PDA

View Full Version : See, we should be grateful.......



Iain
03-03-2008, 09:54 AM
http://www.nodejoe.com/index_en.php

344 euros for a node editor for 3ds max.

Steamthrower
03-03-2008, 10:06 AM
What, Lightwave costs right around 350 euros too, doesn't it? :D

Andyjaggy
03-03-2008, 11:20 AM
I thought Max had a node editor. Guess not. I hated texturing in Max the few times I had to do it. Uck.

theo
03-04-2008, 06:54 AM
Money and infecting the unwashed, unwitting and unknowing with the LW virus is my gratitude.

Infect away good carriers.

Stooch
03-04-2008, 02:50 PM
lol on one hand we have lwers complaining how no one wants to develop kickass plugins for lw, on the other hand people get outraged by the prices of good plugins....

hmm. everyone wants something for nothing...

hrgiger
03-04-2008, 02:53 PM
I love getting things for nothing. I think that's fairly normal. In fact, I notice a strong correlation between what I spend and the satisfaction I get. I receive a lot more satisfaction from something I paid $10 for then something I had to pay $100 more.

Kooky.

Oh and another thing, where's my free beta?

Steamthrower
03-04-2008, 02:58 PM
I'd have to agree with Stooch on this one. If you want something good expect to pay for it.

TANSTAAFL.

theo
03-04-2008, 03:26 PM
everyone wants something for nothing...

Ah yes... welcome to the webbishly wide world- where twelve year olds hawk and pimp broken data, fingernails scrabble through dusty servers for the solution most free, and the genius of creative seed spills and effervesces under heels of indifference...

RedBull
03-04-2008, 03:43 PM
http://www.nodejoe.com/index_en.php

344 euros for a node editor for 3ds max.


Hmmmm, to be fair i think it looks a lot more powerful than ours, which is really way to limited to be fair.... I'd quite happily pay $350 euros to see LW's Node Editor actually move forward, rather than no advancements be ever made again.

Andyjaggy
03-04-2008, 03:52 PM
Yeah after using shake lately I begin to realize how limited in functionality our node editor really is.

Steamthrower
03-04-2008, 03:56 PM
I've been playing around with Apple Color...and it's the equivalent of giving a double nodal ice cream cone to a little kid. I love it. It's so easy, too.

LW's nodal interface is pretty limited, but it's also pretty clunky too. It's harder to use as well.

theo
03-04-2008, 03:57 PM
Whoa!! I'll take nodal in its present state than not at all. I use nodal in Fusion which in my view is far superior to LW nodal but in spite of this I am extremely thrilled that we at least HAVE nodal interfacing within Layout.

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 04:01 PM
Yeah, but it goes right back to the same old deal! Poorly planned features that are half as useful as they could be... and I am not even trying to start a fight!:agree:

Steamthrower
03-04-2008, 04:11 PM
I'll be the first to admit that they're introducing that feature speedier than expected. Was it even available in 9.0? I don't think so, I can't even remember.

theo
03-04-2008, 04:16 PM
Yeah, but it goes right back to the same old deal! Poorly planned features that are half as useful as they could be... and I am not even trying to start a fight!:agree:

I understand you aren't trying to initiate a confrontation but nodal is not poorly conceived.

No one could possibly argue that it does require polishing and who the heckamagoo knows when this will be slated for but my view is that nodal is one of the more powerful features in Lightwave.

Would you prefer nodal not be a feature within Layout at this time due to its 'poor implementation'? Certainly, even one with your highly critical nature can see the immense benefit of incorporating nodal even in its currently rigid state.

Dodgy
03-04-2008, 04:23 PM
I guess no-one other than me bought amelie or visual texture then?
http://www.nodalideas.com/

And they were only $170 for the both. Guess people really didn't want to pay for that kind of power....

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 04:25 PM
I understand you aren't trying to initiate a confrontation but nodal is not poorly conceived.

No one could possibly argue that it does require polishing and who the heckamagoo knows when this will be slated for but my view is that nodal is one of the more powerful features in Lightwave.

Would you prefer nodal not be a feature within Layout at this time due to its 'poor implementation'? Certainly, even one with your highly critical nature can see the immense benefit of incorporating nodal even in its currently rigid state.

Love um, use um... far from good implementation though! I have actually resorted to this, because it lets me have global surfacing... Could use weight maps too like protons vids, but I like this...

Weetos
03-04-2008, 04:33 PM
I have to admit this looks far more polished and modern than the current LW nodal interface, looking at the features (dockable windows, global nodes, etc)

Lets just hope LW's nodes implementation keeps getting updated with new stuff (don't get me wrong, it's already really powerful, but some basic node features are still missing so far - think about the ability to create nodes groups, global nodes that can be applied to several surfaces in one place, to attach labels to items, and so on).

It's pretty exciting to imagine what could be added to this in the upcoming release, and I'm confident the work done so far under the hood is going to pay anytime soon. LW's definitely reborn for good :thumbsup:

back on the topic - I'm a bit surprised though, I thought Max had nodes :screwy:

IMI
03-04-2008, 04:38 PM
I guess no-one other than me bought amelie or visual texture then?
http://www.nodalideas.com/

And they were only $170 for the both. Guess people really didn't want to pay for that kind of power....

That looks pretty cool. Certainly affordable. I can't see if they have a 64 bit version though.

UnCommonGrafx
03-04-2008, 04:52 PM
Oh,
I bought it.

And the Max crowd will buy this one because it offers more than the one built-in. Heck, if someone came up with this kind of functionality for us, I'm pretty sure I'd get it, too.

My only questions when I went there was: why does our stuff look so clunky, is LW's code so old we can't get these spline curves betwixt nodes and when the f*()& can we get it already implemented in the 9.5 beta?
Well, the last one wasn't a thought at that time... yet it is great for throwing more fuel on the "Where is 9.5 beta" fire.
:devil: :D :hey:

I guess no-one other than me bought amelie or visual texture then?
http://www.nodalideas.com/

And they were only $170 for the both. Guess people really didn't want to pay for that kind of power....

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 04:58 PM
LOL! The spline curves are the least of my worries...

Lightwolf
03-04-2008, 05:27 PM
I understand you aren't trying to initiate a confrontation but nodal is not poorly conceived.
To be quite honest, they do have their design weaknesses, both internal (SDK) as well as external.
For example, they were never conceived with openGL in mind, nor with being used as a complete nodal solution for LW that goes beyond surfacing. There's also a bunch of internal technicalities I'm not happy with (for example: every node output triggers a complete evaluation of the node, which is a bit of a waste for certain nodes that have multiple outputs, but could share some pre-computation per evaluated surface spot - i.e. the 2D image node re-computes the projection for every hooked up output).

Still, they're a big step ahead...

Cheers,
Mike

P.S. For how many years was NodeJoe in beta now? Three or four?

UnCommonGrafx
03-04-2008, 05:47 PM
'Tis great to hear.


LOL! The spline curves are the least of my worries...

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 05:49 PM
'Tis great to hear.
I am glad you enjoyed hearing it!
Is there anything else you would like to hear? :hey:

theo
03-04-2008, 06:05 PM
To be quite honest, they do have their design weaknesses, both internal (SDK) as well as external./...

I understand this, Lightwolf. Going from Fusion nodes to Node Editor can be quite jarring in terms of usability. Perhaps, I could have stated the sentence you are responding to better.

My view is, it doesn't matter, at this point, if Node Editor is poorly implemented. It functions. And, it functions reasonably well, and, frankly, I am thrilled to see this feature available within the LW environment simply because I enjoy using nodes.

I far prefer seeing Node Editor 'implemented poorly' than not at all.

Obviously, the Node Editor weaknesses you, I and others see should be addressed.

UnCommonGrafx
03-04-2008, 06:21 PM
Chuckle,
Not from you. Thanks, though.


I am glad you enjoyed hearing it!
Is there anything else you would like to hear? :hey:

But in general, I'd like to hear that the beta is ready go. (Just checked - not yet)

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 06:25 PM
Any time...
Are you sure?

Matt
03-04-2008, 06:52 PM
Check the tutorial videos out, there's some lovely workflow ideas in there.

Very polished product.

Dodgy
03-04-2008, 07:31 PM
Okay, things I would like from those videos in nodes in LW.


Linking from closed nodes. If your node is rolled up, by clicking on it a context menu opens with a list of the closed node's outputs to be connected to.
Auto node layout. Pressing a key to do a smart layout of nodes.


Any more? I can't be bothered watching the rest ;)

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 07:39 PM
I'll take the collapsing children,
and why does nothing in LW drag and drop?

zapper1998
03-04-2008, 08:23 PM
Love um, use um... far from good implementation though! I have actually resorted to this, because it lets me have global surfacing... Could use weight maps too like protons vids, but I like this...
what was that surface node for anyways ??

wavemaster
03-04-2008, 08:59 PM
Its so you can have all surfaces in one nodal interface. Basically like using masks to define your surfaces, instead of having 4 different nodal interfaces, you only have one that you can mix nodes between them all...

Iain
03-05-2008, 01:39 AM
I suppose people will be negative about anything and if they weren't, those things would stagnate and never improve but seriously, come on.
How much better off are we with the Nodes system we now have built in? It's opened endless possibilities for us and it works really rather well, I think.

It was one of the major things in 9.0 that stopped LW looking like becoming the bottom end 3d app.
You can compare it to other, more expensive apps, and you can criticise it's shortcomings but it's there and it works. It's also relatively new so I'm sure it will improve.

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 03:06 AM
I understand this, Lightwolf. Going from Fusion nodes to Node Editor can be quite jarring in terms of usability.
Hah, I didn't even mention usability ;)


My view is, it doesn't matter, at this point, if Node Editor is poorly implemented. It functions. And, it functions reasonably well, and, frankly, I am thrilled to see this feature available within the LW environment simply because I enjoy using nodes.
Absolutely.

Cheers,
Mike

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 06:43 AM
I suppose people will be negative about anything and if they weren't, those things would stagnate and never improve but seriously, come on.
How much better off are we with the Nodes system we now have built in? It's opened endless possibilities for us and it works really rather well, I think.

It was one of the major things in 9.0 that stopped LW looking like becoming the bottom end 3d app.
You can compare it to other, more expensive apps, and you can criticise it's shortcomings but it's there and it works. It's also relatively new so I'm sure it will improve.

Just because LW isnt one of the "more expensive" apps doesnt mean it cant have well planned out features!

Iain
03-05-2008, 06:56 AM
Just because LW isnt one of the "more expensive" apps doesnt mean it cant have well planned out features!

No, but I think you have to be realistic; you almost always get a more refined and feature rich product if you spend more money. That seems fair and logical to me.

Nobody would complain that the Sat Nav on their Ford Fiesta isn't as good as that on a BMW. (Well some probably would!)

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 06:58 AM
Lets hope they do some refining...

Stooch
03-05-2008, 10:19 AM
for me. if you cant do global texturing, why even bother creating a nodal inteface? its like introducing a car with no engine. its beyond stupid.

sorry to be a gadlfy lol (actually no, im not sorry)

Andyjaggy
03-05-2008, 10:45 AM
Was there something about global surfacing in the 9.5 announcement? I seem to recall that. Lightwave always falls flat on it's face when it comes to dealing with complex scenes and surfacing.

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 10:51 AM
Was there something about global surfacing in the 9.5 announcement? I seem to recall that. Lightwave always falls flat on it's face when it comes to dealing with complex scenes and surfacing.


Set Surface Properties Through the Surface Global
Is that what your talking about?
Its listed under sdk improvements though...

Andyjaggy
03-05-2008, 11:11 AM
Yeah that is what I was talking about. Not sure what it means, or what can be done with it. I remember someone making a big deal of it somewhere so lets hope if we don't get a global surface option then someone else will make one :)

Steamthrower
03-05-2008, 11:11 AM
Surface Global...that would make my day. I'm sick of having to go through two dozen textures just to lower the spec on all of them.

Andyjaggy
03-05-2008, 11:30 AM
It would make setting up an occlusion pass alot easier as well. In fact it would be cool if there was a global occlusion surface option. Just check the little box and it automatically overrides all your surface setting and replaces them with a white occlusion surface.

hmmm, that's a really great idea, I'm going to go post it in the feature requests.

theo
03-05-2008, 11:52 AM
for me... its beyond stupid.

Definitely not the terminology I would apply to Node Editor.

But-to each its own...

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 12:01 PM
no... he's right! It does defeat the whole reason of having a nodal interface...

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 12:01 PM
Surface Global...that would make my day.
Erm, globals in the sense of the SDK are basically function libraries... ways to access LW from a plugin.
The Surface global is thus a set of functions to read (and now change, weird to an extent that can be done already) surface settings from a plugin.

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 12:06 PM
no... he's right! It does defeat the whole reason of having a nodal interface...
The whole reason? You mean there is no gain in functionality now, only because it isn't global?

Cheers,
Mike

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 12:17 PM
OK...ok... It is better then layered, but why would it have been designed this way? Makes no sense to me...

Steamthrower
03-05-2008, 12:20 PM
Erm, globals in the sense of the SDK are basically function libraries... ways to access LW from a plugin.
The Surface global is thus a set of functions to read (and now change, weird to an extent that can be done already) surface settings from a plugin.

I stand, erm, corrected.

I would still very much like a Surface Globals tab. Building upon what Andy said, something that can override all your individual surface settings. Anyway. A bit off track. So.

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 12:33 PM
OK...ok... It is better then layered, but why would it have been designed this way? Makes no sense to me...
Because:
a) it was initially a third party plugin
b) it would open up a huge can of worms considering the current LW architecture.

Think of this: Objects are self contained and include all surface properties in LW.
On the other hand, scenes have no notion of surfaces.
Managing all the overrides here would be a nightmare looking at the current structure (even worse, you can have multiple surfaces with the same name in a single scene ... and people like to surface in Modeler).

Plenty of issues to tackle, and surely not within the scope of a the first code revision by a team new to the code.

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 12:34 PM
Building upon what Andy said, something that can override all your individual surface settings.
I've got an idea that I've been thinking about for a long time now... I'll hopefully find the time to code it soon as well.

Cheers,
Mike

Steamthrower
03-05-2008, 12:36 PM
I've got an idea that I've been thinking about for a long time now... I'll hopefully find the time to code it soon as well.

Cheers,
Mike

If you accept credit card/Paypal I'd pay for it!

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 12:42 PM
If you accept credit card/Paypal I'd pay for it!
We do... and it is planned to be a part of the next exrTrader... 8/ - darn' I said too much already ;)

Cheers,
Mike - who ought to learn to shut up...

Qexit
03-05-2008, 12:44 PM
I guess no-one other than me bought amelie or visual texture then?
http://www.nodalideas.com/I bought Visual Texture when it first came out. I really liked the way it worked in FPrime straight out of the box :thumbsup: Shame that the inclusion of 'native nodes' in LW basically stopped development.

Andyjaggy
03-05-2008, 12:55 PM
Sounds like the next EXR trader will have a built in occlusion pass in the options. Yum.

jburford
03-05-2008, 01:15 PM
Hmmmm, to be fair i think it looks a lot more powerful than ours, which is really way to limited to be fair.... I'd quite happily pay $350 euros to see LW's Node Editor actually move forward, rather than no advancements be ever made again.


Redbull, who the heck said (as usual...) that there would never be anz advancements made again??????

as usual negative, negative, negative....... and that in light of what Newtek has waiting for us.

jburford
03-05-2008, 01:17 PM
I suppose people will be negative about anything and if they weren't, those things would stagnate and never improve but seriously, come on.
How much better off are we with the Nodes system we now have built in? It's opened endless possibilities for us and it works really rather well, I think.

It was one of the major things in 9.0 that stopped LW looking like becoming the bottom end 3d app.
You can compare it to other, more expensive apps, and you can criticise it's shortcomings but it's there and it works. It's also relatively new so I'm sure it will improve.


amen Iain!

Stooch
03-05-2008, 02:43 PM
Ok ok, newtek the node editor is perfect! you are finished, it is now best in the market! no need to listen to us we are just being negative for the sake of it.

there happy now?

want a lollipop?

Steamthrower
03-05-2008, 02:56 PM
Man, some of you guys automatically have this Stooch assumption that goes something like "okay - let me disagree with everything he says". I think he has a good point. The node editor ain't perfect.

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 02:59 PM
for me. if you cant do global texturing, why even bother creating a nodal inteface? its like introducing a car with no engine. its beyond stupid.

Ok ok, newtek the node editor is perfect! you are finished, it is now best in the market! no need to listen to us we are just being negative for the sake of it.
Make up your mind, will you? ;)

The truth is somewhere in between - going to either extreme isn't really helping though. So far it seems the only criticism (except for mine ;) ) is the fact that the nodes aren't global... is that it? C'mon, you can do better than that :D

Cheers,
Mike - no lollipop please

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 03:08 PM
Make up your mind, will you? ;)

The truth is somewhere in between - going to either extreme isn't really helping though. So far it seems the only criticism (except for mine ;) ) is the fact that the nodes aren't global... is that it? C'mon, you can do better than that :D

Cheers,
Mike - no lollipop please

Now your instigating...:D
Id like to group nodes,
id like to package nodes into one node and only have certain parameters editable...ala houdini...
and when I say global, I mean global, not just to surfacing!

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 03:15 PM
Now your instigating...:D
Hey, if it's the only way to get some constructive criticism instead of blanket bashing :p


Id like to group nodes,
id like to package nodes into one node and only have certain parameters editable...ala houdini...
Yup, requested that ages ago as well, those are obvious and probably high up on the wish list of a lot of people.

and when I say global, I mean global, not just to surfacing!
Hm, so you'd want a LW re-write then.
Allright then, let's play this through: What would differentiate LW from other, already completely nodal apps (i.e. Maya or Houdini)?

Or, to phrase it differently: why should LW take that route if you can already purchase apps that have taken it a long time ago?

Cheers,
Mike

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 03:22 PM
Hm, so you'd want a LW re-write then.

If I am not mistaken, isn't that what they are doing. What was this big hype about a core rewrite? So what you are saying is that our rewrite needs a rewrite...right?

Steamthrower
03-05-2008, 03:27 PM
Right, the rewrite being written requires a rewrite to really be a rewrite, right?

RedBull
03-05-2008, 03:27 PM
Redbull, who the heck said (as usual...) that there would never be anz advancements made again??????

as usual negative, negative, negative....... and that in light of what Newtek has waiting for us.

It seems only people who see negative, actually are negative.....The best prediction of one's future behavior, is by analyzing their past behavior.

How much improvements has the Node Editor gained since it's implementation? We have now had 4 major revisions since LW9.0 and how many improvements and enhancements have been made...?

We now have Hair, and better GI, still no OGL or ability to disable individual nodes... Since Newtek bought R2, how many improvements have been made?
Since Newtek bought Rounder how many improvements have been made? Since Newtek bought Water Pool and TLU's plugins, how many improvements have been made... When was the last time Viper or Hypervoxels were updated?

Than why would the Node Editor be constantly updated and revised and enhanced?, NT seem to be flatout making one feature perfect, not to mention consistently updating every facet of the program every revision.

NT don't have a good track-record in this area.... They can always show me to be wrong, i won't be holding my breathe however. If you have ever developed for LW, you would know how much of a mess the Core and architecture really is and while it's not easy for NT to keep putting a band-aid to stop the bleeding.

theo
03-05-2008, 03:29 PM
we are just being negative for the sake of it.

I would say 'manically disproportionate', for the sake of it. Teasing on the 'manic' part.

Node Editor is neither the worst nor the best so I would posit that this position on the gradient of judgment should at least warrant a more reasonable assessment rather than the digital flogging you and your partner-in-binary-discrimination seem to be so quick to levy.

If nodal sucked I would, of course, happily watch you two have your tempestuous ways with this feature... I might even hand you the cat-o-nine.

And after the beating you would both receive a raspberry lollipop wrapped in gold foil with an attractive little paper ribbon decoratively tied around the stem with the insignia "Lightwave Feature Punisher Person" embossed on its crinkly surface.

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 03:32 PM
Right, the rewrite being written requires a rewrite to really be a rewrite, right?

I think thats what he is saying?
no, but seriously... are we getting a rewrite or a partial rewrite, or what?
I was under the impression that we were getting a core rewrite... so why not rewrite it right, instead of wrong?
I have confused myself...:ohmy:

Weetos
03-05-2008, 03:36 PM
why should LW take that route if you can already purchase apps that have taken it a long time ago?

to go a bit further :
Why should LW have better CA tools if you can already purchase XSI ?

??? I don't really see your point, here Lightwolf :confused: A global nodal system is what would make LW a modern 3D application, so what's the problem with that ? Because some other 3D apps already have this, LW shouldn't have its own implementation ? I remember a time when LW was among the first apps having a GI rendering engine - Do you think the competition thought 'Ok guys, we give up , no need for another GI renderer, LW has already one - let's get focused on some new fancy icons for our GUI instead' ?

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 03:37 PM
If I am not mistaken, isn't that what they are doing.
Not really. They are currently doing an in-place re-write. Isolate parts (such as the renderer), rip it out, work on it, but keep the interfaces.

However, a complete nodal workflow would indeed touch the heart of the app (Layout) and that is a real core re-write. They might be able to keep the interface to the isolated renderer, may be even openGL... but anything else within Layout *boom* - unless a lot of time is also spent introducing compatibility layers.

And frankly, for 9.x the team hasn't been on board long enough to design a completely new core. That takes time if you want to do it right.

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 03:43 PM
to go a bit further :
Why should LW have better CA tools if you can already purchase XSI ?

Not quite my point...


??? I don't really see your point, here Lightwolf :confused: A global nodal system is what would make LW a modern 3D application, so what's the problem with that? Because some other 3D apps already have this, LW shouldn't have its own implementation?
No, the question is differentiation. That goes down to the core of how LW is defined as an application. Sometimes I get the feeling that users expect a Maya/Houdini/XSI clone for less money.
I have no issues with a completely nodal workflow, or just a nodal backbone that can, but must not be used.

But, what would make it LightWave? (except for the pricing)

Cheers,
Mike

Iain
03-05-2008, 03:46 PM
Ok ok, newtek the node editor is perfect! you are finished, it is now best in the market! no need to listen to us we are just being negative for the sake of it.

there happy now?

want a lollipop?


Who said it's perfect? It's not but it helps a lot of people do things they found very difficult before. You don't rate it so it's "beyond stupid".

With this post I hereby grant you the attention that you so transparently crave. :o

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 03:46 PM
And frankly, for 9.x the team hasn't been on board long enough to design a completely new core. That takes time if you want to do it right.

Well thats what they are advertising... a core rewrite!
If thats not whats happening, I really hope they plan on telling their customers... Because things are only going to get worse with every release.
Like redbull said... You can only add so many band aids, before all you have is on big band aid ball!

theo
03-05-2008, 03:53 PM
Who said it's perfect? It's not but it helps a lot of people do things they found very difficult before. You don't rate it so it's "beyond stupid".

With this post I hereby grant you the attention that you so transparently crave. :o

Iain, if Stooch 'transparently' craves attention you wouldn't be able to 'see' the craving. Perhaps you meant 'opaquely crave'? :D

theo
03-05-2008, 03:55 PM
before all you have is on big band aid ball!

Dear sweet Jemima that's funny. Lightwave as 'big band aid ball'?! :ohmy:

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 03:58 PM
Dear sweet Jemima that's funny. Lightwave as 'big band aid ball'?! :ohmy:
I just got a great idea for a model!:D

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 04:00 PM
Well thats what they are advertising... a core rewrite!
It was stated a few times that the dev team is doing a "parallel changeover" ... and that implies that they can only change so much at any time.
A core rewrite, maybe. But not a radical new core that affects all areas. Going completely nodal would currently blow the whole app apart.

Speculating here... but one way to approach it might be to re-vamp the SDK first (with the next gen core in mind, killing all current third party plugins), hook those up and then give them expanded functionality be swapping out the core.
Doing it the other way around wouldn't make sense... what's the use of a new core if nothing makes use of it?

It might be possible to do it all at once... but that wouldn't be a "parallel changeover" anymore.

Cheers,
Mike

Iain
03-05-2008, 04:05 PM
Iain, if Stooch 'transparently' craves attention you wouldn't be able to 'see' the craving. Perhaps you meant 'opaquely crave'? :D

It's the posts which are transparent. The craving is there underneath for all to see.

theo
03-05-2008, 04:11 PM
It's the posts which are transparent. The craving is there underneath for all to see.

Ah...:thumbsup:

theo
03-05-2008, 04:12 PM
I just got a great idea for a model!:D

You'll need Zbrush... if I am picking up on your wave function, that is.

Stooch
03-05-2008, 04:31 PM
oh great so i should check with you just how much proportion of negativity i should have? nice. i dont think im negative at all. i think its stupid to have nodes that dont affect surfaces globally, i dont really care how that comes across. is it and extreme vew? maybe, is it an extremely stupid functionality without this feature? DEFINITELLY! IMO of course. I dont really care what state of development its in, until the functionality of nodes is there, it will remain so in my view. and i dont need anyone to modulate my views, thanks. infact i think its rude when other people try to force their opinions on me.


I would say 'manically disproportionate', for the sake of it. Teasing on the 'manic' part.

Node Editor is neither the worst nor the best so I would posit that this position on the gradient of judgment should at least warrant a more reasonable assessment rather than the digital flogging you and your partner-in-binary-discrimination seem to be so quick to levy.

If nodal sucked I would, of course, happily watch you two have your tempestuous ways with this feature... I might even hand you the cat-o-nine.

And after the beating you would both receive a raspberry lollipop wrapped in gold foil with an attractive little paper ribbon decoratively tied around the stem with the insignia "Lightwave Feature Punisher Person" embossed on its crinkly surface.

Stooch
03-05-2008, 04:37 PM
It's the posts which are transparent. The craving is there underneath for all to see.

really? i think that you are the one that is craving MY attention, thats why you are riding my nutts. i didnt make a post singling anyone out specifically until now. Besides i dont need any more attention then i already have.

Stooch
03-05-2008, 04:41 PM
Make up your mind, will you? ;)

The truth is somewhere in between - going to either extreme isn't really helping though. So far it seems the only criticism (except for mine ;) ) is the fact that the nodes aren't global... is that it? C'mon, you can do better than that :D

Cheers,
Mike - no lollipop please

really ? well i think that your critcism is akin having two balls firmly planted on your chin. Its a limp wristed apologist stance that i personally dont share. however I dont like to criticise PEOPLE like you are so fond of doing, im here to criticise LW nodes. I know i can do better though, once NT handles this critical issue, i will deliver the rest of my, less important crits. now how about doing us all a favor and focus on LW instead of derailing the thread with personal crits?

thanks.

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 04:57 PM
This is a present for you stooch... to brighten up your day!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6syezOHJ2Q&feature=related
Back up in this *** with your resurrection

Stooch
03-05-2008, 04:58 PM
my day is actually awesome. but thanks.

RedBull
03-05-2008, 05:00 PM
So far it seems the only criticism (except for mine ;) ) is the fact that the nodes aren't global... is that it? C'mon, you can do better than that :D

Actually after using the Node editor for just 24hours (2006) i posted a list of feature requests on things that came to mind straight away, I'm sure these days i could add another dozen things to the feature request. I also tried to keep it to things i thought could be done.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55761

I'll note none of them have been implemented jburford... ;)

Iain
03-05-2008, 05:04 PM
really? i think that you are the one that is craving MY attention, thats why you are riding my nutts. i didnt make a post singling anyone out specifically until now. Besides i dont need any more attention then i already have.

This is the way you always post. You start off being mildly rude and generally give the impression that you think there is little merit in anyone else's opinion. When people react, you go for it and really let rip on them, then you say that it was their fault.

I know what's coming next too. You'll throw some insults at me, maybe even some veiled threats (always hilarious) then say I started the personal stuff.............

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 05:05 PM
But for example a Light Info Node that could have inputs and outputs,
so surfaces and gradients could control intensity, colour etc. Basically anything that has channel info could be utilised in a very Houdini'esuqe way...
Essentially it could leverage quite a lot of power out of the Node Editor and LW in general. The Node Editor would become a very intergral part of LW's interface in that everything from selection of lights to objects and their properties could all be controlled via the Node Editor. Basically creating a very dynamic workflow, that could blow the others away IMO...

I like this one, and the rest too...

RedBull
03-05-2008, 05:17 PM
I like this one, and the rest too...

I looked at the Schematic view in LW yesterday, I always thought it could of evolved to Nodal but in it's own viewport.... That would make it very Houdini'esqe.. Mmmmmm dreams....... (sigh)

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 05:19 PM
Actually after using the Node editor for just 24hours (2006) i posted a list of feature requests on things that came to mind straight away, I'm sure these days i could add another dozen things to the feature request.
Good post, most of these are on my whishlist as well (bypass isn't because I can't think of a predictable way to implement it for all cases).

I suppose we'll see lights with node support once the light SDK is out. As for cameras I guess nobody saw the need to nodalize them yet - I wonder what it should do.

Cheers,
Mike

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 05:21 PM
I looked at the Schematic view in LW yesterday, I always thought it could of evolved to Nodal but in it's own viewport.... That would make it very Houdini'esqe.. Mmmmmm dreams....... (sigh)


I said the same thing a few weeks ago... The schematic view is in need of some tlc anyway. I think part of the problem is that we still are two separate programs... So not much can really be done to anything!

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 05:23 PM
however I dont like to criticise PEOPLE like you are so fond of doing, im here to criticise LW nodes.
I didn't criticise you, I criticised your posts - maybe I should've made that clearer though.
Next time ... promised!

Cheers,
Mike

theo
03-05-2008, 05:38 PM
oh great so i should check with you just how much proportion of negativity i should have? nice.

Actually, I agree- this is a nice idea. Very nice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reverting to topical fodder:

Feature requesting seems to be such a pistol shot in the dark. I, literally, have little confidence in NT's ability to implement significant changes to the Node Editor, or anything else for that matter, based specifically on user demand. Which is why you will rarely, if ever, see me requesting features. I tend to be efficient in this regard.

Lightwolf
03-05-2008, 05:55 PM
I tend to be efficient in this regard.
As a general (as in, not directed at you theo [is that better stooch?]) thought... does the same go for b*tching as well?

If I follow your thought then there is little faith in change after the implementation as well.

<devils advocate>What's the point then? Friendly (or not-so-friendly) chit-chat and little :cursin: every now and then to let off steam? ;)</advocate>

I actually do think it makes a change... even though progress seems to be slower than expected (by the users).
I bet if there wasn't so much requesting we wouldn't have IES lights in 9.5 - or custom lights. Yes, it has been requested for ages, but who knows what it took to get it implemented. I also have a hunch that the dev team would surely like to implement a lot of the nodal related features (hey, any developer wants to write the ultimate code), but there are surely priorities that we are not directly aware of.
Heck, even I have enough ideas that could have me coding for a year straight ... and that's within the confines of the SDK.

Base line: NT does listen (well, read). What they make of it though is outside of our control.

Cheers,
Mike

theo
03-05-2008, 06:34 PM
As a general (as in, not directed at you theo [is that better stooch?]) thought... does the same go for b*tching as well?

If I follow your thought then there is little faith in change after the implementation as well.

<devils advocate>What's the point then? Friendly (or not-so-friendly) chit-chat and little :cursin: every now and then to let off steam? ;)</advocate>

I actually do think it makes a change... even though progress seems to be slower than expected (by the users).

Steam is kosher... but what's the point in developing it in relation to something like advancing Node Editor, for example?

I tend to lean circumspect in the sense that I believe emotional steam and passion for change does not ordinarily equate into observable change, especially concerning an entity as complex as Lightwave, which makes the process inefficient, in my view.

The glut of recommendations and requests for this software really do just sit there and gather dust, for the most part. I have been around here long enough to see the validity of this statement.

Sure, a few small concepts make it through the rapids but outside of these special specie the crux of user requests are a useless vapor.

I am not being critical of NT at all here. Obviously, they have business plan that must be engaged. I respect this, but not at the behest of my own perceived reality, which, I admit, can be flawed.

For example, I don't know too many folks who were clamoring for an integrated hair/fur solution. There are other examples I really prefer not to highlight simply because it would change the course of the thread.

It is quite obvious to me that NT is focusing on introducing features that can be positioned to create sales in the long-term, which is just good business planning. But is NT doing enough to meet the specific needs of the core user base? Without bias, I sometimes wonder if there isn't a bit of disconnect between NT and what users not only want, but need.

So, it is in this vein that I will continue to avoid casting pearls into the paths of disinterested mermen.

Stooch
03-05-2008, 07:20 PM
This is the way you always post. You start off being mildly rude and generally give the impression that you think there is little merit in anyone else's opinion. When people react, you go for it and really let rip on them, then you say that it was their fault.

I know what's coming next too. You'll throw some insults at me, maybe even some veiled threats (always hilarious) then say I started the personal stuff.............

lol actually you arent worth my time. you think im too harsh on LW nodes? tough cookies.

i guess there is nothing wrong with criticising MY POSTS but criticise LW? oh god no!

what a bunch of hypocrites. anyway like i said before, i really dont care so its kind of pointless to argue with me on this. it wont change my pov, will only clutter up threads.

Stooch
03-05-2008, 07:27 PM
by the way IMO, a nodal shading network that doesnt have global shading nodes is beyond stupid. And anyone who doesnt agree is dumber than the nodes in question.

:)

wavemaster
03-05-2008, 07:58 PM
Cant really blame the nodes for being stupid... as they didn't program themselves and implement themselves poorly.:D

jin choung
03-05-2008, 10:55 PM
well, i wouldn't say "beyond stupid" but i definitely agree with the sentiment that it's limited... but it's an acquisition of a third party development, not a change in lw architecture.... so it COULDN'T be any more than it is.

a primary idea of a nodal interface is that you can create a node ONCE and then RE-USE that node across multiple situations and objects... throughout your whole scene. as long as the output DATA TYPE matches the input's, you're good to go, no matter what kind of node it is (animation, material, object, etc...).

at it's most complex best, nodes can approximate a GUI'd programming interface. (maya's getting closer but it still falls short and betrays its legacy as simple render utilities)

with lw nodes now, you can only re-use anything in a single material. not even across multiple materials! (it blew my mind when i first discovered that! it didn't even occur to me that it would be THAT limited!)... decidedly not a robust application of the concept.

basically, just gives you a new way front-end to do something you can already do. again, not a robust application of the concept.

certainly wouldn't be satisfying to someone used to working in "true" node environments (maya, houdini, fusion, blender) and potentially simply an opiate for the masses as in - "yay! we got the buzzword."

it's that last point that bothers me. bulletpoints as decoys.

and apparently adding to an aging legacy instead of taking a step toward a new base.

jin

p.s. sigh... so the 'dogpiles' continue eh? hang in there stooch. gadflies probably don't do each other any favors by sticking together... but... fwiw...
: )

Cageman
03-06-2008, 01:29 AM
We do... and it is planned to be a part of the next exrTrader... 8/ - darn' I said too much already ;)

Cheers,
Mike - who ought to learn to shut up...

Sounds promising. I'll buy exrTrader soon.... will this new version of exrTrader be a free update or do you plan on having it a pay upgrade?

Cageman
03-06-2008, 01:37 AM
by the way IMO, a nodal shading network that doesnt have global shading nodes is beyond stupid. And anyone who doesnt agree is dumber than the nodes in question.

:)

While I can't say that nodes are bad for what they do in the Surface Editor, I do agree with the sentiment that there has to be a more unified workflow of nodes throughout the application. I, for one, use Node Item Motion and DP Kit ALL the time, because they offer for some really neat workflow improvements. I'm quite hopefull that NT will make Nodes more integrated throughout the app, but that won't happen in a long time. There is just too many things with the old design that doesn't allow for an easy or fast implemented switch.

Iain
03-06-2008, 03:01 AM
p.s. sigh... so the 'dogpiles' continue eh? hang in there stooch. gadflies probably don't do each other any favors by sticking together... but... fwiw...


Gadfly is a term usually applied to people by themselves because alternative, and arguably more accurate, terms would be replaced by asterisks. A Gadfly doesn't dismiss but rather contributes in an alternative or new way.

As I said before, I think that quite often when people jump into a civil discussion with brusque comments, they just want to appear superior and like the attention it brings them.

Lightwolf
03-06-2008, 04:24 AM
Sounds promising. I'll buy exrTrader soon.... will this new version of exrTrader be a free update or do you plan on having it a pay upgrade?
:offtopic: but I ought to answer: It is planned to be a free update... which is downright silly looking at the planned features... ;)

Cheers,
Mike

Lightwolf
03-06-2008, 04:31 AM
certainly wouldn't be satisfying to someone used to working in "true" node environments (maya, houdini, fusion, blender) and potentially simply an opiate for the masses as in - "yay! we got the buzzword."
Let me just isolate that one (because I'm the most familiar with it).
Even Fusion isn't completely nodal, far from it. You have two layers of abstraction, once being that actual tools in the flow with limited connectability (you can basically only pass images/masks, particles or 3D data around) while you have another layer that allows you manipulate tool values (and connect them). There is no visible node graph for the second layer.

Now, if you look at LW nodes, they operate on a much lower level since they are evaluated per "surface sample" - and really have only been designed for that kind of evaluation as well (the analogy in compositing would be a per pixel node graph, where every tools setting can change per pixel).

And yes, I'd like to see something more global in LW as well... but 9.x is/was way to soon to expect it. Look at the plugin from the start of the thread... it'S been in development for years and still only concentrates on shading...

Cheers,
Mike

theo
03-06-2008, 06:39 AM
by the way IMO, a nodal shading network that doesnt have global shading nodes is beyond stupid. And anyone who doesnt agree is dumber than the nodes in question.

:)

At this point, the various flavors of the topic have coalesced into palatable arrangement.

One can only hope NT can act on this expeditiously... I give the time frame an 'expeditious' two years.

Stooch
03-06-2008, 10:12 AM
s I said before, I think that quite often when people jump into a civil discussion with brusque comments, they just want to appear superior and like the attention it brings them.

really? In my opinion people that jump on others under the assumption that "they are superior" is an indicator that you are infact insecure in your abilities. since you are the one that thinks that i am superior - i think its a problem with your self image that causes you to always compare yourself to others instead of sticking to the topic at hand... nodes. but i will not deny you the pov and infact take no offense by your assertion. I am probably superior to you - since i can talk about software features critically without the need to compare myself to you, so save yourself the jabs since all they do is serve as an admission of your inferiority.

jin choung
03-06-2008, 11:27 AM
Even Fusion isn't completely nodal, far from it.

no argument. and as i say, even maya's node implementation is wanting in lots of areas.

but fact remains that for maya users, lw's nodes seem MUCH more localized, limited and stifling.

"true" is misleading then... i'll revise to "more mature and thorough implementations of nodes".

jin

wavemaster
03-06-2008, 12:00 PM
The lack of painting abilities in Layout is really starting bother me! We should be able to paint the new fur, paint hd instances, paint clones, paint weights, paint any property! we are stuck working in the dark ages!!! I AM MAD:devil:

Been working in Blender today, and all I can say is... what a crying shame for NT!

jin choung
03-06-2008, 12:15 PM
Gadfly is a term usually applied to people by themselves because alternative, and arguably more accurate, terms would be replaced by asterisks.

this is insulting, unhelpful and provokes a forum brawl that has nothing to do with the current topic of discussion.

identifying instance in which non-gadfly is trying to contribute to forum noise.

jin

Lightwolf
03-06-2008, 12:26 PM
but fact remains that for maya users, lw's nodes seem MUCH more localized, limited and stifling.
No argument either... ;) On the other hand... they're easier to use :p

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
03-06-2008, 12:39 PM
No argument either... ;) On the other hand... they're easier to use :p


yah, it takes a while to get used to maya's nodes. not super user friendly and the whole notion of "upstream" "downstream" was a bad terminology idea imo... what the heck was wrong with input output?!

if newtek could extend the lw node system to be "system wide", that would make for a very compelling node system. in terms of user friendliness, it would blow maya out of the water.

my only concern is whether the current implementation of a node system CAN be propagated system wide....

jin

Lightwolf
03-06-2008, 12:42 PM
my only concern is whether the current implementation of a node system CAN be propagated system wide....
I doubt it. Currently a node is basically a shader (as in LW shader plugin) with additional, visible inputs and outputs. Hey, that's what it was designed for.

It would need to be a lot more generic to make sense in a system wide fashion.

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
03-06-2008, 01:15 PM
sorry for revisiting but i forgot to add this before and it is necessary for the sake of clarity:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
gad·fly /ˈgædˌflaɪ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[gad-flahy] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -flies.
1. any of various flies, as a stable fly or warble fly, that bite or annoy domestic animals.
2. a person who persistently annoys or provokes others with criticism, schemes, ideas, demands, requests, etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
not sure where the "other" so-called definition of gadfly can possibly come from but....

as defined, it is a term that i believe i started using to refer to myself and others considered as persistent detractors. i chose a term that was sufficiently nasty enough to be considered fair and equitable when placed against "fanboy".

thank you.

jin

theo
03-06-2008, 01:45 PM
i chose a term that was sufficiently nasty enough to be considered fair and equitable when placed against "fanboy".


...this is practically what Iain stated, jin.

jin choung
03-06-2008, 01:55 PM
maybe you didn't read what he wrote.


Gadfly is a term usually applied to people by themselves because alternative, and arguably more accurate, terms would be replaced by asterisks. A Gadfly doesn't dismiss but rather contributes in an alternative or new way.

jin

Jim M
03-06-2008, 02:57 PM
Error

SBowie
03-06-2008, 02:59 PM
maybe you didn't read what he wrote.He's not claiming to offer a definition. Rather, he's making a personal observation about the use of the term. Without getting into the details of this particular thread, I agree that some people frequently use the notion that (gadfly-like) they are serving the good of all by their 'frank contributions' to justify what is simply a rude, cynical manner of expression.

I'm not easily convinced by claims that run along the line of 'I'm really your best friend because (unlike all these other idiots) I am telling you like it is.' There are ways to express almost any suggestion or criticism that are respectful, and then there are ways that invariably set off a flame war. Personally (not that anyone cares) I think the latter is largely just a counter-productive exercise in vanity.

jin choung
03-06-2008, 03:11 PM
He's not claiming to offer a definition. Rather, he's making a personal observation about the use of the term. Without getting into the details of this particular thread, I agree that some people frequently use the notion that (gadfly-like) they are serving the good of all by their 'frank contributions' to justify what is simply a rude, cynical manner of expression.

I'm not easily convinced by claims that run along the line of 'I'm really your best friend because (unlike all these other idiots) I am telling you like it is.' There are ways to express almost any suggestion or criticism that are respectful, and then there are ways that invariably set off a flame war. Personally (not that anyone cares) I think the latter is largely just a counter-productive exercise in vanity.

?

again, if people are using the term in a less than derogatory way, that is their MISTAKE.

his personal observation is that gadflies (apparently by definition) would do such and such - but in actuality they deserve to be called something derogatory. just looking at the quote, that's what i get. (and again, this is a hostile post that contributes nothing to conversation except fan flames.)

i use it on myself (and my ilk) as a way of being fair. and that fairness only is achieved when it is taken per definition.

IN ANY CASE - if there was any confusion as to the definition and implication to the word, there should now not be.

sigh.

jin

SBowie
03-06-2008, 03:23 PM
?again, if people are using the term in a less than derogatory way, that is their MISTAKE.OK, you're right that the term is somewhat derogatory, which mostly is what was indicated in the original comment. I confess I don't know what this bit purports to mean - "A Gadfly doesn't dismiss but rather contributes in an alternative or new way."

Apart from that bit the comments seem consistent. Hostile? Well probably, but hardly exceptional in that. Some people seem to manage to bring that out in others. :)

jin choung
03-06-2008, 03:48 PM
Apart from that bit the comments seem consistent.

fantastic. that happens to be the operative statement...

seems to me that it would stand to reason that one would have a firm grasp of a statement before one would jump in out of the blue to defend it....

but that's just me.

i guess....

...


Hostile? Well probably, but hardly exceptional in that. Some people seem to manage to bring that out in others. :)

wonderful rationalization. anyway, people are complaining about forum noise. there is a contention going around that non-gadflies contribute to the magnitude and duration of that noise as much if not moreso than gadflies.

just making a record.

jin

Iain
03-06-2008, 04:06 PM
this is insulting, unhelpful and provokes a forum brawl that has nothing to do with the current topic of discussion.



That's great! Did you lift it straight from the email that informed you of your suspension from the forums?:bowdown:

To clarify, this thread was, (surprisingly in light of the recent trend of most threads descending into bitter, purile crap) making quite a good read.

Then it looked like that all might change.

So............
In a real life situation (e.g. in the pub with friends) the solution to someone blurting out unwarranted or dismissive remarks in the middle of a civil conversation is quickly telling him to stop being a wanker. After some protestation, that person generally stops being a wanker. I just thought it might work here.

And my understanding of 'gadfly' comes from Plato's description of Socrates, a useful but uncomfortable goad. Not entirely an insult as I understand it.

jin choung
03-06-2008, 04:13 PM
That's great! Did you lift it straight from the email that informed you of your suspension from the forums?:bowdown:

:devil:


anyway, people are complaining about forum noise. there is a contention going around that non-gadflies contribute to the magnitude and duration of that noise as much if not moreso than gadflies.

just making a record.

and go argue with the dictionary as you will.

jin

Lightwolf
03-06-2008, 04:17 PM
After some protestation, that person generally stops being a wanker.
And then you tell him the next round's on him... :beerchug:

Cheers,
Mike

Iain
03-06-2008, 04:26 PM
And then you tell him the next round's on him... :beerchug:

Cheers,
Mike

Yeah, then when he's at the bar, you phone his girlfriend/wife and tell her he's at the police station after being caught urinating in the street, dirty boy.

SBowie
03-06-2008, 04:46 PM
seems to me that it would stand to reason that one would have a firm grasp of a statement before one would jump in out of the blue to defend it....but that's just me.I think I have the main thrust right. The rest is splitting hairs (IMHO, of course.)


there is a contention going around that non-gadflies contribute to the magnitude and duration of that noise as much if not moreso than gadflies.I think probably more, because the gadflies (by definition, if you will) tend to be an annoyingly vocal minority - thankfully.

jin choung
03-06-2008, 04:50 PM
I think I have the main thrust right. The rest is splitting hairs (IMHO, of course.)

as i said, you missed the essential statement. not hairs... you missed the ballpark.

imho of course.

jin

bobakabob
03-06-2008, 05:12 PM
Jin, with the greatest respect, you're a fanboy in denial but like to flatter yourself you're "annoying". Judging from your number of posts and the amount of time you spend on the forum you love Lightwave really. It's never too late to seek :help:

jin choung
03-06-2008, 05:21 PM
Jin, with the greatest respect, you're a fanboy in denial but like to flatter yourself you're "annoying". Judging from your number of posts and the amount of time you spend on the forum you love Lightwave really :help:

wow. that's was a pointless post. with the greatest respect.

jin

bobakabob
03-06-2008, 05:26 PM
Heh. Pointless posts? Yes, regrettably there have been rather a lot of those lately...

jin choung
03-06-2008, 05:30 PM
thanks for "regrettably" adding yet another one. heh.

jin

Stooch
03-06-2008, 05:38 PM
Lol, i love it when people get all psychoanalytical and attempt to hypothesise about "real life".

the term "wanker" is a matter of perception. IE for me a "wanker" buts into a conversation with unrelated personal commentary (that would be you).

in a real life situation if you feel inclined to enter a conversation just to ***** about the "harshness" of dialogue and otherwise tell other people how to phrase things or criticise them infront of everyone - you deserve (And probably will get) a backhand to the mouth. Generally "in real life" if you dont like a conversation, you dont participate in it, unless of course you are looking for a confrontation, something most reasonable people who actually interact in real life, realize.

like i said in a previous thread, if you have personal issues - adress them via PM, otherwise a public approach will amount to nothing - and is a pretty opaque cry for attention. Afterall its not about your delicate sensibilities really, its about you standing on your soapbox and trying to impress everyone here with how polite and righteous you are... BUT, If you were really as polite as you try to pretend to be, voicing your pov politely via pm would be the most logical and effective means (ironically people like you dont really get the whole politeness thing anyway so they sound like hypocrites in the first place).

If i had to pick my words with you when discussing any lightwave functionality in real life so that you don't get personally offended, I would never even bother talking to a loser such as yourself. All my friends are intelligent enough to be able to share ideas with no restrictions on terminology, or getting personally offended when the conversation isnt personal to begin with. I guess they and I are "superior" to you in that sense.

All you accomplish by your current approach is derision on my part where I have 0 inclination to do as you say and develop a negative attitude towards you for future interactions (obviously). At that point it really doesnt matter how right you are, I have no incentive to agree with you... (obviously) naturally your accusation then turns to: "your opinion is more important than everyone" when in fact, its more important than any "wanker" (that would be you). At this point your pov has been completely derailed and im in essense laughing at you in front of everyone, hardly the effect you intended?

Now back on topic. My pov that the current nodes are beyond stupid is my OPINION, and I fully expect other people to disagree with me, and i respect their povs as long as they respect mine. Having used many incarnations of nodes (pretty much all major packages in the industry), i have a very deep appreciation for a proper implementation, the ONLY real benefit to using nodes is the fact that you can control many things with 1. Everything else in regards to surfacing can arguably be done without them. So harsh or not, my opinion stands.



That's great! Did you lift it straight from the email that informed you of your suspension from the forums?:bowdown:

To clarify, this thread was, (surprisingly in light of the recent trend of most threads descending into bitter, purile crap) making quite a good read.

Then it looked like that all might change.

So............
In a real life situation (e.g. in the pub with friends) the solution to someone blurting out unwarranted or dismissive remarks in the middle of a civil conversation is quickly telling him to stop being a wanker. After some protestation, that person generally stops being a wanker. I just thought it might work here.

And my understanding of 'gadfly' comes from Plato's description of Socrates, a useful but uncomfortable goad. Not entirely an insult as I understand it.

Andyjaggy
03-06-2008, 05:54 PM
It's always amazing how offended people get and how much peoples mannerisms and social norms change when online.

Lightwolf
03-06-2008, 06:00 PM
It's always amazing how offended people get and how much peoples mannerisms and social norms change when online.
Either that or we're missing out on a lot of secondary communication here...

Cheers,
Mike

Andyjaggy
03-06-2008, 06:02 PM
Or CG guys are all socially backwards. Probably more likely. :)

Exception
03-06-2008, 06:52 PM
Is it just me or doesn't anyone see the striking resemblance to LW's nodal layout?

Iain
03-07-2008, 02:44 AM
It's always amazing how offended people get and how much peoples mannerisms and social norms change when online.

Do they though?

I suspect people remain pretty much unchanged, they just feel more able to express their feelings with little fear of retribution or confrontation. On a site with light moderation that can be a great thing and a terrible thing as there's no character checking at registration.

Anyway, nodal eh? Wasn't he in Gorillaz?

theo
03-07-2008, 07:07 AM
Do they though?

I suspect people remain pretty much unchanged, they just feel more able to express their feelings with little fear of retribution or confrontation. On a site with light moderation that can be a great thing and a terrible thing as there's no character checking at registration.

Anyway, nodal eh? Wasn't he in Gorillaz?

OT excessively:

This is a piece of the social fabric that has held my fascination for years, since one of my small interior passions is observing humanity (not from an aloof position, by the way).

People in 'physical' ego-extending spaces (cars, web...), I think, do tend to regress to a more base social schema. I don't know how 'common' this is, though. I don't want to be trapped in a biased generalization.

I would agree with your assertion above Iain in the sense that people probably do remain unchanged, with one caveat; how 'aware' one is when expressing information in an anonymous setting will modulate, I think, tones that will not be considered socially productive, particularly between members in a social group who are largely familiar with each other (for example, most of the members in this thread).

A family is good example; members will act out with base emotion, at times, to create an environment of transparency (which is really healthy, in my view) but to counteract specific negative feelings which will result (isolation, inadequacy...) healthy families will work toward the larger goal of prime interaction which includes respect, appreciation, love (familial), greater self-awareness and so on.

SBowie
03-07-2008, 08:09 AM
People in 'physical' ego-extending spaces (cars, web...), I think, do tend to regress to a more base social schema.I think you're right about that. You will often observe a similar effect in a drunken person. An overdose of alcohol, a ton of steel on rubber or the use of 1's and 0's can bring out a baser (I use this word in several senses here) behavior.

In such cases, social standards may fall away. I believe one's behavior in those environments reveals a lot. A person given to warmth and friendliness may become overly so when 'under the influence.' An arrogant person may reveal an uglier interior, rhetoric becoming abusive and intolerant.

I do not believe arguments that the invective serves any useful purpose, nor do I think those who find it repellent are just 'touchy.' Abusive language always degrades the conversation, tending naturally toward a destructive rather than constructive purpose. I'd like to have heard a good discussion on the node editor's strengths and weaknesses. This would be valuable, informative. But as soon as someone has the arrogance to characterize others as "stupid," useful discussion deteriorates. That sort of language has no other effect than to rudely put down and dismiss all who have a different view. (Shortly afterward, ones who have behaved offensively in this manner will usually be found condemning the majority who bristle at such language as 'overly sensitive.' )

Surely there are mature ways to advance the discussion, without recourse to juvenile expression. Whatever intelligence and talent one may have, or however correct his view, a person who cannot express himself without being abusive is a sad case - willing to sacrifice the real benefit a good intellect might bring others on the altar of egotism.

Suppose a very smart, talented, and experienced person is in a conversation, and a young child is bold enough to interrupt and offer a view. What would other adults think of the one who said "Be quiet, you don't know anything, you stupid child." Even in a case where the child truly was mentally deficient and completely wrong, most adults would be sickened by the arrogance of the one who spoke that way. Should it be any different in a group of adults? However one using such terms attempts to justify it, such behavior is juvenile, unnecessary, and destructive*. Sadly, we see such corrosive disrespect in the highest places now, parliaments hurling invective and even physically assaulting one another like aggravated 3 year olds in a sandbox. Pathetic.


*There will always be the rare case when even the child is correct, as when he may simply say "Excuse me sir, but your fly is down.'

Thank heavens for those who manage to keep dragging the point back on topic, without insults. (Having just re-read this entire thread, my personal award on that score goes to Mike, though there are runners-up.)

Stooch
03-07-2008, 10:55 AM
wow all this pseudo intellectual debate still doesnt change that you guys are completely off topic, the current node implementation is still beyond stupid at the moment and taking a subjective statement about a software implementation as a personal insult is still childish and insecure. so ponder about that for a bit more. Yes this forum allows for people who would be too embarrassed to whine about such things in person to let it all out, but again its not really for the sake of mending an intellectual rift between the "offended and the offendee" its purely for a juvenile popularity contest, as explained clearly in my previous post. So iain dont pretend to be taking the moral high ground, not after your "wanker" references.

you do realize that there is a big difference between saying that "this program feature is stupid" and "you are a wanker" right??

SBowie
03-07-2008, 11:24 AM
Does it really require any intellectual ability or imagination to realize that when someone says 'the current implementation is beyond stupid', this is a sideways slash leveled simultaneously at 1) the people responsible for the implementation, and 2) anyone who remarked on anything they like about it?

That is a personal insult. It's the same as if someone looked at your artwork and told everyone in the room "That is complete crap." Even though directed at the work, it strongly implies something about the artist. Someone truly interested in improving things might simply point out where it could be better, without inflammatory rhetoric.

Saying "I'm really unhappy with the current implementation, because it lacks x, y and z ... etc." would make the same point - without provocation. (And yes, you're right - "wanker" is unflattering too ... although in my experience at least the latter is usually delivered with a modicum of humor, which may take the edge off a bit.)

Stooch
03-07-2008, 09:15 PM
actually if someone said that my work is complete crap and pointed out how it could be improved i would not take it as an insult, i will simply try harder next time. Especially if they have a valid point.

HOW they deliver that point is irrelevant.

however you have told me alot about your mentality with that example and i have no respect for you as a result. Anyone who takes a criticism about their work, no matter how harsh, personally, does not get respect from me so their feelings do not matter to me. infact ill come right out and say it right now, i hate thin skinned premadonnas and you just gave me the impression that you are one.

thanks.

SBowie
03-08-2008, 06:14 AM
i hate thin skinned premadonnas and you just gave me the impression that you are one.Precisely the reaction I predicted. There is *no* practical advantage advantage to abusive speech. It merely elevates the one using it ... in his own mind. Courtesy is not a weakness - rudeness is.

theo
03-08-2008, 06:56 AM
i hate thin skinned premadonnas and you just gave me the impression that you are one.


Hate is an inefficient energy.

I do understand, actually, your distaste for 'thin-skinned premadonnas'. Social 'correctness' can be a subtle tyranny, more often than not.

What you are addressing in this thread, though, is a much different and more relevant social beast, Stooch.

Most of the conversationalists in this thread have been immersed in the LW community for years now, which, in a way, makes us a strange family, of sorts.

Familial respect for one another transcends many differences and enables us to productively share concepts and information without reverting to castigations of ideas, software and, sometimes, people.

Heightened passion and blowing the occasional emotional load can be entertaining and personally expressive, but without a counterbalance of rationality they can be rash and pointless in the larger conceptual climate.

For example, your 'stupid' and 'dumb' comments in reference to Node Editor lend no useful information for change. Referring to people who care for you as 'thin-skinned premadonnas' offers no useful remedy for your social disagreement.

SBowie
03-08-2008, 07:04 AM
'thin-skinned premadonnas' offers no useful remedy for your social disagreement.The fact is, if someone calls me names, it really doesn't bother me (I just hate to take part discussions that are degraded to such a juvenile level, and also hate to see other people verbally bullied by those who stoop to it) - but if we're going to keep using the term let's get the spelling right, shall we? It's "prima donna."

Here's a cute quote: "Arrogance and rudeness are training wheels on the bicycle of life -- for weak people who cannot keep their balance without them. "

theo
03-08-2008, 07:47 AM
The fact is, if someone calls me names, it really doesn't bother me (I just hate to take part discussions that are degraded to such a juvenile level, and also hate to see other people verbally bullied by those who stoop to it) - but if we're going to keep using the term let's get the spelling right, shall we? It's "prima donna."

Here's a cute quote: "Arrogance and rudeness are training wheels on the bicycle of life -- for weak people who cannot keep their balance without them. "

Just KNOWING that I do know how prima donna is spelled makes this oddly painful. Saturday morning eyeball mist, that's what it is...

lightmaster95
03-08-2008, 08:05 AM
If this thread is about nodal sucking? I agree... it is one of the worst implementations of nodes I have ever seen. Wonder if they will fix them?

SBowie
03-08-2008, 08:12 AM
If this thread is about nodal sucking? I agree... it is one of the worst implementations of nodes I have ever seen. Wonder if they will fix them?I'd love to hear - or better yet see (mockups are helpful) - practical suggestions of how the feature could be strengthened. Global operations have been mentioned already; I'm fairly sure we all agree with that. What else? Where would you start, specifically. to improve things?

lightmaster95
03-08-2008, 08:18 AM
I pretty much agree with everything that wavemaster said...

IMI
03-08-2008, 08:20 AM
I pretty much agree with everything that wavemaster said...


Imagine that. ;)

SBowie
03-08-2008, 08:29 AM
I pretty much agree with everything that wavemaster said...A bit of work to parse those contributions scattered through this thread, but looking for them did turn this up, which I'd overlooked earlier:

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55761

A thread which manages to discuss practical issues without rancor. Cool. (Someone will perhaps point out it's going on two years old - fair enough.)

JBT27
03-08-2008, 08:31 AM
Does nodal make any improvement to use of LW, irrespective of good or bad implementation? Or have I missed the point?

Probably.....:)

Julian.

IMI
03-08-2008, 08:38 AM
Does nodal make any improvement to use of LW, irrespective of good or bad implementation? Or have I missed the point?

Probably.....:)

Julian.


I think it does. I think it's a huge improvement far as surfacing and displacement mapping goes.
But I think the problem here is that it's limited to those aspects of the program, and not incorporated fully into the rest of it. Something like that. I'll admit I've not followed this thread too closely.
I think the bottom line is, if you like LW 9's nodes there's something wrong with you or you're not professional enough. ;)

lightmaster95
03-08-2008, 08:40 AM
The biggest problem is its not even global to surfacing... If you have 20 surfaces you need 20 different node trees...

IMI
03-08-2008, 08:44 AM
The biggest problem is its not even global to surfacing... If you have 20 surfaces you need 20 different node trees...


Well yeah, you're right. Certainly I've noticed that too, incredibly obvious as it is.
I never saw that as a liability though. You're describing one large global surfacing panel (or window or something else) with all surfaces in it, ready to be edited at once?
That would be cool.

theo
03-08-2008, 08:51 AM
Well yeah, you're right. Certainly I've noticed that too, incredibly obvious as it is.
I never saw that as a liability though. You're describing one large global surfacing panel (or window or something else) with all surfaces in it, ready to be edited at once?
That would be cool.

Actually, IMI, it would be more than cool... it would be huge step toward increased productivity and blazing-fast efficiency. Global surfacing should be implemented as soon as NT can manage this.

IMI
03-08-2008, 09:00 AM
Actually, IMI, it would be more than cool... it would be huge step toward increased productivity and blazing-fast efficiency. Global surfacing should be implemented as soon as NT can manage this.


OK, sign me up. I'm on board with that idea, for sure. :)

EDIT: Somebody ought to make a poll for the idea.

tischbein3
03-08-2008, 09:05 AM
Global operations have been mentioned already; I'm fairly sure we all agree with that. What else? Where would you start, specifically. to improve things?

Can't resist (although quite help/hopless to do this without deeper knowledge of the source :D ):

I would suggest trying to implement the global node editor inside the envelope evaluation functions fist:
Meaning the global node editor will display all envelopes in the output node, / and overwrites those when the envelope value evaluation takes place
(Don't know if this is the easiest way to implement it into, but at least this sounds a bit reasonable from the outside perspective...)

As for a global surface node: I would even suggest to implement two:
One before the surface values are evaluated (and overwriting the basic values) and one wich is implmented after surface evaluation (Before raytracing takes place..). This would practically also allow you to work / integrate current surface shader plugins on a practical level.
(And of course allow to activate / deactivate global processing of those for each surface individually)

JBT27
03-08-2008, 09:07 AM
I think it does. I think it's a huge improvement far as surfacing and displacement mapping goes.
But I think the problem here is that it's limited to those aspects of the program, and not incorporated fully into the rest of it. Something like that. I'll admit I've not followed this thread too closely.
I think the bottom line is, if you like LW 9's nodes there's something wrong with you or you're not professional enough. ;)

There's my lack of a reputation in tatters then ;) :D

Fair point - as far as they go they are useful and add alot to LW; that is my perception, but I do, almost everyday, bemoan the lack of them having been pushed further, into other areas of LW, into a more global implementation, and so on. I don't know if that's coming - I would suspect so as LW X will need to stand up in the industry and not merely play catch-up. But for now, well, nodes are kind of useful at times.....:)

Doubtless I 'will never eat lunch in Hollywood again!!!' :eek: ..... that's OK ..... I never did or wanted to anyway :D

Julian.

Lightwolf
03-08-2008, 10:08 AM
I would suggest trying to implement the global node editor inside the envelope evaluation functions fist:
Meaning the global node editor will display all envelopes in the output node, / and overwrites those when the envelope value evaluation takes place
(Don't know if this is the easiest way to implement it into, but at least this sounds a bit reasonable from the outside perspective...)

That won't work though, at least not for shading. Envelopes are only evaluated once per timeslice, node connections once per surface sample (at least).

Cheers,
Mike

tischbein3
03-08-2008, 12:19 PM
That won't work though, at least not for shading.
yes. (Not to mention evaluating envelopes on each pixel / raytrace operation might be quite an performance killer while rendering )
I shouldn't have posted both suggestions into the same post.
But discussing how hard it would be to reroute to other evaluation functions is definitve outside my own scope. (and there are still some other things to consider)

theo
03-08-2008, 12:20 PM
OK, sign me up. I'm on board with that idea, for sure. :)

EDIT: Somebody ought to make a poll for the idea.

With all due respect IMI, this doesn't require a poll. Global surfacing should be a mandatory inclusion.

With the amount of brain juice NT currently has on tap I would be quite surprised if this isn't already in the works.

Certainly any of their programmers are far more intelligent than I which would lead me to believe that if a lowly user such as myself (and others, though maybe not so lowly) can surmise that a massive hole exists in the Node Editor due to the lack of global surfacing then it will require little effort for them to realize this and work toward a solution.

WHEN we will see this option implemented is probably best left to the stars and novelty. Hence, my desire to not bring it up in the first place.

IMI
03-08-2008, 03:07 PM
With all due respect IMI, this doesn't require a poll. Global surfacing should be a mandatory inclusion.


I agree with you there so far as the "mandatory" part is concerned, but I was just curious to see what kind of a response a poll on the subject would get. I'd just start one on my own, but I'm afraid at this point it might look like another invitation for another round of Newtek bashing.

Now, I'm not saying this is Newtek bashing here, and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Newtek bashing. Gotta cover my bases. I'm neither a fanboy nor a gadfly. ;) My position is somewhat neutral as far as how they deal with their program updates - if it works for me, I can still be happy, even though there are tools I think should be fixed, updated, or added. If everyone wants to argue and flame each other over it, that's fine with me too; even in the midst of all that, good points are made and good ideas brought up.

It's funny though, I've been happily surfacing away all this time, and never had a problem with the node editor (aside from Sigma II and its penchant for crashing Layout completely)... but now I can't properly enjoy it anymore, now that I've been made aware it could have been done up in a way to make it more efficient...

Ignorance is bliss. I wish I hadn't read this thread. ;)

toonafish
03-10-2008, 02:15 AM
The biggest problem is its not even global to surfacing... If you have 20 surfaces you need 20 different node trees...


euh, I haven't been using LW for a very long time so kick me if I'm wrong.

But if you give every object the same surface and use weightmaps as an alpha mask you could surface every object in your scene with a single node I think.

toonafish
03-10-2008, 05:31 AM
yep, I just tried it and you can. All you have to do is enable "edit by scene" in teh surface editor. These are 3 seperate object files that have the same surface name but different colors because I used a weightmap as an opacity input for the Mixer:

http://www.toonafish.nl/clients/globalnodes.jpg

Stooch
03-10-2008, 07:57 PM
you are missing the point. try 3 different surface names. i hope you are kidding btw, otherwise this is mighty dense of you.

jin choung
03-10-2008, 09:38 PM
that's a bit harsh.

it's conceivable that you can replicate the effect of multiple materials using a single material and toona's weightmap assignations.

it's a different take on the situation but not everyone has the same needs, workflow or production requirements.

jin

toonafish
03-11-2008, 02:16 AM
you are missing the point. try 3 different surface names. i hope you are kidding btw, otherwise this is mighty dense of you.

Yeah, right.

I don't think you actually need global surfacing, you're just a bored kid looking for attention.

Iain
03-11-2008, 02:30 AM
not everyone has the same needs, workflow or production requirements.


Quite. I understand the sense in having a globally based nodal setup but it's not something I personally need. If it can be changed at some point in the future, then great, but of course it was aquired and integrated.

To me (and a lot of people like me) the node editor has made solving a hundred texturing challenges easy. I don't have to compromise or fudge. I can just plug in a few nodes or a material.

That is a huge improvement over what I had before.

IMI
03-11-2008, 03:29 AM
I'm wondering, what would the node surfacing interface look like to have every surface available in one global surfacing node setup?
The largest scene I ever did had 400-some surfaces, and I can't imagine fitting even the base nodes for all that into the current LW node editor, let alone all the inputs and outputs of each surface.
For that matter, it would seem like even only ten surfaces would make for an unnavigable mess with the current design.

Lightwolf
03-11-2008, 04:09 AM
For that matter, it would seem like even only ten surfaces would make for an unnavigable mess with the current design.
No doubt... it would need a whole set of new tools to navigate, filter, sort etc...

Cheers,
Mike

Iain
03-11-2008, 04:31 AM
If I were to criticise the current implementation, it would be the navigation.
It's not just clunky, it's.....beyond clunky.
:hey:

jin choung
03-11-2008, 11:26 AM
I'm wondering, what would the node surfacing interface look like to have every surface available in one global surfacing node setup?
The largest scene I ever did had 400-some surfaces, and I can't imagine fitting even the base nodes for all that into the current LW node editor, let alone all the inputs and outputs of each surface.
For that matter, it would seem like even only ten surfaces would make for an unnavigable mess with the current design.

yah. that's a very very very very important point. that's the next big thing for lw... not just implementation of features per se but the more general issue of COMPLEXITY MANAGEMENT.

i work with DAUNTINGLY large files in maya with bewildering arrays of STUFF and even with its fairly good complexity management, it's still hard.

generally, this is gonna be a big deal for all apps cuz scene intricacy is getting worse, not better. but maybe especially for lw that has to play some catchup....

jin

Stooch
03-11-2008, 11:27 AM
that's a bit harsh.

it's conceivable that you can replicate the effect of multiple materials using a single material and toona's weightmap assignations.

it's a different take on the situation but not everyone has the same needs, workflow or production requirements.

jin


you know its hillariously ironic to hear that from you. but then again you just love to argue so i guess its to be expected.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 11:28 AM
Yeah, right.

I don't think you actually need global surfacing, you're just a bored kid looking for attention.

and you are just a retard.

touche.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 11:29 AM
I'm wondering, what would the node surfacing interface look like to have every surface available in one global surfacing node setup?
The largest scene I ever did had 400-some surfaces, and I can't imagine fitting even the base nodes for all that into the current LW node editor, let alone all the inputs and outputs of each surface.
For that matter, it would seem like even only ten surfaces would make for an unnavigable mess with the current design.

yes i agree that the current implementation sucks. ill leave it at that.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 11:38 AM
that's a bit harsh.

it's conceivable that you can replicate the effect of multiple materials using a single material and toona's weightmap assignations.

it's a different take on the situation but not everyone has the same needs, workflow or production requirements.

jin

actually now that i read your statement again i have to say, damn you must be dense too lol. what toonafish showed is OLD functioanlity that has been around before nodes were, sure you could name all surfaces using the same name, howerer thats a brute force solution to the wrong problem. Why not just use a single surface name for the entire model? that way you will need only one node... lol you know after all this chest thumping by you about maya i was kind of expecting for you of all people to understand a bit more about the program. Ooops. i guess i gave you a bit too much credit...

Iain
03-11-2008, 11:45 AM
lol you know after all this chest thumping by you about maya i was kind of expecting for you of all people to understand a bit more about the program. Ooops. i guess i gave you a bit too much credit...


Truly, you are a prince among men. We should all be grateful of, no, humbled by your arrogant, belittling, attention seeking presence.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 11:56 AM
yes you should be.

jin choung
03-11-2008, 12:02 PM
it's a different take on the situation but not everyone has the same needs, workflow or production requirements.


jin

Stooch
03-11-2008, 12:17 PM
jin honey i think of all the people you should be applying that quote to yourself more than anyone. at the end of the day if it works for you, keep your mouth shut. you have nothing to say right? why spoil it for people who actually need the changes?

Stooch
03-11-2008, 12:50 PM
how so? by criticising LW? oh you mean all the people who are sitting there and crying about me being "insulting" while calling me a "wanker" and a "kid asking for attention"

right. what im asking YOU is to STFU unless you have something to add to the discussion. if you are happy with nodes the way they are, USE THEM. you have nothing to say.

thanks.

Iain
03-11-2008, 12:52 PM
oh you mean all the people who are sitting there and crying about me being "insulting" while calling me a "wanker" and a "kid asking for attention"


Do you think we've done that for no reason?

And I merely intimated.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 12:53 PM
there is a reason for everything. i too "merely intimate". so if you dont like my intimations, stick to the topic, so far you have added exactly 0 to the discussion, apparently the most valuable contribution you can make is to criticise others. well if you are going to criticize, prepare to be criticized.

SBowie
03-11-2008, 02:07 PM
There are pretty clearly two topics in this thread. Early on, the second topic was marked by OT in the Title field, but as it has taken on a life of its own that seems to have subsided.

Although it's hardly uncommon for threads to wander a bit over time, one could argue that the secondary topic (which I would characterize as 'considering whether abusive speech contributes anything to a discussion or should even be tolerated') constitutes hi-jacking of the original thread - a bad thing. OTOH, the question of who is to blame for the hi-jacking is subjective - was it the first person to employ abusive language, or the first person to object to it?

Based on the content of this thread and many others, I'm pretty sure any contention that epithets, pejoratives, slurs and innuendo are required to offer constructive criticism (or that these are consistent with mature or professional conduct) will find very few supporters here (or anywhere adults gather.)

Stooch
03-11-2008, 02:45 PM
JUVENILE RANTS will no longer be tolerated.
STOOCH is banned for 7 days.



thanks for quoting appropriate responses to posts that deserved them.
whats your point? although you seem to have missed out on some posts that were deragotory towards me, why is that?

I know why.

you are stuck on the same old topic when it comes to me after that one time your butted in on a valid critique and got ***** slapped like you deserved. Then you started crying like a little girl and apparently still havent stopped. i know you are still butthurt over that stupid little rant (kind of pathetic really), i know where you are coming from and i dont care. I will never take your whining seriously because i dont like you and looks like i never will.. no offense. so its funny how you keep on trying to talk your twisted sense into me when i have absolutely 0 interest in your pov. I can clearly see you are biased against me and will always look at me in a negative light, but you kind of lost all rights for consideration from my POV so save your breath.

kthanksbye



You ask "How so?"

blah blah blah blah blah blah, stooch is so bad and everyone else is so good. blah blah blah im a whiny little... (prejorative)

Good Luck!

Stooch
03-11-2008, 02:51 PM
Whatever Stooch, you're a sad person indeed.

Good luck with that.

Sure, keep crying and will keep laughing at you.

good luck with that.

IMI
03-11-2008, 03:44 PM
Well, not to stray too far off the topic here....

I was wondering if having one large playing field, sort of like we have now, lacking the proper terminology for it... that huge space in the node editor for the surfaces....
I don't know if it has a space limit or not, but if you drag a node towards the top, bottom, left or right, it opens up more space.
Suppose that space were infinite and could be divided into regions. Maybe you could assign each surface to a region, and pan to them such as in a browser window, or click on a list of surface names, and it would automatically scroll to the appropriate region of the space.
Also maybe have the ability to group node structures into collapsible groups or groups of groups...
Just some way of having only one window open, but the ability to contain an infinite number of surfaces and their associated nodes and to be able to get at all of them quickly.

OTOH, I would by no means say the current method sucks, but I can easily envision what could be done to make it more organized and more efficient. That's assuming it could be done without an OGL problem, with hundreds of little previews running in one window. Turn the previews off globally and on selectively, maybe.
I have no idea how difficult it would be to slide in some organization code in between what already exists, though.

Steamthrower
03-11-2008, 03:45 PM
Sure, keep crying and will keep laughing at you.

good luck with that.

I don't care what the subject of the thread is, the fact remains that abusive speech, expletives, and derisive talk is totally non-professional.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 04:00 PM
i guess im not a professional :)

lol, i can be good natured and nice when people are good natured and nice towards me. the moment someone makes it personal, the kid gloves come off.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 04:04 PM
another solution is to make a "global" node

sort of like the "global channel" in lw.

it would basically mirror any attributes you plug into it, so that if you drop that same node onto any other surface instance, you can now connect across surfaces. although ideally i would like some way to readily have a list of all the surfaces and be able to share any attributes in one location, anyway ill be happy with any solution that lets me reuse existing nodes, for example to share one fractal noise map across a bunch of surfaces without duplicating the entire tree every time..

also a collapsible container would be a good way to clean things up if you do end up with a bunch of surface entries.

the current way defeats the whole purpose of nodes to begin with.


Well, not to stray too far off the topic here....

I was wondering if having one large playing field, sort of like we have now, lacking the proper terminology for it... that huge space in the node editor for the surfaces....
I don't know if it has a space limit or not, but if you drag a node towards the top, bottom, left or right, it opens up more space.
Suppose that space were infinite and could be divided into regions. Maybe you could assign each surface to a region, and pan to them such as in a browser window, or click on a list of surface names, and it would automatically scroll to the appropriate region of the space.
Also maybe have the ability to group node structures into collapsible groups or groups of groups...
Just some way of having only one window open, but the ability to contain an infinite number of surfaces and their associated nodes and to be able to get at all of them quickly.

OTOH, I would by no means say the current method sucks, but I can easily envision what could be done to make it more organized and more efficient. That's assuming it could be done without an OGL problem, with hundreds of little previews running in one window. Turn the previews off globally and on selectively, maybe.
I have no idea how difficult it would be to slide in some organization code in between what already exists, though.

Iain
03-11-2008, 04:10 PM
What's bizarre about all this, Stooch, is the total contradiction in everything you say:
You don't care what anyone thinks or says about you and yet you keep coming back at them trying for one-upmanship.

You constantly tell others that you are someone who merely speaks bluntly and honestly when actually most observers just see you as obnoxious and rude.
When this self deception is pointed out you say it's the "thin skinned" targets of your help who are at fault, even though you were obviously deeply upset by the remarks I made about you.

You don't like being spoken to the way you speak to others is, I think, a more accurate explanation.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 04:12 PM
lol im not deeply upset, i enjoy talking back to you and im laughing at you the whole time. the only thing that bothers me is that people are derailing the point of the conversation which i feel is important - to something unimportant. i speak to others the same way they speak to me is the most accurate explanation. its clear to me that you still havent gotten the point across that nothing you will say to me here will change things to suit you, if you are so quick to point out this contradiction, then why DO YOU waste your time? Im hoping that at some point you will realize that you are wasting your time...

i have been pointing out your contradictions this whole time btw. lol

jin choung
03-11-2008, 04:20 PM
Well, not to stray too far off the topic here....

I was wondering if having one large playing field, sort of like we have now, lacking the proper terminology for it... that huge space in the node editor for the surfaces....
I don't know if it has a space limit or not, but if you drag a node towards the top, bottom, left or right, it opens up more space.
Suppose that space were infinite and could be divided into regions. Maybe you could assign each surface to a region, and pan to them such as in a browser window, or click on a list of surface names, and it would automatically scroll to the appropriate region of the space.
Also maybe have the ability to group node structures into collapsible groups or groups of groups...
Just some way of having only one window open, but the ability to contain an infinite number of surfaces and their associated nodes and to be able to get at all of them quickly.

OTOH, I would by no means say the current method sucks, but I can easily envision what could be done to make it more organized and more efficient. That's assuming it could be done without an OGL problem, with hundreds of little previews running in one window. Turn the previews off globally and on selectively, maybe.
I have no idea how difficult it would be to slide in some organization code in between what already exists, though.

right. back to the topic of complexity management.

i think what you're talking about, the ability to have an "infinite" playfield will be necessary... the ability to "zoom out" as you would in a 3d view.... most windows and interfaces in lw are not set up to do that now, most critically in things like the spreadsheet editor....

i would probably prefer an unlimited number of tabbed playfields rather than regions on a single one. each playfield has a "player manager" that lets you filter who gets to "play". by object, by type, etc etc... and the ability to multi-discriminate... as in, only these type of nodes from this character (or these three characters).

also, yes, blender has the functionality of grouping nodes and creating an (in object oriented design terms) an ENCAPSULATED BLACK BOX.

once the nodes are collapsed into this, it becomes a little machine. you don't need to know HOW it does what it does. you just need to know WHAT it does and what input it takes, what output it gives.

this would allow people to make extremely complicated and programmatic modules and you just get a black box called "LEG RIG" and you just wire it up into your setup.

jin

p.s. i actually DON'T think highly of lw's current node implementation. for what nodes CAN be, it seems we have an excruciatingly limited implementation (kinda like having a mansion but only being allowed into the foyer).... can only hope it opens up as we're discussing.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 04:30 PM
dude, i feel that you sitting here and criticising me is just as "rude" as me saying that it was mighty dense of toonafish. So its a matter of perception, maybe toonafish overreacted to my statement the same way you are overracting to me right now? do you honestly believe that making this post will change anything? because if so, you are by far the densest guy here.

Get it through your head, im giving YOU as much respect as you deserve. infact i am giving you WAY MORE respect then you deserve, because i flat out dont like you from your previous rant about my valid critique, so if you are incapable of accepting a VALID critique that the other guy who was actually being criticised agreed with - then there is no way that i will ever accept any kind of opinion from your again. infact by keeping up with this pointless crusade, you are coming across to me dumber with every post. because somehow you are missing the point that you are wasting your time. GET THIS THROUGH YOUR HEAD, i do not respect you, therefore i will not accept your pov. got it?

lol.



You got that bit right.



And yet when toonafish was trying to understand what everyone was saying and pointed out what he thought might be right... you had to be nasty and come back with:



with NO provacation on his part. YOU.... had to be nasty. So I guess you're only good natured when you decide to be good natured? Even when others are just fine, if you feel like it you've got to write an obnoxious comment you just go ahead and do it because you can.

How nice.

Stooch
03-11-2008, 04:52 PM
hey im having more fun then you are :) im actually working on effects shots so i have plenty of time to spare inbetween renders.

what are you working on ?

i knew that it feels good for you btw, i mean how else would you get attention? this entire thread has been filled with your desperate cries for attention in fact. i think that even that original thread that i referenced was nothing more than a cry for attention.... that backfired lol.

cresshead
03-11-2008, 04:54 PM
FYI there also a free ''node editor of sorts'' for max btw...not fully nodal though.
but yeah...lightwave does have a builtin node editor...

if course lw is still waiting for groups, instacing, great rigging etc..so swings n roundabouts if you know what i mean!

Stooch
03-11-2008, 04:59 PM
i doubt it. archvis is for 3d guys with no talent. :) enjoy rendering your boxes lol.

IMI
03-11-2008, 04:59 PM
also, yes, blender has the functionality of grouping nodes and creating an (in object oriented design terms) an ENCAPSULATED BLACK BOX.

once the nodes are collapsed into this, it becomes a little machine. you don't need to know HOW it does what it does. you just need to know WHAT it does and what input it takes, what output it gives.

this would allow people to make extremely complicated and programmatic modules and you just get a black box called "LEG RIG" and you just wire it up into your setup.


I see what you're saying, jin. Put me into the group of those who doesn't know HOW it works, but I do grok what you're getting at. And I think I see now what you've been saying regarding some of these things which create obstacles and handicaps for someone trying to get something done with as little head-banging as possible.
While I do appreciate LW as being the way-cool app that it is, I'm beginning to understand how some of these design deficiencies could add up to some serious problems in a hurried production setting.
I'm way out of my league discussing such things with you guys who do professional animation work, but it's sinking in that by and large these are all very valid complaints.
And why shouldn't you all expect more from an app which delivers so well on so many other fronts? You should.

Iain
03-11-2008, 05:03 PM
FYI there also a free ''node editor of sorts'' for max btw...not fully nodal though.
but yeah...lightwave does have a builtin node editor...

if course lw is still waiting for groups, instacing, great rigging etc..so swings n roundabouts if you know what i mean!

Instancing must be coming soon, surely. So many hints.

SBowie
03-11-2008, 07:22 PM
"Arrogance and rudeness are training wheels on the bicycle of life -- for weak people who cannot keep their balance without them."Just a minor correction, I was quoting too - but the source was not given.