be totally different!
Hehe, nope, logic is logic. The assumptions (and thus the workflow) are different.

But you're right, there is no one package that has got it bang on, otherwise everyone would adopt that way of working!
And I truly think this is too a large degree to the complete industry being more or less self-taught.
I.e. if you look at other industries that are older than computers and now use computers as tools you'll find that there is a lot of best practice that has been adopted to the digital age.
CG might have related areas... but is way to deep and diverse to stem from one pre-digital trade.

Cheers,
Mike

cresshead
02-19-2008, 07:10 AM
looks a bit like how the skin wrap modifier works in 3dsmax:thumbsup:

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 07:13 AM
Let's take Maya's hotbox and gestures as an example, this is a step beyond of anything you could find on the normal workflow in the rest of the programs, and it takes an innovator to come with the idea.
The hotbox yes, gestures not (think quantel and discreet, not surprising since both have a tablet driven GUI).

But there you go... that spark of innovation is nothing without the logic to make it work properly, reliably and to be useful. There's plenty of GUI concepts that may be innovative... but don't work.

As for it taking an innovator... who says a coder can't be? Not all of them, granted... but then again only the minority of CG "artists" is innovative as well.

Cheers,
Mike

paulrus
02-19-2008, 07:15 AM
Blender is like that guy who complains that he can't keep a job because every company he's worked for is full of jerks. He never stops to consider perhaps he can't keep a job is because he's the problem, not everyone else.

There's a reason why there's a constant stream of comments about Blender's interface... and it's not that the world is full of jerks that don't get it.

Most competent 3D people can jump from LW to Maya to XSI to Max in fairly short order. There's a reason those same people run away from Blender.

Titus
02-19-2008, 07:30 AM
Most competent 3D people can jump from LW to Maya to XSI to Max in fairly short order. There's a reason those same people run away from Blender.

Then I'm very incompetent, because I can jump from Blender to LW and Maya :D.

In theory there are two kinds of GUI (I learned this in a couple of GUI design courses). With the first you learn as you go, you start clicking randomly and discover/learn the program using it, this is true for most modern apps.

Blender is part of the second group, you need to learn the interface first and just then you can start using the program. Both approaches have their benefits.

Titus
02-19-2008, 07:38 AM
But there you go... that spark of innovation is nothing without the logic to make it work properly, reliably and to be useful.

That's why I used the hotbox and gesture as an example, that's innovation who works (and work together). And we should accept the sad reality that most programmers don't even care about usability, because they/we/I have a particular structured mind, as long as the File and Edit menus are in the left corner and the Help menu is the last column, everything complies with how a GUI should be.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 07:44 AM
And we should accept the sad reality that most programmers don't even care about usability, because they/we/I have a particular structured mind, as long as the File and Edit menus are in the left corner and the Help menu is the last column, everything complies with how a GUI should be.
Don't blame the coder for that... blame the designers that say everything should work the same across all apps. Apple, Microsoft, rigid style guides...

Not that style guides are bad per se... but it depends on the kind of application and the target group.

Cheers,
Mike

Titus
02-19-2008, 07:49 AM
Maybe I'm not being clear on my point, this joke can illustrate it better:

For an engineer the perfect chair is a wooden box: it's cheap, it's easy to build and it works. It doesn't matter if it's not comfortable.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 07:55 AM
For an engineer the perfect chair is a wooden box: it's cheap, it's easy to build and it works. It doesn't matter if it's not comfortable.
You can of course easily reverse this:

For an artist the perfect chair is pure grace. It doesn't matter if you can sit on it or not.
(at least you can sit on the wooden box ;) )

That's what designers are for though - and that requires the talent to bring both parts together. A design that doesn't work isn't worth a thing.

Cheers,
Mike

Titus
02-19-2008, 08:00 AM
You can of course easily reverse this:

For an artist the perfect chair is pure grace. It doesn't matter if you can sit on it or not.


Yes, but artists don't create chairs, they create art. Designers create chairs, and they know how to make something beautiful that works, and I can think on hundreds of examples. Boy, I love my Aeron Herman Miller!

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 08:06 AM
Yes, but artists don't create chairs, they create art. Designers create chairs, and they know how to make something beautiful that works, and I can think on hundreds of examples. Boy, I love my Aeron Herman Miller!
Well, here is an example that doesn't work:
http://www.heals.co.uk/content/ebiz/heals/invt/703409/703409_m.jpg - created by a designer.
But yes, essentially you are right, GUI designers should create GUIs. Now, that may even be a talented coder, or a talented artist... but either is rare enough.

Cheers,
Mike

Matt
02-19-2008, 08:10 AM
But Phillipe Stark creates design "icons" not usable products! ;)

Matt
02-19-2008, 08:13 AM
Another example:

http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/

Has anyone used this abominable excuse for a mouse?

Because it has no divisions on the buttons (and no the little blip ain't good enough) your fingers end up wandering all over the place!

The number of times I have to look down to see where my fingers are because I'm clicking the right button with my left finger!!!

Also, if you accidentally bump the front of the mouse into anything, you can execute an unwarranted mouse click!

It's an ergonomic disaster, and I bet it's won a design award somewhere.

Titus
02-19-2008, 08:22 AM
Also, if you accidentally bump the front of the mouse into anything, you can execute an unwarranted mouse click!

It's an ergonomic disaster, and I bet it's won a design award somewhere.

They failed trying something different (no one said designers don't make mistakes), that leads you to a better product, but a programmer with no idea on GUI design hardly will make a good interface. BTW, I think Philip Stark's mouse works fine.

Titus
02-19-2008, 08:24 AM
Another example:

http://www.apple.com/mightymouse/

Has anyone used this abominable excuse for a mouse?

This is an excuse for a mouse, but they learned the lesson.

Titus
02-19-2008, 08:28 AM
And without innovation and evolution we could still be using the original Engelbart's design :D.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 08:37 AM
...but a programmer with no idea on GUI design hardly will make a good interface.
No doubt... but this goes both ways. GUI design is one of those areas that requires skills in multiple disciplines (as does any other design really).

Cheers,
Mike

Matt
02-19-2008, 08:45 AM
Part programmer, part designer, part artist, and knowing when to draw the line between them!

Steamthrower
02-19-2008, 09:02 AM
The day that Blender can be programmed to download & convert all of my Gmail into extruded text inside a scene is the only day I'll consider switching to it.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 11:24 AM
The day that Blender can be programmed to download & convert all of my Gmail into extruded text inside a scene is the only day I'll consider switching to it.
I don't see the problem here. It includes full Python support which in turn can be extended to do mundane tasks such as manage http sessions. ;)

I'd probably a lot easier than coding something similar for LW, at least from a scripting PoV.

Cheers
Mike

adamredwoods
02-19-2008, 11:44 AM
I am no Blender expert, so I could be wrong, but here's why I dont use it:

The most basic operation, moving an object, is defined by 'g' and then the object sticks to your cursor. To let go, you add another click or keypress. To constrain to an axis, another click or keypress. Not ideal for nudging items or doing something quickly. This adds an extra operation to your steps. Most other 3D software uses one keypress to enter a move mode with crosshairs.

How is it logical? How is that efficient? Why fight against an established convention?

Lightwave: Press 't' then you have an interactive and constrained movement that can be repeated several times by right clicking.
Blender: Still no defined keyboard commands.

And finally,Blender isn't really tablet friendly. I use a tablet, and Lightwave is better suited for that.

Don't get me wrong, Blender is _amazing_, but it seems blender is run by multiple coders that want to only work on the new, cool, technical functions and they have put any UI suggestions to the bottom of the list. Capability over praticality.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 12:03 PM
How is it logical? How is that efficient? Why fight against an established convention?
Actually, it is from a CAD background, believe it or not...

Cheers,
Mike

stib
02-19-2008, 12:11 PM
I wouldn't be holding LW up as a model of good User Interface. There's not a day goes by when I don't swear at how annoying LW's UI is.

Like the Scene editor: no maximise button. Because...? Why no ability to scroll with the mouse? Ridiculous. And suppose I want to see an object's properties and motion options at the same time? No can do. Why? Is there some part of the programme's inner workings that prevents this, or is it just stupid UI design. I'm guessing the latter. And Modeler - say I want to add some geometry to my selection while I've got a tool active. A good UI would let me do that, but with LW I have to drop the tool, select the geometry and pick up the tool again.

If ever there was an app designed by programmers for programmers, or more to the point by programmers with no thought who will be using it, it's Lightwave.

Dexter2999
02-19-2008, 12:15 PM
I am no Blender expert, so I could be wrong, but here's why I dont use it:

Don't get me wrong, Blender is _amazing_, but it seems blender is run by multiple coders that want to only work on the new, cool, technical functions and they have put any UI suggestions to the bottom of the list. Capability over praticality.


The UI really is a big deal. Coders used to be the elite using computers back in the DOS and shell days. The general public just couldn't overcome the interface to take advantage of the power that computers offered. It wasn't until Apple and Microsoft introduced the GUI.

Blender is no different. It is a powerful program but if the UI scares away the general public how will it ever find it's full potential? If the UI attracted more users, then it may follow to reason that more coders might find interest in developing the functions.

Then again maybe Ton isn't interested having many more coders picking over his work.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 12:28 PM
If ever there was an app designed by programmers for programmers, or more to the point by programmers with no thought who will be using it, it's Lightwave.
Even here I'd disagree (sorry, I'm in that kind of mood today ;) ).
LW shows its age, true. But way back when the GUI was designed it did work extremely well, considering state of the art back then as well as the amount and scope of features (as well as technical limitations, screen resolutions etc...).
The problem is that the GUI hasn't grown. It might have had bits grafted on, but there was no common concept it seems - a LW specific UI design guide.
And now we have a new team that clearly like to approach things differently, causing yet another rift (not that I'm blaming them, mind you).

Actually, LW has had a lot of thought put into it initially - but there's been little progress in the area since and some of the original concepts either don't make sense anymore or have been watered down.

Cheers,
Mike

stib
02-19-2008, 12:33 PM
Yep, the original design is good - low clutter, very straightforward. But since then every new feature seems to have come with its own way of doing things. It is so inconsistent, which makes learning and using it harder than it should be. That's the really annoying thing - a little more thought and it could be a lot better.

Steamthrower
02-19-2008, 12:45 PM
For my part, the text-based UI and tabs are very helpful. If it's not a feature that I've used before, I know where to find it, and finding it is only three clicks at maximum. And since I learn the shortcuts to the tools I use the most, that makes it even shorter.

The slight problem I have is in the panels. Instead of a plethora of different types of panels (presets panel, scene editor, motion mixer, properties panel), I'd like to see them all condensed into one window (a DOCKABLE window!). Perhaps with tabs for quick switching. Or splittable like the windows in Silo.

Lightwolf
02-19-2008, 12:59 PM
The slight problem I have is in the panels. Instead of a plethora of different types of panels (presets panel, scene editor, motion mixer, properties panel), I'd like to see them all condensed into one window (a DOCKABLE window!).

And suppose I want to see an object's properties and motion options at the same time? No can do.
See, there you go. Expectations have grown, a GUI should ideally please both of you, right now neither is fully served.

Cheers,
Mike

adamredwoods
02-19-2008, 02:02 PM
It is so inconsistent, which makes learning and using it harder than it should be. That's the really annoying thing - a little more thought and it could be a lot better.

I agree.

But then, UI inconsistency goes with most 3D apps. It's the nature of software. Software takes years and years to develop. Programmers come and go. New guy wants to do things a little different than the last...

As I always say, use the tool that best suits your needs, so you can get to a finished piece of art.

tischbein3
02-19-2008, 02:04 PM
The most basic operation, moving an object, is defined by 'g' and then the object sticks to your cursor. To let go, you add another click or keypress. To constrain to an axis, another click or keypress.


Current builds / the next offical release, do have the options aviable inside the user preferences (Under Edit Methods: "Drag Immediatly"). Wich will give you click'n drag capabillity.


@inigo07
Ironically I detest blender for not having a floating graph editor window. :D

jin choung
02-19-2008, 02:52 PM
i would say that the proper word for ui expectation is NOT "grown" but "evolved".

grown implies more of the same. evolved means essentially improvement through actual change.

lw's gui may have been good in its day. but the idea is not to GROW to be just more of the same. that is kinda what it is now.

the idea is to evolve.

blender's problem is similar to zb's problem. lots of good but under a very non-standard interface.

zb overcame its problem by becoming a bit more user intuitive to 3d guys AND being so overwhelmingly good that it couldn't be ignored... no matter how odious its interface.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

blender's interface is NOT great. there are some great ideas and largely, it is a matter of different but GOOD. for what it is, it is well thought out and logical.

but it is not ALL like that. some of it is just plain bad. for instance, with the default interface, the right click is used BOTH TO SELECT AND DISMISS!!! in differenct contexts.....

HORRIBLE.

but the goal for 2.5 is a radically redesigned gui engine so that it can be as radically redesigned as you want it to be.

personally, i'm hoping that the gnu 3d app lives up to its name and allows you to "blend" your blender to operate like any app you or your studio is comfortable with. THAT would be a big deal and make blender truly formidable anywhere.

afaicansee however, blender is THE big threat to lw. the moment where the interface is overcome, blender is already pound for pound better than lw in a great many feature, especially character animation.

and if lw's prime sell is based on value per dollar... it becomes very very hard to beat free.

jin

adamredwoods
02-19-2008, 05:25 PM
Current builds / the next offical release, do have the options aviable inside the user preferences (Under Edit Methods: "Drag Immediatly"). Wich will give you click'n drag capabillity.

*Good to know that they actually thought about that "Drag Immediately".


but the goal for 2.5 is a radically redesigned gui engine so that it can be as radically redesigned as you want it to be.

I would consider switching to Blender if the next release were radically different in UI. I even bet a large portion of the industry would switch.

But I hardly think that it will be. I'll give it 3 years until that point.
http://www.blendernation.com/2008/01/18/25-development-demos-available-on-youtube/

//

adamredwoods
02-19-2008, 05:29 PM
Future of Blender & 2.5:

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/02/18/the-future-of-blender/
@4.32 is UI talk

tischbein3
02-19-2008, 06:02 PM
afaicansee however, blender is THE big threat to lw.

No.
But if LW sales would be primarly based on the quality of features like Character Animation, Dynamics and Fur rendering, and native game engine support, and Blender would have a similar intuitive material/surfacing system, the same amount of modeling tools and rendering options, I would agree.

:D

(And thats one of the reason why NT should take great care for a better / more comfortable import support inside the sdk and working on fbx and collada plugins).

jin choung
02-19-2008, 06:18 PM
No.


we'll see..... meet you back here in a couple of years.

jin

SP00
02-19-2008, 06:21 PM
Don't get me wrong, Blender is _amazing_, but it seems blender is run by multiple coders that want to only work on the new, cool, technical functions and they have put any UI suggestions to the bottom of the list. Capability over praticality.

No doubt blender will become a feature rich program that is offered for free, but it will also be chock full of inefficiency. There is always the quality vs. quantity vs. speed argument.

jin choung
02-19-2008, 06:27 PM
speculations aside:

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/02/18/the-future-of-blender/

ton roosendall seems to have a pretty good reign on the direction and evidently veto power.

also, last few iterations seem to be focused not on mere implementation but usability issues. the interface has come a loooooong way over several revisions.

but it seems like there's gonna be a gigantic break in 2.5 that will make the implementation of the ui vastly customizable.

jin

jin choung
02-19-2008, 07:30 PM
There is always the quality vs. quantity vs. speed argument.

absolutely... but my contention is that lw can end up on the wrong side of that argument... and may well given a few years.

if blender keeps up the current pace of development, it may eventually outdo maya. but it'll catch lw first. and again, primarily because it's hard to argue against free.

i mean if blender can have a relative performance to maya that even open office provides against M$'s office, a lot of apps are gonna have a hard time justifying their existence....

jin

p.s. http://www.blender.org/development/architecture/ featuring the heartening degree of thought that goes into their architecture.

IMI
02-19-2008, 08:04 PM
It will make the other apps work harder to maintain their position at the top of the heap and to justify the expense. Might cause them to lower their prices, too.
Which will probably happen anyway, given the competition which is probably right now gearing up for an inevitable takeover.
But, how long will Blender continue to advance before someone gets the idea it should no longer be free?
These people who work on Blender, assuming it reaches the peak it's working towards and becomes a major studio app used in successful movies, commercials and so on - how long before they decide their hard work is worth something?
If I own a studio which uses Blender to make all the CG in the next LOTR-type movie and it makes a hundred million dollars in ticket sales and assorted products, how long before they rethink their policy of free and open source?

Probably though, as long as there are developers paying their programmers, and selling software, those companies will stay ahead, as they're able to consistently develop along with the technology.

SP00
02-19-2008, 08:40 PM
Changing the GUI for Blender should be their top priority. I hope they can pull this off.

stib
02-19-2008, 09:19 PM
There's a fair bit of precedent for people making money from free software. Say the Big Studio that uses Blender for the next LOTR needs support to scale it up for the studio workflow, or wants customised code written for it. The people who wrote the software are going to be the ones getting the contracts to supply that kind of support.



Probably though, as long as there are developers paying their programmers, and selling software, those companies will stay ahead, as they're able to consistently develop along with the technology.

I'm just speculating about who actually writes the code for Blender, but I'd imagine that there'd be a way bigger team than would be the case if someone was paying them. Lots of people making small contributions versus a few people working full time. Pretty fair match I'd say.

jin choung
02-19-2008, 11:19 PM
Changing the GUI for Blender should be their top priority. I hope they can pull this off.


version 2.5

jin

Dexter2999
02-20-2008, 12:52 AM
I can't understand much of what Ton is saying but I did gather that he is drawing some inspiration from the MODO interface. So multiple windows are going to be involved because he said some people are already moaning because they are afraid the interface will turn out a mess of windows like The Gimp.
He seems like he knows what he wants to incorperate and what he plans on avoiding. Just a matter of time.

stib
02-20-2008, 01:55 AM
there are subtitles on that movie. I liked his response when the interviewer asked if the development would get faster for blender. He said something like "not faster, just better quality". Seems a sensible chap.

starbase1
02-20-2008, 03:40 AM
Actually, it is from a CAD background, believe it or not...

Cheers,
Mike

That can make a lot of sense - I think it's fair to say that one of the reasons Photoshop was a big hit early on was that it was designed to work the way a photographer would expect. Those doge and burn icons were a good example of this.

Also many years ago, when I was a humble cobol programer, I worked on a system which had what I considered the worst screen design I had ever seen. The users absolutely loved it and could use it with zero training. This was because it closely mimicked the paper layout they were used to and their current way of working.

You need to know your audience before you can say is something is good design.

I was also surprised after getting Vue 5i (thanks to Newtek), you go to their forums and the users there love blobs on knobs interfaces, and software locks as opposed to dongles...

Nick

Lightwolf
02-20-2008, 03:44 AM
That can make a lot of sense - I think it's fair to say that one of the reasons Photoshop was a big hit early on was that it was designed to work the way a photographer would expect.
If you think about the fact that PS was initially written for film single frame retouching... ;)


You need to know your audience before you can say is something is good design.
Another example is probably the hideous workflow of early video editors. They all mimicked the traditional A/B player approach to make it easier for editors to switch. Luckily those days are gone.

Cheers,
Mike

stib
02-20-2008, 04:51 AM
Another example is probably the hideous workflow of early video editors. They all mimicked the traditional A/B player approach to make it easier for editors to switch. Luckily those days are gone.

Cheers,
Mike

I don't know about that: the source monitor / record monitor metaphor is alive and well in just about every NLE I can think of: Avid, FCP, Premiere, Lightworks etc. The only one that I've used that doesn't have some sort of source screen and record screen was media 100, and that was in the days when macs were beige.

Lightwolf
02-20-2008, 05:06 AM
I don't know about that: the source monitor / record monitor metaphor is alive and well in just about every NLE I can think of: Avid, FCP, Premiere, Lightworks etc. The only one that I've used that doesn't have some sort of source screen and record screen was media 100, and that was in the days when macs were beige.
Plus the VT of course.
I was actually more thinking about the track A/B with a transition in-between timelines.
Source/Record monitors still make a lot of sense (even though the separation between different types doesn't), but A/B rolls just don't.

Cheers,
Mike

stib
02-20-2008, 05:51 AM
Oh right.. yeah I remember a/b tracks from media100. Shudder. Add a dissolve at the head of a sequence and you'd have to go through swapping A and B tracks all the way to the end.

part of that was that you were cutting for online, and you could just produce an A and B roll EDL. These days, who onlines any more? You can just finish on your laptop.

Blender does NLE, doesn't it? It's more node based though innit (I've tried to use it, but never got very far).

Titus
02-20-2008, 08:29 AM
Blender does NLE, doesn't it? It's more node based though innit (I've tried to use it, but never got very far).

Nodes work for the compositor, the NLE is more straightforward. If you understand hoy to select, move and scale objects you can understand how to edit.

gerry_g
02-20-2008, 09:14 AM
A and B rolling was about having two (usually) identical copies of the same footage that were placed on the two source (slave) machines to feed the (master) recording machine in a typical 3 machine betacam setup, they would all be genlocked so as to enable you to set in and out points for on the A and B role to enable you record either using dead cuts or cross-fades one at a time to the master machine, all very tedious, but still ironically way faster than using any of the early NLE digital packages. My brother still A and B tracks in Premier to this day and personally I find it still a valid paradigm as a) it gives a more visually obvious notion of where the breaks are between each clip and b) you can squash more clips into a given space as each is overlapping the next taking up less space and requiring less scrubbing of the time line. The only real similarity between true A and B rolling and NLE A and B tracks is they use the letters A and B

Lightwolf
02-20-2008, 09:28 AM
My brother still A and B tracks in Premier to this day and personally I find it still a valid paradigm
If you're talking PPRo then those are the second gen A/B tracks.

In the early days you'd have A, B (two tracks) and a transition track in between.
That's it. Maybe, if you were very lucky, overlay tracks. Obviously all of them behaved differentlty.

Surprisingly some NLEs way back then (15 years ago) never used that approach and just offered tracks... of anything. Which just makes so much more sense in a digital world.

Cheers,
Mike

Ark_of_Kaos
02-21-2008, 10:18 AM
Blender has many cool features, but comes with several limitations as well. Only 16 textures per object, hair/fur implementation totally lacking and doesn't support dynamics or shadows. Blender's morphing or "shape keys" need work. If you need to make modifications to a character, you really need to redo the shape keys as well. Many of blender's open source plug-ins either 1) work, 2) crash or 3) kinda work in some half-assed manner.

Personally, I feel that lightwave is quite a bit more advanced in many areas. Now that v9.5 will include full hair and fur capabilities without needing to purchase sasquatch and uv unwrapping/relaxing is also another bonus for LW.

You can do some really great things with blender, but you can do them better with LW, in my opinion.

jin choung
02-21-2008, 11:42 AM
http://peach.blender.org/index.php/grooming-time/

cresshead
02-21-2008, 11:54 AM
blender development via the production of 'peach' is taking blender into pixar quality results for hair/fur and character animation..i've pre ordered the dvd to get my hands on the short film and the scenes from the movie.

finally lightwave is adding fur and hair as a core tool/feature we have yet to see/try just how capable it will be..i'm hoping it's going to be a good as blender's results we've seen so far.

it'll really be just what the cut/combing and groming of hair fur tools in lightwave will be once 9.5 is out....then dynamics and finally how it renders..early days for lightwave and production proven days for blender..lw has some catching up to do.

jin choung
02-21-2008, 01:09 PM
yeah - it is a brilliant, if luxurious, development strategy: create an internal movie and make all the features that you need and get them battle tested through production.

-identifies need
-provides testing ground for implementation
-creates incentive to get it done quick

in the animation test in the above link, i was watching it with a colleague and he said - "meh, not a big deal... the hair's not doing much"....

but my response to that was - BUT LOOK AT IT! it's hair... on a deforming character... and out of the box, it's not doing anything BAD! that's amazing and that's 9/10ths the battle right there.

anyhoo, 2.5 looks like a monster. hair, fur, ik pole vectors, weightpainting revision (which WE badly need) and deformation order editing (which we also badly need).

jin

Ark_of_Kaos
02-21-2008, 02:36 PM
All of those hair pics shown on the peach site are great and all, but they still really don't show any shadowing in those renders. Short hair/fur on a cartoon critter is one thing, but I wanna see what it can do with long hair and producing shadows. Also, I'd like to see how long hair handles dynamics. From reading the blender.org stuff, it seems a stable release with their new hair system is a ways off, yet.
Some early videos they've posted makes it seem pretty promising.

Carrara 6 has put a lot into developing a good hair system. I've seen some great renders from it. Too bad the animation features have a long way to go to make it competitive in any way.

I would love to see what the future releases of blender have in store.

jin choung
02-21-2008, 03:47 PM
they're on it:

"For the final rendering we also depend on some further additions like level of detail rendering, as for now all the hair strands have a fixed size. Also for better lighting we need deep shadow maps and a slightly more physically accurate light falloff (area lights).

One big question mark at the moment is, how often we can run dynamic simulations on the fur. we have very fast, snappy animations, will the fur look too rubbery or too stiff? How much time can we spend on refining that? How to deal with intersections? Also, in an ideal world you would want the animators to be able to control the fur, is that feasible for us?

Some more food for the stat junkies: Rinky currently has 1.4 million hair strands (800 children hairs per parent particle), Gamera around 1.5 million (400 childs per parent for the body and 1000 for the tail). Child particles are generated per tile at rendering time, so memory consumption is very low. Furthermore, all textures are created in png format, currently at a resolution of 4096 pixels.

As a final goody, here is one of my rendering tests with Gamera in motion. (1st one is only the parent particles, 2nd one is the final render)"

from the article from above link.

hair and fur will be available from direct result of peach in release 2.5

jin

tischbein3
02-21-2008, 03:48 PM
All of those hair pics shown on the peach site are great and all, but they still really don't show any shadowing in those renders. Short hair/fur on a cartoon critter is one thing, but I wanna see what it can do with long hair and producing shadows.

They do have shaddows, They do also feature full softbody dynamics support. Wich has been also improved by optimised caching.


Also, I'd like to see how long hair handles dynamics. From reading the blender.org stuff, it seems a stable release with their new hair system is a ways off, yet.

Hairs will be included in the 2.46 version, wich will be released quite soon
(feature freeze already happened)

A lot of the feature come from Jhakas Particle Patch, so you get interactive Combing Cutting Growing etc, Child Hairs (With a certain grade of independ options (curling)....very usefull. And I would even say that you can work / edit long hairs better than fur.

Downsides:
It is stable, as long as you didn't try to render 5 million hairs on a win32 system.
Soft Shaddows / AmbOCC + Hairs is too slow for animating.
Combing sometimes has the same haptic like trying to remove some hairs from a wool jacket.


Considering the lenght this feature needed to develop (original particle strand implementation, Jhakas patch + peach optimisation)
I would be even satisfied if LW's first own hair release "only" gets close to it.
(Especially now we get Collada support :) )

jin choung
02-21-2008, 04:02 PM
oops. that's right. hair and fur in 2.46... actually most of the features i was talking about for 2.5 such as weight paint revision and deformation ordering is for 2.46....

jin

Ark_of_Kaos
02-21-2008, 06:34 PM
The last blender I used was 2.3 and they didn't support those then. I am excited for the 2.46 release. A buddy of mine wants to do another animated short for his church (we did one last year). The only thing we really wanted to do different was incorporate hair into the next one.

Ark_of_Kaos
02-21-2008, 06:44 PM
edit: the last blender I used was 2.43

Defiance
02-21-2008, 11:52 PM
Maybe I'm not being clear on my point, this joke can illustrate it better:

For an engineer the perfect chair is a wooden box: it's cheap, it's easy to build and it works. It doesn't matter if it's not comfortable.

We engineers have a loop hole out of that joke. Comfort level could have been an engineering specification.

cresshead
02-23-2008, 06:09 AM
blender is looking cool, i'll even have a bash with it once the dvd arrives and i can open up some of the scenes/models from the peach project.

dx394b
04-21-2008, 12:58 AM
As to the interface complaints. I started with blender before transitioning to Lightwave and find that many modelling tasks are easier with blender.

starbase1
04-21-2008, 05:10 AM
As to the interface complaints. I started with blender before transitioning to Lightwave and find that many modelling tasks are easier with blender.

Always the way with interface changes, people like what they know, whichever package they start with. I daresay there are some people who find Gimp easier to use than Photoshop. Well, maybe one or two...

Nick

doimus
04-21-2008, 06:13 AM
True about the interface changes.... recently got myself a mac, and to be honest, I can't stand OSX interface. It's neither clumsy or ugly, but the shortcuts... oh my, how I hate different keyboard shortcuts!:D

Regarding Photoshop - GIMP is fugly, but I always considered Paint Shop Pro to have much streamlined interface than Photoshop. Last PSP I used was before Corel acquisition, so I guess it's ugly now too.

starbase1
04-21-2008, 06:53 AM
Regarding Photoshop - GIMP is fugly, but I always considered Paint Shop Pro to have much streamlined interface than Photoshop. Last PSP I used was before Corel acquisition, so I guess it's ugly now too.

You know, you are absolutely right about PSP? I'm hanging onto my old one like grim death - it's perfect for the very fast simple stuff, like adjusting sizes, making high compressed versions for these forums, and so forth. One mouse button to zoom in, the other to zoom out, perfect! Fit window to image, obvious! Nice image browsing too. I really lost interest when they started trying to turn it into another full blown photoshop clone.

The perfect tool has all the options you need, but what fewer people realise is that it also has none of the ones you don't. They just add clutter and confusion.

Nick

SP00
04-21-2008, 07:11 AM
Gimp is no joke, it is used on a regular bases in film and tv. They use a 16/32 bit color version, under a different name and it is free and does the work just as well as a fully licensed version of photoshop. Photoshop interface is nicer, but Gimp is free, both can do the same work. You do the math.

Titus
04-21-2008, 07:32 AM
Always the way with interface changes, people like what they know, whichever package they start with. I daresay there are some people who find Gimp easier to use than Photoshop. Well, maybe one or two...

Nick

About Blender it's just a matter of possitive thinking. A couple of weeks ago I teached in half an hour the basics of Blender UI to one animator, after this he started doing fluid simulations for our project.

Titus
04-22-2008, 09:36 AM
Here's a TV interview with Ton abput Blender:

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/04/22/tv-interview-with-ton-sacha-now-online/

Matt
04-22-2008, 12:32 PM
Here's a TV interview with Ton abput Blender:

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/04/22/tv-interview-with-ton-sacha-now-online/

The comment about the grass made me laugh!

theo
04-22-2008, 02:29 PM
As to the interface complaints. I started with blender before transitioning to Lightwave and find that many modelling tasks are easier with blender.

Interfacing with engineered code is a psyche-based experience. Not unlike socializing (one of my female siblings is a socialite on par with the likes of Brooke Astor) or overcoming personal fear.

ZBrush is famous for its odd interface but after months of use I find it brilliant and efficient. Tenaciously persevering with ANYTHING for an extended period of time will reap abundant rewards. WHICH, in the interface world, means productive involvement and creative unlock with code most foreign.

The catch here is time... which, generally seems to be in short supply.

hrgiger
04-22-2008, 08:34 PM
Anyone here know about how well Blender works with large polygon counts?

jin choung
04-22-2008, 10:19 PM
i think on a windows 32bit system, it starts choking at about 4million polys? in the sculpting pipeline that is... someone on the silo boards said that it's decidedly below what zb can handle but more than what silo2 can. that sounds about right to me.

jin

hrgiger
04-22-2008, 10:51 PM
4 million. Well that's about 2 and a half million more then Layout can handle on my 32-bit machine...

jin choung
04-22-2008, 11:02 PM
...

yep...

...

jin

jin choung
04-22-2008, 11:24 PM
oh, just checkin' my numbers - pg. 127 of "the essential blender"

3.2mill for a mesh with a multi-res history (sculpting). over 4million on a mesh without history. a bit higher on osx and can be considerably higher still on linux.

jin

jin choung
04-23-2008, 01:44 AM
holy moly.... well, they just added real time camera tracking for some reason....

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/04/23/camera-tracking-using-the-game-engine/

certainly not rock solid... wonder if it can provide a better track if it's not in real time....

but impressive.

jin

p.s. re: gimp - i want to believe... but it is fing fugly! capable but it's not so awesome that you just have to stuff your interface objections in a hat like with zb or blender. when they have full HDR imaging... that might be the turning point for me (cinepaint isn't being developed much seems like). how's gimp on cmyk btw?

Etch
04-23-2008, 06:11 AM
holy moly.... well, they just added real time camera tracking for some reason....

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/04/23/camera-tracking-using-the-game-engine/

certainly not rock solid... wonder if it can provide a better track if it's not in real time....

but impressive.

jin

p.s. re: gimp - i want to believe... but it is fing fugly! capable but it's not so awesome that you just have to stuff your interface objections in a hat like with zb or blender. when they have full HDR imaging... that might be the turning point for me (cinepaint isn't being developed much seems like). how's gimp on cmyk btw?

CMYK in gimp is pretty much unsupported, after browsing for a while on the net I found that most gimp users convert their files to cmyk through some other program out on the web.

So that's kinda a pain, especially when you consider the lack of layer groups and styles.

Short of those things previously mentioned I find the gimp to be pretty comparable. I've had pretty good results with it. Especially considering their "Scissors Select Tool", that thing rocks. All you have to do is put little control points around the basic edge of whatever your selecting and it does a great job of hugging the edge.

tischbein3
04-23-2008, 06:53 AM
when they have full HDR imaging... that might be the turning point for me (cinepaint isn't being developed much seems like). how's gimp on cmyk btw?

Interestingly as for 16 bit and hdr support they finaly started working on it (see gimp 2.5 release notes about gegl integration)....


As for cinepaint (can't resist to share my view on this):
The tool in its public incarnation is pretty much unusuable for hdri editing on a regular basis. Especially if you try to work it out under windows.
Although the linux version is quite stable, it still contains a lot of small bugs wich are real showstoppers. (Most of them can be fixed quite easily)

The big advantage clearly lays in its releatively small overvieweable source code wich does allow you to hack in new features in a quite easy and fast way. And this is imho the main reason its got its place inside the vfx companies.

jin choung
04-23-2008, 09:47 PM
Interestingly as for 16 bit and hdr support they finaly started working on it (see gimp 2.5 release notes about gegl integration)....

yah, i checked out the blurb from a digg - hope it doesn't take them long to get a good implementation.

i don't want to pay $400 to go to cs3 pro (ack, they get rid of after effects pro and add it to ps?!!) if i don't have to.

jin

Titus
04-23-2008, 10:30 PM
The GIMP saved my butt today. I have a group of TIFF 16 bits images for a commercial and none of the programs available on my machine could read them, GIMP did the conversion to 8 bits without problems.

MSwengel
04-25-2008, 04:33 AM
Last time I checked, the GUI was somewhat like torture.

Oh not at all. If you can learn LW, Blender should be a snap. Blender and LW are easily two of the easiest programs to learn. I'm a long time Blender user, but I actually switched to LW because of the MUCH better modeling tools and rendering abilities. For instance, fire and smoke in Blender is like trying to chew your hand off - not something worth trying. Fortunately, hypervoxels in LW make that stuff a cinch.

Blender is fun for hobbyists, but for those of us who already have a commercial package like LW, it's not really worth it.

adamredwoods
05-19-2008, 09:49 PM
Blender 2.46 released.
http://www.blender.org/development/release-logs/blender-246/


View the forums:
http://blenderartists.org/forum/

jin choung
05-19-2008, 10:31 PM
yup! got mine installed on windows rig as well as my linux laptop... woo hoo....

just love that release page... clearly organized with all the hilites... HILITED!

been planning a little live action comp project to get my bearings in blender and now i really gotta come up with a good simple idea fast!

jin

Dodgy
05-19-2008, 10:49 PM
Looks like some very nice features...

adamredwoods
05-20-2008, 11:30 AM
I read on the Blender forums that most users prefer to model point-to-point rather than box-modeling, or a hybrid of the two.

I'm not exactly sure what point-to-point modeling is, but if it means making your own polys point-by-point I think that's a touch more labor intensive and results with more polys than needed (unless you know your exact topology before beginning to model)?

Iain
05-20-2008, 11:37 AM
I'm really going to take the plunge this time.
It's too promising to be ignored now.

jin choung
05-20-2008, 11:38 AM
it's not an uncommon technique in lw modeling either. check out dan ablan's books.... he usually approaches head modeling by going a poly at a time starting from major part (eye socket, nose, mouth, etc) and propagating out.

it's actually not harder or more labor intensive, just different and puts the labor in different areas... for faces actually, i prefer working this way (if i don't zbrush that is).

yet another way to go is creating a spline cage to either patch final res surface or even the low poly cage.

but no reason why you can't box model in blender.

jin

jin choung
05-20-2008, 11:46 AM
http://www.blendernation.com/2008/04/10/timelapse-steam-punk-head/

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/02/21/timelapse-video-modeling-a-creatures-head/

some techniques on display

jin

Andyjaggy
05-20-2008, 01:02 PM
Wow, blender is really coming of age. It's starting to grab my attention. This is good it will force major 3D apps to be more innovative and such.

Matt
05-20-2008, 04:07 PM
No denying it, it does make the need for 'paid for' 3D software companies to raise their game, especially if Blender has features that other software doesn't.

NAS
05-20-2008, 04:15 PM
Problem is that at the moment Blender is of no threat to any of the companies
It is still seen as a free app you might have with your main apps
Even chatting on the Blender IRC channels you find that a lot of the hardcore Blender users see it as that too

There is always the problem too that it could in reality slow development of other packages aswell
I mean why should a company create a fluid dynamics plugin for a good price if it cant hold up to doing it in Blender passing it to Lightwave and rendering ?
What motivation do Newtek have to make HVs better if Blenders new volumetrics system makes it look crappy before it ever gets released and so on and so on

Hopefully this is just a dim outlook but to be honest i don't really care
Blender does it so i'll learn it and to be honest nothing yet has made me upgrade from 8.5 to 9 and i havent seen anything so far that will to be truthful
Then again i haven't seen 9.5 yet because of the ridiculous secrecy Newtek put on it hahahahahaha


NAS

jin choung
05-20-2008, 04:49 PM
as i keep saying, that's why i love project peach.

if you're not sold on the professional capability through the feature list, then look what it can do... big buck bunny will be getting it's internet open may30 btw.

as for it not being a threat... i beg to differ.

some people may still be jaded against free and open source but the case study of linux makes it increasingly difficult to marginalize.

commercial companies ignore foss at their peril.

as for companies not working on their feature sets because of free software... uhhhhhh... no... i don't think that's gonna happen. why would it?

competition is competition, whether it's from a commercial competitor or a gnu competitor. so unless anyone's planning on exiting the market, the likely result will be to be better and easier and etc. than the guy who's free. probably will make things cheaper too... : )

and if blender does something that makes lw look crappy, newtek better make it "not crappy"!

anyway, this is great for the consumer and disarms producers of excuses... : )

jin

dballesg
05-20-2008, 04:54 PM
Problem is that at the moment Blender is of no threat to any of the companies

There is always the problem too that it could in reality slow development of other packages aswell
I mean why should a company create a fluid dynamics plugin for a good price if it cant hold up to doing it in Blender passing it to Lightwave and rendering ?
What motivation do Newtek have to make HVs better if Blenders new volumetrics system makes it look crappy before it ever gets released and so on and so on

Hopefully this is just a dim outlook but to be honest i don't really care
Blender does it so i'll learn it and to be honest nothing yet has made me upgrade from 8.5 to 9 and i havent seen anything so far that will to be truthful
Then again i haven't seen 9.5 yet because of the ridiculous secrecy Newtek put on it hahahahahaha


NAS

Hi,

Two comments here. There are a few Lw plugin developers that go dark, you try to contact them and they ignore any request. Simply Pathetic.

There is another one that you can catch on Skype, and he got quite a few of the BEST lightwave plugins EVER, but he didn't developed them on a enough fast pace or ignore improvements, from time to time ;) Yes you know who you are! :) But as a guy, he is a wonderful guy, simply he didn't manage his business to its full potential!!! And NO, it is not Mike Wolf! Mike it is one of the coolest and nicest guys on this forums ;)

In fact if I had enough math knowledge I would do more complex plugins myself. I would be really envious of Blender and try to improve and make better tools that them. Something called pride ;), looks like Newtek developers do not mind to be bashed from time to time by third party applications [and worse, WE the users, asking for features every minute], and third party developers.

Seriously I would be really upset seeing what others are doing and not implementing it on my application of choice.

Sorry a bit frustrated with LW today! :)

But I can recognize as well the improvements on 9.5 (and they are HUGE, for what we are used to on a free update), and Newtek it is not secretive about it, join the open beta. Trust me, you would not regret it!!! :)

Cannot say more or Chuck would send his flying monkeys after me! :) You know a secret spell call NDA or something like that ;)

David

NAS
05-20-2008, 05:17 PM
Sorry i can't join the open beta i am an 8.5 user
I might be inclined to upgrade if i knew what was in 9.5 but the hair plugin is pretty much the only thing i have seen of any interest to me
So no 9.5 beta for me im afraid :(

NAS

jay3d
05-21-2008, 12:20 AM
Sorry i can't join the open beta i am an 8.5 user
I might be inclined to upgrade if i knew what was in 9.5 but the hair plugin is pretty much the only thing i have seen of any interest to me
So no 9.5 beta for me im afraid :(

NAS

You better look at the hair system included in Blender, I've never seen a feature complete one as that!

archijam
05-21-2008, 01:57 AM
Sorry a bit frustrated with LW today! :)

Strange, is it performing differently than yesterday? Have you submitted a bug report?

Frankly Blender is progressing faster than ANY other app, why LW is singled out in this is a mystery to me .. the chicken little effect perhaps?