PDA

View Full Version : Pipeline Extension: Lightwave or Modo



lukasdesign
07-16-2008, 12:50 AM
we plan to switch from Maya Modeling and Rendering to something more stable and with a better integrated render engine as Mental Ray. For Animation we rely on Houdini.
My question is how LW 9.3 compares to Modo in terms of Polymodeling (NURBS we do in Rhino) and Rendering (quality and speed). How can these apps be integrated with Houdini?
I kinda like LW, as it can do some animation if Houdini fails, but others would prefer Modo cause it seems to be easier to use.

Thanks to everybody

Captain Obvious
07-16-2008, 02:43 AM
modo is better at modeling, Lightwave is better* at, well, pretty much everything else. If you only need a modeling tool, I would suggest modo. If you need other stuff as well, Lightwave might be a better option. I don't think either one of them would be easier to integrate into Houdini than the other.



*better meaning sometimes doing stuff better, sometimes just that it has more functions

wavk
07-16-2008, 07:06 AM
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86307


mlon

Andyjaggy
07-16-2008, 08:56 AM
Wish I could recommend lightwave for modeling but have to say if you want a good modeler go with modo.

SP00
07-16-2008, 12:08 PM
Modo is great for general modeling, if you want fast accurate hardsurface modeling, I would look into LWCAD. Yes, its that good.

bobakabob
07-16-2008, 05:49 PM
What exists real or imaginary you can't model in Lightwave's Modeler + LW CAD? :lwicon:

Captain Obvious
07-17-2008, 03:26 AM
Any modeling application out there can be used to model any shape imaginable. Any 2D image editing software can be used to produce any output. It is technically possible to do high-end photo retouching using only Microsoft Paint. Would you want to, though?

It's not that Lightwave Modeler can't do the job. It's that modo does it faster.

bobakabob
07-17-2008, 04:50 AM
Good artists use an economical toolset. Taron's brilliant character models are made with a handful of tools in Lightwave's Modeler. And is there anyone here who can match him for speed (not to mention artistic vision)?

Most pro poly modelling apps have reached a plateau in terms of what they can do. It's entirely subjective in the end... use what you feel comfortable with.

Modo is undoubtedly a great tool but personally I've never really taken to it and find it's too costly when you can combine LW with ZBrush or 3D Coat for the money. The default interface is also a bit odd... what's with the vertical lettering? Sure it's customiseable but what happened to Modeler's no nonsense template of sheer immediacy? :)

othornton
07-17-2008, 06:21 AM
we plan to switch from Maya Modeling and Rendering to something more stable and with a better integrated render engine as Mental Ray. For Animation we rely on Houdini.
My question is how LW 9.3 compares to Modo in terms of Polymodeling (NURBS we do in Rhino) and Rendering (quality and speed). How can these apps be integrated with Houdini?
I kinda like LW, as it can do some animation if Houdini fails, but others would prefer Modo cause it seems to be easier to use.

Thanks to everybody

Hi,

I own LW and Modo. I don't know about Houdini integration (mdd maybe?) but I would suggest LW over Modo for five reasons (started as two but added three more before I finished the list):
-Sick rendering power and unlimited render nodes.
-New poly hair rendering in 9.5
-The animated support you mentioned in case Houdini can't quite bridge some gaps.
-Great 3rd party plugs like FPrime, LWCad, paint support in 3D-Coat. LWCad alone makes a huge difference over Modo, which has virtually no 3rd party support. LW also has a legacy collection of dozens upon dozens of free plugs made by the diverse community that uses it.
-Easy to use particle system, nodal shader system fairly similar to Maya's (easy learning curve), 64 bit support, over 24 hours of free videos, etc, etc.

That being said, Modo continues to grow in leaps and bounds and has some great sculpting tools. But if it comes down to power per dollar spent, LW kicks Modo's butt every time. For now.

Hope this helps clear up some points for you. If you have any other questions please just ask. Good luck with your change-over, whichever you choose.

Cheers,

-Oliver

Captain Obvious
07-17-2008, 06:36 AM
-Great 3rd party plugs like FPrime, LWCad, paint support in 3D-Coat. LWCad alone makes a huge difference over Modo, which has virtually no 3rd party support. LW also has a legacy collection of dozens upon dozens of free plugs made by the diverse community that uses it.

While modo is still somewhat lacking in the plugin department, it has a great scripting community.



But if it comes down to power per dollar spent, LW kicks Modo's butt every time.
Unless all you want is a modeling tool. If you never use Lightwave's animation or rendering features, I don't see any advantages over modo.

bobakabob
07-17-2008, 07:54 AM
He is a great artist with a great workflow that suits his particular needs (Others might prefer a different way of working...

My point exactly. It's all subjective. I actually prefer XSI's modelling toolset to Modo's. As I said earlier you use the tools you feel comfortable with that get the job done. If Modo serves your needs, great. It's undeniably a powerful app. Personally I can't justify investing as I enjoy using Lightwave + ZBrush. True, Newtek have neglected Modeler of late and if there's no inkling of innovation in the near future I'll take another look at the competition. ZBrush was a revelation.


If you don't find these things of use, then I see your point

Heh.. Nice rhetorical flourish Neverko. I get by :)

Cageman
07-17-2008, 07:55 AM
Well, that was the thing wasn't it? A replacement for Maya as in a package that can do modeling and rendering, with some additional animation capabilites...

I would go for LightWave. The renderer and Nodal (or Layer) workflow in LW beats Modos shading, imho.

Captain Obvious
07-17-2008, 10:49 AM
I'm a bit conflicted about both Nodal AND modo's shader tree. Nodal is amazingly great, yeah, but it can also be very confusing and limited by sheer virtue of not being very well-organized. It has great capabilities, but the inability to group nodes (for example) is a significant problem.

modo's shader tree can easily get rather confusing with a lot of stuff in it, but the actual quality of the shaders, basic though they be, is quite impressive. SSS, for example: Lightwave has, what, ten shading nodes for SSS? modo has just one value for it. Yet it is, in my opinion, way easier to get good SSS in modo than in LW. That's just one example, and it's not like that with everything, but Nodal is very very rough around the edges still.

Cageman
07-17-2008, 04:43 PM
I'm a bit conflicted about both Nodal AND modo's shader tree. Nodal is amazingly great, yeah, but it can also be very confusing and limited by sheer virtue of not being very well-organized. It has great capabilities, but the inability to group nodes (for example) is a significant problem.

If they are used to Houdini, they certenly can cope with LWs Nodal, even when there are things missing, like grouping. It's far from a showstopper though, don't you agree?



modo's shader tree can easily get rather confusing with a lot of stuff in it, but the actual quality of the shaders, basic though they be, is quite impressive. SSS, for example: Lightwave has, what, ten shading nodes for SSS? modo has just one value for it. Yet it is, in my opinion, way easier to get good SSS in modo than in LW. That's just one example, and it's not like that with everything, but Nodal is very very rough around the edges still.

LW has 3 legacy shaders (which I take as they are not going to be developed further). So, excluding them, I have two SSS shaders (SSS and SSS2).

If we then move onto Materials (instead of shaders), I see 2 SSS Materials, Fast Skin and Simple Skin, both capable of using Interpolation for very fast tuning.

So, 2 shaders and 2 materials + 3rd party shaders (I'm not counting those Legacy dudes). :)

I do agree with your point though; it seems easier to get great looking SSS in Modo. So, the question is: How much of what they do are characters? (because that's where I've seen LWs SSS weakness).

And then, not to forget, LW have seen some improvements in terms of IK-solving (not to even mention the free PLG tools) and there are, of course, alot of other tools in LW for animation. So, looking at LW as a whole, it still offers more than Modo for the price you pay. Sculpting in Modo is still under wraps, sort of, and I don't see people used to ZBrush or Mudbox leave in flocks to use Modos sculpting.

It boils down to 2 things:
1. What does he want to do and how much?
2. How will the pipeline look and how will it work?

For this to be properly evaluated, one should download the demoversions of both apps, and hook them into the existing pipe.

GregMalick
07-17-2008, 05:35 PM
we plan to switch from Maya Modeling and Rendering to something more stable and with a better integrated render engine as Mental Ray. For Animation we rely on Houdini.
My question is how LW 9.3 compares to Modo in terms of Polymodeling (NURBS we do in Rhino) and Rendering (quality and speed). How can these apps be integrated with Houdini?
I kinda like LW, as it can do some animation if Houdini fails, but others would prefer Modo cause it seems to be easier to use.

Thanks to everybody

I own and use both products and here is my two cents.
First off - when you post in any application's forum, you are going to get a lot of people coming forward to tout that app's capabilities. You gotta expect that.

Second, it sounds like you are going to buy multiple copies since you mention what others prefer. I suggest you download each and spend $25 - $50 to get an appropriate tutorial to show you how to do 'whatever".
Andy Browns Modo training is amazing. (http://www.luxology.com/store/training_materials.aspx)
Kurv Sudio's has some Great & diverse tuts for LightWave (http://www.kurvstudios.com/lightwave/)
ditto for Larry Schultz (http://www.3dtrainingonline.com/order.htm)
and Dan Ablan (training for both LW & Modo) (http://www.3dgarage.com/category_s/3.htm)

And there is plenty of free videos for both all over the web.

I gotta say that I love Modo Modeling: the layering of tools, the extent you can tailor the UI for your personal workflow, and most especially the painting tools that are native. These paint tools work in Color, Bump, Spec, Displacement channels (or multiples thereof). But it ain't no ZBrush.

And at the moment, Modo only has the most rudimentary animation tools and no particles/hair/FX. Of course if you're only going to build assets for Houdini that may not matter.

If you take my advice you have some fun ahead with both apps. I think the Modo demo costs $25 but comes with some training videos (at least it used to ). I hope you hang out at both forums and help us all out with Houdini. There's a lot of interest generated here about that app recently! :thumbsup:

Mike_RB
07-17-2008, 07:50 PM
The modo eval is now freely available.