PDA

View Full Version : Dynamic cloth – Discretion is advised if you have a heart condition



ben martin
09-01-2008, 06:08 PM
I would like to see LW cloth dynamics doing this in real time, during my lifetime, if you please:
http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/feature-videos/?video=realtime_cloth

It surly creates some questions on people's mind... why pay for software when open source is beating the crap on paid solutions?

Ah, well, it must be me! :twak:

shrox
09-01-2008, 06:25 PM
I would like to see LW cloth dynamics doing this in real time, during my lifetime, if you please:
http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/feature-videos/?video=realtime_cloth

It surly creates some questions on people's mind... why pay for software when open source is beating the crap on paid solutions?

Ah, well, it must be me! :twak:

Might be your video card.

Celshader
09-01-2008, 06:50 PM
why pay for software when open source is beating the crap on paid solutions?

Each artist has different needs. For me, it's easier to make money with LightWave.

-+-

I'd like to learn Blender as a supplement to LightWave, though.

shrox
09-01-2008, 07:41 PM
I am sure that the LW demo scene for cloth shows it realtime, but now I can't find it in my older install.

Nangleator
09-01-2008, 08:43 PM
Notice that there's no sound? No one wants to hear the screams of the wretched user from the interface-induced agony.

I have to say, he or she is fast, though. I guess it's like ripping off the bandaid.

Celshader
09-01-2008, 08:57 PM
I am sure that the LW demo scene for cloth shows it realtime, but now I can't find it in my older install.

KO_PolyFit (http://studiohiro.com/graphics/plugins/POLYFIT.HTML) and SoftFX can be realtime, but ClothFX is not realtime. The LW demo scene probably had a baked MDD file for realtime playback.

shrox
09-01-2008, 09:09 PM
KO_PolyFit (http://studiohiro.com/graphics/plugins/POLYFIT.HTML) and SoftFX can be realtime, but ClothFX is not realtime. The LW demo scene probably had a baked MDD file for realtime playback.

Yes it did. Oh well.

adamredwoods
09-01-2008, 09:36 PM
The blender demo shows a simple cloth, which is fine for some uses.

I'd rather see somthing much more complex.

archijam
09-02-2008, 01:03 AM
I don't think it's anti LW to post this, it has the same implication for all paid 3D apps.
Blender is becoming a companion software to all makes, not just LW. As long as the interchange between the apps (filetype and motion etc.) stays even, it's a good thing.

Should all 3D apps try to play catchup with blender? Not much of a development strategy there ...

jin choung
09-02-2008, 02:02 AM
hey ben,

i think trying to get lw to play catchup to blender is a losing proposition. not a slam against newtek but because of the resources that the open source community can bring to bear on blender, the pace of development between the two apps is not even comparable.

yah, that cloth is impressive, their fluids is impressive, their fur is impressive, the multires mesh and cc subds tech is impressive and it seems like they're going to extend the fluid dynamics soon to handle smoke and gas simulation:

http://www.blendernation.com/2008/08/26/realistic-smoke-in-blender/

there's a LOT going on in blender and it's impossible for lw to try to keep up to that pace.

personally, i have much more modest goals for lw now. i just want things not to be implemented in an incomplete and/or broken fashion. i just don't want one of my tools to be in a constant state of disrepair...

that's pretty much it.

there's evidence in even the current version that they've been overreaching and the strain... shows.

i'd rather them pull back and just make sure everything works like its supposed to before they try to get fancy. well either that or total tear down....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

fortunately, because blender IS free, we can all add it to our workflows and leverage the features it offers.

probably one of the best things to come out of lw in recent memory - that actually feels almost industry standard because it is so mysteriously widespread - is the .mdd file format and luckily, a great deal of useful stuff can be shuttled back and forth using that (including blender's cloth sim).

there's a lot of stuff about lw that leaves me scratching my head these days but .mdd fing rocks and it is a very nice bit of saving grace that really keeps lw relevant and multi-app friendly in a lot of situations.

and the lw we have now is already ours to use as we please. so i for one plan on continuing to use it for traditional poly modeling - a task that lw is still very good for (though i wish it were more of a poly pusher).

but blender is a free tide that's rolling in and lw is indeed low man on the water line. it will be interesting to see what case can be made for continued investment.

jin

jin choung
09-02-2008, 02:23 AM
yikes have you seen this? for me, this is more impressive than the cloth demo.....

http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/feature-videos/?video=modifier_stack

holy crap... i don't even know what's going on in most of that and the workflow seems extremely alien... but it's very cool what their modifier stack can pull off.

jin

ben martin
09-02-2008, 03:55 AM
Yeah Jin, I completely agree with you.

I saw that as well, but I decided not to throw much of Blender at the same time, cause, probably the folks around here would collapse or kill me (neither is good)!

Anyway, note to all:
I understand you all, don't get me wrong.
When I show this kind of stuff and use some sarcasm to comment it, I only have one goal in mind, which is:

NEWTEK WAKE UP!

I would love to say that Lightwave fills all my 3D needs; unfortunately it's not the case.
I say unfortunately because, like all of you, I like LW philosophy and interface, but the engine(s)... oh boy the engine(s)... picture this:
The most cool car prototype you can imagine and now assemble on it a regular car engine... huh... pretty crazy idea right?
Yeah, that's how I feel about LW.
Blender is the other way around, a nasty powerfully engine(s) with an ugly but robust chassis.

Why can't life just be perfect? :stumped:

Iain
09-02-2008, 04:08 AM
When I show this kind of stuff and use some sarcasm to comment it, I only have one goal in mind, which is:

NEWTEK WAKE UP!


I don't think for a moment that Newtek (and Autodesk, Avid et al) aren't fully aware of what's going on in the industry.

9.5 was a huge leap forward. There's still loads to do but in the meantime, we can use Blender/Modo/ZBrush/whatever to complement what is there that works for us.

However, if LW doesn't work for you, dump it. Or switch your main app to XSI or Maya.
Really, it's a no brainer. Only hobbyists are restricted by budget these days.

Matt
09-02-2008, 04:18 AM
yikes have you seen this? for me, this is more impressive than the cloth demo.....

http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/feature-videos/?video=modifier_stack

holy crap... i don't even know what's going on in most of that and the workflow seems extremely alien... but it's very cool what their modifier stack can pull off.

jin

WTF, modifier stack or not, HOW much clicking in the interface did that take!

This is a perfect example of why I loathe Blender, nice feature totally crippled by the workflow.

That was truly horrible, and I've given up caring what anyone says about Blender, it might be logical, it might easy once you know it, but you will NEVER convince me that it's the right way, because quite simply, it isn't.

You see this? This is my bored of Blender face.

If you love it so much, GO AND USE IT, it's FREE.

Matt
09-02-2008, 04:29 AM
(Sorry about the last post, caught me in a bad moment!)

ben martin
09-02-2008, 05:19 AM
However, if LW doesn't work for you, dump it. Or switch your main app to XSI or Maya.
Really, it's a no brainer. Only hobbyists are restricted by budget these days.

Well, if that was the question here, I even wouldn't bother to post anything around.

The reason I don't quit LW was already very well explained above, if you read it well.
I know English is not my primary language but I try to explain myself the better I can.

So, and again, I don't dump Lightwave because I like the workflow, the philosophy behind the concept and the Interface. I only wish it cold get better, with better programming and engines.

I claimed for a decent LW-CA system and till today I see nothing.
I convert myself to IKB just because I need to solve some of my productions needs.
The Blender / Lightwave MDD cross files do not work to all situations.

Well, anyway... thanks' for your valid comment. :)


Hey Matt, he..he...he... you are really pis**d at Blender huh! :bangwall: :D

Glendalough
09-02-2008, 05:44 AM
...
The Blender / Lightwave MDD cross files do not work to all situations...

Hi Ben,

Glad you are enthusiastic about Blender. I like this program too but am having trouble with MDDs. Does Blender have trouble importing MDDs?

Here are some letters which have been dropped and shattered in Houdini. The Mdd imports no bother to Lightwave and Modo but just doesn't seem to work properly in Blender.

Glendalough
09-02-2008, 05:46 AM
Here's how it comes through in Blender(???):

Iain
09-02-2008, 06:00 AM
I claimed for a decent LW-CA system and till today I see nothing.
I convert myself to IKB just because I need to solve some of my productions needs.

CA improvements are something Newtek have stated they will provide.
There has been a lot of comment on the subject of how rendering has been tackled first but basically, the existing users rated and loved the renderer but it needed improvement.

It just seems to me you have options if CA or dynamics or hair are major elements of your work. Lots of others have let their fondness for LW be overruled by a need for functionality it doesn't currently provide.

Posting impressive and interesting links to Blender is fine but constantly asking why an existing program can't have all the great emerging tools a brand new one has is pointless in my opinion.

RebelHill
09-02-2008, 06:16 AM
I claimed for a decent LW-CA system and till today I see nothing.

I have always found LW to be useful enough for an awful lot of CA stuff... and some of the new features and changes in 9.5 have improved things even more... Im liking it lots.

faulknermano
09-02-2008, 07:00 AM
KO_PolyFit (http://studiohiro.com/graphics/plugins/POLYFIT.HTML) and SoftFX can be realtime, but ClothFX is not realtime. The LW demo scene probably had a baked MDD file for realtime playback.

is syflex for LW real-time... not sure where i got that impression, though.

Dodgy
09-02-2008, 07:54 AM
I seem to remember reading that somewhere on here too.

Dodgy
09-02-2008, 08:02 AM
Very nice demos... But a stack is sooooo nineties... We want it as nodes :) Go on NT, you know you want it, you know you doooo....

ben martin
09-02-2008, 09:19 AM
Here's how it comes through in Blender(???):

I'll check those files and let you know what I found! Stay tunned! :)

Elmar Moelzer
09-02-2008, 10:24 AM
The open source comunity still has the advantage that they are under the radar enough to not be targeted for IP infringements. From what I understand not everything that is free is also legal to use. E.g. FFMpeg which has to be installed for (most versions of) Blender to use, does infringe upon several others copyrights (e.g. Apple for Quicktime codecs, etc).
Now I am not 100% sure about the features in Blender, but I would not be surprised if some of them used technology covered by patents or that are otherwise protected. It is not as easy as simply reading a technical paper and just doing it like that.
This is something noone cares about in the context of Blender (yet, but that might change should it increase in popularity), but NewTek can not afford to do that.
The other way around it is not possible for NewTek to simply copy code from open source apps like Blender, since this is usually covered by GPL or other licenses that prohibit the use in commercial applications, or may only be used in open source apps and so on.
These days, with everyone going nuts about copyright violation claims and patent claims and what not (of which some might be rather unjustified), things are a lot more complicated...
CU
Elmar

Glendalough
09-02-2008, 10:45 AM
I'll check those files and let you know what I found! Stay tunned! :)

Thanks a lot!

I'd really be much obliged.

lardbros
09-02-2008, 11:19 AM
Blender is VERY impressive, but have to agree with the interface thing... it feels horrible to use. Occasionally at work i'll opne it up during a quiet moment, and i just cannot get used to it. LW took 5minutes and 3dsmax took about 5 too, they work well for me.

BUT, from what the blender guys said, in their presentation on Big Buck Bunny, at siggraph, they'll be doing another short and the things they are looking at this time round are:
Fire
Crowds
4k resolutions for both rendering and their compositor. (The compositor is just a genius idea, and works brilliantly... newtek we need this)

Can't remember the rest, but it's all very impressive. They set HUGE goals they really do, and they are some of the nicest, funniest guys i've seen talk at siggy.

jin choung
09-02-2008, 11:22 AM
The open source comunity still has the advantage that they are under the radar enough to not be targeted for IP infringements. From what I understand not everything that is free is also legal to use. E.g. FFMpeg which has to be installed for (most versions of) Blender to use, does infringe upon several others copyrights (e.g. Apple for Quicktime codecs, etc).

why would you infringe on quicktime codecs instead of just USING the quicktime codecs installed already on a computer?

as for FOSS being under the radar... yeah, go tell that to linux. if anything, foss has a LOT of VERY HUGE ENEMIES and it is in their interests of survival that they keep their noses very very clean.

especially as they very rigorously enforce their own licence agreements (gpl).

if there is actual evidence of infringement in blender's core code, please bring it up. i'm sure ton roosendall would be very interested in knowing about it. also, the source code is freely available to anyone who cares to look - unlike lw's or volumedic's - so don't you think THAT would be incentive to stay in the clear?

otherwise, this kind of speculation has as much merit as me speculating that lightwave and volumedic MUST have lots and lots of patent violating code because they're pretty small and "under the radar" and we're just not paying attention. AND - SUSPICIOUSLY... their source code is not open to the public!

jin

Celshader
09-02-2008, 11:22 AM
probably one of the best things to come out of lw in recent memory - that actually feels almost industry standard because it is so mysteriously widespread - is the .mdd file format and luckily, a great deal of useful stuff can be shuttled back and forth using that (including blender's cloth sim).

there's a lot of stuff about lw that leaves me scratching my head these days but .mdd fing rocks and it is a very nice bit of saving grace that really keeps lw relevant and multi-app friendly in a lot of situations.



The MDD file format's been around as long as Motion Designer 2, if not Motion Designer 1. So, it's been around since 1999 or 1998. The alternative to a nice, neat, one-piece MDD file is to save out a morph sequence of objects. I heard somewhere that object sequences were used on Chicken Little instead of MDDs. MDDs provide a more elegant solution.



but blender is a free tide that's rolling in and lw is indeed low man on the water line. it will be interesting to see what case can be made for continued investment.

Okay, I'll try. Please show me where I can sign up for a steady paycheck working at a Blender studio here in Los Angeles. Since 1999 I've only met ONE Blender artist out here -- and he had switched to LightWave (http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/testimonials/animatics-for-motion-pictures/) months before I started working on Spider-Man 2.

My personal license of LightWave may cost a few hundred dollars every two years, but I recoup those costs many times over each year as a LightWave artist.

I'm not hurting for money right now, but I am hurting for time. Every spare moment goes into learning my current software packages, running errands, scribbling words on this forum, or working on my comic book. It will be interesting to see what case could be made for an investment of time in learning Blender.

LightFreeze
09-02-2008, 11:50 AM
Hi Ben,

Glad you are enthusiastic about Blender. I like this program too but am having trouble with MDDs. Does Blender have trouble importing MDDs?

Here are some letters which have been dropped and shattered in Houdini. The Mdd imports no bother to Lightwave and Modo but just doesn't seem to work properly in Blender.

Hi this might help (http://www.vuescripts.com/_A/index.php?aid=75) get your stuff into blender, The zip you posted works fine.

Pay attention to the obj import settings and just before I create a new vertex group for each object I right-clicked it to select it

jin choung
09-02-2008, 12:08 PM
Okay, I'll try. Please show me where I can sign up for a steady paycheck working at a Blender studio here in Los Angeles. Since 1999 I've only met ONE Blender artist out here -- and he had switched to LightWave (http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/testimonials/animatics-for-motion-pictures/) months before I started working on Spider-Man 2.

My personal license of LightWave may cost a few hundred dollars every two years, but I recoup those costs many times over each year as a LightWave artist.

well generally, the discussion so far has been about software capability rather than these kinds of job related concerns.

BUT as it pertains to job related concerns-

(prologue: just want to point out this is the argument that lwers hate generally! the counter-arguments are usually - "it's the artist, not the tool," and "most workplaces care about how good you are as an artist, not what app you use!" and inevitably the example of pixar comes up.... : ) ... just sayin....)

if you already have a job where you're being paid to use lw, your argument's fine. so it makes sense for you.

but if you're speaking about the availability of jobs in general, the amount of positions that are offered that specifically ask for lw experience, as opposed to maya or max, pales.

max and maya folk can use the exact same argument to argue against lw.

i don't say lw is the low man on the waterline for nothing.

there's probably no blender house in l.a. now but i would say that blender will make as much sense as linux eventually.

sure, there will always be a place for commercial apps, especially if you have longstanding pipelines that are built around them.

but eventually, maybe not for all but for a lot, the ever impressive capability combined with free becomes really hard to argue with.

and this is not just a threat to lw. as i say, it's probably most imminent with lw because it's low man on the water line but it'll become an issue for those higher up on shore eventually.

especially for the places that simply use maya as an interface to drive their own software (not as widespread as some would like to believe), blender would make far far far more sense for a zombie job like that.

basically, all the traditional lw arguments apply to blender: if you replace "lw" with "blender" and "cheap" for "free".

jin

Giacomo99
09-02-2008, 12:09 PM
I'm not hurting for money right now, but I am hurting for time. Every spare moment goes into learning my current software packages, running errands, scribbling words on this forum, or working on my comic book. It will be interesting to see what case could be made for an investment of time in learning Blender.

What she said, and double for me because I'm an artist, not a technician, and I usually need to pore over every bit of available documentation and spend weeks fooling around with a new software tool before I can hope to use it on a paying job.

Cloth and fire and dynamics are all very well, but 95% of what I do consists of modeling, rigging, texturing and rendering. Improving and streamlining those basic functions is infinitely more important to me than adding on bells and whistles like cloth, fur, and liquids.

By the way, that real-time cloth video is nothing to get excited about. So Lightwave would take a few seconds to do the calculation for a similar setup--who cares? If Blender posts a video of, say, a character wearing a simulated-cloth bathrobe that deforms in real time, I'll be interested.

Glendalough
09-02-2008, 01:47 PM
Hi this might help (http://www.vuescripts.com/_A/index.php?aid=75) get your stuff into blender, The zip you posted works fine.

Pay attention to the obj import settings and just before I create a new vertex group for each object I right-clicked it to select it

Wow, Thanks LightFreeze, that was it!

Didn't check the "Seperate objects from obj..." correctly on import of the Wavefront OBJ.

Glendalough
09-02-2008, 01:56 PM
... If Blender posts a video of, say, a character wearing a simulated-cloth bathrobe that deforms in real time, I'll be interested.

Is this in relation to your avatar? (Couldn't resist this as it sprung to mind immediately)

ben martin
09-02-2008, 03:56 PM
Wow, Thanks LightFreeze, that was it!

Didn't check the "Seperate objects from obj..." correctly on import of the Wavefront OBJ.

Yup, I see you already have the solution, I'm sorry but I just arrived home.
I was just to start looking over that MDD Blender problem when I decide to check this thread to find out that “LightFreeze" just figured it all out!

That's cool! :)

Elmar Moelzer
09-02-2008, 05:49 PM
Jin, no need to be offensive like that.
If you dont believe me read up on Fedora Linux and why they dont include any(!) multimedia functionality with it out of the box.
Also, to the best of my knowledge Apple has not released its software for Linux yet (but I might be wrong here, since I honestly dont care much about it).

ALSO TO MAKE THIS CLEAR: A BIG PART OF MY JOB IS TO MAKE SURE I DO NOT INFRINGE ANYONES PATENTS OR COPYRIGHTS!
Which is why I inevitably stumbled over this in the first place. Comprende?!
CU
Elmar

ben martin
09-02-2008, 06:36 PM
Jin, no need to be offensive like that.
CU
Elmar
Elmar, he... calm down.... Jin is always like this... :hey:
It's nothing personal, trust me, he is not being offensive... he is just too phlegmatic defending his own point of view. :)
I learned to like and understand his CAPS style. :lol:

We are here to chat, exchange opinions, and yup, eventually at some point to yell and kick someone buts (virtually speaking that is) but hey... wouldn't life be boring without all that? :beerchug:

Just take a deep breath, relax and enjoy it... in two months no one will remember what was said here today... I think! :lol:

jin choung
09-02-2008, 06:37 PM
??? how is anything about what i said offensive?

i'm just making an example to show that speculating that blender has a lot of copyright violating code is as wrong as just wildly speculating that lightwave or volumedic does.

i'm saying that such speculation about volumedic is as absurd as such speculation about blender.

do you for a fact know that anything inside of blender violates copyright?

do you know for a fact that ffmpeg or whatever is actually a part of blender package? i don't remember seeing that and blender's install is quite light.

and if they are licensed under gpl, what protection do you think they can possibly claim if they themselves are under violation?

i'm saying you seem to have said a lot under speculation but do you have ANYTHING that backs it up? comprende?

jin

jin choung
09-02-2008, 06:57 PM
If you dont believe me read up on Fedora Linux and why they dont include any(!) multimedia functionality with it out of the box.


regarding this:

do you have a link to fedora's policy regarding proprietary software?

ubuntu has similar versions that you can download that have absolutely no non open source software... but the issue here (and as far as i knew, in all linux distros) is one of PHILOSOPHY and NOT LEGALITY.

http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy

usually, the most problematic issue has been one of DRIVERS. because nvidia (most notably) has not released their drivers as open source.

but the non-inclusion stuff from linux seems to be about a commitment to the philosophy of open source... the fact that fedora adheres to its policy seems NOT to be one of trying to STAY LEGAL.

i don't think there's a distro out there that willfully includes copyrighted software that they have no legal right to distribute! do you think they include pirated software willy nilly?

again, FOSS has big enemies. the biggest. free threatens everyone who is not free.

they have an incentive to keep their noses very clean indeed.

jin

richcz3
09-02-2008, 08:29 PM
WTF, modifier stack or not, HOW much clicking in the interface did that take!

This is a perfect example of why I loathe Blender, nice feature totally crippled by the workflow.

That was truly horrible, and I've given up caring what anyone says about Blender, it might be logical, it might easy once you know it, but you will NEVER convince me that it's the right way, because quite simply, it isn't.....
QFA - Blender Work Flow and User Interface is a mess. Every year or so I buy into it. Some Blender fan or open source enthusiast posts Blender is radically improved. So - I download - Install - Open Blender - Scratch head - pull hair - uninstall and wonder what I was thinking. Blenders interface makes Zbrush work flow as easy to navigate as Windows Paint. :stumped:

How about for once - the true genius coders of Blender have a meeting with industry professionals and take notes on work flow. Then plan on building an intuitive interface to wrap up all that untapped potential.

Titus
09-02-2008, 08:40 PM
We use Blender for some things LW isn't capable to do. Every time I spent no more than 10 minutes to explain the interface to an animator and he then gets the rest, in a few minutes after starting Blender for a first time he is growing marvelous hairs or simulating some water.

Maybe Blender interface is awful, but with the correct mentor isn't as hard as any other program.

Celshader
09-02-2008, 08:46 PM
We use Blender for some things LW isn't capable to do. Every time I spent no more than 10 minutes to explain the interface to an animator and he then gets the rest, in a few minutes after starting Blender for a first time he is growing marvelous hairs or simulating some water.

Maybe Blender interface is awful, but with the correct mentor isn't as hard as any other program.

I'm interested in Blender as a supplement to LightWave, myself. I have been meaning to learn Blender since January of 2006. It will be some time before I learn Blender, though.

How does Blender's render engine compare to the LightWave render engine?

Titus
09-02-2008, 09:01 PM
LW render engine is superior hands down, however Blender has tight integration with a lot of free renderers like Yafray (http://www.yafray.org/), Indigo (unbiased like maxwell) (http://www.indigorenderer.com/joomla/), Gelato (via frappe), Kerkythea, Sunflow, 3Delight (RenderMan lookalike), etc. and even Vray (I know, not free).

Celshader
09-02-2008, 09:22 PM
LW render engine is superior hands down, however Blender has tight integration with a lot of free renderers like Yafray (http://www.yafray.org/), Indigo (unbiased like maxwell) (http://www.indigorenderer.com/joomla/), Gelato (via frappe), Kerkythea, Sunflow, 3Delight (RenderMan lookalike), etc. and even Vray (I know, not free).

I appreciate this information. I have heard good things about Vray. How well would Yafray, Indigo, Gelato, Kerkythea, Sunflow or 3Delight hold up during a production?

Elmar Moelzer
09-02-2008, 09:35 PM
Jin, please refer to here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFmpeg
here (even the developers admit that there are problems, but as always it depends on the POV and this is obviously a grey area):
http://ffmpeg.mplayerhq.hu/legal.html

Check what it says in the Linux build http://www.blender.org/download/

I am sure that I would find more pages about this topic, if I had the time to search for this, which is what you should do before you put my words into the realm of speculation.
Oh and it was Jin who started yelling arround, just to make this clear. I thought he was just deaf so I was yelling back, sorry ;)
CU
Elmar

Titus
09-02-2008, 09:39 PM
3Delight (http://www.3delight.com/en/) is a renderman renderer, it has been used on some Hollywood productions, and its the favourite renderer of Massive (the thing used to make crowds in The Lord of the Rings), it has been supported recently by XSI. Gelato is a nvidia product (now discontinued), I don't know anyone aside from Frantic Films using it. Indigo is an unbiased renderer so I don't think is suitable for animations, but architectural renderings. Yafray is rock solid but slow due its global illumination nature.

Blender has radiosity but was designed to bake lighting as part of the game engine, so it's not an option for production.

Cohen
09-02-2008, 09:42 PM
There are a few things to be said about the blender rendering system. Raytracing routines are sluggish compared to lightwaves'. Their GI system is horrible, the worst of any app. It is not even a true light simulation. You have to refine your geometry by subdividing it a few levels as it stores lighting information at each vertex, very much like a light map. Thats on their TODO list for improvements, and have made some headway already. But in its current state, you'll have to remember to subdivide your models a few times before any light simulation is to be performed.

Some good things could be said in the areas of the integrated compositor and its render layers system. But they sadly extended that compositor to fake Depth of field effects, motion blur, lens glare and distortion effects. Which may work most of the time, but sometimes you can get artifacts in your images and reveal a black void in areas especially when emulating lenses due to the fact that it works with only whats been put into buffer. On the shading side of things, they provide pretty much all standard shading models and a decent SSS solution. The SSS used to only work with shadow maps, but i dont think thats the case anymore. As for lights, Direct lighting works well as any other app. New soft shadows are now available on every light type.

I would like to say better things about its renderer, but cant think of much at the moment.

Celshader
09-02-2008, 09:59 PM
3Delight (http://www.3delight.com/en/) is a renderman renderer, it has been used on some Hollywood productions, and its the favourite renderer of Massive (the thing used to make crowds in The Lord of the Rings), it has been supported recently by XSI. Gelato is a nvidia product (now discontinued), I don't know anyone aside from Frantic Films using it. Indigo is an unbiased renderer so I don't think is suitable for animations, but architectural renderings. Yafray is rock solid but slow due its global illumination nature.

Blender has radiosity but was designed to bake lighting as part of the game engine, so it's not an option for production.

Again, I greatly appreciate information from experienced Blender artists.

3Delight sounds good for full-fledged studio production, though additional licenses are not cheap:


From http://www.3delight.com/en/index.php/products/3delight/3delight_pricing_and_licensing

The first 3Delight license is free of charge. This is a fully functional two threads license that is liable for commercial use and can be downloaded here. No support is included with the free license but can be purchased for 250 USD.

For all additional licenses:


* The cost is 1,000 USD for a two threads license and 1,500 USD for a four threads license.
* Support is 190 USD per license per year for the two threads license and 285 USD for the four threads license. Support includes free upgrades and e-mail support.
* All licenses are floating.


I had wondered if Jin's notion that Blender threatened LightWave held any merit. In the hobbyist realm, this could be true. Hobbyists could no doubt render beautiful images with Blender and a free, two-threads license of 3Delight.

For architectural rendering, this could also be true with Blender and Indigo, if Blender modeling is as easy as LightWave modeling.

For commercial production, I do not see the threat, since the cost of quality rendering with Blender exceeds the cost of LightWave.

jin choung
09-02-2008, 11:14 PM
Jin, please refer to here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFmpeg
here (even the developers admit that there are problems, but as always it depends on the POV and this is obviously a grey area):
http://ffmpeg.mplayerhq.hu/legal.html

Check what it says in the Linux build http://www.blender.org/download/

I am sure that I would find more pages about this topic, if I had the time to search for this, which is what you should do before you put my words into the realm of speculation.
Oh and it was Jin who started yelling arround, just to make this clear. I thought he was just deaf so I was yelling back, sorry ;)
CU
Elmar

when was i yelling? as i've noted many times before, i CAPS to emphasize... easier than bolding.... unless you think i'm yelling the word "USING" in my first response to you for some reason...?

as for speculation - you ARE speculating. you even ADMIT that you're speculating:

Now I am not 100% sure about the features in Blender, but I would not be surprised if some of them used technology covered by patents or that are otherwise protected.

as for ffmpg, i asked for backup to your statement and you provided it. thanks.

so ffmpg is included in the linux install... got it. well, a codec pack shouldn't be difficult to excise should the need ever arise.

but then evidently, it shouldn't ever be a problem in many european union countries... i assume so for the netherlands, blender's home. are there software patents or legal prohibitions on reverse engineering in austria?

(from wikipedia link) FFmpeg's legal status varies by country. Some included codecs, (such as Sorenson 3), are claimed by patent holders. Such claims may be enforceable in countries like the United States which have implemented software patents, but are considered unenforceable or void in countries that have not implemented software patents. Furthermore, many of these codecs are only released under terms that forbid reverse engineering, even for purposes of interoperability. However, these terms of use are forbidden in certain countries. For example, some European Union nations have not implemented software patents and/or have laws expressly allowing reverse engineering for purposes of interoperability.[12] In any case, many Linux distributions do not include FFmpeg to avoid legal complications.

so most certainly - a VERY gray area indeed.

and if the legal threat primarily applies to commercial products:

(from ffmpg faq)Q: Since FFmpeg is licensed under the LGPL, is it perfectly alright to incorporate the whole FFmpeg core into my own commercial product?
A: You might have a problem here. Sure, the LGPL allows you to incorporate the code. However, there have been cases where companies have used FFmpeg in their projects, usually for such capabilities as superior MPEG-4 decoding. These companies found out that once you start trying to make money from certain technologies, the alleged owners of the technologies will come after their protection money. Most notably, MPEG-LA (licensing authority) is vigilant and diligent about collecting for MPEG-related technologies.

then this will never affect blender no matter how "big" it gets.

finally, we can go into the idiocy of allowing code to be patented, the wisdom of many (most? all?) EU countries in not recognizing such things and america's idiocy in having them..... but that's another discussion.

but i'll just conclude by stating my view that no matter how big and popular blender gets, its future does not seem to be at threat (certainly not from the sole concrete example of ffmpg). it seems mostly in the clear in the EU (even now) and quite probably will be in the u.s. if anyone here still favors sanity (and innovation) and gets some patent reform underway.

jin

jin choung
09-02-2008, 11:54 PM
For architectural rendering, this could also be true with Blender and Indigo, if Blender modeling is as easy as LightWave modeling.

it's not as good yet and lwcad simply pounds not only blender but lots of "traditional modelers".

there are some areas that are more advanced and better implemented than stock lw (operator overloaded commands - a single extrude command, whether face, vert or edge for example) but others are RIDICULOUSLY PRIMITIVE!

in lw and almost all poly modelers, you can extrude (for us bevel) up and down as well as IN AND OUT. blender does not have in and out! even to the point where most blenderheads don't understand how a bevel in/out differs from scaling! ACK!

it's available with a script but ack....

this is definitely something in blender that makes me smack my forehead.

For commercial production, I do not see the threat, since the cost of quality rendering with Blender exceeds the cost of LightWave.

3delight need not apply....

lest we forget,

http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/index.php/media-gallery/

Big Buck Bunny was rendered with the blender renderer. i have no problem believing lw's renderer is better but there's nothing debilitating or disqualifying or unprofessional about blender's renderer.

and it seems to do fur much better. : )

also, not every house or seat would be interested in blender primarily for rendering. for a "professional" game studio, it's a non issue.

and someone already mentioned the free renderers... yafray is included in the install:

http://www.yafray.org/index.php?s=10
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

there are a lot of valid points to be made against blender... but i'm just sayin', at a certain level of capability, it becomes very very very hard to argue with free.

jin

ben martin
09-03-2008, 03:35 AM
Here we are, we finally reached the point I was expecting.

Yes, I agree, Blender render engine is not that good! Lightwave beats Blender hands down (but like Jin said, that per-si means nothing, Blender is able to produce great renders "BigBuckBunny").
I also agree that Blender modeler is low behind Lightwave (some tools are better implemented in Blender though).

So my point is, why are we using Blender in production for?

Easy, to achieve those things Lightwave can't touch, or touch awkwardly!

Liquids, Dynamics, CA, (I won't talk about fur cause I did not studied FiberFX properly yet), Decent compositor, even a basic but effective NLE.

What I mean is, at least, Liquids, Dynamics, CA is something Newtek should address soon, because Lightwave is clearly loosing focus on the actual state of 3D development.

Technological revolutions are happening faster and faster with less gap of time between them, so Newtek, can't rely on old habits and tools if the goal is to evolve and keep up the pass, or soon, very soon, I'm afraid, we all end being members of an old and nostalgic club of Lightwavers.

I give credit to Lightwave render engine, but that's what we really need and want? Turn Lightwave into a render plug-in to Blender or other application?

This is exactly my point!
Render excel does not qualify a software as a good 3D solution.
Lightwave must provide solutions in all areas.
Agree, that Newtek can have some personal issues, like cash flow and other speculative areas, but that can't be used as an excuse... there are things in Lightwave that are clearly wrong implemented / programmed and others are doing it well.

Let's compare:
Blender presents you a bad modeler and a weak render solution compared to Lightwave… here we all agree!
Now let's classify all the rest:
Decent Digital Sculpting, Intelligent UVunrap, Very capable Liquids simulation, well implemented cloth / soft body simulations, Basic NLE, Good node compositor, Pretty decent CA structure, Very good Vertex painter, all this (between other tools) comes in a 9Mb pack?????
Lightwave presents a base pack of 50 Mb (32-bits version) to offer what? A better render solution and a better implemented modeler???????? :question:
Something is not right here (regarding coding area that is)!

Yeap, you can scream and kick and burn all you want, it won't convinces me that Newtek is really doing the best they can regarding Lightwave. Maybe they simply need to start from fresh, maybe Lw10 is that start fresh (Oh boy I'm hoping that since version 6). :sleeping:

ben martin
09-03-2008, 03:35 AM
_ duplicated post

Iain
09-03-2008, 03:53 AM
Yeap, you can scream and kick and burn all you want, it won't convinces me that Newtek is really doing the best they can regarding Lightwave. Maybe they simply need to start from fresh, maybe Lw10 is that start fresh (Oh boy I'm hoping that since version 6). :sleeping:


You need to look at the facts, Ben. LW is used as a renderer in many major outfits. Those people (and those who follow their lead) are being looked after first.
It's also used as a modeller in many pipelines.

Those who rely on LightWave for CA in a production environment seem to be few and far between. Why would they get priority? That wouldn't make any business sense unless the process of doing it all in one sweep was simple (and I think you know it's not-Luxology can't do it either.)

You can wait and hope forever or you can use something else. The former will just make you look foolish when applications are so cheap and easy to use.

jin choung
09-03-2008, 03:54 AM
Yeap, you can scream and kick and burn all you want, it won't convinces me that Newtek is really doing the best they can regarding Lightwave.

that's the thing though, i for one am pretty sure they ARE doing the best they can. given the resources they have. and i don't think i've ever doubted that.

some might reasonably make the argument that that's not good enough.... but that's neither here nor there. if they don't have the resources to do better then that's it. and i easily believe that developing a 3d software application outside of FOSS is an expensive proposition.

in fact, the quickest and easiest way for newtek to shut me up when i really get going is to just say, "we don't have the resources to do that now". i will not, i cannot argue with that.

you say that money is not an excuse and i understand what you're saying but i don't really look at it as an excuse... i see it as "everything". the car can "try" as hard as it can but if it just doesn't have gas, it's not gonna matter.

if you're hoping for newtek to adopt blender's rate of development, i think you're gonna be waiting a looooooooong time.

the only thing we can hope for imo is - given the resources they DO have, that they make smart use of it.

jin

ben martin
09-03-2008, 05:13 AM
You need to look at the facts, Ben. LW is used as a renderer in many major outfits. Those people (and those who follow their lead) are being looked after first.
It's also used as a modeller in many pipelines.
You have a point, maybe I'm being too much stubborn requesting things to Lightwave that are already available using other applications (and can be integrated to a Lightwave production line).

Like someone once said to me: "…you must learn to use the best a software has to offer and if possible combine it with other solutions!"

Maybe I should resign myself to use this option, while MDD integration or COLLADA are around. :)

ben martin
09-03-2008, 05:23 AM
that's the thing though, i for one am pretty sure they ARE doing the best they can. given the resources they have. and i don't think i've ever doubted that.... some might reasonably make the argument that that's not good enough.... jin

I'm not saying they are not committed.
I'm sure they believe they are doing the right things and doing it great!
This is not the point, neither if they are being professional or else, my point is that they are not simplifying, observing, making the right conclusions about what they already have and how to turn it into something better.

In a phrase: "Be smart and stay focused!"

I've seen great works done by small teams and tight budgets.
Money is important but creativity and the knowhow are more important than money.

For instance two different feature movies with "relative" same budgets.
One becomes a master piece and the second becomes crap.
The money was there, but something failed big time!

Did you get my point? :hey:

dballesg
09-03-2008, 07:11 AM
Those who rely on LightWave for CA in a production environment seem to be few and far between. Why would they get priority?

Hi Iain,

Sorry but you touched a sensible fiber there. At least a very sensible one for me an the place I work. And why we must not get priority? Are we second class citizens compared to the "elite" of Archviz, or TV FX???

Please do not take it personally, I really admire a lot the quality of your jobs and comments on the forums. And other archviz users as well. I am only trying to make a point.

It is only I am tired of the argument of "Oh! CA users are five, while archviz, tv fx, whatever else are 500 so they can wait!!!"

People that likes rigging and CA as a hobby or do it on production were ignored almost since version 4 of the program. All that is changing since 9.5 THANKS NEWTEK'S NEW DEV TEAM!!!!!!

We have the same right to get the tools we need for our daily job, as the people doing archviz, we are paying customers as well. Full stop. No more arguments, in fact all the users that use an specific area need the same loe care and attention from Newtek on those areas. And there is the difficulty of the dev team job, make changes on so many areas so everyone is happy.

And if you read the comments that Philip Nelson made here:

http://www.sportsvideo.org/portal/artman/publish/article_12316.shtml

"The new FiberFX provides artists with a full suite of tools to model and style each fiber, creating realistic hair, fur, and feathers. A lot of stadiums are beginning to animate their mascots in 3D. In some programs, the hair would just stick out. In this version, designers can actually comb the hair. “It is freaky to watch,” says Nelson. "

How do you expect the people animate those if there is not a full and reliable CA toolset?. Looks like Newtek it is finding new areas were put LW to work.


That wouldn't make any business sense unless the process of doing it all in one sweep was simple (and I think you know it's not-Luxology can't do it either.)

Do not make me talk about Lux people!!! :(


You can wait and hope forever or you can use something else. The former will just make you look foolish when applications are so cheap and easy to use.

We were thinking to change to XSI for CA, but suddenly they dropped foundation, and XSI Essentials it is not cheap compared to LW. So basically we delayed that decision. Aside the time we needed to learn a new app, against the time we have for our next production. So that is another factor that make us stick with LW. And I hope, really hope that we made the correct decision.

Cheers,
David

Iain
09-03-2008, 07:30 AM
And why we must not get priority? Are we second class citizens compared to the "elite" of Archviz, or TV FX???


I know where you're coming from David but I was talking purely as an observer and from a business point of view.

If you have two big items to update on your complex, ageing program, which one would you prioritise-the one which is more easily improved and is currently just about keeping your biggest user base happy or the one which needs more serious attention in the face of very advanced and affordable competition?

It had to go one way or the other and I can understand the logic in what they did. I'm not saying it was fair but fair doesn't come into business decisions.

Elmar Moelzer
09-03-2008, 07:45 AM
Jin, you are missing my point.
My point was that NewTek has to care about these things more than the Blender people do.
NewTek has to make sure that whatever they do is 100% free of even grey area issues. It would be desastrous for NewTek if someone blocked their sales in the US for even a month or two due to legal issues like these.
Blender does not have to care about these things as much.
CU
Elmar

dballesg
09-03-2008, 08:26 AM
I know where you're coming from David but I was talking purely as an observer and from a business point of view.

Hi Iain,

Sorry if my post was a bit harsh! :(


If you have two big items to update on your complex, ageing program, which one would you prioritise-the one which is more easily improved and is currently just about keeping your biggest user base happy or the one which needs more serious attention in the face of very advanced and affordable competition?

I suppose you are talking about ANY two items?

Well, I suppose if we look to the areas improved from release to release on the 9.x cycle, we know the render engine has taken a lot of love, care and attention. And that is fine for me, we never considered to drop the renderer from LW, only the CA part.

But I think the CA Tools are being improved now, because as you said they found it was much "easier" than they expected?

I do not know, I am not on the dev team! :) And I will need to have a look to the source code to tell you which areas were more easy to modify! :)

What I noticed it is the new additions, are improved and fixed quite quickly, so the way the team is programming the new areas, allows them to really start looking almost all of them at the same time. And that is really good for ALL users.


It had to go one way or the other and I can understand the logic in what they did. I'm not saying it was fair but fair doesn't come into business decisions.

Neither I implied that, sorry if my post sounded like that. but in this case I found quite fair that CA tools were looked after so long of being the third world tools in LW! :)

And I will risk myself, predicting that maybe on the next release, modeling and dynamics will receive quite a lot of focus. ;)

Cheers,
David

Celshader
09-03-2008, 10:11 AM
i'm just sayin', at a certain level of capability, it becomes very very very hard to argue with free.

For some, this could be true.

-+-

However, sometimes "free" doesn't matter. When Flash Film Works started working on Guardian, Blender came out with a fluid dynamics system.

Yet Flash purchased several licenses of RealFlow for thousands of dollars instead of using the Blender freeware package. RealFlow did everything they needed, and they were willing to buy the best.

-+-

Jin, please read the assessment of the Blender rendering options by Titus and Cohen earlier in this thread. From their descriptions, only three engines can compete with LightWave. Of those three, Vray and 3Delight cost more than LightWave, and Indigo is only suitable for architectural renderings at this time. Yafray sounds too slow to compete with LightWave.

The native Blender render engine might be acceptable for painterly short films, but I seriously doubt any of the LightWave houses in town are going to toss LightWave out in favor of a Blender rendering solution anytime soon. Their clients demand LightWave quality.

-+-

On top of that, I remember telling a friend about Blender in mid-2006. He told his boss: "Look: a free 3D package with a fluid solver." She refused to allow Blender into her studio, because commercial packages offered tech support and Blender did not. She did not want to take chances with freeware 3D packages.

So, there you go. Blender does not threaten LightWave or any other commercial 3D package. I'd still like to learn it, and someday I will learn it. I'll never find a job out here as a Blender specialist, though.

Titus
09-03-2008, 10:32 AM
On top of that, I remember telling a friend about Blender in mid-2006. He told his boss: "Look: a free 3D package with a fluid solver." She refused to allow Blender into her studio, because commercial packages offered tech support and Blender did not. She did not want to take chances with freeware 3D packages.

This thinking has been very common with OS programs, it happened with Linux 10 years ago: Windows has support, Linux doesn't. Well, Blender gets daily bug updates, What other program does the same?

Blender fluid system is not as good as realflow in terms of how you can manipulate the simulation. This is good because it's easier with Blender to get water going down the drain :), but with realflow you need a lot of practice and time to get something to behave like water or a specific fluid, but if you want to make a river to transform into a monster and then explode, RF is the way to go.

ivanze
09-03-2008, 10:38 AM
"This thinking has been very common with OS programs, it happened with Linux 10 years ago: Windows has support, Linux doesn't. Well, Blender gets daily bug updates, What other program does the same?"

Lightwave? :)

Titus
09-03-2008, 10:41 AM
"This thinking has been very common with OS programs, it happened with Linux 10 years ago: Windows has support, Linux doesn't. Well, Blender gets daily bug updates, What other program does the same?"

Lightwave? :)

Wrong, try again.

I visit often this site to get experimental versions:

http://www.graphicall.org

jeremyhardin
09-03-2008, 11:07 AM
Was going to find the almost identical thread from earlier when cloth was announced, but I remembered that the thief/troll bryphi came in and p*ssed all over it. Same old story any way. Like Matt said, if you like blender, enjoy, it's free.

And like celshader said, when I get paid to use it, I'll use it. My employer prefers maya just now.

And Jin, it's not about how you mean your caps. It's about how they're being perceived. It's shouting, mate. And if you don't care, you're not doing a very good job communicating, are you, when you don't care how people perceive what you say?

Another rule is to avoid typing in ALL CAPS, which is considered shouting or yelling.

And Titus, in the OS analogy, monthly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patch_Tuesday) isn't bad. :)

richcz3
09-03-2008, 11:29 AM
Speaking of OS's in this Free Vs Paid debate.....
Its very much like the Linux debate - Its free....

In my view, whenever something "Counter" becomes "Mainstream" for the masses, it inevitably conforms, bloats, and it tends to lose its edge. Something else inevitably springs to being to replace it in the fringe.

Without getting into a tangle - Use what works for you. :D

jin choung
09-03-2008, 12:09 PM
Jin, please read the assessment of the Blender rendering options by Titus and Cohen earlier in this thread. From their descriptions, only three engines can compete with LightWave. Of those three, Vray and 3Delight cost more than LightWave, and Indigo is only suitable for architectural renderings at this time. Yafray sounds too slow to compete with LightWave.

again, for a video game company who's not doing cut scenes, it doesn't matter. and there are plenty of seats in plenty of houses where rendering simply doesn't figure in.

the renderer in lw is great. but it is not the end all be all of whether blender will ever threaten its commercial rivals. does the fact that maya's built in renderer is considered to be less beautiful than lw's make maya the lower man on the waterline? i think not.

and i read their assessments. it's just that maya's renderer has been reviled in comparison to lw's as well and it gets used in real world production all the time. and it may not be good enough for archvis with radiosity everywhere but if you approach the renders with the frequent pixar motto "avoid ray tracing if at all possible", then all of a sudden you're well back in the game again.

at a certain point, "it's good enough" for a lot of things and it simply doesn't matter that it's not the best (good thing for lw too since it can claim to be good but hardly can claim to be the best). blender may not have a better renderer than lw. absolutely. but many times, for many uses, that won't matter.

haha. it sounds like "painterly short film" is being used to dismiss BBB but considering that a lot of pixar stuff can be considered along the same lines, i'm comfortable with that evaluation. : ) and the simple fact of the matter is... it looks undeniably good - and even better than short films i've seen rendered out of lw.

and at THAT point, it really is good enough imo.

jin

Celshader
09-03-2008, 01:40 PM
again, for a video game company who's not doing cut scenes, it doesn't matter. and there are plenty of seats in plenty of houses where rendering simply doesn't figure in.

the renderer in lw is great. but it is not the end all be all of whether blender will ever threaten its commercial rivals. does the fact that maya's built in renderer is considered to be less beautiful than lw's make maya the lower man on the waterline? i think not.

and i read their assessments. it's just that maya's renderer has been reviled in comparison to lw's as well and it gets used in real world production all the time. and it may not be good enough for archvis with radiosity everywhere but if you approach the renders with the frequent pixar motto "avoid ray tracing if at all possible", then all of a sudden you're well back in the game again.

at a certain point, "it's good enough" for a lot of things and it simply doesn't matter that it's not the best (good thing for lw too since it can claim to be good but hardly can claim to be the best). blender may not have a better renderer than lw. absolutely. but many times, for many uses, that won't matter.

haha. it sounds like "painterly short film" is being used to dismiss BBB but considering that a lot of pixar stuff can be considered along the same lines, i'm comfortable with that evaluation. : ) and the simple fact of the matter is... it looks undeniably good - and even better than short films i've seen rendered out of lw.

and at THAT point, it really is good enough imo.

jin

Great! I don't work in the video game industry, so I have nothing to fear from Blender.

I am not dismissing Big Buck Bunny. It is a great accomplishment. However, its look is not what clients want for car commercials and photoreal VFX.

It looks like I can't convince you that commercial 3D packages will survive against Blender in the future. Your mind's made up, and nothing I say will change that.

So...why are you still here? Why do you keep using commercial 3D packages like LightWave and Maya?

jin choung
09-03-2008, 03:14 PM
Great! I don't work in the video game industry, so I have nothing to fear from Blender.

I am not dismissing Big Buck Bunny. It is a great accomplishment. However, its look is not what clients want for car commercials and photoreal VFX.

It looks like I can't convince you that commercial 3D packages will survive against Blender in the future. Your mind's made up, and nothing I say will change that.

So...why are you still here? Why do you keep using commercial 3D packages like LightWave and Maya?

wow, that sounded touchy...

i never said YOU had anything to fear. just as I have nothing to fear. unless your livelihood is inextricably linked to lw for some reason, we'll all adapt and move on when and if the times call for it.

and i've never said that commercial 3D packages will not survive.

and i've given ample reasons already, in this very thread, about why other packages (including lw and lwcad for me) remain relevant.

but what i've said is that free becomes a very compelling argument at a certain level of capability... with the addendum that there does not seem to be any indication that blender intends to slow down its continued and rapid growth. that argument will just get more compelling as time goes on.

if not now, i'm saying that it holds promise for the future.

and there seems to be some movement in the professional-non-gaming-realms already too:

http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/index.php/siggraph-los-angeles-report/#more-506

sorry if you didn't change my mind. were you intending to?

jin

Celshader
09-03-2008, 03:34 PM
i've never said that commercial 3D packages will not survive.

That's not the impression I got from your posts in this thread.

jin choung
09-03-2008, 03:44 PM
That's not the impression I got from your posts in this thread.

errr,

impressions aside... i simply didn't say it.

jin

jin choung
09-03-2008, 04:02 PM
sure, there will always be a place for commercial apps, especially if you have longstanding pipelines that are built around them.


http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=743861&postcount=31

and in fact i'm on record as having said just the opposite.

jin

Dodgy
09-03-2008, 05:01 PM
I think one thing that needs to be mentioned under the question of 'is NT doing everything it's able to with its expertise?' is 'Are we seeing all the work they are doing with LW?'

I mean, just because we've not seen any forward progress with modeler really doesn't mean it's not been worked on. In fact, I would suggest the opposite, it shows there's going to be a big difference when we do see a change. Same with the rest of the bits which haven't apparently been touched. Whether you can wait for that change is another matter.

I really can't imagine anyone saying 'NT can't write modeling tools'.

jin choung
09-03-2008, 05:41 PM
I think one thing that needs to be mentioned under the question of 'is NT doing everything it's able to with its expertise?' is 'Are we seeing all the work they are doing with LW?'

given that they haven't SAID they're doing anything else, i think it's completely sane to assume that we are seeing all their work.

after all, there's a whole boatload of things that they HAVEN'T SAID... like that they're secretly a soviet sleeper group... and we don't go around making that assumption.

also, considering the size of the team, it's hard to believe that they have surplus resources to tackle stuff not in the immediate release schedule.

i think it's a sane policy to place no hope or faith on that which even newtek does not feel warrants public announcement. what they say is all they are in my book.

jin

Dodgy
09-04-2008, 12:40 AM
Further improvements to modeling will come to their day in the sun, and when they do it will be perfectly clear that at no time were we ignoring modeling functionality nor had the new team abandoned development in this area. Some efforts just take longer to come to fruition.

Improvements to OpenGL performance and the selection system and extension of I/O to Collada, FBX and a vastly improved OBJ have been among the successes for this cycle; while many make use of the Catmull-Clark SDS and edge functions, some don't see them as usable yet and all would very much like improvements to complete the functionality in those areas. In both those cases, as well as of many other changes requested, the issues revolve on the need for a major core revision of LightWave's modeling functionality that is a very long and involved task.

We can understand if many folks need to look at options available today for immediate needs in modeling. When LightWave's new capabilities are in place, we hope to have made them so well that adding them to your toolset as well is an easy and happy choice for you.

Direct quote from Chuck. So where you got that NT had said nothing about modelling I don't know.

jin choung
09-04-2008, 12:59 AM
Direct quote from Chuck. So where you got that NT had said nothing about modelling I don't know.

i stand corrected. not NOTHING but.... pardon me if i consider it close enough.

they said something vague. i find NOTHING there (in terms of THE FUTURE - which was the subject of our exchange) to hang my hat on. honestly, do you? anything there other than a promise that is devoid of detail? i mean it's on the level of politician speak for cryin' out loud.

(also - the fact that they remain ultra secretive on some details (assuming there's something there there) while tossing out joints that should have been held back until they were at least feature complete (!) is completely beyond me.)

you keep bringing up something "just over the horizon" that may "surprise us all" but what the heck is that supposed to mean to anyone?

actually, i'd like to know something once and for all - do you have information that we are not privy to? do you have INSIDE INFORMATION on what they're doing?

cuz if so, you CAN'T have it both ways. you CAN'T try to cultivate some kind of P.R. good will and at the same time tell us nothing. either tell us something or inherit the benefits of secrecy - nothing.

jin

Dodgy
09-04-2008, 01:28 AM
It's not inside knowledge. It's just reading what they've said and taking it to a logical conclusion.
No improvements to modeler. This means they've abandoned it completely, (yeah, they've said they're not doing that) or they're making major changes which require a lot of work (which is what Chuck said they are doing). This would touch a lot of the tools, hence no point adding new tools to Modeler, unless they're easily converted over or really needed. What kind of things could need to touch a lot of tools? Well, the tools needed culling, snapping needed adding, better UV support, mesh deformation/editing needed speeding up, CC subd needed more work, and more. Doesn't that seem like a lot of really core work? Which might take a lot of time? Or am I the only sane one in this conversation?

I think I've said this before, but it really doesn't seem to make much difference. If you don't think this stuff isn't being worked on, despite all the calls for it, then time for you to go Blender/Maya. Why waste more time on a package which you don't think is going anywhere fast? If I had your opinions, I'd already be there right now.

I seem to remember the same sort of negative stuff being said about rendering and GI a while ago. Now where are we with that?

Dodgy
09-04-2008, 01:36 AM
And I'm sure they've said other stuff related to modelling etc, but that was the first quote I came across searching.

jin choung
09-04-2008, 01:39 AM
oooooh, getting nasty now.

hahaha. why is it that so many posts devolve to "lw, love it or leave it"?

L
O
L

priceless.

and you seem to be putting words in my mouth. i'm saying simply that i have no faith in what is not seen. that is all.

whereas you seem to be supporting the notion that we should have faith and be of good cheer because salvation is on the mountaintop can i hear an amen?!

i am merely RESERVING JUDGMENT UNTIL I SEE SOMETHING. you evidently have a problem with that?

evidently that is a sign of INSANITY? : ) goodness.

am i preaching that modeler has been abandoned? or that it will forever stagnate? nope.

but i will give no props, no cheers, no hurrahs or huzzahs and certainly no yeahboys until there's something appropriate to lavish such things on - whether that is manifested features or info.

yeah... i know. i'm CRAZY that way....

jin

jin choung
09-04-2008, 01:51 AM
No improvements to modeler. This means they've abandoned it completely, (yeah, they've said they're not doing that) or they're making major changes which require a lot of work

and are you kidding me with this?

OR they have limited resources so they are devoting most of their resources to one thing at a time (recently, focusing on the renderer)....

OR they lost interest at the moment they've been staring at the ceiling....

OR they got a new kitten and it's just been really really adorable and....

OR....

seriously - to say that your conclusion is logically inevitable stretches... uhhhhh... not sanity... no... but maybe just.... necessity....

again, i see no reason to break out my pom poms. doesn't mean they won't come out when called for. but for now, the pom poms are staying in the drawer.

but cheer on if you must.

jin

p.s. seriously i wish i had a scoreboard for how many times i get "lw, love it or leave it"... so awesome.

DiedonD
09-04-2008, 02:33 AM
And I'm sure they've said other stuff related to modelling etc, but that was the first quote I came across searching.

And they said alotta stuff about instancing too. Specifically for 9.x circle aswell. It was there on the site for all to see. I dont know weather there will be a 9.7 so as they include that and remain on their word, but this seems to be the general facet at NT. Not enough money to do it all regardless all. Ge use to is or leave again.

Dodgy
09-04-2008, 02:42 AM
I seem to remember you brought up the sanity thing first.

I think it's completely sane to assume that we are seeing all their work.
I assumed the opposite, by your logic that makes me insane. This is because a few things came into the beta which we hadn't been told about before. I mean, the light API must have been worked on before they announced it to you personally right? Or did they start it when they said a new light API was going to be part of 9.5? I'm not really thinking they did it that way around.


given that they haven't SAID they're doing anything else,
I then directly quoted Chuck's confirmation that they were working on something modeler side, which was taking a long time and that it was worth waiting for, which was exactly what I was saying. That actually makes you wrong, despite your attempt to lessen it to nothing. Maybe you forgot, you were part of that thread.

I really would have left LW by now, if I had your opinions of its development. I've even looked at other packages. The signs of development I have seen have encouraged me that LW is moving in the right direction, fast enough. I just expressed what I was thinking.

jin choung
09-04-2008, 03:09 AM
I then directly quoted Chuck's confirmation that they were working on something modeler side, which was taking a long time and that it was worth waiting for, which was exactly what I was saying. That actually makes you wrong, despite your attempt to lessen it to nothing. Maybe you forgot, you were part of that thread.


as I SAID - i stand corrected.

"Further improvements to modeling will come to their day in the sun, and when they do it will be perfectly clear that at no time were we ignoring modeling functionality nor had the new team abandoned development in this area. Some efforts just take longer to come to fruition."

that says SOMETHING.... not much but something. so i will and i have given you that. and seriously, does it really take very much on my part to "lessen that"? i get absolutely nothing of substance from that. it says virtually nothing. but it says something. sigh. so take your point - you earned it.

as for the sanity thing - i certainly didn't mean to imply that you were insane... merely that it was reasonable for me to take my position - which is a very likely reading from the way i stated things.

as for leaving, i will leave when i am gd good and ready. or until i'm kicked out. whichever comes second. i've invested time and money, i OWN IT NOW and there are things that i use it for now - such as modeling with lwcad. and so i'm here. tada.

finally, as i've said in other threads, there certainly HAVE been developments that have caused me to smack my forehead and ask why. there really have.

so fear not - the future of my engagement with lw, in terms of both time and money is by no means assured.

jin

DiedonD
09-04-2008, 03:37 AM
Nobody wants you to go Jin. I mean whose to have the other away from here!

This is just another confrontation between members. Its normal. Everybodies color is important. Otherwise it wouldve been a solid single colored minds saying "YES" all the time to another. Boring by me.

As long as the intensity remains below naming and the worser things above it, sounds like just anothe way of dealing with issues.

Dodgy
09-04-2008, 03:47 AM
And they said alotta stuff about instancing too. Specifically for 9.x circle aswell. It was there on the site for all to see. I dont know weather there will be a 9.7 so as they include that and remain on their word, but this seems to be the general facet at NT. Not enough money to do it all regardless all. Ge use to is or leave again.

They could have kind of done it in modeler with the custom polygon handler, which is what Hairblade and easyspline use, but from using those there's a lot of bugs/design flaws which currently mean it would be crippled. You can't use UVs with them for instance, or sub-d's. You could have done it in the renderer like HD instance, but then you can get HD instance for that, and I would have thought NT would want more than just a rendering effect.
Maybe they'll surprise us with one of those options, or add it into the core.

ben martin
09-04-2008, 04:00 AM
From my point of view, you both are right!

Jin is right, it's no news that we (users) are used to read some implied things that NT drops at some point without any explanations our using the standard one (lack of resources).
Sometimes even, the promise seems to imply great changes and stuff and in the end they do nothing but a small change. Take as an example the so publicized Modeler tools into Layout.

People were mislead to believe that Layout would get a modeler segment approach.
What did we get? Nothing relevant, I even wonder how many of us really give use to those new Layout modelers' features.

Anyway, this kind of misunderstandings seems to be excell to Newtek statements… maybe we are retarded persons who can't understand NT announcements very well, I give that a chance.

Dodgy is also right!
I too believe that the team is sketching a plan to take Lightwave to a new line of development and yes, so far they have done good things with the render engine and other issues but are they doing what is really needed?
Are they going in the right direction?
That's my argue… that's my point.

It's true that I can't criticize much NT (The new Chuck team), cause they have done some good things so far and I still giving them the "grace" introductory period of time.
They didn't have much time to prove themselves… but one small glimpses is already showing, they talk too much about development and stunning new features and revolutions that are to come, and when they come we'll be amazed. Like my mother uses to say: "Hell is full of people's promises"!

To resume: Yes, Chuck team are doing something to Lightwave development and I'm glad with that cause if not, I would recommend them to resign and buy a fishing tread and go fishing. They are doing what people expect them to do… their jobs!
If they are doing it right or not, that's another discussion! :argue:

DiedonD
09-04-2008, 04:26 AM
"Hell is full of people's promises"!


Classic. Or "You should rather be satisfied with the small bird that you have in your hand, rather than wish for the big one thats standing up there. Otherwise you may loose them both altogether" :D

My point is though. Since development is slow anyway. Dont add much of that "dissapointed" flavoir into the clients by giving promises that NT cant reach. Be who you are NT. Slow or Blender-fast.

Heres another one "One can stretch his legs (while sleeping) just as long as the blanket allows it" :D

Verlon
09-04-2008, 04:30 AM
oooooh, getting nasty now.

hahaha. why is it that so many posts devolve to "lw, love it or leave it"?

L
O
L

priceless.



jin

Because most of your posts seem to say, "LW, hate it but stay anyway."

One of the countries that has software patents and enforces them also happens to be the one where the most money is spent. Video games, movies, TV, or sports arenas with animated mascots, the United States is a big deal in entertainment dollars.

The tech support concern is valid, also. While I do not work in this industry, companies I work for prefer someone they can call (and if necessary, sue) if the software isn't working.

I would imagine that if I were trying to pitch Blender for a job in LA, and tried something like "You can always go to the forums for support if it doesn't work," no matter how good those forums actually are, I'd be laughed out the front door (or thrown out the back).

Dodgy
09-04-2008, 04:37 AM
finally, as i've said in other threads, there certainly HAVE been developments that have caused me to smack my forehead and ask why. there really have.

I agree, the joints have yet to grow on me. And FFX isn't as fast as I'd like, owning Sas, and I have problems with other bits of it. The rest of the bone and animation stuff is pretty cool though. As is the Lights, cameras, GI cache, and the developments in the sdk suggest to me they know the code better now. I think they've been updating stuff that was easy to break out. I've been told in bug reports that certain things wouldn't get sorted this cycle, and usually I can see why. On the other hand, there have been a quite a few easy/medium fixes which have been sorted by the next release.

Modeler's problems are more integral, and while they don't have a big team, I think at least a couple of programmers would be working on it, rather than waiting for everyone to be ready. Programmers tend to work on their own areas of code, if only because it can be quite involving getting people up to speed, and some will have more expertise than others in certain areas. Ramping up the number of programmers does not always equal more production. Certainly where I worked, programmers were assigned areas and worked pretty much in those areas. It was down to who suited what job. It makes more sense to have a few people who know the renderer inside out, and a few who know modeler inside out. That way, when LW is fully up to speed, it can all be developed equally. That doesn't mean some won't move around a bit, but you'll see development even out after this mess has been sorted. The code for LW was developed years ago, who knows how archaic some of it is. The new dev team do now.

Anyway, I've explained my reasons for the things I believe, that's enough wittering.

faulknermano
09-04-2008, 08:15 AM
haha. it sounds like "painterly short film" is being used to dismiss BBB but considering that a lot of pixar stuff can be considered along the same lines, i'm comfortable with that evaluation. : )

speaking as an individual artist (e.g. not an employed artist) i dont care for citing someone's (or some other company's) particular render-style as a basis for my own taste or evaluation. (i'm glad of how they *partially* removed that 'same ol' pixar look' for Wall-E, and gave it a more realistic feel to it.)

however if you're a pixar-worshipper, or a CG sup being told to go for the 'pixar-look', then i suppose that's another thing. but i wonder, even in such a situation, whether or not using Blender would be the best option.

ben martin
09-04-2008, 10:12 AM
Seems to me that people are mixing issues here.

There are two distinct aspects in this conversation:

1- The technical development of a certain application (Blender, Lightwave)
2- The acceptance of such in the 3D professional market.

I have no doubt's that, at this point, Blender is nothing but a nice complement to Lightwave (or any other application) when people decide to compare the professional acceptance of both applications.

Thus, this does not imply that Blender is not capable of produce professional results all alone (profs already are in the market); in fact in Europe at least 2 houses are using Blender to make money at pro level.

For the sake of this debate we shouldn't mix the acceptance of a product with its state of development to justify anything.
If Lightwavers have nothing else to cement their position, then we all are in deep trouble!
I have no doubts that Lightwave is accepted in any serious 3D production studio, like wise I also have no doubts that Blender is growing strong, looking strictly to the technical development of the software.

If tomorrow, Ton Roosendaal announces that Blender is going to gain a new UI much like (Lightwave or XSI) and a comparable modeler philosophy, I would like to have an hit counter that could tell me how many Lightwavers would download it and start to use it more and more and following this idea, maybe Lightwave would become Blender's render engine :hey: and why would that happen? Any clues?

jeremyhardin
09-05-2008, 08:50 AM
What 2 houses in europe use blender commercially? Are they using it as their main application? And do you have their websites?

ben martin
09-05-2008, 09:17 AM
http://www.blender.org/community/professionals/

You'll find here links to professional studios using Blender.
I know that an relevant 3D house in Germany is also using Blender, I'll try to find the link and I'll post it.
Enjoy.

ben martin
09-05-2008, 09:28 AM
It's worth also to check some work developed to archviz using blender:
Just scroll the page down. :)
http://www.blender3darchitect.com/

jeremyhardin
09-05-2008, 09:57 AM
Right, I knew about the links. There's 28 links there. You spoke specifically of two. I was asking about specifically those two.

ben martin
09-05-2008, 10:12 AM
You spoke specifically of two. I was asking about specifically those two.
I'll try to find the links, I read that somewhere.
I'm sure one of the houses is in Germany… at the time (it was almost one year ago) I was impresses with the work they've done using Blender.
I'll try to find the link or the notice; I'll get back to you with it.

ben martin
09-05-2008, 10:44 AM
Crap! :foreheads it was in the end of that list!
I didn't check it first… I just posted the link:

Here it is:
http://www.3d-artworx.de/
Check the:
Services / 3D Animation and simulation segment.

I knew these guys beside 3D/video are also related to music.
The news interested me specially becasue I'm also an electronic music composer. I'm actually writing to a Portuguese feature movie.

Anyway, I don't quite understand why you are specifically interest about those two examples I spoke of:
My meaning, when I told about that, was related to the fact that someone stated that Blender wasn't used professionally.

That's not true, there are people all around the world using Blender professionally. Just check the links. You'll find people from Canada, Japan… keep on checking the links... and if you bother to do a Google search, maybe you'll find some more (like I did)! :)

Anti-Distinctly
09-05-2008, 11:28 AM
Anyway, I don't quite understand why you are specifically interest about those two examples I spoke of:
My meaning, when I told about that, was related to the fact that someone stated that Blender wasn't used professionally.

That's not true, there are people all around the world using Blender professionally. Just check the links. You'll find people from Canada, Japan… keep on checking the links... and if you bother to do a Google search, maybe you'll find some more (like I did)! :)

I imagine the interest is due to the fact that the term 'professional use' can cover a very wide area. i.e. There is a difference between some hobbyist doing something for a friend for a little bit of cash and one of the large London digital houses for example. A world of difference.

ben martin
09-05-2008, 12:39 PM
There is a difference between some hobbyist doing something for a friend for a little bit of cash and one of the large London digital houses for example. A world of difference.

Huh... I totally disagree with you!
Maybe you are confusing "Professional" with "Reference".

To me "Professional" implies someone who makes money to pay the bills selling knowledge/work/art...

"Reference" is something (or someone) that did/achieved a relevant recognition at certain area of knowledge/work/art...

So, if you put it that way, well till today the only Blender references I consider worth of recognition was Elephant Dreams and BigBuckBunny.
It's a fact that I don't follow Blender artists.
I have some interest in Blender, I have it installed, I use it, I admire its development, and I wish Lightwave could present some Blender solutions but that's all.

Anyway, If I'm not being completely dumb, this kind of argumentation (prove to me), normally is used when people simple can’t bare to be open minded and agree that something they don't appreciate/like/use much is really surpassing several aspects of something that they care about/love/protect.

I won't play that game.

To me, Blender is doing fine, Lightwave is not doing that well.
Are they at the same level?
Can't specify that much.

I have no doubts that Blender is very head of Lightwave at some points, the opposite is also true. I just don’t understand why people waist so much energy trying to prove that this is not true?!

Is Lightwave the best thing around? Hell no! It is not!
I Love it, I use it but it is not the best 3D software around and frankly I don't see it going that way (excluding some points like the render engine and the IES Lights).

So where is the wrong/bad/terrible attitude of appreciating other software developments and wish (Oh man how do I really wish) that Lightwave could offer the same things Blender is offering.

Please don’t come with that attitude of: (Go, take Blender and leave Lightwave story), cause I invested money, time (more than a decade) to Lightwave cause, and if I’m here, writing to all of you is just because I care about Lightwave and wish better.

Anyway, like I said before, jut give to Blender a good (fast) render engine, better modeler and a decent UI and then we shall talk again!

The next Blender level (if I recall it correctly) it’ll will be focused at Particles-VFX, HD instance (crowds).
Do you believe Lightwave is going to develop something this huge any time soon?
Hypervoxels? Yeah! Right!
When was the last time that Lightwave shock-up the 3D community?

Keep on smiling! :)

rakker16mm
09-05-2008, 01:04 PM
Anyway, like I said before, jut give to Blender a good (fast) render engine, better modeler and a decent UI and then we shall talk again!


:agree: 100% I sometimes suspect they have made the UI counter-intuitive in order to sell more manuals :bangwall:

In the meantime however I am finding there are enough interesting features in Blender to make the learning curve worth the effort.

Anti-Distinctly
09-05-2008, 05:51 PM
Huh... I totally disagree with you!
Maybe you are confusing "Professional" with "Reference".

To me "Professional" implies someone who makes money to pay the bills selling knowledge/work/art...

"Reference" is something (or someone) that did/achieved a relevant recognition at certain area of knowledge/work/art...

Are you saying that there is no difference between someone charging £20/hour for logo design and a large London house such as double negative or mpc?



So, if you put it that way, well till today the only Blender references I consider worth of recognition was Elephant Dreams and BigBuckBunny.
It's a fact that I don't follow Blender artists.
I have some interest in Blender, I have it installed, I use it, I admire its development, and I wish Lightwave could present some Blender solutions but that's all.

Anyway, If I'm not being completely dumb, this kind of argumentation (prove to me), normally is used when people simple can’t bare to be open minded and agree that something they don't appreciate/like/use much is really surpassing several aspects of something that they care about/love/protect.

I won't play that game.

To me, Blender is doing fine, Lightwave is not doing that well.
Are they at the same level?
Can't specify that much.

I have no doubts that Blender is very head of Lightwave at some points, the opposite is also true. I just don’t understand why people waist so much energy trying to prove that this is not true?!

Is Lightwave the best thing around? Hell no! It is not!
I Love it, I use it but it is not the best 3D software around and frankly I don't see it going that way (excluding some points like the render engine and the IES Lights).

So where is the wrong/bad/terrible attitude of appreciating other software developments and wish (Oh man how do I really wish) that Lightwave could offer the same things Blender is offering.

Please don’t come with that attitude of: (Go, take Blender and leave Lightwave story), cause I invested money, time (more than a decade) to Lightwave cause, and if I’m here, writing to all of you is just because I care about Lightwave and wish better.

Anyway, like I said before, jut give to Blender a good (fast) render engine, better modeler and a decent UI and then we shall talk again!

The next Blender level (if I recall it correctly) it’ll will be focused at Particles-VFX, HD instance (crowds).
Do you believe Lightwave is going to develop something this huge any time soon?
Hypervoxels? Yeah! Right!
When was the last time that Lightwave shock-up the 3D community?

Keep on smiling! :)

Please do not assume that I'm down on Blender for no reason at all. I'd love it to be great as currently it's the only other 3D app I have access to.
I keep trying it and then I remember why I don't use it. It's my personal experience I'm talking about here and nothing more.
I'm not telling anyone to go anywhere and I never have.
Blender keeps adding lovely stuff to it's feature list, but for me the core or the app is rotten. I'll keep trying it anyway though and hopefully, one day, it'll not end with me bashing my head against a brick wall in frustration.

Titus
09-05-2008, 06:13 PM
An interesting example of a professional use of Blender by a studio is Plumiferos (http://www.plumiferos.com/), an animated feature being made in Argentina, with a $700,000 USD budget(1).

The open source nature of the program also helped to create a custom previz version for Spider-Man 2 (http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/testimonials/animatics-for-motion-pictures/).

1. Introducing Character Animation with Blender, Tony Mullen.

ben martin
09-05-2008, 07:17 PM
Are you saying that there is no difference between someone charging £20/hour for logo design and a large London house such as double negative or mpc?

Sure there is!
That's why one is paid £20/hour and the other very differently. But do we agree that both are professionals, since they both pay the bills with incoming from 3D work?

The fact that they are at different levels is completely irrelevant for the "professional" definition.
I understand that some people use the “Pro” word with a different connotation, like:
“He his great”, “big artist”, “incredible good at what he does”, but that's a cool distortion of the meaning.

“Pro” is a short for “professional” and that means what it means:
Someone that sells his/her time working/developing something regularly (gaining know how and expertise in the area) and being paid for it.

That's how I see it! :)

ben martin
09-05-2008, 07:32 PM
Please do not assume that I'm down on Blender for no reason at all. I'd love it to be great as currently it's the only other 3D app I have access to.
I keep trying it and then I remember why I don't use it.

I understand you, believe me... I've been there for several times, till some kind of lamp just burn bright and I started to see the logic in Blender's IU.

Nevertheless, I keep wishing they change it to something more user friendly!
I heard Ton talking about some plans pointing at that direction. I just hope that happens soon!

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

Hey Titus, I never heard about that one (Plumiferos)... seems cool! :hey:

RTSchramm
09-05-2008, 08:38 PM
It doesn't matter what the application is, its' the end results that count. I have seen great stills, production shots, FX, and CA animation from ALL of the products mentioned in this thread. In my view, its the artist who makes the difference not the software.

Back in 2005, a guy at my college demonstrated how to create a fully rigged Pixar quality character in two hours with cloth and polygon hair that rivals anything that I have seen in the movies using only Lightwave 8.5!

This guy seemed to have an intimate knowledge of Lightwave that bordered-line on the supernatural. He was a texturing maniac. It was his real time demonstration that convinced me to buy LW. His character had long flowing hair that looked so real I could almost touch it. The dynamics of the scene looked flawless to me.

So I bought LW 8.5 that year instead of Maya, 3D max, or Animation Master. I installed the program and "BAM!" Reality check - this stuff is hard! Creating animation takes A LOT OF WORK. Understanding LW takes A LOT OF WORK! LW sucks!

So I blamed the software and moved on to Maya. I bought the program and "BAM!" Reality check - this stuff is hard! Creating animation takes A LOT OF WORK. Understanding Maya takes A LOT OF WORK! Maya sucks!

So I blamed the software and moved on to 3D Max. I bought the program and "BAM!" Reality check sunk in - this stuff is hard! Creating animation takes A LOT OF WORK. Understanding 3D Max takes A LOT OF WORK! 3D Max sucks!

So does anyone see the pattern here; I blaming the software for my inadequacies. The guy who inspired me to babel in the art on 3D animation loved LW and for him at least there was no limits as to what he could quickly do in LW. He might have used slight of hand, or some other trickery, but when his product was finished anyone would be hard pressed to figure out which 3D applivation he used. He learned how to rig a character in LW just as quickly as the demos that I'd seen on the Maya web site. He was a master to whom it was the end result that mattered, not how he got there. The limitations of LW didn't seem to matter to him, or slow him down.

Would his demo have been quicker, or more professional if he had used some other 3D application? Maybe, but this guy seemed to have fully mastered LW and had the LW CA animation workflow imprinted in his neurons.

The moral of the story, for the millionth time is, there is no "Holy Grail" 3D application; its the artist who creates the art, not the 3D program.

Rich

jin choung
09-05-2008, 09:15 PM
this sentiment comes up time and again and time again we need the obligatory:

THE TOOL MATTERS.

THE CAR MATTERS.

this is not nascar where all the cars must be reasonably the same and the prime difference is driver.

this is F1. and money and tech advantage MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

for many people and situations, good enough will do. if your situation calls for nothing more than a hyundai, you're good to go with virtually any car on the street.

but if you're gonna compete in a grand prix, different situation.

no matter how good of a driver/artist you are.

car matters.

jin

faulknermano
09-05-2008, 09:35 PM
please, let's keep the car analogies to a minimum. :D hehe.


(i was meaning to go further with the analogy about cars with particular aspects of car handling vs acceleration vs top speed vs navigational aids, etc... let's just say that blender has great features, but many non-blenderheads seem to be discouraged how to the interface to control those features. the interface is, like.. ahem... car handling. and car handling also part of the car.)

giacob
09-05-2008, 09:51 PM
the fact is ....
i would like that my paid for 3d application had a better and easier cloth simulation than a free 3d application and it hasnt, since ( i tried it) blender cloth system is far more user friendly and far more efficiente than lw cloth system
i would like that it had a fluyid simulation system and it hasnt
etc

DiedonD
09-06-2008, 03:06 AM
for many people and situations, good enough will do. if your situation calls for nothing more than a hyundai, you're good to go with virtually any car on the street.

Yeah thats me. Not a finer word describes it. :) Anyone else? Come on dont be shy, step forward :D

jin choung
09-06-2008, 03:31 AM
it's not just the artist or person either... as i said, situation too.

i mean really, virtually ANYTHING can be done in any of the big 3d apps these. days. just a matter of blood sweat and tears sometimes.

and for lots of situations, virtually any of them will do. and many times, what you're familiar with will trump something that maybe really great but is alien to you.

many times in much of what we do, a hyundai (which is what i actually drive btw) works just great.

all i'm trying to say though is that this is not the same as saying that the kind of car NEVER matters and all that ever matters is driver.

jin

jin choung
09-06-2008, 03:52 AM
the interface is, like.. ahem... car handling. and car handling also part of the car.)

actually, i'd say the handling is quite good.

the problem is that the positions of the accelerator and brake have been reversed, someone has hidden the clutch, the gearshift box is randomized and the steering is performed with your door locks for some reason.

unfortunately, imo, it seems to have been designed by someone who has had limited exposure to other apps and so it not only flaunts convention, at times it seems completely unaware of them.

much better now but still has a legacy from its initial incarnations.

but what is there is rather self consistent and some things - like the way you can split the windows any way you want and you can zoom in and out of even the buttons menus is brilliant.

jin

mav3rick
09-06-2008, 04:04 AM
ok ... after 8 pages guys what is conclusion ? i feel you are running around in circles....

theo
09-06-2008, 06:22 AM
ok ... after 8 pages guys what is conclusion ?

...that we need to throw Jin into a Blender... perhaps on the grate setting?

kidding :thumbsup:

ben martin
09-06-2008, 07:07 AM
ok ... after 8 pages guys what is conclusion ? i feel you are running around in circles....
Glad you asked!

To me the conclusion is obvious:
Newtek should effectively listen ALL the user base and not only some relevant houses who (generally) have resources (some guys that drink and breath Lightwave all the way till the grave) to solve some LW bad implemented issues.

The big block of Lightwave users are freelancers, people that work solo (that's not my case), Newtek should care about these people and these kind of discussions should reveal something to them.

Any of you have the feeling they really care about what we claim or need?
Do you all believe they are really listening and paying attentions to the red flags and signs about where Lightwave is failing big time?

I truly hope your answer is YES!
That's why I started this stating that: "Why pay... if free... gives more?"
That does not mean I don't need Lightwave.
That does not mean I don care about Lightwave.
Finally, that means I believe for all sakes that Lightwave should be a better tool on all 3D areas, and is hasn't been that for a long time, why?! :confused:

Forgive me if I'm wrong!

jin choung
09-06-2008, 03:40 PM
...that we need to throw Jin into a Blender... perhaps on the grate setting?

kidding :thumbsup:

i come out of the factory set to grate.

: )

jin

tischbein3
09-08-2008, 07:09 AM
So, there you go. Blender does not threaten LightWave or any other commercial 3D package. I'd still like to learn it, and someday I will learn it. I'll never find a job out here as a Blender specialist, though.
Mhmm....
Replace "blender" with "motion builder" or "zBrush" and you get a good picture why I'm not that happy about this statement.

chris

clagman
09-08-2008, 07:47 AM
but eventually, maybe not for all but for a lot, the ever impressive capability combined with free becomes really hard to argue with.

and this is not just a threat to lw. as i say, it's probably most imminent with lw because it's low man on the water line but it'll become an issue for those higher up on shore eventually.

especially for the places that simply use maya as an interface to drive their own software (not as widespread as some would like to believe), blender would make far far far more sense for a zombie job like that.

basically, all the traditional lw arguments apply to blender: if you replace "lw" with "blender" and "cheap" for "free".

jin


Agreed, however unless we really feel that NT cares very little for the progression of LW (and the users of it) I should think that NT can see the handwriting and are making strides to take up these advances into LW. The problem is that it will cost to integrate these things (assuming they can do it in a decent time frame) and LW will lose it's current "bang for buck" standing. But it's all conjecture really...

clagman
09-08-2008, 08:31 AM
We will probably never know they why of it. Could be lack of resources to speed up production, could be internal problems who knows. I doubt it's the lack of talent or insight.

Considering the large strides that NT has made lately on LW, I do believe that they are working on much larger strides for the next version. I'm sure that they know the main complaints, just aren't replying to them on a regular basis. They will also have to keep LW competitive in price to keep the smaller production house happy.

tischbein3
09-08-2008, 11:58 AM
We will probably never know they why of it.
Well I think they said it more than once: Rewrite.



Considering the large strides that NT has made lately on LW, I do believe that they are working on much larger strides for the next version.

Well let's see. I really think they do a wonderfull job, by improving the core and still delivering features. (Judging from my outside perspective),
and a lot of my most pessimistic thoughts/ statements have already been proven wrong by NewTeks actions.
But in the meantime I invest more time setting up my 0 flaw blender <>lw pipeline, to really get the best "bang for bucks".

clagman
09-08-2008, 12:11 PM
I've tried blender before. I was taking too long to get the interface down to make good use of it. Perhaps I'll get some time eventually and pick it back up. It's always a good idea to be diverse. Probably if I were going to take the time to become really proficient on another package I would pick XSI. I was really digging the way their node system works (nodes for everything?).

ben martin
09-08-2008, 12:50 PM
I've tried blender before. I was taking too long to get the interface down to make good use of it.
Google "Blender Video Tutorial" and you'll get there (learn it) very easily.

Just scroll this page down:
http://www.ibiblio.org/bvidtute/

tischbein3
09-09-2008, 08:50 AM
Probably if I were going to take the time to become really proficient on another package I would pick XSI.
Not making any suggestions towards commercial packages here, sorry.

But one of the stronger arguments wich finaly convinced / motivated me to get into blender, wasn't that much the comparison of the price / features the packages offer now, but rather how much the maintaining "costs" to keep them updated would affect current and planed investitions on a longterm scale.