PDA

View Full Version : Feature poll



hrgiger
02-24-2003, 11:27 AM
I thought this would be a good place for a poll. If you could pick one feature for LW8...

hrgiger
02-24-2003, 02:50 PM
See, that's not one of the options CIM.

Valter
02-24-2003, 04:32 PM
I think that CIM have reason

hrgiger
02-24-2003, 05:47 PM
I guess I just wasn't aware that Lightwave wasn't functioning as a whole... Seems to be working fine here.... Just what exactly isn't working for you?

Even though not a lot of people have voted yet, I'm surprised that nobody has picked the hair one yet. Seems like a lot of people don't like saslite and would like to see a fuller hair system in LW.

Joril
02-24-2003, 07:10 PM
Hmm,
AI on my characters, that sounds kinda nice :)

hrgiger
02-24-2003, 09:28 PM
Hmm, no not new at Lightwave. Must be something else. So again, what SPECIFIC problem are you having getting to work in Lightwave? I like to model, texture, animate and render in Lightwave. Somehow, I seem to get all those things done with ease even though you say the program is crappy and close to death.
You think that Lightwave is two limited programs. Hmmm, I'm thinking you must be new to Lightwave.

You sound very dissatisfied. You should consider another application.
Lightwave close to death? :rolleyes: Dont' think so.

This was a simple poll for fun. You didn't have to turn it into something else entirely.

Jimzip
02-24-2003, 10:48 PM
CIM, I have read many many threads with your replies.
They are all negative. (Excluding .02%)
Perhaps hrgiger is right, a new app is for you, maybe you can go and complain to all the Maya users about their app not working properly because of its icons..

Jimzip
02-24-2003, 10:50 PM
P.S. Maybe go to the Lightwave.com gallery and take another look at what an application that is 'close to death' can do.

Matt
02-25-2003, 01:58 AM
better animation / motion tools all round, enhanced UI, much faster global illumination and / or much faster area lights.

that'll do me, don't need character stuff at all, don't use it, but a lot of people do and have been asking for it for ages, so I reckon that'll be the big thing in the next update.

pixelmonk
02-25-2003, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by CIM
Hm, you must be new to Lightwave or just not know what's going on. Most of Lightwave's tools are simply just plugins, meaning that the program doesn't function at a whole level (no communication).

-snipped the yawn factor-

I guess we all better start learning a backup program, since Ligthwave is close to death.


You must be new to 3D. Most other packages have plugins and DLLs associated with specific single tasks as separate files. It's easier to update a single plugin or library file than to have to recompile the whole thing. Also, having it modular as such, you're not waiting 20 minutes for an executable to load. Things load as needed.

You start learning Poser and Bryce.. it seems to be on your level. Have an adequate day.

hrgiger
02-25-2003, 12:29 PM
And again CIM, what specific problem are you having?

hrgiger
02-26-2003, 06:31 AM
Well, it seems like most are leaning towards better soft/rigid bodies. I voted for the skinning tools myself but I'd be happy with a MD on crack.

hrgiger
02-26-2003, 01:37 PM
Nope. Not new to 3D here...
See Cim, this is the feature request forum. What people do here is they submit requests for features that they would like to see in future versions of Lightwave. If you want something fixed in LW, then feel free to make your own thread too. That's the way it works. It's too bad I have to explain it to you like you're a retard.
See, I don't really have a problem with plug-ins. So far, I haven't come across anything that has been a problem for me in the last year and a half I've been learning and using Lightwave. At least other then missing a few features that I would like to see. Useful (and I think necessary, not garbage candy like you call them) features like skinning tools. How fundamental is that? Shouldn't we be able to control the mesh as it's deformed with pinpoint accuracy? The fact that you can't give any specifics to problems you are having (and I've asked you now like 3 times in this thread to list them) just tells me that you are the one that's new here you think that if NT fixed these so-called problems, it'll make you a better 3D artist. Not likely.

faulknermano
02-26-2003, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by CIM
pixelmonk, you're wrong. Most programs that have plugins/.dll files only make up like 10% of the program, not 90% like Lightwave. [/B]

CIM, have you, by chance, seen the file size of the maya executable (i know you use maya)? it's under 200Kb. now, do a file search for all .dll's and .mll's in the maya bin directory. look at the resulting file size. (about 90 megs).

in other words, it may seem when you're using maya that the tools you are using is 'built-in'. it may feel that way (kudos to maya programmers, then). but that is not the case. do you really think that the algorithm for maya's IK solvers, skinning tools, animation tools, (among other things) can be fit into 200kb? do you have any idea how slow an 90mb exectuable will load?


[QUOTE]Also, the other programs actually take the time to make the plugins communicate with the core, not just slap them in there like retarded chimps.

that's a good point of contention. some plugins, imo, are like that. but surely not all. for example, i dont like using spreadsheet because i dont like the interface and i way i have to set things up just to select. so usually, i just lscript it out. but old standbys like morphmixer and the deform tools are good and fast.

you dont have to make sweeping statements. it'll do you good, too. :)

faulknermano
02-26-2003, 10:15 PM
i'm sorry.. let me repost that...



pixelmonk, you're wrong. Most programs that have plugins/.dll files only make up like 10% of the program, not 90% like Lightwave.

CIM, have you, by chance, seen the file size of the maya executable (i know you use maya)? it's under 200Kb. now, do a file search for all .dll's and .mll's in the maya bin directory. look at the resulting file size. (about 90 megs).

in other words, it may seem when you're using maya that the tools you are using is 'built-in'. it may feel that way (kudos to maya programmers, then). but that is not the case. do you really think that the algorithm for maya's IK solvers, skinning tools, animation tools, (among other things) can be fit into 200kb? do you have any idea how slow an 90mb exectuable will load?



Also, the other programs actually take the time to make the plugins communicate with the core, not just slap them in there like retarded chimps.


that's a good point of contention. some plugins, imo, are like that. but surely not all. for example, i dont like using spreadsheet because i dont like the interface and i way i have to set things up just to select. so usually, i just lscript it out. but old standbys like morphmixer and the deform tools are good and fast.

you dont have to make sweeping statements. it'll do you good, too.

Zach
02-27-2003, 02:42 AM
I just want to see better integration with the graph editor and Layout's viewports. Like "for realtime" autoupdate. like for real dude! heheh

when you drag the frame slider in layout, objects move pretty smoothly, so the graph editor shouldn't be that much of a stretch to have smooth motion while editing keys, curves, and moving the graph editor's time slider, right?

Actually, I would like to see instead of having to save motion designer mdd's in order to continue to use them in a scene that has been closed then opened again, can't they just automatically be saved and loaded with the particular scene you're working on? Saving them out should be an option like exporting motion curves. Shouldn't it?

All in all, I would just love smoother motion. That would be the kicker for me! sometimes deforming a mesh with bones makes me wish i'd just take up the ancient art of being a puppet master and forget this computer thing. :p

sannyasi
03-02-2003, 01:11 PM
In my opinion I don't want LW combined into one program, I love the speed I get with a smaller program running. I have been using LW since version 5.5, and now maya for about a year, (learning XSI as well)

I know LW has not had a great reputation as far as character animation is concerned, so I think (although I'm not a character animator) that this is a much needed area of improvement if LW is to better compete with XSI and Maya.

However as to CIM's comments to the entire program (LW) consisting of plugins/scripts, I'd like to say that maya is 99.9% made up of scripts. Thats what gives it is power, and makes it easy to update and customize.
This is not LW's problem.. I beleive (although I'm just speculating) that the Lscript language is just not as powerfull as MEL. The problem with these plugins like faulknermano said is that they arn't well integrated into LW. Personaly I would like to see a better connection within all of LW parameters... Like weight maps.. You should be able to use Point groups.. weight maps..etc in all parameters. Like in MD to controll all attributes.

As far as the auguments I've seen in this forum for a better UI in LW. I'd like to say the best UI is no UI. I could not tell you the menu layouts of Modeler or Layout. In modeler I use only hotkeys, and one of the mouse pop up menus. The toolbar is covered by the Vertex Map window, Numeric widow, and Selection Window. The only part I see are the XYZ cord at the bottom. In Layout one custom menu is all I need.

__As for the poll I voted for a better soft/hard simulation engine
But I do agree with CIM in the respect that most of those features are most likely not needed as much as a better integration of LW's functions, but please don't integrate the progs, I need both sets of hot keys as it is. And I don't want LW to chug along with the unbearable slow speeds of maya and MAX.

Sorry for the length of my msg... I've included a screenshot showing my modeler and Layout menu setups.. Its the most streamlined way I've found to work in LW and I think those of you that have a prob with the interface would enjoy it more if you adopted a similar philosophy.

hrgiger
03-03-2003, 02:20 PM
Sannyasi,

Well, I don't use as many hotkeys as you do but I do enjoy my move, rotate, select connected, and keyframe hotkeys! I didn't even think of the hotkey issue when it came to integration. It's a very valid point. I imagine with integration that your choice of hotkeys would be limited if you use as many as you do.

PXLPSH
03-04-2003, 02:24 AM
I also like the fact that Modeler And Layout are separate..
I have played with Max and maya and xsi.. I find them to be great apps (excluding Max ) ... :)
but we have the greatest modeler and renderer ( in my opinion) around.

I like being in the mindset of modeling in modeler,
Then being in the minset of layout....
if i need to change something on my model... i hit synchronize..
WTF is the problem.

peace

Oh btw.... upgrading MD would be very cool.. hehe

Epita
03-05-2003, 03:41 PM
Well, i want better tools for blowing the cr/\p out of things. Like a auto exploder in the layout same as for the particle FX. That would be really cool. Oi i started with LW then Bryce then Poser then LW again. Lw is just a little unstable on the old versions and overly complex on the latter versions.

LW is not going to DIE. (you might for comments like that!)

Epita

aloysius1001
03-06-2003, 12:30 AM
Actually, Lee Stranahan from FX Academy said during the Next Dimension Tour that he expects LW's two programs will become one in V8. He strikes me as a fairly reliable source of information.

faulknermano
03-06-2003, 02:05 AM
Originally posted by aloysius1001
Actually, Lee Stranahan from FX Academy said during the Next Dimension Tour that he expects LW's two programs will become one in V8. He strikes me as a fairly reliable source of information.

so he's 'expectation' is a 'reliable source of information?'
:rolleyes:

Rory_L
03-06-2003, 11:14 PM
Why do so many of us on these boards behave so badly? Why, when someone disagrees with us do we become uncivilised ranters? This is a public forum and it has been pointed out in other threads that anyone, everyone and their granny and granddaughter may be reading our words. Well, shame on us!

Calling people names and disputing their skill levels is not going to strengthen our arguments, nor make our correspondent see our point clearer.

Please let`s be civil!
____________________________________________

Steve: I voted for the hair!

R

mattclary
03-07-2003, 10:55 AM
So why haven't you moved to another app, Cim? And I think what hrrgiger is asking you, is what error messgages/malfunctions have you seen due to LW not being an integrated package? What is it you are trying to accomplish that you can not?

hrgiger
03-07-2003, 11:47 AM
Yes Cim, why haven't you moved onto another package? You sure seem to hate LW a lot. And can you not list at least one thing that you cannot do because LW is not integrated? You talk as though LW is crippled as two apps. Tell us how that is.

ModelMonkey
03-08-2003, 05:23 AM
Well... In lightwave you have buttons that really work, in maya, xsi or 3ds, you have functions that pretend to work...or get you lost in the submenu of the submenu. Lightwave is the program most, "press the button an it works" that i ever seen.

faulknermano
03-08-2003, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by ModelMonkey
Well... In lightwave you have buttons that really work, in maya, xsi or 3ds, you have functions that pretend to work...or get you lost in the submenu of the submenu. Lightwave is the program most, "press the button an it works" that i ever seen.

do you work with maya as much as you do lightwave? i ask because i do, and i dont come to the same conclusion as you do.

ModelMonkey
03-08-2003, 12:02 PM
If you work so much with maya, why do you bother to write lw plugins?

Are you masochist? :) No, really nobody can take modeler from me! hehe.

faulknermano
03-08-2003, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by ModelMonkey
If you work so much with maya, why do you bother to write lw plugins?

i work with both programs. the lscripts that i write are for _personal_ stuff. the stuff i write for maya, are more often than not, proprietary. i write proprietary stuff for lw too, so obviously nobody knows about them.

i'm just expressing how you i dont reach the same conclusion as you do when working with maya. maya's functions are very "functional" and very unlike what you have described.

ModelMonkey
03-09-2003, 05:18 AM
I hope you donīt have that "duality" when it comes to sex, haha.

Really, try at least to be good at one app... both of you.

faulknermano
03-09-2003, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by ModelMonkey
Really, try at least to be good at one app... both of you.

ok sure man, i'll try. :rolleyes:

hrgiger
03-09-2003, 09:58 AM
True Cim, I am a lightwave fanatic, but it's not because I haven't used other packages. In fact, I'm a lightwave fanatic because I HAVE used other packages. I don't have any experience wtih Maya or XSI. And for one reason, they're too expensive and I won't be able to afford them in my near future (as in the unlimted Maya). I could used the Demos, but what's the point? I'm not ever going to use them for production so I have no desire to learn or own them. I've used Truespace, Animation Master, and Max and I con honestly say, that in my experience, they all suck compared to LW. Here are the reasons. Truespace's interface is the worst I've ever seen. Animation master was actually a nice program (esp. since it was only $200 when I owned it), but it was too limiting as far as output was concerned, and also I didn't like tha it worked with only patches and not polygons. Max again was an interface problem, not only because of the stupid icon buttons but also because the interface was so cluttered (due to the fact it is integrated) and having to scroll down through all the tab windows.... yeah, just didn't like it. Now this was Max 2 and I'm sure some things are different (maybe) now but as I currently still like LW, there's really no reason to change up.
To say that people are blind to everything around them or are inexperienced just because they like LW the way it is, well, that's a pretty ignorant statement.
I agree there could be some improvements in Lw's workflow as far as character setup goes, I don't think it's awful. In fact, now we have programs like TSM and ACS4 which allows us to rig a character in as quick as 10 minutes and they're both very affordable esp. ACS4 which I use. You don't even have to paint weight maps if you don't want to. So see, another plug-in to the rescue.

Zafar Iqbal
03-16-2003, 07:23 AM
Im with CIM on this one. I love LW, and i am fanatic about it. But still - i think LW has some major issues regarding functionality as a whole as CIM points out.

I would personally like to se LW 8 as a "whole" LW 7.5 rather than getting new features.

I admit, there are several features that works like charm, but then again - there are also alot of features that either has annoying bugs or are simply not fully worked out.

I was about to write several examples, but im not going to. This will result in a very timeconsuming reading so i will spare you all this :)

Like i said, i love LW - on of the greats things about it is thats it's so flexible. If something can't be done directly then you can almost always figure out a workaround for it. But one of the major drawbacks of this application is also this flexibility to come up with workarounds.

Since it's so easy to workaround something, people (imo) tend to forget about the flaws, limitations in excisting features etc. in LW. Istead we see requests for stuff that really aren't that important.

I dont blame Newtek for all this. I think we (the few of us who's with me and CIM :) ) should blame the consumers. Newtek try to live up to our demands. We don't requst a fully funtional (whole) software. So instead - we get new secondhand features.

Just my 2 cents...

Zafar Iqbal
03-16-2003, 09:25 PM
Well, i've heard good stuff about LW 8 so far (no specifics though), so im very excited about it :)

hrgiger
03-17-2003, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by Zafar Iqbal

Since it's so easy to workaround something, people (imo) tend to forget about the flaws, limitations in excisting features etc. in LW. Istead we see requests for stuff that really aren't that important.
Just my 2 cents...


You assume that everyone is unhappy with LW because of these supposed flaws. When you say requests for stuff that isn't really important, well, that's only one point of view. Skinning tools or a updated MD might not be important to you, but it might mean a world of difference to someone else. It all depends on what you use LW for.

Zafar Iqbal
03-18-2003, 12:59 AM
Yes, it's only my point of view - but all im saying is that i would rather have quality instead of quantity.

hrgiger
03-18-2003, 11:54 AM
Well, if you're talking about a re-write of the program (which in essence you would have to be before everything could work together like you want it to), then while we wait, I want the quantity.

ModelMonkey
03-18-2003, 03:28 PM
Newtek is looking for new employees, expect a NEW lightwave.

Newtek - Lightwave Programmers
Posted February 21st, 2003

NewTek, Inc., is now hiring for the LightWave 3D Development Team in San
Antonio, TX, USA. Currently we are open to applications for five positions on the team.

Our careers page: http://www.newtek.com/newtek/careers.html

Detailed listings at:

* 3D Rendering Engineer: http://www.newtek.com/newtek/3drendering.html

* 3D Modeling Engineer: http://www.newtek.com/newtek/3dmodeling.html

* 3D Animation Engineer: http://www.newtek.com/newtek/3danimation.html

* 3D Dynamics Engineer: http://www.newtek.com/newtek/3ddynamics.htm

* User Interface Engineer: http://www.newtek.com/newtek/userinterface.html

Lamont
03-20-2003, 02:34 PM
Originally posted by CIM
Hm, you must be new to Lightwave or just not know what's going on. Most of Lightwave's tools are simply just plugins, meaning that the program doesn't function at a whole level (no communication).Remove the plug-ins/script folders on any app and it will not function.

Plug-in type architecture is vital for adding new tools/features w/out breaking existing ones. Also users can add without knowing Lightwave deeply and where in the code is the drag tool function.

So yeah, it's good to recompile an app when you add a new tool/function to it? No. Stupid and a waste of time.

Lamont
03-21-2003, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by CIM
This isn't a problem in the other programs.Whatever dude. I just got off the phone today with Discreet and how the Character tools do not work with it's own geometry that's been applied to a heiarchy. It breaks the heiarchy and doesn't allow you to fix it.

Also the Sliders don't work with Character Studio. What's up with that? I mean, it's not free damn it. That's 2000 bucks for something that doesn't intergrate with the application it was made for.

The answer: This is new to us. And they will find a solution and call me back on Monday.

Don't make large assumptions like "This isn't a problem in other programs" because you will be wrong. You should be more specific.

John Fornasar
03-21-2003, 09:49 PM
Cim,


Well, as I've said a thousand times: The reason I said this is because Lightwave's plugin architectue is poor; it doesn't communicate well with other plugins or the program.
Actually, four pages back you said:

Most of Lightwave's tools are simply just plugins, meaning that the program doesn't function at a whole level (no communication).
Quite different. I'm not sure what your problem is, but it's not an understanding of modern programming methods. By the way, I have 183 .8bf's in my Adobe folder - maybe I'll flame Adobe.

Also, Lightwave has very different types of architecture for Modeler and Layout.
OK, you are entirely correct here... one of them provides a way to place, visualize and edit massive point clouds in 3D space. Acknowledged as an industry standard modeler.
The other allows us to skin, light, and animate those point clouds and, as a bonus, includes an industry standard renderer.
Two different functions, two separate programs. One low price.

So, basically Lightwave is .... tied together with a crappy communication devise called the hub.
Hub works fine for me. What part doesn't work for you?
An electronic artist needs to know (whether he/she likes it or not) at least a bit about computers and operating system of choice.

If you think, practically all of the user complains that have come up over the years would be solved if Newtek only stepped back and actually integrated all the plugins and unified Modeler and Layout as one.
I'm thinking really hard, and running 20 years of programming and computer graphics through my mind...

...how exactly will that happen? Really, I'd like to know.

Last bit... some programs are integrated, some (LW) aren't. If that's a problem, choose the program that fits your workflow. I've been using LW since 4.0, and I for one like it the way it is.

hrgiger
03-21-2003, 10:41 PM
Yeah John, I wouldn't bother asking CIM what problems he's having with LW or the hub. I think I've asked him about 4 times or so on this thread and he can't seem to answer that question. I guess he actually doesn't use LW enough to answer it. The only thing he's said is that he doesn't like to model, pointweight, jump to layout, deform, jump back to modeler, adjust weights. Well, unfortunately, that's not really an example of Modeler and Layout not working together as 2 seperate apps because that system does work. It may not be the best workflow I'll agree, but it's not that it doesn't work between the two programs.
CIM, I'm not saying I'm against the idea of integrating the two programs as one. If it happens, great. I don't think it's necessary though. I'd love to see MD brought into the core of the program so that it can understand weight maps, that might be a good benefit of having an integrated LW. I just don't see how you can say that LW is a weaker program then any other just because they're seperated. Other programs have issues too, just like Lamont said.

Lamont
03-22-2003, 02:56 PM
Like I said. Be more precise in your rants.

Please give us an example of how it's supposed to work CIM.

Freak
03-22-2003, 03:17 PM
LW plugins do need the ability to communicate, No Doubt!
It will be done with LW8....

Until then, you may as well go and protest the war......

Because protesting about something we all know needs to be fixed, is not going to make it happen any faster.

Perhaps with your 20 years of programming experience,
You could apply for a position at NT, and fix all the problems,
that seem to plague you and LW, CIM?

:)

Again, yes i'm all for constructive criticism, (it think we all are)
but endless moaning and bitching, about things that we have no control over is a waste of time and energy...

Correctly identifying real problems that affect real users, and offering possible solutions, and ideas for better products and tools seems like a much better way to help NT and the gang make us all a better product.

My 0.2c

faulknermano
03-22-2003, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by CIM


As for the clueless LW defenders: I'm just giving suggestions to improve LW.

with all due respect, you're not. you're just sounding off.

Adrian Lopez
03-23-2003, 03:30 PM
While I do not agree with CIM's attitude, I do agree that Lightwave's plugin architechture is flawed.

The plugin that best illustrates this limitation is Vertex Paint. When using Vertex Paint the user is forced to undergo a context switch: Because Vertex Paint does not extend Modeler's interface but instead uses a separate interface, using Vertex Paint feels like using a separate app.

Other plugins that illustrate the flaws in Lightwave's plugin architecture are those that would work a lot better as interactive tools but instead force the user to work "blind" by entering some values into a dialog box and hitting undo whenever the results are not as expected.

There's nothing wrong with using plugins, but Lightwave's plugins often feel like patchwork fixes.

hrgiger
03-24-2003, 07:10 AM
And more often then not, they're solutions to problems in LW.

Sensei
03-24-2003, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by hrgiger
Even though not a lot of people have voted yet, I'm surprised that nobody has picked the hair one yet. Seems like a lot of people don't like saslite and would like to see a fuller hair system in LW.

In my humble opinion integrating hair system in LightWave is essencial. SasLite and Sasquatch do not renders hair and fur which should be visible after ray reflection or refraction, which is very big limitation.

Adrian Lopez
03-24-2003, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by hrgiger
And more often then not, they're solutions to problems in LW. I never said they weren't. There's no denying that Lightwave's toolset is powerful, but there's also no denying that a better plugin API would help improve Lightwave's interface. Imagine if all those fixes felt like such an integral part of Lightwave that users couldn't tell fixes apart from core features. That's what I'd like to see.

JeromeMD
03-24-2003, 03:42 PM
Part of the reasons I use Lightwave (aside from it's price, the unlimited render nodes, speed of render) are :

- having two seperate apps for modeling and rendering

- One of the best interface. Clearly labeled buttons is a big plus for me (also why I use Combustion rather than AE).

Now I am a noob. I only started using lightwave 3.5 years ago. I have tried other programs for "fun" like Maya or 3D Max. I'd rather have my video card spend cpu cycles and vram rendering my objects/scenes rather than "cute" icons that don't mean a thing to me (what's the donkey with a party hat do?).

My noob $0.99 opinion :D

harhar
03-24-2003, 04:44 PM
Other plugins that illustrate the flaws in Lightwave's plugin architecture are those that would work a lot better as interactive tools but instead force the user to work "blind" by entering some values into a dialog box and hitting undo whenever the results are not as expected.

That sounds like the programmer's fault.

Adrian Lopez
03-24-2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by harhar
That sounds like the programmer's fault. A plugin developer can only do as much as the plugin API allows.

hrgiger
03-24-2003, 07:22 PM
I personally don't care about it being an interactive tool just so long as it works. And of course that I always have the undos to change it. In modeler with 128 levels of undo, that's not really a problem.
I would like to see better integration of LW's tools. I think MD could be twice as good as it is now, even without an update, if it could read weight maps.

harhar
03-24-2003, 09:40 PM
A plugin developer can only do as much as the plugin API allows.

the plugin API allows you to create all kinds interactive tools.

faulknermano
03-24-2003, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by Adrian Lopez
A plugin developer can only do as much as the plugin API allows.

true. that's why the only people who have A RESONABLE RIGHT and KNOWLEDGE to comment about the plugin API are those who develop plugins on it (i dont, btw, so i'm not one of them). that's why i dont understand when people say "fix the plugin API or SDK" when they dont know squat about what they're talking about. everything is just heresay (not heresy :p). that's why when people, say CIM, say fix this and fix that and offer no detailed explanation of what needs fixing, i just go :rolleyes: . talking about the plugin SDK without first-hand knowledge of it is just sounding off.

Adrian Lopez
03-24-2003, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by harhar
the plugin API allows you to create all kinds interactive tools. Okay, so it's possible to create interactive tools with the plugin SDK, but what about tools like Vertex Paint? Care to point me to specific API functions that would allow tools such as Vertex Paint to operate directly on meshes through Modeler's viewports instead of opening a separate window of their own?

Sensei
03-25-2003, 02:01 AM
Originally posted by harhar
the plugin API allows you to create all kinds interactive tools.

Dear HRGiger, you are wrong.

The all plug-in classes (except LWLayoutGeneric, LWMasterHandler and Modeler's LWCommandSequence) can't safely issue commands, so whenever you need it (there is a lot of options and tools which could be exclusively used only by issuing command) you have to, abbandon idea or if it's at all possible simulate the whole thing done by wanted by you LightWave command.

Halsu
03-25-2003, 06:14 AM
Originally posted by Adrian Lopez
Okay, so it's possible to create interactive tools with the plugin SDK, but what about tools like Vertex Paint?

I don't know the exact commands, but as there's a weight brush tool, which is a plugin AFAIK, it should be doable.

As far as the plugins interacting with each other, it can be done, but most plugin writers don't see it worth the extra coding it requires.

I.e. in my ModPak modeler scripts, i actually have added some possibilities for other LScripts / plugins to take use of their functionality - though i haven't made anything that makes use of this functionality yet, it exists.

I also plan to make these "handles" public when i'm done with them.

So, anyone with even a moderate scripting ability could make a plugin that creates i.e. a forest of trees using my TreeGen's routines, with varying detail level based i.e. on the distance to origin.

Honestly, the reason why i.e. my scripts are all non-interactive, is mostly simply because of my lazyness and lack of scripting ability, not the lack of access to functions in LW. Creating good scripts (or plugins) is not exactly the easiest thing in the world...

faulknermano
03-25-2003, 07:06 AM
to talk about only what i know ;):

modeler lscript has no 'official' way for interactivity. it's "go in, get out", it's not call-back type of archiecture. again, when it comes to lscript. i was hoping that bob could somehow introduce that 'class' into lscript so we can start scripting our own interactive tools. at the moment, the non-modal tricks that people like carl and some japanese writers wrote into their lscripts are just tricks. very good ones too. in the end, creativity rules in the end.

as with vertex paint, i wish i could say something meaningful. maybe dstorm wanted more flexibility when showing weights. dunno.

hrgiger
03-25-2003, 07:25 AM
Sensei,

You mean harhar is wrong. Or did I not see what you're talking about?

Sensei
03-25-2003, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by hrgiger
Sensei,

You mean harhar is wrong. Or did I not see what you're talking about?

Oh, sorry. Obviously I had harhar in mind.

hrgiger
03-25-2003, 09:47 AM
S'ok. I just was just wondering what I was wrong about this time.;)

harhar
03-25-2003, 10:26 AM
operate directly on meshes through Modeler's viewports instead of opening a separate window of their own?

what's wrong with a seperate window?
Plus, I think it's dstorm developer's decision to make a seperate interface for vertex paint, and not because they can't integrate it with the viewport.

Sensei
03-25-2003, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by harhar
what's wrong with a seperate window?
Plus, I think it's dstorm developer's decision to make a seperate interface for vertex paint, and not because they can't integrate it with the viewport.

Because it's in separate window it is also completely different LW plug-in class, LWMeshDataEdit or LWCommandSequence classes, I guess so. The last one (LWCommandSequence) is the only one which can execute Modeler's commands, but the only one class which can works interactive and in viewports is LWMeshEditTool class.

If I would be creating Vertex Paint plug-in I would do the best I can to make it LWMeshEditTool class plug-in. This looks like more LW integrated.

Epita
03-26-2003, 02:56 AM
i think that LW is a great program, ive been using it since 5.5 and its got better each time. Ive used other programs, infini D, max, blender, maya and i have to say that LW is still the best out there. but it could do with better stability. even with 7.5 on Xp it still crashes far to much!

Epita

Doran
04-03-2003, 02:30 PM
"A plugin developer can only do as much as the plugin API allows."

sounds like a cop out. I've seen plugin people in lightwave history do amazing things with less to work with.

Lightwolf
04-10-2003, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by Doran
"A plugin developer can only do as much as the plugin API allows."
sounds like a cop out. I've seen plugin people in lightwave history do amazing things with less to work with.
Its not a cop out.
I've been doing in-house coding with the SDK since 5.6, had a couple of plugins for download (did anybody use the lightwave gadgets? :) ), and am currently digging deep, very deep into the SDK. It is of course possible to overcome the limitations, but that is a question of time vs. money (or effort or "worth it").
Examples:

I'm currently writing a volumetric handler. I found that that it doesn't self shadow automatically (no self reflections and refractions either). This is a pain because I have to re-write my plugin to a certain extent, re-invent the wheel, to get that functionality. I'd rather tell LW: Yes, you cann call my plugin again for self shadowing (... up to a certain recursion limit). No go.

Let's say I wanted to write a new light type (hm, howzabout photometric point lights with deep shadow maps :) ). Since there aren't any hooks for custom lights, I'd have to write a shader that replicates LW shading and adds the influence of my custom light, plus may be a custom object for visual feedback, may be even a small script to add the shader to all surfaces. Sounds like G2? Yep, thiis is exactly why G2 is so complicated to use. I'm quite sure worley labs spent most of their time to make it as simple as possible to use, stepping around limitations.

Also, the current SDK is only object oriented to a certain degree. Let's assume I need to reference an object from within my plugin. My UI contains a popup listing all objects, I retrieve the id and use it. _But_ I have to manually make sure I change my id if the id of the object changes, manually load and save it (which is not easy, since I have to take care of a "load from scene" as well) and generally be very careful.
In a more object oriented SDK, I'd just say: Hey, I need an "object reference". I would get it, read out the id whenever I need it, and the "object reference" object (as in programming object) would automatically track the id, load and save etc, and save me from doing that manually.
Solution? Write my own object oriented wrapper for LW, which is something a "casual" developer should not be concerned with :)

Long rant, sorry, but I hope I brought a bit of insight.
Note, I consider myself a hacker, so I'm no expert coder or anything.

Cheers,
Mike

kevingun
04-18-2003, 04:59 AM
Hi every one!
I am a TrueSpace user and I have been using it for
about 5 years buy the way a very nice program.
Any ways I would like to learn at least one more 3d
program the ones I have in mind where Of course LightWave
Cinema 4D and 3ds Max. Can not afford Maya or Soft Image at the present time so they are out. I have been reading through the forums here and I see most people do not like 3ds Max LOL is it really that bad. Any ways I would like to hear some reasons to choose LightWave say over Cinema 4D. I for one think the opinions from the users of there software and from people who have used more then one program will make my mind up for me. I know some people will say download the demos. But before I waste away hours on some demo I would like to hear peoples opinions I believe I can learn any program given enough time I would just like to get the most bang for my buck .That is why I bought TrueSpace to begin with Now I would like to move up to a new level and I want to get the most for my money at level. So any info from you guys will be very help full

Thanks;)

mallenlane
04-19-2003, 02:33 PM
I think what CIM is attempting to say, is that tools in other programs are often more well-rounded, and encompasing.

If we were going to compare approaches of two programs as an example of how they implement..

In XSI you have "Bevel"... bevel works on whatever you have currently selected. Polygons, Edges, Points... doesn't matter. Whatever you have selected, you are still wanting to "bevel" it, so you always go to the same spot.

In LW (if it had such abilities as point and edge) if history is any indication, each of those would end up a seperate plugin. Bevel for Polygons, then we'd get Point Bevel.. and then there is faking it using an edge bevel which is done on point selections.

Newtek needs to learn that if it quacks like a duck, use the duck button and just make the program\plugin smart enough to use what the user has selected to determine "which aspect of this function am I doing".

There are also problems with tools that do not respect other features; V-Maps, UV maps come to mind. Some tools play nice, some don't. In other programs tools are usually not implemented unless they play nice with everything they will affect when they come into operation.

In many respects even a lowly program like Wings3D is better at modelling workflow. The selection modes are more comprehensive, the tools often behave more intelligently (creating a more responsible mesh that more accurately respects neighboring forms) and the functions are on the whole more integrated.

I highly suggest people take a look at it, as the modelling workflow in it is closely matched to Mirai's and thus was the precursor to how 3DSmax, and moreso XSI approached polymodelling implementation.

There are examples like these to be found everywhere in a myriad of packages, where the selfsame tools simply are more "tuned". What is difficult is to bring out a laundry list of these functions , and write out in gory detail exactly "how" something is more so than another.

Lamont
04-25-2003, 02:42 PM
I am sure NT got my e-mail about game tools... that is all I have to say about it.

Hiraghm
04-25-2003, 04:50 PM
I just voted for 3D Paint system. With all the complaining about how difficult it is to unwrap UVs, I would think this would be the #1 desire.

Matt
04-25-2003, 05:00 PM
I love LightWave, I really do! But if I had to improve anything, in an ideal world,
I'd do these (in no particular order) . . .

General

Full snapping tools in both Modeler and Layout (point, edge, centre face, tangent, segment etc.)
All areas of LightWave to be 'object-layer aware' - lots of things aren't
Do for edge weighting what you've done for vertex weighting!
Ring bound manuals, in colour, divided into relevant sections, written by Dan Ablan! :)
Better examples explaining the more complex aspects of LightWave
Speed and stability improvements with large models/scenes
Fix LScript, and improve the documentation for novice users! An A-Z on each command and it's inputs would be very welcome!


Animation

Any plugins that affect motion to appear in scene manager timeline
Proper 'live' dynamics engine with an easy to use interface!
Improved motion plugins, especially for animating objects along splines
More tools for creating mechanical movements e.g. linkages


General User Interface

Ability to drag 'n' drop elements (e.g. colour, coords etc.)
Totally customisable UI/workflow
Totally customisable keyboard shortcuts (including CTRL (Apple key for Mac) Shift and ALT)
Totally customisable context sensitive menus for right mouse button
Scrollbars added to render display image viewer!!!
Collated and much improved preference editor for both Layout and Modeler
Version numbering for plugins (viewable in plugin editor)
Make all bezier tools everywhere in LightWave work like the ones in Adobe Illustrator!!!
Interactive cursors for snapping and other functions


Rendering

Major speed boosts to area/linear lights, radiosity, anti-aliasing
Better network rendering utility (with error pre-flighting, e.g. check things like 'auto frame advance' is on etc!)
Network rendering available for test renders (frame splitting)
Ability to render non-perspective views (VERY important for product visualisation users!)
Photometric light support for better interior rendering
Full render report logging (also available in network rendering)
Keyframable ability to switch cameras while rendering


Layout Specific

Tons of useful 'layout' tools for Layout!!! Aligning, spacing, cloning etc. (with interactive previews)
Fully integrated spreadsheet/scene manager for total control over everything
Better visibility for linear lights in layout (one line isn't enough!)
Ability to group elements (done properly!)
Layers with full management over layer properties (e.g. layer 'renderability', view settings etc.)


Modeler Specific

Proper fully live splines, bezier tools
Proper layer management, re-ordering, copying, duplicating etc.
Speed improvments with very large models
Much improved bevel and filleting tools


Surfacing

More intelligent UV un-wrapping
Simpler, faster, better integrated vertex / texture painting solution
Real sub-surface scattering
Bigger preview windows for presets
Improved preset management tools
Speed boost to reflection blurring
Procedural texture for injection moulding tool spark finishes <- selfish product designers request!


oh, nearly forgot, a website one, please sort the images in the gallery into their relevant sections e.g. architecture, characters, automotive, fantasy, product design, still life etc.

:)

cgolchert
04-25-2003, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by Halsu
I don't know the exact commands, but as there's a weight brush tool, which is a plugin AFAIK, it should be doable.

If you want to even have an airbrush in "your" plugin you need to duplicate the functionality...not make a call to a brushing system. :(


Ask Stuart. :)

Hellbring
04-25-2003, 06:04 PM
2 biggest improvements that are needed are optimization for AMD chips and MAC osx.

For animation/rigging I would suggest buying acs4/tsm and also ortho pak. Tools like that built into the program are essential to 3d animation.

private
04-25-2003, 06:13 PM
Keytrak or some kind of dope sheet.
Full customization of hotkeys.
Intergrated plugins to the core of the program.
Virtual mirror.
Sizeable and resizable endomorph panel after creating endomorphs so long names in multiple tabs aren't truncated.

ethann
04-25-2003, 06:38 PM
this is more of a "would be nice to have, but not essential" if it doesn't take development away from other improvements/enhancements: to have LightWave utilize a lot of the new pixel shader capabilities that cards such as the nVidia boards support. Definitely "low" priority, but would be a nice surprise:)

Designer
04-25-2003, 07:03 PM
If Newtek want to attract users from other package, they better have multiple undo's in Layout and intergrate Modeler and Layout (traditional LW users prefer them to be separate it seems, perhaps it should be configurable?). There is no excuse in 2003 for a 3D package with only 1 undo when most major packages has got it.

Lamont
04-25-2003, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by ethann
to have LightWave utilize a lot of the new pixel shader capabilities that cards such as the nVidia boards support. Definitely "low" priority, but would be a nice surprise:) I think not, being able to see what you get as close as it could be at run-time saves guesswork. Being able to alter your viewport renderings would help tremendously with game development. Alphas in the viewports as well.


More intelligent UV un-wrappingAuto-Unwrap is never going to be as good as getting in there yourself. For real-time applications auto-unwrap (in any application) is always a no-no.

Full snapping tools in both Modeler and Layout (point, edge, centre face, tangent, segment etc.)Don't forget UV snap.

Collated and much improved preference editor for both Layout and ModelerI saw in the key-command/menu editor there was a pull down. I searched all over the LW install and prefs for a way to add my own to the pull down. Being able to have presets would be cool.

Totally customisable keyboard shortcuts Yeah, I need more.

Totally customisable context sensitive menus for right mouse button This is good too. I work w/out the interface in Modeler and Layout, so having something contex sensitive would speed it up a bit when I don't remember a keystroke.

Scrollbars added to render display image viewer!!! Hahaha!! I ran into this problem last night ^_^!! It would be nice!

Better network rendering utilityThis would help tons of people who set this stuff up. Right now it's like rocket science, and I try to avoid it.

Ability to render non-perspective views Ortho would rock when I make game sprites.

Ahh, back to work...

Fabio
04-25-2003, 09:05 PM
.I gotta say that I think mergeing the apps would be a really bad idea unless it was really *really* well done and well thought out.
I've just finished working on a huge scene - merely "playing" the scene in front face wireframe mode with a GF4Ti4200 a P4 2ghz and 1Gb of ram was SLOW - I mean *SLOW*... ;o) And my client was constantly concerned whether their machines could handle it..
Having the modeller app inside the same package would have been a nightmare I think.
As it was when I needed to alter something I flipped back to Modeler where I had a nice *dedicated* work area un- cluttered with the intricacies of my scene; and I could work on an object unhindered and then merely flip back to Layout and see my modifications take effect in my object and all of the 100 clones of it at the same time - In Layout then I could concentrate on other things entirely seperate from construction.
I've always preferred the idea that the two apps were separate - it's what attracted me to the package in the first place. I see other people saying that other software is integrated and that's *why* it's attracting users - sorry I can't see that as a viable reason for preliminary choice or migration either. I think peer pressure is the factor at work there more than anything else..
..but - Film studios still maintain the LightWave approach - in that they have a seperate construction area for their "Props" and a seperate studio where they then place those props and film them. This is essentially what LightWave is at it's core. I don't see the studios changing that work ethic as it's proven and works.
Mergeing the apps would be akin to the studio have the workshop right in the same spot as the film stage instead of "next door" ;o). Well sure it "could" be more efficient - but when you want your prop changed you stop and edit the prop - 80-90% of the time it has to leave the set - very much alike to the situation we have now.
But I tell you what I would very much like to see - and that's full integration of a render preview in Modeller where I can see final output of my texturing on my object and the render angle could simply be based on the view selected in the OpenGL: preview window.
Now some may say that this is a bit hypocritical of me and that this is partial integration anyway! - but essentially this is just developing what modeller already has now by adding a render preview ability. It's what we already have just a little bit better and WITHOUT all the clutter of having the entire layout app there tagging along for the unused ride during the modelling process.
I mainly work in modeller as that is what I mainly do - I model - sometimes I "don't" even get to texture my meshes - that's done by someone else - why then should my work interface be unneccessaarily cluttered as a result of the merger?
But I've just had an idea - if the core programming and certain universal inbuilt plugins were better integrated; couldn't we just give the end user the ability to *choose* whether they prefer an integrated app or a divided one when they install LWxx for the first time?

just my 2 cents

Fabs

as you probably don't want to pop off to the LWG forums and read up on our discussion on features over there I'll just quote certain requests here.

if you want read the full discussion pop here:
http://www.lwg3d.org/forums/showthread (http://www.lwg3d.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=10317)
the poll is 85% against an integrated app' btw..


there would have to be common features that simply need to be implemented. Such as instance copies. Nearly every other program has them but not LW. Yes, if you make a copy of the mesh the scene size won't double, but if you copy a lightsource and you want to it to be connected settingswise to the original light you can't do that. I'm currently working on a big scene with a hundred or more lights and I can tell you that it hasn't been fun knowing I could have made that lighting setup in 1/10th or even more of the time it takes in 3DS Max.


Oh hey wait a minute, what about that one undo level thing there

i want to be able to disable the AAing of background images....

Presently i find Lightwave to be very robust already. I'm more of a modelor guy and that's what i would like to see handled better. We rely on plugins to much to accomplish tasks in lightwave. I'd like to see Newtek approach the develpers of the more robust plugins on the market and intergrate those plugins within the modelor and layout interfaces.

The primary reason I'd like to see them integrated is to allow animation of meshes at a point-level, which is something that is very easy to do in just about every other package but is very difficult if not impossible to do in Lightwave. Yes, I know that you can set up a set of Endomorphs or stick in some bones, but how often have you wished that you could just grab a bunch of vertices from a model and move them from here to there over a few frames? Easy in Maya, almost impossible in Lightwave.

I'd also like to see the plugin API properly documented and open - there are some fantastic plugins for Max and Maya but they rarely get ported over to Lightwave because developers perceive that the Lightwave plugin architecture is badly documented and extremely limited in its capabilities, mainly because half of the available systems are 'secret'...

BUY VERTIBEVEL NEWTEK!!! nuff said there.
1) Instancing as everyone has stated.
2) Subpatch Ngons
3) Construction Planes ala autocad.
4) Procedural Shader setup ala darktree. What would be a HUGE boon to LW is the able to output to the vertex shaders used by the new(er) video cards. It would make game model texturing a snap.
5) camera switching at render, No need to comp slices of anim if you don't want to.
6) Vertex weighting...to compliment point
7) The ability to load a new version of a model into an exsisting scene where layers have been added. This one bugs the hell out of me.
8) A diffrent formula for motion blur for stills!!!!
9) Motion blur setting on an object basis.
10) Non linear motions in endomorphs. ie Rotation
11) The ability to move points along a vertex line. ala Onedge.
12) implimentation of about a hundred free plugins that I use lots!

can we please have windows/panels that stay minimised and in their last minimised positions whenever we open one of the two apps - ala P'Shop for example. For those of us with smaller monitors and without an extra monitor for the panels - it's a pain to have them pop up right in your face whenever you launch an app or maximise it from the apps bar again

but the one thing I want above all esle right now? - the ability to do this in Sub-d......
http://www.firedragon.com/~lwg3d/GD/2003/01/30-975762.jpg

FULLY IMPLEMENT MULTI-THREADING!!!!! It may seem like it is but take a look at a render in progress on C4D and you'll see the diffrence right away. Once a "slice" of the image is done instead of just sitting there as LW does now, It would move to the thread that has the least completed and starts at the end and works back towards the original thread as others finish they join in by splitting the remainder and continuing to render. I think that this alone would show a HUGE saving in render time.


I've seen a few requests for nGon subd's. This is a subject that has been discussed quite a bit. I lean more towards keeping only 3/4 sided ngons in subd for poly flow issues. 5/6/7/etc sided ngons tend to cause 'nasty' things to happen to the polygon flow.
A much better idea would be to implement heirarchical subd's. Great for adding local detail whilst keeping the mesh optmized. Something that LW excels at.....

I've got a new(er) one that has been bugging the hell out of me lately. Select an area of polygons to work on and hide the rest. Start welding points and see what happens. hidden points popup everywhere!??!?! I've got to leave the polys selected and spacebar to poly mode. = to hide them all again then back to point for another weld and repeat. If I hide them then they should STAY hidden!!! Nothing more fun than being zoomed in close to weld a couple dozen points, unhide and find out that 1/4 of your model has been welded all over the place. sigh... thank god for multiple undos in modeler.

A more advanced Viper for surfacing would be great. While viper works fantastic for previewing volumetrics it lacks much when previewing surfaces. It really looks nothing like the render, it doesnt retain shadow info, or accurate light info, etc... Its funny because G2 (yes theres much more to it than scattering) does this in its preview window, but unlike viper, g2 will not preview changes you make in the channel editor, such as color, procedural, or texture placement. The need for an IPR type preview for surfaces should be implemented/ hence a more accurate and advanced viper.

Per object blurring

archiea
04-26-2003, 12:17 AM
Its great to see that the last few post got back on target.

I voted for the Skinning and muscle system as its completely lacking in LW while rigging tools, hard/soft dynamics, fur and fluid dynamics exist now as plug ins. Its a bit of a stretch, but it would complement the character toolset concerning simulation considering today's powerful CPU's... if you're using a PC.. :D

Idealy, one would hope that NT see's ver 8 of Lw as an incremental change, rather than a silver bullet solution to the feature wars. Important are the issues of workflow and stability, with the room and architecture to expand. In the area of character rigging, it seems that skelegons is a bit of a band aid solution to workflow. To hop between LW and modeler (which never bugged me before) seems a bit sloppy. The recent Set up machine provides a more modular and flexible approach. There are far more experienced character riggers to comment here...

In the area of dynamics, be it fluid, soft bodies or hard, I would hope that NT would introduce a dynamics engine to LW first before tackling the tast of having full featured fluid, soft and hard bodies dynamics. By having the engine available, it becomes another animation tool that can be, perhaps, motion mixed with keyframing and so forth. Consider having just mass, inertia, forces etc, as an animation option. have the plug in comminity work on the elaborate front ends for these, just make sure that the engine is at the core of LW. To me, this is far more important than having a killer fluid dynamics that stands on its own.

Crowd simulation should be reduced to the ability to do instancing within Lw far easier. As to what drives each can be implemented by plug ins... be it crowds or a flock of birds or leaves in a forest. Again, there are people with far more experience to comment in this area...

having a hair system seems tough because i involves the renderer, modeling (in terms of representing your hair guides) and dynamics. its hard to ask Lw to do something just in the core when it woiuld involve doing the how thing. I'd imagine it would take alot of resources... I just don't know....

3D paint. For me the pain is in unwrapping UV's, but it may just be my ignorance. I like bodypaint's approach to painting, but I have no other experience to draw upon, i,e studio paint, amazon, etc.

Back to muscle and skinning, that seems to span rigging all the way to soft body dynamics. Idealy, it would be cool to be able to create areas in the rig for muscling... areas that would swell, stretch and compress based on the position of the rig. A parameter for the actual skin that would define elasticity, fat layer (define what jiggles) and "fold management" for defining whats a thick or thin fold. perhaps something that would utilize expressions to save on actual simulation time; circumference of arm when its bent and when its straight, general volume changes in anatomy when an arm is flexed. stuff like that...

archiea
04-26-2003, 01:01 AM
Its great to see that the last few post got back on target.

I voted for the Skinning and muscle system as its completely lacking in LW while rigging tools, hard/soft dynamics, fur and fluid dynamics exist now as plug ins. Its a bit of a stretch, but it would complement the character toolset concerning simulation considering today's powerful CPU's... if you're using a PC.. :D

Idealy, one would hope that NT see's ver 8 of Lw as an incremental change, rather than a silver bullet solution to the feature wars. Important are the issues of workflow and stability, with the room and architecture to expand. In the area of character rigging, it seems that skelegons is a bit of a band aid solution to workflow. To hop between LW and modeler (which never bugged me before) seems a bit sloppy. The recent Set up machine provides a more modular and flexible approach. There are far more experienced character riggers to comment here...

In the area of dynamics, be it fluid, soft bodies or hard, I would hope that NT would introduce a dynamics engine to LW first before tackling the tast of having full featured fluid, soft and hard bodies dynamics. By having the engine available, it becomes another animation tool that can be, perhaps, motion mixed with keyframing and so forth. Consider having just mass, inertia, forces etc, as an animation option. have the plug in comminity work on the elaborate front ends for these, just make sure that the engine is at the core of LW. To me, this is far more important than having a killer fluid dynamics that stands on its own.

Crowd simulation should be reduced to the ability to do instancing within Lw far easier. As to what drives each can be implemented by plug ins... be it crowds or a flock of birds or leaves in a forest. Again, there are people with far more experience to comment in this area...

having a hair system seems tough because i involves the renderer, modeling (in terms of representing your hair guides) and dynamics. its hard to ask Lw to do something just in the core when it woiuld involve doing the how thing. I'd imagine it would take alot of resources... I just don't know....

3D paint. For me the pain is in unwrapping UV's, but it may just be my ignorance. I like bodypaint's approach to painting, but I have no other experience to draw upon, i,e studio paint, amazon, etc.

Back to muscle and skinning, that seems to span rigging all the way to soft body dynamics. Idealy, it would be cool to be able to create areas in the rig for muscling... areas that would swell, stretch and compress based on the position of the rig. A parameter for the actual skin that would define elasticity, fat layer (define what jiggles) and "fold management" for defining whats a thick or thin fold. perhaps something that would utilize expressions to save on actual simulation time; circumference of arm when its bent and when its straight, general volume changes in anatomy when an arm is flexed. stuff like that...

archiea
04-26-2003, 01:02 AM
Holy double trouble batman!!

Sorry for the double post!!!!

Robert Zeltsch
04-26-2003, 06:20 AM
Yes it`s good to go back to an topic related discussion, because Newtek is following this thread with "some interest".

I have voted for the 3D-Paint feature. It`s cool to have image processing and painting tools in LW, so you can modify images/textures directly on the object!! Everyone could benefit from it:
You can paint on different texture channels directly in LW.
Or the possilbility to paint weightmaps/displacement maps with it.

To use the full range of this feature, it`s important to improve the OpenGL support in LW. Alpha Transparency and Pixel/Vertex Shading would be cool. So you can "see what you get" in realtime without time consuming test renders.

;)

cresshead
04-26-2003, 07:10 AM
features for lw8?

*make lightwave a single app...modular like maya where you have ,modelling,animation,rendeing and dynamics..all under one roof...selectable via a tab or whatever..
*online help system with tutorials [would be a real step forward for lightwave]
*instancing and referencing tools like 3dsmax
*"shift n drag" copying like max with ref n instancing capabilities
*better character system tools like intergrating ACS4..or acs5???
*multiple undos in layout if its still there [layout that is!]
*pivot point tools like you have in 3ds max...simple..easy to use.

*...icon based interface as an "option"...load your own icons rendered in lightwave!..keep the text interface as well though eh?
*render to swf to match maya's new capabilities for cartoons
*make the fbx capabilities very tight


cheers

looking forward to lw 8


steve g

hrgiger
04-27-2003, 09:19 AM
Cresshead-

There already is an online help system with tutorials. At least, Newtek provides plenty of tutorials online and they do have the manuals in PDF format. It's a good supplement to the printed manual.
I think as far as having a good rigging system...It's nice but the plug-ins to do this are cheap enough to argue that LW should concentrate on other important upgrades. ACS4 is $90. And for what it does, that's practically giving it away.
Just IMHO, icons suck. What would be the advantage of having icons instead of the tool spelled out for you? Just curious.

cresshead
04-27-2003, 09:45 AM
hi sorry, probably wasn't as clear as i should have been..i mean online as in a built in help system like in 3dsmax, photoshop,maya or corel draw where you have essentially the whole collection of printed books [reference and tutorial] with searchable words and a decent contnents listing..not like the cumbersome pdf lightwave has at present...would make learning lightwave much faster.

as to icons...i'd like the choice of icons AND text listings...
text is good because you simply read it and its plain what it is...
yet when you look for a text button you have to read ALL the buttons to find the one you are looking for...icons are at first glance "hyroglific " in nature but once you know what they are representing and usually the icon has a good visual clue it's faster to find an icon in the interface than re reading all the text buttons over and over again...like the saying a picture says a thousand words..we are [humans] much faster at recognising shapes than reading text.

that's why most 3d apps use icons...they work...and most 3d apps have an option to also use text buttons or to create your own icons if you wish.

it's called customisation and giving choice to the artist to work how he/she likes to maximise their time in the application.

hope that helps a bit

cheers

steve g

hrgiger
04-27-2003, 10:09 PM
I knew what you meant but I'm personally fine with just the printed manuals and the online tutorials. I already spend enough time staring at the computer screen as it is, it's nice to put my face in an actual book once in a while.

I would have to argue about the icons though. I would say that after using Lightwave for a while, the words become their own icons in a sense. You don't see the word bevel,but rather the button you push to bevel an obect. Same as an icon. Difference is, with Lightwave there's no picture key to memorize. You don't have to look up what icon is the one with the squiggly line and the hourglass shape on it, you just find it. It might be 1/1000(I can spare it) of a second faster to register an icon in your head but there's all that time wasted to learn what the icons mean in the first place either through looking it up or experimenting with the tool. You also won't always remember exactly what an icon did the first time so again, look it up. I guarantee you'll never forget which button in Lightwave bevels. Anyway... I just think that's part of the simple elegance of Lightwave. I wouldn't even want that as an option, nor want to sacrifce development time coming up with an icon system at the expense of an actual useful Lightwave feature. I think that would be a better as a 3rd party plug-in or script if you wanted customizable icon buttons.

All IMHO of course.

John Fornasar
04-27-2003, 11:46 PM
I agree with Steve, words are easier...

anyhow, who clicks "Bevel" when you just tap the "b" key?
I know the keyboard shortcuts for all my usual tools, and if I'm looking for something that I don't use that often, the words tell me what I have - with icons I'd have to hunt and peck, or refer to a manual.

I've been using LW since LW4, and I like the separate apps, no reason to use memory if it's not needed. When needed, I've had no problems using the Hub.

Cresshead:
***"shift n drag" copying like max with ref n instancing capabilities**
I've never used Max, but is this what you are looking for...

we all know c = copy and v = paste, but check out the Paste button under Multiply/Duplicate/Paste
copy your object, tap the Paste button, and right click in your viewports... you can paste multiple copys to your heart's content.
(a left click lets you paste one object with the crosshairs ready to move into postition, then Enter to set it and drop the tool).
Pretty cool tool, I had never used it before thinking it was the same as the Paste button at the bottom of Modeler.

Psyhke
05-03-2003, 02:27 PM
Whoever mentioned scrollbars for the render display-- you can pan around your image by using the alt or ctrl key (can't remember right now), and moving the pic around with you mouse (if the picture is bigger than the window, of course).

j3st3r
05-06-2003, 02:29 AM
Most important changes required:

INTEGRATION
I was against it, but since I had to work recently with highpoly characters, I realized, that if modeler and Layout are both open, the textures are loaded twice. My characters used to mapped with ca 2048*2048 maps (3 times at least, for color, spec, bump). So it`s a great waste of resources, not to mention the OpenGL performance.

UV Tools
In general, I am satidfied with LW UV featurus, but I think, since ALL major programs handles to subdiv-UV conflict very well (even MAX was the first in it!!!!), LW must rework it`s UV management. I would welcome also an angle limit in Atlas mapping, and UV sewing tools. Max is excellent in UV sewing. LW handles the UV very differently than other programs, and that should be changed. I mean, that if an object has UV, in the UV view for each geometry vertices only one UV vertex is accessible, unless you unweld your model.

In general, I am satisfied with modeler!!! The best modeller around

LAYOUT has to be changed a lot...I think an endless list could be written, but the most important things:

INTEGRATION (or MUCH-MUCH-MUCH BETTER INTEGRATION WITH MODELLER)
UNDO
MORE ANIMATION OPTIONS
DIRECT ACCESS TO VERTICES
Object selection
etc.

j3st3r
05-13-2003, 03:37 PM
HRgiger:

I`m just curuious, that what is the biggest scene/model you`ve loaded in Layout, when you had Modeler also in memory? My Platoon character had ca 70-80k polygons (the cage), and 390 MB of textures. I`m curuiuous if I`m the only one with textures that are double loaded...The model takes also at least double memory with the current architecture...

I`d be glad, if LW would work like this:

Integrated system.
Modeling-Texturing-Animating-Rendering
Modeling
The viewports, and the whole package changes to the well known modeler, but as an integrated part of Lightwave. You can model as you did before.
Texturing
Here you can drag`n`drop materials, textures onto models, UV them (a little bit like UVEditPro) but offering more tools (like sewing, relaxing, UV smoothing, or even sketching UV)
Animating
Here is the layout, but with much more options to animate, much better selections, and deformers. But the same (ok faster) perfect flexible bone system. You may edit weights here, and you do bone setup here (of course bones may be saved with the model, represented as skelegons)
Rendering
Here you set up scene lights, cameras, materials, shaders etc. And of course not only basic, but shader parameters are multi-editable. Here you do everything related to rendering

To save memory, your NewTek Plugin Manager helps you. You may check your plugins, or modules (modeler, Texturer, Animator, Renderer) to be loaded when you launch LW.

I think, this solution would solve every requests, for all parties satisfaction.

Lightwolf
05-13-2003, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by j3st3r
To save memory, your NewTek Plugin Manager helps you. You may check your plugins, or modules (modeler, Texturer, Animator, Renderer) to be loaded when you launch LW.
Hi j3st3r,
That wouldn't actually be needed. If LW was just a small "stub" .exe, and everything else .dlls (share libraries), like the plugins, then LW would load on demand, and only use memory for the libraries that are in use.
This is how plugins work currently.
The only option needed would be a "flush" button, to unload unused libraries, but even this could be done automatically by LW in a tight memory situation (i.e. oops, I can't allocate memory for this huge image, let's flush all libraries and try again).

Cheers,
Mike

prospector
05-17-2003, 06:49 PM
not a nooby here, been with LW since early Amiga days,

we've never needed multi undos as everything that can be done in LW can be undone (even if there isn't just 1 undo button)

They have always been and should always stay seperated

we just need a paint program run thru the HUB like Aura

plug-ins are WONDERFUL, no need to wait and wait for program upgrade to get plug-ins re-worked that's cool

some tools might need better intagration between Modeler and Layout but that's about it.

I have tried the other weaker:) programs for about an hour and gave them up.
they were pathetically inferior compered to LW.

If ya can't run a program within an hour without manuals (as ya can with LW )then it isn't worth being on the store shelves.

So in conclusion;
LW is 97.85% perfect

j3st3r
05-18-2003, 12:33 AM
Prospector, it was a not too clever post...

Think of poor Africans, living in mud-houses, they do not know about airconditioning, so they think mud-house is 97.85% perfect. :)

Sorry.

One hour in a "weaker" 3d app, is NOTHING. It`s the same that you never spent a minute with it.

I`m asking you, what was the greatest size (in memory) of textures you used? My record was 390 MB of textures per a 80k poly model (unsubdivided!). That was loaded twice into the memory, causing problems when I tried to run Photoshop, Layout and Modeler together.

You`re an old LW customer, so you`ve learned to live with LW. My experience, that those, eho use LW for a long time think of weakness as a value. I was a max user for almost 5 years, when I migrated to LW (i didn`t mind that!!!!), but the first I was missing the multiple, and full undo. In Max or Maya, or XSI or even Cinema4d, everything is undoable with a custom size undo stack. You make a surface setting wrong? No prob, Sir, press Undo. You made a bad keyframe 5 operations ago? Press Undo 5 times...That`s a VALUE.

Layout requires the most changes. Undo, point, and poly level operations, snapping, and more OGL options...If hub would handle memory and connection much better I would aggre with the dual architecture.

Jester

www.3dluvr.com/jester

prospector
05-18-2003, 10:09 AM
You make a surface setting wrong? No prob, Sir, press Undo.

With LW ya just move the sliders to where ya want, no need for UNDOs

actually ya should really save all your textures in the preset drawer for that quick texture setups.


You made a bad keyframe 5 operations ago? Press Undo 5 times...That`s a VALUE.

That's a VALUE :confused: :confused:

To All the Multi-undo afficianados out there, this is important !!!


With LW, we have NON_LINEAR UNDOs :D

just use the graphs and ya can undo any key ya need to anywhere in timeline OR EVEN only a channel of a key anywhere in timeline.

NOW THAT's VALUE


and because every button everywhere in Layout seems to be getting envelope buttons (much more than when LW first came out), then every possable thing ya do in Layout is UNDOABLE in NON_LINEAR form.
NOW THAT's REAL VALUE

graphs are your most endearing friend;)

Why oh why would you want a LINEAR multi-undo button ?????????????


I didn't say it was 100% perfect because we do need a better HUB and if not a FULL 3D paint program the at least something like Deep Pockets ER Deep Paints UV program.

And I STILL maintain;

If ya can't run a program within an hour without manuals (as ya can with LW )then it isn't worth being on the store shelves.

Now, that's not to say you will be doing PIXAR quality stuff in an hour, but ya can build something AND do some sort of animation,UNLIKE the OTHER programs that almost take that long to decipher the Icons.

I didn't want to learn Egyptology in school and I don't want to learn to deciepher symbols now, just print the word on the lable and I know EXACTILY what I need.

Greatest size in memory for textures?
Dunno, don't even know where to look.
Right now I am working on a little 4 min anim that has ABBA on a stage with a Wall sized screen behind them with 16 individual screens that make up the wall and each flips between individual pics of ABBA and full motion video, jumping between the individual screens and the full sized wall (taking up all 16 screens at once), the individual pics are all 762 X 486 with a total of 32 of them, and the video texture is from individual anims with the camera set on each singer and I cut and play sections from that.

Then there is the individual textures for the singers who are all mapped to a 4000 X 4000 texture map.
And all the maps for the insturments.

It takes about 5 sec to update between modeler and Layout when correcting morphs, which really isn't a problem to wait for me.

OH YEA



they do not know about airconditioning, so they think mud-house is 97.85% perfect.

If they don't know, then they would think thier house is 100 %,
because how would they know something is missing ??
To them, thier house is 100% totally functional.

j3st3r
05-18-2003, 11:09 AM
Honestly.

You mentioned a lot of workaround of undo problem. Calling this non-linear undo is fun to me. I don`t want to key everything. especially when I`m just experimenting.

Anyway you gave me few ideas to work with until LW[8] arrives. But adding a "LINEAR" undo will increase LWs popularity, there is no doubt.

Saying "If ya can't run a program within an hour without manuals (as ya can with LW )then it isn't worth being on the store shelves" it`s a little bit unprofessional to me. I think, you have never used maya for long time, I did. I don`t say that I like it, I don`t like it. But I do realize, that it`s open architecture, and the ability to easily connect every property with each other it`s the greatest advantage against the other applications (especially LW). So Poser, Bryce etc. are better than Maya?

It took me five years to migrate to LW. Five years, to forget MAX, stack, sub-object levels etc. But within a day, I used to LWs toolset, and my modelling speed became trhree or four times faster than before. So LW is a very good application. But it takes time to get used to another interface, architecture, etc. I know guys, who made wonderful things with Maya in the first hour, although they were LW or MAX users. And they now among the best Maya users here, and they are working fast, and do quality stuff. I wish if LW had such an open possibility...But I`m sure, there are workarounds for this.

I do love LW, I couldn`t imagine that I`m wotking with other package, but there issues to be solved. As I see, I would agree a much better HUB.

And finally, I don`t want Maya replace our LW. But I`d like to see LW beating other sw much better than now. Currently I see that the most fanatical LW users are those, who are against the integration, and all the requested extras, which are common in other packages. It`s fun, that I can`t do point level animation, only with (no-free) plugin. It`s fun ho the splineamation works. It`s fun, that I can`t draw paths in Layout. There are lot of problems. I`m satisfied with Modeler in 95%, Layout only 70%.

Anyway, prospector. You made me curiouous about your project. I really liked ABBA when I was a child, and nowadays I used the listen to ABBA Gold hits...:)

prospector
05-18-2003, 12:07 PM
AHHH but there IS one :D

On the FLAY site called MiniMo..
works great in layout

j3st3r
05-18-2003, 12:53 PM
In 16 bit color mode...

Prospector, its great to debate with you :D

prospector
05-18-2003, 02:30 PM
HMMM all my compys set to 32 bit color and it seems to werk
I gotta delete it then cuz I must be dreamin :D

Debate ? Debate ?

there's no debate when I am right :D


HA HA HA HA

j3st3r
05-18-2003, 11:36 PM
Oh yes! Yes!

You`re absolutely right! In your point of view!

Hey, Newtek, here`s a satisfied customer!

:D

Ok. So all in all, this discussion proves, that there are different requirements. I think a full customizable sw would be the solution to this gordian knot. Like Maya? ;) Sorry, I couldn`t resist.

Anyway, I`m glad, that currently LW has the biggest, and most worthy plugin support around.

By the way. Do you know a plugin wich would allow me scaling along a 2 point polygon axis? I need it desperately...It seems that you could tell me one.

prospector
05-19-2003, 08:58 AM
HMMM
Lets see if I can figure this out..

Scaling for 2 point poly

making 2 pointer on compy

surfacing it

bring to layout

add snake texture

NOTHING SHOWING DOOHHHH:mad:

no scales showing, tried all axis too

can't even see them totaly zoomed in with camera

Ya got me on that one:D

erikals
05-19-2003, 05:21 PM
What I'd like :)
In this order,

-More than one undo in Layout
-Better renders of SubPatch surfaces
-At this point MD/PFX does not have any options as far I know that makes it possible to animate 100 objects independantly. To put it in another way, what if you want to animate blowing leaves on a tree, animate 100's of towels that are blowing in the wind like in backyards in Italy +much more.
-One program (IF they manage to merge it properly. The big minus is that that would cause less available shortcut keys as they would have to be merged into one program. I don't like the fact that I can't render in Modeler)
-EdgeTool


It's more of course, but this was what was on top of my head.
Erik

prospector
05-19-2003, 05:45 PM
I 'think' ya can do the leave trick...
correct me if I am wrong but...

a point in modeler can be changed to a sprite in layout

hence if you model a tree, put points where ya want leaves
save
load layout
load tree
change the points to sprites that are texture of a leaf

use the wind to move them without any particular direction and all will move acording to the wind setup (shimmy and shake independently ) but will stay where they were modeled.
Like the leaves on the 'Star Trek' show where Spock fell in love with that blonde girl and hung upside down in a tree.

theroetically ya can do towels too but they won't blow and curl but move as a stiff object.

those would have to be an object like the sail demo and use the wind over the whole city to make them all blow and curl independently.

Not positive about this but like 95% sure.

sketchyjay
05-20-2003, 01:54 PM
Instead of intergration just ramp up the hub and create additional programs to fill in the missing areas.

Modeler: modeling
Layout: setting up scenes/rendering
Painter: 3d paint system/create modify UV maps


all should have a basic renderer or at least a real time viewer.

And setup some kind of hot key system through the hub to jump back and forth between them effortlessly.

If something isn't work as well well as I hoped then fix and improve it don't toss it out. Yeah Maya has shelfs/modes for modelers and animation and so on but by having them as seperate programs allows each to use as much memory as they need. There are plenty of weeks when I just worked in modeler so the added overhead of layout's features running in the back incase i need them is a waste.


One tool I'd love is for instances to be added as a clone option so that when you modify the original the rest get updated.

OR have lights be saved as a type of object so we can tweek the original file and the rest update. Regular objects do this so why not lights/surfaces/volumetric objects and so on.

just a few ideas to through out there...


Jason

iFX
05-21-2003, 03:36 PM
You might be able to find something at:
http://plaza17.mbn.or.jp/~PICTRIX/index.html

There's some really cool stuff here!
http://plaza17.mbn.or.jp/~PICTRIX/index2.html

Checkout c_bend, c_form, c_fit etc (though unrelated)...


Not sure exactly what you're after, but this may help:
http://plaza17.mbn.or.jp/~PICTRIX/lw/ls/22scale
or maybe:
http://plaza17.mbn.or.jp/~PICTRIX/lw/ls/VAM

j3st3r
05-21-2003, 10:51 PM
Thankx iFX, these stuff are all great!!!

Cageman
05-29-2003, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by PXLPSH

I like being in the mindset of modeling in modeler,
Then being in the minset of layout....
if i need to change something on my model... i hit synchronize..
WTF is the problem.


Couldnīt agree with you more! At school I run Lightwave on two monitors... itīs very nice to have layout on one screen and modeler on the other. Gives me a feeling that Iīm using a very cool program! =)

By the way. It seems that Lightwave doesnīt remeber the positions of the windows. I want surface editor, viper, image editor and graph editor to be opened on the second monitor, but everytime I close a window and open it up again it appears on the first monitor. Is there a solution to this?

cgolchert
05-29-2003, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by Cageman At school I run Lightwave on two monitors... itīs very nice to have layout on one screen and modeler on the other.

No way, Layout on one monitor and a bunch of open panels like VIPER, the graph editor and a properties panel open on the other. :)

Cageman
05-29-2003, 07:18 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by cgolchert
[B]No way, Layout on one monitor and a bunch of open panels like VIPER, the graph editor and a properties panel open on the other. :)

Hehe... well, it works that way too... :) Just leave a small piece of the modeller window visible and when you click it... well... you know what I mean!! =)

cgolchert
05-29-2003, 07:26 PM
Yeah, I usually have a small bit of modeler open that I can just click and have that pop up front. If I am running both.

Most of the time I really close the other and have both icons in the quicklaunch toolbar.

Cageman
05-29-2003, 08:24 PM
hehe... just thought about how nice it feels when someone at school stands behind my back, trying to figure out what Iīm doing. And then I click on the layout so that all those nice windows pops in front on the second screen. The person says: "What is this?" I say "Itīs Lightwave!". Most of them walks away before I have the chance to explain and show the program, but those interested in 3D stays for a while and says: "That is a cool program." :D

Lamont
06-05-2003, 11:50 PM
We should have a complete hair system. I was inspired by this image:

sketchyjay
06-05-2003, 11:53 PM
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!

I'm blinded....

j

Doran
06-11-2003, 04:13 PM
uuuwwwhh, inspiring isn't the word I might use...

Doran
06-11-2003, 04:20 PM
"-One program (IF they manage to merge it properly. The big minus is that that would cause less available shortcut keys as they would have to be merged into one program. I don't like the fact that I can't render in Modeler) "

:: givin' this idea a big standing O'boooo::

Intergration belongs in some other package not Lightwave.. Sorry but with integration we would have a Max like mess. Ifn ya don't like it use sumthun else.

jimnokc
06-19-2003, 07:45 PM
I would guess the reason many of Lightwave's features are implemented as LScripts and Plug-ins because that's a very robust way to build a complex system. By keeping the big functions in plug-ins, updating is easy. No everyone has broadband and if a fix can be released by just releasing a plug-in, everyone wins.

I've had some problems with 7.5, didn't have much with 7.5b, and none with 7.5c. No software can be bug free unless it doesn't do anything. Every new feature introduces the potential to break an existing feature ( as 7.5b did with some third-party plug-ins).

I have experienced two occasional non-reliably-reproduced problems. One I know NewTek is aware of because Worley reported it. Sometimes Lightwave doesn't like images to be changed while it's query them. The other problem I've had is occasional crashes in lwtools.dll, resulting from the use of a "non big guy" third-party plug-in. It's been very stable.

Personally I enjoy the modeler/layout separation and hub has worked great for me.

I did get some unusual plug-in errors at one point. So I saved my menu and keyboard shortcuts configs, cleared all plug-ins and let LW scan all the directories except the legacy plug-ins. That cleaned up a lot of problems.

I would put Fluid Dynamics at the top of my list. Next Limit has an awesome simulator (I have it, it cost most than Lightwave), so we could use a free or low-cost more integrted fluid solution. TO Next Limit's credit though, both RealWave and RealFlow are high quality programs, in fact RealFlow could probably be used in real-world fluid dynamics sims.

FaeKitty
06-24-2003, 11:12 PM
These features sound interesting:

True 3D Micro Triangle Displacement (http://www.finalrender.com/products/feature.asp?UD=10-7888-35-788&PID=36&FID=381)

Normal Maps (http://amber.rc.arizona.edu/lw/normalmaps.html)

Volumetric Shadows Using Splatting Shadows - Soft Shadows with Participating Media Using Splatting (http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/%7Ezhangc/research/research.html)

caustic wave
07-08-2003, 04:48 AM
cim, your imagination is like a bird, trapped in a cage, and you need LW to unlock this cage, but your mind does not understand just how to unlock it.

maybe a ****ty pragram like maya will do, if you like spending 4 hours just get inside a dump camara. jesus, in lightwave you just select camara. TADA

Librarian
07-17-2003, 02:07 PM
I would be happy with some workflow enhancements.

- All dialogues should be non-modal! and interactive. The new Cinema has a complete non-modal/drag`n drop/full customizable interface and it`s damn fast to work with. Less mouseclicks and less popups = faster. Keeping the general appearance *I hate iconbased interfaces* but adding the above functionalities.
- History for modeler
- a good and speedy dopesheet! Ok there`s keytrack, but it`s third party.

hrgiger
07-23-2003, 11:57 AM
Good to see Newtek is listening.

Most voted for better softbodies and it looks like that will be one of the strong features of LW8. Let's hope they follow suit with the #2 vote which is 3D paint....

hrgiger
07-25-2003, 03:43 AM
And I couldn't reply before but I don't want to know why you have that picture Lamont.:)

jimnokc
07-26-2003, 07:49 AM
Interesting how the top 3; 3D Paint, Advanced Soft/Hard body sim or MD 2.rocks, and Auto Character Rigging tool just happen to be some of the best plug-ins out there. Impact3 is an excellent hard body sim, F/X Break has promise, but I didn't care for the way it integrated into LightWave. However, that might be a cheap and easy way to go ahead and add it. Deep Paint is excelent, and if you were "dumb" enough like me to buy the cripple LW version, they finally gave us the full blown version for free so they wouldn't have to support an older program specific version. Pretty good consumer relations if you ask me. But at $995, I doubt it'd get rolled up into LW anytime soon, at least not this release.

The only thing I've heard of is a third-party bones/rig plug-in that will be in LW8. If you own the plug-in you probably got an email from the author. I don't want to say any more at this time about which plug-in it is, I'll let NewTek announce that next week (no, it's not Setup Machine or ACS4)

Coming in close were Advanced Fluid Dynamics and Muscle_Skinning System/tool. RealFlow and RealWave can't be touched for fluid dynamics, but some of the sims get really bogged down, and the price alone can empty your wallet. But I have yet to see anything that performs such realistic fluids sims.

Lastly with Complete hair system and Crowd Simulation/AI.
I don't think the Crowd Sim/AI plug-in ever made it to Lightwave. I forget the company's name offhand, but their LW pages have disappeared. I guess it's easier to sell a $1000 plug in to someone who spent 7K or so on their main package, rather than something that cost many of us the same as what we paid for full-blown LW. Sasquatch fules the hair system market, and I'm sure more features are in store for 2.0!

Lastly, remember, only a few more days till we start discovering the REAL feature list of 8.

dglenn
10-20-2003, 11:12 AM
Pardon My Ignorance, but I assume that 3D Paint is describing something kindred to Disney's Deep Canvas. Right?

Lukesutherland
12-06-2003, 08:20 AM
How about some sort of interactive render preview system similar to G2?

...or has this been mentioned? (haven't read all nine pages)

proteus
01-01-2004, 06:04 AM
many were said about how poor the plugin intergration is.. so here is what i think

lightwave API is very very nice, just needs some extensions

1) for one, every dialog based plugin can EASILY be "upgrated" to a real time user interactive one, without even rewriting its code. Just add handles and recompile. But the programmers have other things to do than "interactiv-ate" all the plugins.. imho some plugs NEED to be dialog based, for example I use bandsaw, NOT bandsaw pro, because i work faster that way

2) one flaw of the api, is that the plugin can't get sufficient viewport information! for example the event->axis data, are "correct" when the user CLICKS, but NOT when he DRAGS the mouse.. this is a VERY important, bug, but i presume it can be easily fixed... i also think thats way vertex paint has its own modal panel?

3) the reason for this "awkard" plugin system in layout is that users add the deformation plugins in one dialog box, the motion plugins in another, so a user must know what type a plugin is, and go to the exact panel and so on. If there were 4 toolbars with the plugins, just like in modeler, and add the motion/displacement plugin to the selected item, workflow would be MUCH better imho. AND if the plugins can have all the viewport and mesh information they want from the core (update the event structure that is), then the programmers could created some interesting "brush-clone" paintfx-like plugins for layout.. SO

4) lw API is VERY good, VERY straightforward, just needs finetuning.. and if you don't want dialogs for the plugins, but prefer TOOLS.. the learn the api and do some upgrades, it's not that difficult!

pixelinfected
01-04-2004, 06:19 PM
actually lw need a bit of rewriting of core to have :

- a chance to share plugin info between similar class (i mean that a displacement plugin can find easely the actual position of point after last disp plug modification

- a faster implementation of modeler layout data exchange (hub is too rought and slow way, and often is way of error or lock of layout. better if is used a stack of memory instead of common tcpip communication.

- a more customizable interface (if someone have ifw or download a bunch of shader know the horrible infinite list where find a shader is very complex.

- a faster render with fake
- a faster antialias
- a better using of memory on big render
- a different implementation of multipass render which not ask giga of ram....
- a real time dinamics, havoc and many other engine show that is possible with simple and complex obj.
- a big debugging.

and the list can be infinite, but is only the start of...

the opinion of CIM and lw size is wrong, more plugin mean more simple programs, less heavy and more flexible, if core of software allow this kind of working. Lw introduce plugininterface with lw 4, with multiplatform support, but from this time to 7.5c i never saw a real plugin oriented application. if someone try to play with max, and its sdk can see the difference, why max was phoenix from 3d studio application, and why it grow and power it fast and fine (i not like 3dmax, but i'm honest with my tools, and lw not come in that way).

max grow with it plugin, lw grow thank to plugin which are often integrated or simply put in plugin folder, and go.

to do a better, confortable and fast work i collect something of 385 plugin free, shareware and commercial.
most of us are used during daily working, and for this reason i rebuild my interface for 80% of buttons, most of lw commands are hided or replaced with better or powerful plugin.

i hide many commands which i not use frequently, and there are a lot of commands which i used two or three times in 10 years of lw working.

i would like to see a more simplyfied interface, especially for the newbie.

pixelinfected
01-04-2004, 07:56 PM
Advanced Fluid Dynamics
can be nice, but not urgent, there is a good next limit product.

Auto Character Rigging tool
useful, actully i'm going to buy TSm, which find a more simple and better configurable setup for char. and more flexible for an animator

Complete hair system
sas work well, i bought complete version and do many more.
the basic version work enought well for commeon using, for other using you can buy sas complete.
only xsi have a integrated hair system, every other app need extra buying (i mean maya complete, max, c4d, anim master, and so on).

Crowd Simulation/AI
if NT are enought smart, can buy it from a factory which develop it and now leave the project for lw, and continue it only for Maya.
i know that lw version work be cause i see it in action, and its a good way. if they ask to sell the code, or to collaborate with them, i think they can avoid to lose time and money in research, and can integrate it fast.

3D Paint
better uv tools can be a more confortable solution, or if you prefer you can buy a 3d paint solution like deep paint, bodypaint or similar.

Muscle_Skinning System/tools
nice, but only if is smart and not heavy on animation.
i japanese guy do something of very nice with polyfit, which is similar of hard collsion in realtime with a displacement plugin.
fast and smart, and splinegod show with a free tutorial how to use it for a muscle deformation. then mean now we have a way to simulate a muscle deformation, if you want a real muscle deformation, must be fast, very fast ,like a max plugin which do that.

Advanced Soft/Hard body sim or MD 2.rocks
from what i can see by lw8 video (some part, at home i have 56k modem and until i'm back in office with a wideband modem i can't see all of them) i think are just implemeted, but i hope with more preset for material then original MD preset (in past i can save material for MD which can be visible in the list of MD preset, but in last version i miss this possibility, i hope NT reinsert this features, are more confortable.

good work Dev Team
everyone of us pray for you and your work

3Demon
02-18-2004, 11:13 AM
Hey Guys,

...
Hijacking, cross-posted spam has been removed by Moderator.

Lamont
02-18-2004, 11:17 AM
Just ban the user.