PDA

View Full Version : Stress Map to nodal?



dmack
11-18-2008, 04:58 AM
Hi All,

Anyone know how you can get the stressmap shader thing inside the node editor (where it belongs!)?

WilliamVaughan
11-18-2008, 05:05 AM
there is always this option:
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=763548&postcount=3

dmack
11-18-2008, 08:49 AM
Not sure I want to bone all the items in the shot. The stress map would have been much better added to the nodal mix no? Is there a reason it was done as a shader rather than integrated into the surface node editor?

SplineGod
11-18-2008, 08:55 AM
You think that would have been a logical thing to do but not so.
Theres a lot of other plugins that have languished as well.
I made the mistake of trying to use the timewarp camera in production. It caused us a lot of problems and come to find out that it was a big evil hack. I dont understand why such things make it into LW while others are left to gather dust...

RebelHill
11-18-2008, 08:58 AM
dpont made a stress map node a lil while back, give that a shot

SplineGod
11-18-2008, 09:15 AM
They should pin a medal on that guy. Hes added as much if not more functionality to LW then anyone. :)

dmack
11-18-2008, 09:22 AM
I agree that DPont has been a massive credit to the LW community. No doubt about that.

I'm being a bit shaken by all sorts of things at the moment. It seems every time I dig deep, I come across things that just shouldn't be or brick walls. Shame....I think Lightwave could do with a strong application architect who just won't allow features to be added to LW unless they are really really thought through and then welded in at the core and work with EVERY other part of Lightwave.

dmack
11-18-2008, 09:24 AM
You only have to try and find a LW modeler function to add a shortcut to, to realise that application organisation is something that isn't Newteks forte. :(

SplineGod
11-18-2008, 09:29 AM
Bolting things on with no thought of actual design is the way its been done as long as I can remember.
What we know and love about LW was a happy accident rather then from carefully thought out design. Its finally come home to roost unfortunately.
It also hightlights that modeler and layout were done by two different people who didnt wish to share code. The result of this unholy marriage is what we call The Hub.

dmack
11-18-2008, 09:37 AM
Whilst I think it would have been financial suicide to do a ground up re-write when the Lux crew left, I can't help but think that this does have to be done now as a gradual process. I agree, it all feels like a bolt-on ontop of a bolt-on etc, which is the exact opposite of what you want your workhorse-app to be. I'm sincerely hoping that LW10 is at least a genuinely thought though framework for future development, even if it means necessarily having to have legacy stuff (ie pretty much everything) bolted on for now. By LW11, they could have a new ground up application that is better thought through. All the algorythms, where I'm guessing the hard work is, will be ready for them to use.... It is a slow disaster waiting to happen otherwise.....That's my opinion (from somene who has been using LW as their source of income since version 5).

SplineGod
11-18-2008, 09:57 AM
Ive also made a livign with LW since it was still amiga only which is why the current state of affairs is very painful.
I can only judge things based on a path of previous experience.
Two things come to mind.
One is that LW has always been developed using the bolt on method.
Two is that I dont feel that Newtek has ever put the proper resources into LW development or marketing.
With those two things in mind I dont have high hopes for LW10.

dmack
11-19-2008, 01:42 AM
Hi Larry,

Hmmmm. That's not good to hear, especially from you. I've really struggled with LW for the last two years now and I've even looked at XSI as a possible replacement. I guess I've been hopefull that things woudl turn around as a. Leanring a new app to the level I know LW will take a long time and b. other apps have their own downsides, I mean XSI doesn't even own its own renderer so you have renderfarm issues, licensing issues etc - at least that's what it looks like from the outside. I was excited about modo (dare I mention it?) but their development, though good, seems to be taking forever and a year. So....it's a tough situation to be in. If XSI had an easy network rendering capacity/system that wasn't too expensive, I probably wouldn't be here right now. I've come to rely on certain plugins recently (HD Instance and X-Dof mainly) but recently, this has been highlighting issues rather thna solving them. I'm getting that sinking feeling again. Soooo many years of using LW....but now what?

biliousfrog
11-19-2008, 06:34 AM
I must say that, despite having some fantastic new features and easily the best LW yet, 9.5 has left a very sour taste in my mouth...mostly because of the open beta. I'm amazed at how many features are broken, certainly more than in previous versions. I just don't 'get' what the whole beta stage was supposed to achieve apart from NewTek getting free software testers. What makes things worse is that any posts pointing out broken features are given the 'download the beta' response...not something that many people using LW professionally would want to do.

It also doesn't do much for NewTek's image when they release 9.5 to a big fanfare, after months in beta, ready for Siggraph and immediately it's apparent that it isn't ready for release, hence 9.5.1 starts straight after.

I've used LW since 5.6 but only recently started using some of Layout's more advanced tools. I must say that if it wasn't for the renderer (and more recently, Autodesk) I'd have gone to XSI. I'm even thinking about upgrading my Messiah License and getting Modo...but it's just that I'm very comfortable in LW and it's a difficult app to switch away from (or to).

SplineGod
11-19-2008, 09:18 AM
Agreed. For the first time in my career using LW Im now FORCED to start looking far more seriously into other solutions.
As usually we get new features that are either implemented half assed or implemented without also upgrading things that the new features depend up. The bone tools are a good example. Joints are still problematic. No UV tools. GI baking not working with deformations. Fiberfx is simply the devils spawn. The problems that one feature alone is incredible. IKBoost is now flakey.

dmack
11-19-2008, 10:43 AM
There appears to be an unhelpfully high level of desire to get lots of features to market without enough consideration of their true production stability or flexibility. We've had how many SSS shaders?!?!?!!? One that was carefully thought through and then carefully implemented would have been far far more useful. I just can't help but think that after the Lux crew left, there was an anxiety to be seen to be relasing lots of shiney new features. What is needed now, more than any feature is a long pause, careful thought on application architecture and a real effort to make all the major features work in close harmony. If I could bias that, I'd say start with good DOF.

biliousfrog
11-19-2008, 12:18 PM
I don't have a problem with constant updates as such but, as you've pointed out, it would be far more beneficial to have the core features improved than just add more.

The SSS shaders are a great example. I actually went through them all yesterday and couldn't really tell what the difference was between them. For example, Fast skin and simple skin have the same interface so why not just have a 'skin' shader with a toggle to switch between them...not that they appear to do anything different anyway. And why are there so many SSS shaders?...why have SSS and SSS2 and the legacy ones? If SSS2 is an improvement over SSS why have both?

Lightwave has become the application equivalent of a hoarder's attic where nothing is thrown away and stuff is piled up to the rafters with things that, 'might come in handy one day'. I admit that I'm used to using 't' and 'r' for move and rotate but if I switched to rove I could do both in one tool...so why hasn't this been implemented? A look through the non-menu plugins shows 'move+' and 'rotate+', there's also bandsaw pro, extender plus...the list goes on. But if these tools are improvements to the old ones, why are the old ones still there?...I think I know why.

...because when all else fails, people can fall back on what works...and that says a lot about how confident NewTek are about 'improvements'.

SplineGod
11-19-2008, 02:15 PM
Right now stability would be the best feature of all :)

dmack
11-19-2008, 02:22 PM
The issue with constant and unplanned feature addition is that, as you say, you end up with a tonne of legacy features and therefore a bloated feel. They have to do this once they've released a feature because someone will have used it in a project somewhere. The answer is most definitely, 'be VERY careful before you relase a new feature/system/shader' etc. It's got to have good generality, work solidly with all other aspects of the program etc. Only when it's passed all these type tests and thoughts should it even be considered for coding. That just simply doesn't appear to have happened with, for example, the SSS shaders. In fact the SSS shaders is an excellent example of an insight into poor application/architecture development IMO. This whole approach needs to change and fast. However it is this exact area that I have such little faith in, which is why I, like Larry, will have to start looking elsewhere soon, much to my disappointment. I'm not even sure I'll make it to LW10 now. If I do, that really would be my last hope. If that were bolt on city, I'd leave, not doubt about that. I hate writing stuff like this but when your income relies directly on an application, you just can't shrug it off when you see it gradualy turn into an unworkable system.