PDA

View Full Version : Modo 401 Preview ...



Pages : [1] 2

aidanodr
02-05-2009, 05:12 PM
Hi Guys,

Seeming that a rather large thread ocurred over at the Luxology Forums about LIGHTWAVE CORE:

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=31775
[ 28 pages and counting as of 6/02/09 - over 36000 views and 680 replies ]

I think it only fair that a thread should start here for the new Modo 4.01 preview:

http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.introduction/

And the 401 thread at lux forums:

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=32081

I own BOTH LIGHTWAVE 9.6 and Modo and intend upgrading to HARDCORE and Modo 4.01 ...

So any way - fair is fair ...
Aidan

DennisVR
02-05-2009, 05:37 PM
Looking good! :) Fur implementation looks rock solid.

Curious what other features will be announced next week.

lwanmtr
02-05-2009, 05:52 PM
Looks cool. The replicator thing looks neato keen.

Will be interesting to see how Modo and Core will compare...Personally I'm going with Core at this time..hehe.

It will also be interesting to see if Modo can deliver in a timely fashion, or if users will have to wait even longer.

MAUROCOR
02-05-2009, 05:54 PM
Hi Guys,

Seeming that a rather large thread ocurred over at the Luxology Forums about LIGHTWAVE CORE:

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=31775
[ 28 pages and counting as of 6/02/09 - over 36000 views and 680 replies ]

I think it only fair that the same should occur here for the new Modo 4.01 preview:

http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.introduction/

And the 401 thread at lux forums:

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=32081

I own BOTH LIGHTWAVE 9.6 and Modo and intend upgrading to HARDCORE and Modo 4.01 ...

So any way - fair is fair ...
Aidan


What are you talking about?
Fair is fair?!??!

I readed the comments on modo´s forum and all that I noticed was a lot of people talking so bad about NT, LW and LWCORE.
Aparentently people who never opened LW once in their life were saying foolishness about it.
Please, give me a break!

R.Feeney
02-05-2009, 06:00 PM
Every time I go past the opening page of their 401 introduction It crashes my browser.
Right now I would prefer a 404 than their 401.

aidanodr
02-05-2009, 06:03 PM
What are you talking about?
Fair is fair?!??!

I readed the comments on modo´s forum and all that I noticed was a lot of people talking so bad about NT, LW and LWCORE.
Aparentently people who never opened LW once in their life were saying foolishness about it.
Please, give me a break!

MAUROCOR,

You saw what i added to my first message - I own both the apps, I hold no malice toward either AND i am sure their are others of the same mind.

I am not interested in - nor will ever be interested in my d*ck is better than your d*ck type talk. OK malice of some sort might have been at the Lux forums toward Newtek, but come on, get over it, ignore it. I only noticed most of the comment was favourable ..

Fair is Fair is what I said .. I stick to that, good or bad comment - its all comment - the very fact that the thread exists re Core at the Lux forums is FAIR enough for me.

Now can we get back to civilised comment and critique of new 3D applications here please instead of this thread degrading into Vitriolic comment - surely we can be bigger than that!

Aidan

aidanodr
02-05-2009, 06:07 PM
Every time I go past the opening page of their 401 introduction It crashes my browser.
Right now I would prefer a 404 than their 401.

Hey RF,

Aha a Galway lad :) - me a Cork Onion ...

I saw some having difficulty with that over at lux forums - I think it was people with MAC's and Quicktime.

I know that when I opened the page in OPERA ( XP PC ) it popped up an Apple Quicktime Upgrade window to ver 7.6. Maybe thats the issue?

Aidan

aidenvfx
02-05-2009, 06:07 PM
I have modo 203. I was less then impressed with it compared to the other tools on the market for a similar price at the time C4D (basic). Even the upgrade price for what amounts to nothing more then a modeler is way to much money for me to spend on.

Though I am new to LW I have found it a far more stable program, easier to use and much faster.

I understand modo 301 is much better but the cost to what I actually get is not there for myself.

With that said I have no ill will to Modo at the time I bought the App I did not know what I really wanted for a program.

However at this time I still see Modo as nothing more then half of what LW can do for almost the same money.

lwanmtr
02-05-2009, 06:07 PM
Most of the comments I read were favorable toward NT and Core..there were a few..but lets face it, we have posters here who constantly rag on LW...LOL

R.Feeney
02-05-2009, 06:13 PM
Hey RF,

Aha a Galway lad :) - me a Cork Onion ...

I saw some having difficulty with that over at lux forums - I think it was people with MAC's and Quicktime.

I know that when I opened the page in OPERA ( XP PC ) it popped up an Apple Quicktime Upgrade window to ver 7.6. Maybe thats the issue?

Aidan

I am lookin south and waving :)

Im using a pc XP with Opera here too, luckily it remembers all the tabs I had open even after the crash. No request for quicktime upgrade pops up nothing but crash!.

aidanodr
02-05-2009, 06:19 PM
I am lookin south and waving :)

Im using a pc XP with Opera here too, luckily it remembers all the tabs I had open even after the crash. No request for quicktime upgrade pops up nothing but crash!.

Aha - Saw you, waving back now :)

Maybe try install the latest QT update independently from the apple site?

http://www.opera.com/docs/plugins/

Have you the latest Opera version installed? This sort of thing happened to me before too with various browser crashes. Also try load it up with Internet Explorer if you have it?

Aidan

R.Feeney
02-05-2009, 06:24 PM
More trouble than its worth right now.I would not be able to afford to buy into new software right now anyway.

Richard

aidanodr
02-05-2009, 06:34 PM
More trouble than its worth right now.I would not be able to afford to buy into new software right now anyway.

Richard

Ah - the R word bites .. And man do we know it is, here on the ould sod ...

No probs, any of my "tech" comments were in general anyway as opposed to trying to woo you to the Modo Site.

laterz!
Aidan

zapper1998
02-05-2009, 07:47 PM
We got Luxology beat big time ..... get er done baby...

kfinla
02-05-2009, 08:03 PM
Well I own current copies of LW and Modo and have to say I still haven't seen some "I need that" feature from 401.. im hoping particles or rigging is shown shortly as they begin to roll out the features they have not already demo'd. Everything so far I see I can do elsewhere often better, other than perhaps render a trillion polygons. 3d Paint i use bodypaint instead, sculpting, i use zbrush. UV's I use Uv layout. Hair I have several choices. Retopology I'd use Silo or perhaps pick up 3d coat just for that part of its feature set. Really the integrated previewer is the really redeeming thing to me about Modo. I hope LW 10 has something similar, or at least a compatible version of Frpime isn't far off.

I was disappointed with the modo 30x series and felt they abandoned it (there was no 303 like there has been in the 10x and 20x series') and jumped ahead to make 401 while the app (302) still had lots of things to polish, some things broken and stability issues to fix. Stuff that should of worked in the 30x series now needs to be purchased in and hopefully works 401.

I have been more interested in LW's development the last 6+ months. My initial interest in modo (103) was they were taking OSX development far more seriously than NT was. That has changed dramatically. The difference between NT spending all the time it did to get 9.6 right and how LUX jumped ahead to make 401 is a night and day different approach in how they have left the last version of their softwares. To me at least.

I think the reasons for choosing either app or the other are changing. It use to be features, and architecture. Now I think they are heading in different directions. My recent impression is NT is going after maya and the technical crowd. Ppl that love houdini because of the limitless flexibility. Modo I think is still focused on appealing to artists. I haven't decided which path is better for me, that is just how I am seeing things as of the last 24 hrs.

hrgiger
02-05-2009, 08:03 PM
Ooh, they get three things. At least that they've shown so far. Hair, replicators, and volumetric lights. I gotta give it to them, the features look nice, especially the hair and replicators but certainly there must be more to 401 then that?

CGI Addict
02-05-2009, 08:27 PM
We got Luxology beat big time ..... get er done baby...

Whose we?

See that's the problem. Alot of folks on this and other forums somehow think that it's like we're on a team, a football team, basketball team, software team. Stop it with that. This isn't about cheerleading tryouts. There are folks that use LW, Maya, Modo and a host of other apps to collaboratively get work done.

One thing is becoming quite clear, this a gonna be a great year for groundbreaking changes in a majority of 3D apps and we get to pick and choose from this buffet of pixel love. :thumbsup:

I'm with HR in that it was embarrassing to read some of the put downs with respect to Jonas. I feel bad for him. :thumbsdow

A Mejias
02-05-2009, 08:50 PM
Hi Guys,

Seeming that a rather large thread ocurred over at the Luxology Forums about LIGHTWAVE CORE:

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=31775
[ 28 pages and counting as of 6/02/09 - over 36000 views and 680 replies ]

I think it only fair that a thread should start here for the new Modo 4.01 preview:

http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.introduction/

And the 401 thread at lux forums:

http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=32081

I own BOTH LIGHTWAVE 9.6 and Modo and intend upgrading to HARDCORE and Modo 4.01 ...

So any way - fair is fair ...
Aidan

So you start a thread here just because some modo user started a thread there? Jeez, that's just asking for a fight. LOL
:lol:


Anyway, sure modo has some cool stuff. But it's still not a complete solution like LW. I will probably go "HardCore" next month.

Sonk
02-05-2009, 09:39 PM
So you start a thread here just because some modo user started a thread there? Jeez, that's just asking for a fight. LOL
:lol:


Anyway, sure modo has some cool stuff. But it's still not a complete solution like LW. I will probably go "HardCore" next month.

Oddly i'm more excited about CORE than Modo 401 so far. 401 has alot of features that seem to be gear toward ArchViz folk(which i'm not), so its abit disappoint from that POV. I won't be surprised if particles were implemented in 401(still not something i need for game development). Modo 302 has layer blending but the thing is you can see them in the viewport, so it makes texturing painting next to impossible.

It's been 7 years and Modo doesn't even have a bone system yet. :thumbsdow I'm hoping CORE might address my needs later this year.

hrgiger
02-05-2009, 09:47 PM
Someone just pointed out new setup and layout tabs on the modo 401 interface. Wonder if they now have bones and character rigging?

jayroth
02-05-2009, 10:00 PM
My recent impression is NT is going after maya and the technical crowd. Ppl that love houdini because of the limitless flexibility. Modo I think is still focused on appealing to artists.

Kfinla, I hope you don't mind my using your quote, but it gives me an opportunity to address this impression. LightWave has always been targeted more towards artists than the uber tech types that Maya serves. We will not change our focus to be more technical than necessary; that said, in order for us to meet the requests of all of the customers who have commented, we need a modern, stable and capable platform. In order to do so, we have to expand the technical abilities and range of that platform. As a result, you get the scripting, full access for the SDK, and so on.

We are not stopping there, however, but rather using that approach as a beginning. The whole idea is to base new technology on a very versatile platform, but to acknowledge and embrace why people are using products like this in the first place: to create. Creation is an inherently artistic pursuit.

By building a base that can handle anything, that is versatile, fast, and so on, we can leverage that base to explore interesting, artist-centric workflows; we can do this, and at the same time, offer the more technically-oriented the type of access and capability that Maya offers. The benefits here allow for LightWave CORE, via python, SWIG, our new file formats, and so on, to more easily integrate into existing pipelines built with Maya as the basis. So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.

js33
02-05-2009, 10:04 PM
Someone just pointed out new setup and layout tabs on the modo 401 interface. Wonder if they now have bones and character rigging?

I think those are just for setting up the interface layout.

I bought Modo when it first came out and all the updates but I've hardly used it as I thought they would've had character animation by now.

Most of my work involves animation so Lightwave has been the only 3D software I've made money with.

Once Lux adds more animation features I will probably dig into it.

I am excited for both Newtek and Lux and will continue to support both.

It's an exciting time to be both a LW'er and a Modo'er. :thumbsup:

js33
02-05-2009, 10:08 PM
Sounds good Jay. Looking forward to it. :agree:


Kfinla, I hope you don't mind my using your quote, but it gives me an opportunity to address this impression. LightWave has always been targeted more towards artists than the uber tech types that Maya serves. We will not change our focus to be more technical than necessary; that said, in order for us to meet the requests of all of the customers who have commented, we need a modern, stable and capable platform. In order to do so, we have to expand the technical abilities and range of that platform. As a result, you get the scripting, full access for the SDK, and so on.

We are not stopping there, however, but rather using that approach as a beginning. The whole idea is to base new technology on a very versatile platform, but to acknowledge and embrace why people are using products like this in the first place: to create. Creation is an inherently artistic pursuit.

By building a base that can handle anything, that is versatile, fast, and so on, we can leverage that base to explore interesting, artist-centric workflows; we can do this, and at the same time, offer the more technically-oriented the type of access and capability that Maya offers. The benefits here allow for LightWave CORE, via python, SWIG, our new file formats, and so on, to more easily integrate into existing pipelines built with Maya as the basis. So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.

Sonk
02-05-2009, 11:08 PM
So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.

Jay,

I'm a Modo user and i haven't touch LW since version 5.6(i think). One thing that seems to be over-look is the user nagivation preferences, i never found the default LW nagivation(for that matter Zbrush navigation) to be comfortable, even in Modo i have that set to Maya style nagivation(ALT + 3 button mouse( rotate,pan,zoom)). So i hope you guys include a Maya style navigation in CORE from the get go as a option.

CORE will have character animation right? My needs are pretty simple, since i'm not a animator. All i need is a bone system + enveloping + weight painting to rig up a character for the purpose of posing it.

adamredwoods
02-05-2009, 11:40 PM
Modo 401 teaser looked great!
I loved the replicator. The hair looked very similar to FiberFX.

By biggest take was that Modo and LW are becoming very similar (I know the history). So that means, what can the apps do NOW? And Lightwave wins, because Modo 401 does not have bones, dynamics, animated particles, or hypervoxels.

Modo will eventually have these things, but it will take them a long time to reach that point. LW Core seems like it has a far greater technical base to build on than Modo does. We'll see by the end of the year, though.

So Modo 401 looks great, but it isn't displacing LW9.6 from my toolset (yet).

Kelgor
02-06-2009, 12:13 AM
I really enjoy working with Modo. I also really enjoy working with LW. Up till now it's only come down to working in the app that can do what I need. They can each do many things the other can't. However, I will say that LW CORE for $395... no brainer for me. What will be a hard decision is 401 at the same price.

Silkrooster
02-06-2009, 12:19 AM
Kfinla, I hope you don't mind my using your quote, but it gives me an opportunity to address this impression. LightWave has always been targeted more towards artists than the uber tech types that Maya serves. We will not change our focus to be more technical than necessary; that said, in order for us to meet the requests of all of the customers who have commented, we need a modern, stable and capable platform. In order to do so, we have to expand the technical abilities and range of that platform. As a result, you get the scripting, full access for the SDK, and so on.

We are not stopping there, however, but rather using that approach as a beginning. The whole idea is to base new technology on a very versatile platform, but to acknowledge and embrace why people are using products like this in the first place: to create. Creation is an inherently artistic pursuit.

By building a base that can handle anything, that is versatile, fast, and so on, we can leverage that base to explore interesting, artist-centric workflows; we can do this, and at the same time, offer the more technically-oriented the type of access and capability that Maya offers. The benefits here allow for LightWave CORE, via python, SWIG, our new file formats, and so on, to more easily integrate into existing pipelines built with Maya as the basis. So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.

Jay,
Thanks for going into a bit of detail. This is very interesting. Even though I don't know much of the technical side as most maya users do. I like the fact that our options are expanding. Giving the ability to test out that side of the fence sort of speak.
I hope I will hear much more from you and the rest of the team soon.
Silk

Frank_Geppert
02-06-2009, 02:14 AM
I am a user of Modo and of Lightwave. I love both tools so I don't understand any flame wars. I need LW for the features Modo does not have: physics, fur/hair, particles, character animation. And I like the material editor of LW very much, the rendering is very good. It is more stable.

But Modo has an improved modeler, has 3d-painting and sculpting and a great preview renderer (some inbuilt FPrime at no additional costs).
I see Modo as a fantastic add-on to Lightwave, it is not a tool that replaces LW at the moment. But it is an evolutionary step in certain areas.

Currently I have the chance to buy a membership to get beta versions of LW Core and to get the final product when it is released for about $400.
But I also could save this money to upgrade to Modo 401. This is a hard decision for me. But there is one fact to make it more easy to me: I have no idea about the features of LW core. But I get information about the features of Modo 401. This makes me tend towards upgrading Modo instead of buying an unfinished tool.

Let us see it realistically: I have a combination of Modo and Lightwave 9.6 (a very great edition of Lightwave, the best LW version at the moment). I cannot imagine in my wildest dreams that LW Core can beat this combo.

What can LW Core do for me? Currently I saw only copies of Modo features in the last video (instancing, parenting, deforming). I already have this. Maybe LW Core should concentrate on having better character animation tools than before? But if the goal is to have a complete app to beat everything out there then it needs 3d-painting, sculpting, baking normal maps from textures and geometry and much much more. This will take some time.

But nevertheless, it will be an exciting time. I see much future for both: Lightwave and Modo because they have more modern code base, more flexible SDKs than the old dinosaurs out there.

Regards

Red_Oddity
02-06-2009, 02:34 AM
Mode looks very promosing, been lurking on their forum for quite a while without registering though, as i don't own it, i don't have much to add to the remarks the Modo users post).
Replicator and Fur look very promising (if their Fur system is able to generate these 'mesh' type fur strands on the fly and is able to add dynamics to them, it is already one step ahead to LWs fur, sorry to say)

I have tried it a couple a times though, felt quite solid (especially in the workflow, selections a are handled very nicely), haven't switched though as i can do most of the stuff in LW or Maya (also, i see a lot of Modo users concerned at stablity and development speed)

Still, the more competition in this industry the better.

JCG
02-06-2009, 02:35 AM
I remember the first time I saw the web text description of Nodal, when it was still independent. My first thought was, "wow, that's more power than I've seen added to LW in a while but, where did I put my calculus book? I'm going to need it!"

In the end, most artists are using nodes so happily, without even thinking that they may be more technically complicated than the old texture layers. Sometimes it's as easy as just plugging dielectric into material and "done"! And all the parameters sound like the ones we've used in the old system. After seeing that, I'm super confident that Newtek can describe the deep technical intricacies of Core in their presentations and deliver increased artist-friendliness and LWishness in the final product. They've already proven that they're really good at that.

biliousfrog
02-06-2009, 02:36 AM
I still feel like most long-time LW users have a huge chip on their shoulder about Modo and the argument against it has always been, 'it doesn't have bones, particles, animation...blah, blah, blah'.

What they miss is all the stuff it does have. It isn't an all in one solution (yet) but what they do have is way beyond what's in Lightwave. I'm not knocking Lightwave but, until Core is released, stable and taking seats from the other apps, it's a jack of all trades app that isn't even a master of one.

You're comparing an ancient app that can do a lot of things reasonably well at a great price to a fairly new app that can do a few things brilliantly. The major difference is that Lightwave has gone as far as it can, which is why they've developed Core, but Modo already has a great foundation which is constantly being built upon and, although it doesn't have complex animation tools, it does have animation built in and can read MDD's...so Modo + Blender is a pretty powerful combo.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 02:44 AM
It is always good when another 3D app improves, even though the fanboy in me wants all competing apps to rot in hell :D ...j/k ;)

seriously, it is all good...personally, if we are to compare CORE to Modo 401 improvementwise, i believe CORE will have the upperhand, but Modo presentation of its features is beatifull, artistic and sure to warm the hearts of its fans.

would it be that i were to quit using Lightwave and look for a new app, id propably be looking at the direction of Modo if i were to look at it as a fun hobby (like LW is for me now), or Max if i were to look at it with a career in my mind.

the changes that the CORE is about to deliver is more than just a few artistic tools, it is job opportunities as CORE seems to have the potential of being widely used by companies that are otherwise very Max/Maya/XSI centric...

exiting times ahead for all of us, and double the fun for the Modo/LW users who get two super updates in a short time :D

DennisVR
02-06-2009, 02:54 AM
@Pete: That's a great attitude. We all should be thrilled that 2 great 3D applications just have gotten even better. More power to the people.

I'll be upgrading to Modo 401 /ducks. But i'm keeping my eye on Lightwave Core and ready to jump in. Just want to see some good videos of it's capabilities.

Frank_Geppert
02-06-2009, 03:00 AM
...personally, if we are to compare CORE to Modo 401 improvementwise, i believe CORE will have the upperhand

Very interesting. I love my LW and I would like to have your belief. But currently it looks from the video like it is a try to catch up rather than to take over. And unfortunately there is no feature list to judge this seriously.

But I hope we get more information soon.

By the way: I do it like DennisVR, I just use both of them.

Sonk
02-06-2009, 03:03 AM
You're comparing an ancient app that can do a lot of things reasonably well at a great price to a fairly new app that can do a few things brilliantly.

Well even if you want to compare what it does, brilliant isn't the word i would use to describe some parts of Modo.

Modo's painting is very slow, so many people can't use them in production. Many other issue with the painting tools that make more of a marketing tool then a production ready feature. As i mention earlier, you do have blending modes like Photoshop, but you can't see them in the viewport..so essentially you can't really use them to paint texture(sign). I'm not sure if they address this in 401...

Modo's image base sculpting also very slow i would put the speed at under Mudbox 1.0.7 when your sculpting a few million polygons.It's just too slow to be used in serious production(creating very detail sculpts). This is on my nVidia GTX 260.

If you take the uselessness of the painting/sculpting away Modo doesn't offer much, its only good at a modeling/rendering tool.



Just want to see some good videos of it's capabilities.


Get in line Dennis! I want to see some more CORE videos also, the sooner the better.

JBT27
02-06-2009, 03:42 AM
If you put the two developing apps up against each other, Core and Modo (and yes, I am a Modo 302 user as well, though uncertain about dropping yet more cash on Lux to be honest) the one thing that must happen is speed. Big meshes handled well, complex rigs likewise, barrels of image maps, complex dynamics, and so on.

Modo is slow and unstable, still that way at 302 - intelligent and elegant for sure, but too much remains broken from the 1.x days, quite a bit never really worked that well anyway, and it chokes on jobs that Modeler 9.6 breezes through, even on my old hardware.

And there's the key - Modo is a new app, like Core is, written from the ground up, but Modo is deeply flawed.

It doesn't matter how clever it is, because if at the root it is essentially slow and unstable, it severely reduces how much you can trust it in production.

One of the first things I'm looking at for Core is speed - OK, sure, I'll be running it on my old 32-bit gear for now with the hopes of better things for the end of the year, but even so, I expect it to be fast and responsive to simple tools. I understand Modo's component and item modes, and that in the latter you can move large meshes quickly and easily, but straightaway that often demands you have to break objects into more layers, just to work with them on a basic level, and then freeze all transforms if you're porting the mesh out to something else.....I dunno, to me it just doesn't feel very 'modern'.

Core looks like it has a heavy reliance on the nodal paradigm - that's probably one of the biggest reasons I just added to my credit card :D (6003 :thumbsup:), and on the tech level why so much of the industry is shifting that way. I understand the artist versus technician argument, but frankly anyone who steps into this world needs to accept there is a degree of tech to deal with, and that once you get around that, nodal is the way to control and achieve what you need. Which is why I'm beginning to err on the side of Core, to the point of not buying into Modo anymore.

Julian.

DennisVR
02-06-2009, 03:51 AM
Modo is slow and unstable, still that way at 302 - intelligent and elegant for sure, but too much remains broken from the 1.x days, quite a bit never really worked that well anyway, and it chokes on jobs that Modeler 9.6 breezes through, even on my old hardware.

And there's the key - Modo is a new app, like Core is, written from the ground up, but Modo is deeply flawed.

It doesn't matter how clever it is, because if at the root it is essentially slow and unstable, it severely reduces how much you can trust it in production.

You must have been using another Modo, because that's not how i know Modo. I've had crashes but those are rare. And can't call it slow either.

iluxa
02-06-2009, 03:54 AM
i'm not watching at new development of 401.
I stay tunned at Nexus/render engine dev-t for Bentley, Solidworks products.
I haven't yet Hardcore subsc-n, because our company has budget to another applications(one of Microstaion and add-ons to it for road/civil projecting).
I check out that a few speculations have at Bentley discussion groups(that lux-engine is weak as native :))).
Hope, core will be closer to civil engineers...

-EsHrA-
02-06-2009, 03:58 AM
there's atleast a good designer doing the presentations. :)

looks slick.

nt?! STEP UP! :) (honestly!)


mlon

dmack
02-06-2009, 04:10 AM
Yes, the presentation of 401 is great so far. I still can't quite get over the amateur nature of Newteks reveal, it was dreadful to put it plainly. Being a user of both LW and Modo, I'm looking forward o tseeing what's in 401. I'm hoping it's enough to start using for proper jobs. Core sounds good but that's just it isn't it....sounds....I've not SEEN anything of Core that makes me excited yet and I know it's AT LEAST a year away.

phil lawson
02-06-2009, 04:36 AM
I think core is really interesting and if you look beyond the video, what they were saying is that its extremely flexible. Sure they didn't really show case the feature list off, but the components that they did show were more than welcomed to see. The fact I can get stuck in with python and avoid c++ is very nice to hear.

I haven't bought into it just yet, I would like to see more before that happens, but I've bought every release of lw since I started with 7, so I don't see why this will be any different.

modo 401 will be an excellent upgrade, I can't talk about anything that hasn't been announced yet, but both fur and replicators are excellent additions to the modo tool set. Replicators require less memory than standard instances and can be generated at render time or real-time(like instances) in random or precise locations depending on what the user requires. They come with a bunch of parameters that can be adjusted to avoid any linear looking render. These settings can of course be animated as can the fur values.

Exciting times from a users point of view as competitions drives innovation and at the end of the day, its us who benefit from it.

Cheers

biliousfrog
02-06-2009, 04:38 AM
Even though CORE is still a year away (whatever they supply by then) it's still a HUGE application that has been built in just 3yrs by a small team, I read somewhere that XSI took over 4yrs to develop.

Personally, I'm extremely sceptical that CORE will be anything more than an unstable tech demo by the end of the year but I'd like to be proved wrong.

JBT27
02-06-2009, 04:42 AM
You must have been using another Modo, because that's not how i know Modo. I've had crashes but those are rare. And can't call it slow either.

I think some people find it like you do, others have my experience, for whatever reasons. That was also true at the 301 release, which was very buggy for so many people, but for a few they couldn't see what the problem was.

Whether that's graphics card related, with my Nvidia, or what I have no idea.

I do know that the 250K poly scene I am working with at the moment is slow enough to be annoying, even moving a bunch of polys of a few 10K around in one go, it's just slow enough to be difficult to work with, in ways that Modeler currently is not.

I'll be more than happy to have a reason and a fix, because I like Modo for what it does, but as it stands for me right now, I am seriously disinclined to spend more on it.

Julian.

Nemoid
02-06-2009, 05:14 AM
hey its way cool to see Jay chiming in here, and talking about software too.

First off i want to thank Newtek for their effort, Since when the new team has arrived, cool things started happening, even with Lw with traditional- limited structure.
With Core, its not a matter to code with patches over an old structure for 2 apps anymore, but to code within a new platform, modern structured, flexible and powerful.

Now, nt has a big big opportunity to demostrate how an app both artist oriented and technical should be.

IMHO, even if apps like maya and XSI are obviously leaders in dcc, there's great room for improvment and good ideas- I like how Nt quotes the fact they will use industry standards too. there are things which are important and that an app have as for example manipulators !!!

another thing i'd want is maya navigation style . It's a standard. so do it.

standards and flexibility and power plus ease of use.

I do hope seeing more about Lw Core, with good videos explaining things.

small advice to Nt

Pls for GODs sake take the time to do classy vids about CORE with good explainations and great models. it makes the difference, actually.
you cannot advertise a groundbreaking product like happened to be for Core stream video. Bells and whistles are needed as well!

Frank_Geppert
02-06-2009, 05:20 AM
JBT27: I remember the exact opposite story from Murrakai Studios, creating this island of the back of a whale and lots of big architectural scenes. He wrote in a review that he could run bigger textures and scenes in Modo compared to LW. But I also remember that he uses both: LW and Modo to do his jobs.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 05:24 AM
But currently it looks from the video like it is a try to catch up rather than to take over. And unfortunately there is no feature list to judge this seriously.


depends on how you read the information at hand..i may have my pink glasses on, but IF i read it all correctly, then LW will work together with for example Maya very nicely..

and since we already have many studios who animate in Maya and render in LW, the number of such studios is likely to grow when it gets easier to do so.

thats just one, very important factor to calculate.

other things, it seems as LW is about to be as opensource as it can be, without actually being opensource...this opens up for tons of highly advanced plugins for LW.
so even if NT is slow at adding new features into LW, there is no longer any hinders in the way stopping the community to add those features...think FPrime, LWCad, 3DCoat, they all had some difficulties due to the way the old LW was designed, now those difficultes will be gone.

as i see it, CORE is just a core..a platform, or a flowerpot if you want a more poetic description, and from that core, platform or flowerpot something new and wonderfull will arise, simply becouse it is no longer impossible to do so.

id be less impressed if we got state of the art CA tools, fluids or other toys...those are not so important, what is important is that NOW it is possible to get all of those, and more....

theres, what..25 different program languages that will work within LW..25!!
there will be no lack of talent, some talent will be as Dpont has been..generous and free, and other talents will be commercial, but the point is, it is going to be easier to improve LW from now on, for NT and for the community, and this is what the "revolution" is all about.

Frank_Geppert
02-06-2009, 05:28 AM
Pls for GODs sake take the time to do classy vids about CORE with good explainations and great models. it makes the difference, actually.
you cannot advertise a groundbreaking product like happened to be for Core stream video. Bells and whistles are needed as well!

A nice website with screenshots will do as well. Videos are needed only to showcase the product in action. Pouring too much money into presentation is not always needed.

I only want to see new features, workflow and progress. Text, images and a few videos of certain tools are sufficient to showcase this.

The last presentation was different because only little features have been showcased. The rest of the presentation dealt with the concept, the idea, the future of the product.

Frank_Geppert
02-06-2009, 05:36 AM
...there will be no lack of talent, some talent will be as Dpont has been..generous and free, and other talents will be commercial, but the point is, it is going to be easier to improve LW from now on, for NT and for the community, and this is what the "revolution" is all about.

I understand your pov, Pete. And I agree. In the long run LW core could be a very important industry factor.

But my point of view is a bit different. I will not buy Maya to communicate with Core. I bought Lightwave because it is more affordable than Max or Maya. I bought it because of the great feature set. I have no advantage if it communicates with Maya, except that I am happy about FBX and Collada to export to game engines.

I am also happy to read that everyone can code it with tons of languages. But you can code Blender as well.

First we lose the existing plug-ins and then the new ones will come. There will be a time when I rather stick to 9.6 to be productive enough to do my work.
Even if I share your excitement I also have to do my work and I need certain features, no dreams and no Python languages, I don't earn money with creating plugins.

But I also would understand if WorleyLabs are amazed about Core.

JBT27
02-06-2009, 05:38 AM
Even though CORE is still a year away (whatever they supply by then) it's still a HUGE application that has been built in just 3yrs by a small team, I read somewhere that XSI took over 4yrs to develop.

Personally, I'm extremely sceptical that CORE will be anything more than an unstable tech demo by the end of the year but I'd like to be proved wrong.

I'd have to agree - at this point it may simply be that Core and NT needs us (for beta testing) and our money to keep going, but even then, it's the big first step, whatever state it's in at the end of the year.

Julian.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 06:15 AM
First we lose the existing plug-ins and then the new ones will come. There will be a time when I rather stick to 9.6 to be productive enough to do my work.

oh, me too mate ;)

dont misunderstand me...I, just as you, am dependant on many plugins and ill propably will be spending most of my work-time with 9.6.

i also do not have need for Maya or similiar, but the fact is that sooner or later there will be more jobs for LW people, it may not affect you or me greatly, unless we seek employment or work freelance with Maya/other app studios.

my excitement is based on simply the facts that what ever plugins we had, can be redone, and plugins or functions we couldnt have, can be done now.
i quess ill be using 9.6 for the rest of the year before Core will be competible with 9.6 (untill it has features or plugins that replace those of 9.6).

the shoe does not fit everyone, and we are all looking for different functions for different needs.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 06:16 AM
hhmmm...instead of bashing MODO 401, we are going off topic and speaking about the CORE lol

biliousfrog
02-06-2009, 06:20 AM
I'd have to agree - at this point it may simply be that Core and NT needs us (for beta testing) and our money to keep going, but even then, it's the big first step, whatever state it's in at the end of the year.

Julian.

What I'm thinking is if I jump in now and pay $395 and the product released at the end of the year is not equal to or better than 9.6, I've not only wasted $395 but also several months that I could have put to something else. If I then go for the next year at $695 ($1090) I'd expect something better than Modo (which is cheaper)+LW 9.6...plus Modo would also be another year ahead...

Nemoid
02-06-2009, 06:29 AM
A nice website with screenshots will do as well. Videos are needed only to showcase the product in action. Pouring too much money into presentation is not always needed.

I only want to see new features, workflow and progress. Text, images and a few videos of certain tools are sufficient to showcase this.

The last presentation was different because only little features have been showcased. The rest of the presentation dealt with the concept, the idea, the future of the product.

could also be, but you have to present the product into a cool way.

Think to new potential customers. they have to see and see well how the product behaves and get precise information about it. Nt have to do more efforts in the marketing/advertising field ( its an art in itself).

watch Maxon website for example...

btw Modo isn't bad. they're slow in development tho. They present very well a yet incomplete product :agree:

dmack
02-06-2009, 06:33 AM
I don't get this, people are talking about CORE as if it's some sort of reality. We've not SEEN anything short of a couple of very very basic clips from Core (and they didn't seem to function as expected!). We know it's at least a year away and we have no idea of the expected feature list at that point. It's just all fantasy at the moment as far as I can see. Is this whole CORE thing a wishlist at this stage or an application? I think Fred from PMG has got it bang on at the moment. I'd love to be proven wrong but RIGHT NOW, there's NOTHING that is VISIBLE that should be creating this excitement. Call me grumpy but that's how I see it right now.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 06:34 AM
what im thinking, is to take part immeadetly and learn a lot at the beta forums, i learned so much from 9.0 to 9.6 at the beta forums that werent even mentioned on the public forums.

there is certainly the risk of an unstable core, something that is unusable to work with..but ill still have 9.6 to rely on.

if CORE will be stable and functional at the end of the year, well then i have not only saved 300 dollars, but also learned a lot on the way.

my biggest problem with all this is not related to NT or LW..it is to figure out how i can order the Core without my wife finding out, alternatively to get her support my decision to get Core....
to be honest i already have far too much to do to have any time for new apps...work, studies and occasional projects will LW doesnt allow much more time for Core, specially considering that the little time i have left over will have to go to social life, wife and training too....

mav3rick
02-06-2009, 06:36 AM
PIMP HAVE PUT EYE ON YOU

resistance is futile you will be assimilated sooner or later.

BazC
02-06-2009, 06:37 AM
I just did a quick test of Modo 283,000 raw polys (565,000 ogl polys) on screen and it's still silky smooth, switch to subd (9,000,000 ogl polys) and it's still fine for both navigation and mesh editing, just slight delays when initialising tools. So I wouldn't call it slow exactly. It does suffer a bit with large numbers of mesh items or a lot of large textures though.

I would say LW does have an edge with complex scenes though, I'm hoping 401 will improve things in that area.

LW core is looking promising, hope there'll be snippets of news about development for those of us who won't be on the Harcore beta!?

Edit just tried 1,000,000 raw polys and it's still fine, the next subdivide took a while, maybe 20 secs, then it crashed lol! Then again that was a mesh of around 4,000,000 polys.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 06:38 AM
regarding my belief in CORE...it is not so much about the techlist, the video preview or things like that, it is becouse i truly believe in Jay and the team.

look what they did with 9.X...its amazing in it self alone, and then they say that they did it with their hands tied to their backs thanks to the many limitations of LW, which they now removed...how can i NOT to be exited about CORE?

has any application improved so drastically as 9.0 did to 9.6, not to mention LW 8?

dmack
02-06-2009, 06:40 AM
Pete,

It's going to be tough with the wife...She'll ask..."what does it do?" You'll have to say "I have no idea, they didn't show anything". She'll say, "wow, yet you want to buy it?", then you'll have ot talk about the hype...and she'll ask "was it a good presentation then?" and then you'll have to avoid answering that one.

cresshead
02-06-2009, 06:41 AM
Q for modo users...i bought the toon character modeling video from lux a while back and even though i don't use modo found it interseting to watch how they model in modo...one thing that never appeared in the video's was any kind of history to the modeling ...it seems very similar to lightwave as what you built was destructive in that youcouldn't step back thru any history like say xsi or maya and there appeared to be model 'stack' for tools so you could open them up at a later time and re ajust them...

is history/stack due for modo atr some point or are they going forward without that feature in modo?

mav3rick
02-06-2009, 06:41 AM
I just did a quick test of Modo 283,000 raw polys (565,000 ogl polys) on screen and it's still silky smooth, switch to subd (9,000,000 ogl polys) and it's still fine for both navigation and mesh editing, just slight delays when initialising tools. So I wouldn't call it slow exactly. It does suffer a bit with large numbers of mesh items or a lot of large textures though.

I would say LW does have an edge with complex scenes though, I'm hoping 401 will improve things in that area.

LW core is looking promising, hope there'll be snippets of news about development for those of us who won't be on the Harcore beta!?

Edit just tried 1,000,000 raw polys and it's still fine, the next subdivide took a while, maybe 20 secs, then it crashed lol! Then again that was a mesh of around 4,000,000 polys.

lw core uses uses like 1/5th of the memory Modo uses for the same amount of geometry how about that info ? not to tell amount of polygons it can chew

dmack
02-06-2009, 06:45 AM
So people have got core? I thought it was weeks away?

biliousfrog
02-06-2009, 06:45 AM
lw core uses uses like 1/5th of the memory Modo uses for the same amount of geometry how about that info ? not to tell amount of polygons it can chew

You're using CORE at the moment are you? Can you also tell everyone what else it does because nobody else seems to have a clue.

cresshead
02-06-2009, 06:46 AM
lw core uses uses like 1/5th of the memory Modo uses for the same amount of geometry how about that info ? not to tell amount of polygons it can chew

how do you know that exactly?

mav3rick
02-06-2009, 06:52 AM
the guy with a bible told me .... ;) :alien:

BazC
02-06-2009, 06:52 AM
is history/stack due for modo atr some point or are they going forward without that feature in modo?

It's been requested many times but no word from Lux as to whether it's planned or not.

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 06:53 AM
...and she'll ask "was it a good presentation then?" and then you'll have to avoid answering that one.

the presentation was lousy, but it always has been..for 9.0, the same bad and unimpressive...remember the video presentation of a null? lol

no, i never cared so much about what the presentator can do with LW, what i care for is what i can use "that tool" for.

there was not too much to see, other than the instanced boxes, but to be honest..thats exactly the tool id like to have right now, im making a robotic chain linked arm and id propably put the instancing into a good use immeadetly, the end result would be more impressive than a twisted box.

as for my wife, she will ask me..do you really need it? and ill force a tear or two out of my eyes, look so much a little boy i can and with a weak, sniffle ill say "...yes, it is very important for me"..and when she is looking at me with disqust, ill dry my tears and say, now with a manly voice " ILL MAKE MONEY WITH IT!!...ILL BUY JEWELS AND SHINY THINGS WITH THE MONEY I MAKE WITH THE CORE!!

it should work :D

if it doesnt..ill just order it and say nothing lol

BazC
02-06-2009, 06:54 AM
lw core uses uses like 1/5th of the memory Modo uses for the same amount of geometry how about that info ? not to tell amount of polygons it can chew

Really? I've never compared them, though I do believe LW has a lighter memory footprint than Modo. I'd be surprised if Modo used five times as much though. I'll see if I can check and let you know :)

cresshead
02-06-2009, 06:56 AM
the guy with a bible told me .... ;)

ahh sorry thought it may have been this bird....little bird eh...don't know him!

http://weblogs.newsday.com/entertainment/tv/blog/FredRogers_BigBird.jpg

SBowie
02-06-2009, 06:58 AM
Every time I go past the opening page of their 401 introduction It crashes my browser.
Right now I would prefer a 404 than their 401.I wanted to see the reported quality of these vids for myself too - but they don't run here in either IE or FF ... hmmmm.

BazC
02-06-2009, 06:58 AM
OK with about 250,000 polys Modeler (9.6) is using around 250mb on my machine, Modo is using 320mb.

cresshead
02-06-2009, 07:01 AM
memory isn't a real probelm nowdays...my old netbok had 2gig...my desktop has 8 gig and memory is cheap...my mac user freiend has 16gig of ram in his 8core...

dmack
02-06-2009, 07:03 AM
Pete,

HD instance and you've got that right now inside of Lightwave 9.6.

The REALLY cool thing about LW9.6 over CORE is that CORE is a four letter word, whereas Lightwave 9.6 is an actual application! Cool eh! :)

cresshead
02-06-2009, 07:20 AM
It's been requested many times but no word from Lux as to whether it's planned or not.

that's what i thought, modo seems to be a re invented 'modeler' and to add history or a stack [or both] may end up taking modo down the strap on/workaround development added plugin...whereas LW-Core has this concept in mind from day 1...1st hour of birth!...

we as yet don't know what's going to be up n running in lw-core once we download it...it may just be a modeler for now...but looking ahead it's a good base to build on.

maybe modo 401 WILL get a modeling stack..i hope so.they're still releaseing info on it over the next couple of weeks so who know's...i do think that history and a stack should be high priority for lux on this, and probably more so than adding bones and particles...let's hope they had this in mind all along and it just drops into place ..modo needs to look 'current thinking' to keep up with progfress on other apps.

Pavlov
02-06-2009, 07:22 AM
I still feel like most long-time LW users have a huge chip on their shoulder about Modo and the argument against it has always been, 'it doesn't have bones, particles, animation...blah, blah, blah'.

What they miss is all the stuff it does have. It isn't an all in one solution (yet) but what they do have is way beyond what's in Lightwave. I'm not knocking Lightwave but, until Core is released, stable and taking seats from the other apps, it's a jack of all trades app that isn't even a master of one.

You're comparing an ancient app that can do a lot of things reasonably well at a great price to a fairly new app that can do a few things brilliantly. The major difference is that Lightwave has gone as far as it can, which is why they've developed Core, but Modo already has a great foundation which is constantly being built upon and, although it doesn't have complex animation tools, it does have animation built in and can read MDD's...so Modo + Blender is a pretty powerful combo.

Sorry, cant agree.
Lightwave 9.6 has a SDK, in first place. Old and limitated, but it has it.
This means LW has ALSO Fprime, LWcad, Kray and HD instance, just to make an example.
And this is far beyond what Modo has: Fprime is by far the best progressive unbiased on the market. Kray is on pair of Vray if not better on some tasks, and LW's engine alone is better than Modo's. Kray quality is even higher (and it has instancing itself). LWcad toolset is unmatched, even if some new modo tool's are trying to mimick them.
Replicators are nice but seem to do, probably, what HDinstance can do for a lot of time, and HD instance has some unique selling points on the whole market, not only in LW arena.
I dont care if a feature is proprietary or not, until i can work with it. And i can grant most PRO users are with me on this. I own an ArchViz studio: i couldnt use Modo alone, not even remotely. I use LW alone (plus Fprime, LWcad, Kray, Fryrender) and i think we get good results. Other first quality VIZ studios are LW based, like Stack-Studios, MIR and other.

So, i like Modo and how it "feels" and for sure i keep an eye there too, but LW 9.6 now, and soon CORE in a much wider measure, are more complete and powerful solutions for production.


Paolo

*Pete*
02-06-2009, 07:22 AM
Pete,

HD instance and you've got that right now inside of Lightwave 9.6.

The REALLY cool thing about LW9.6 over CORE is that CORE is a four letter word, whereas Lightwave 9.6 is an actual application! Cool eh! :)

I have HDInstance...wonderfull as it is, it has limitations.

either way..two HDInstance plugins cost the same as one CORE.

Darth Mole
02-06-2009, 07:44 AM
Well the Luxology team do a very good job of selling their new features, whatever they are. Already I can feel myself being drawn into dropping another couple hundred $ on 401- even though i just today signed up for HardCORE.

Thing is, having invested in Modo from v1 right through 302, I really need it to come through. I've spent enough money that now I need 401 to deliver on stability and features - because, frankly, it really doesn't get used that much. And I'd like to, having paid for it!

Riff_Masteroff
02-06-2009, 07:46 AM
Possible, but not probable: rewrite Modo as a plugin to LW Core
Or is this not possible?

JBT27
02-06-2009, 07:47 AM
JBT27: I remember the exact opposite story from Murrakai Studios, creating this island of the back of a whale and lots of big architectural scenes. He wrote in a review that he could run bigger textures and scenes in Modo compared to LW. But I also remember that he uses both: LW and Modo to do his jobs.

Yes, I remember - those images are stunning!

I have to wonder, genuinely, if it's simply my older hardware.

It's not that I cannot use Modo, and for simpler things it's great, it's just that it bogs down alot sooner than LW.

I really wish I could get it to work like others say it does :)

But still, when (and if) I ever get some more up-to-date gear, we shall see then :D

Julian.

cresshead
02-06-2009, 07:55 AM
'''maya''' ..plug that into the lwcore!

....or carrara...or bryce.....poser...dazstudio...nahhh..the KILLER thing would be 'notepad'!

iluxa
02-06-2009, 07:58 AM
Why? What would be achieved? Just... ???

Where do people get ideas like this from? I want to know. I want to experience it to better understand it.

Via python/perl. I saw several such applications(blender with different editions), additionally c-language support(win32ole and ect).

Pavlov
02-06-2009, 08:24 AM
(lollllll)

biliousfrog
02-06-2009, 10:19 AM
Sorry, cant agree.
Lightwave 9.6 has a SDK, in first place. Old and limitated, but it has it.
This means LW has ALSO Fprime, LWcad, Kray and HD instance, just to make an example.
And this is far beyond what Modo has: Fprime is by far the best progressive unbiased on the market. Kray is on pair of Vray if not better on some tasks, and LW's engine alone is better than Modo's. Kray quality is even higher (and it has instancing itself). LWcad toolset is unmatched, even if some new modo tool's are trying to mimick them.
Replicators are nice but seem to do, probably, what HDinstance can do for a lot of time, and HD instance has some unique selling points on the whole market, not only in LW arena.
I dont care if a feature is proprietary or not, until i can work with it. And i can grant most PRO users are with me on this. I own an ArchViz studio: i couldnt use Modo alone, not even remotely. I use LW alone (plus Fprime, LWcad, Kray, Fryrender) and i think we get good results. Other first quality VIZ studios are LW based, like Stack-Studios, MIR and other.

So, i like Modo and how it "feels" and for sure i keep an eye there too, but LW 9.6 now, and soon CORE in a much wider measure, are more complete and powerful solutions for production.


Paolo

:lol:

You do realise that your argument that Lightwave has better features was just a list of expensive, third party plugins?

You say that you use Lightwave 'alone' but then list 4 plugins which offer something that Lightwave doesn't have built in...not really 'just' Lightwave is it? It's a total of 5 different tools...and here's the thing...

FPrime doesn't currently work with 9.6 unless you restrict yourself to extremely basic surfaces and the old lights...Modo has a realtime previewer built in.

LWCAD was created to make up for LW's terrible snapping and lack of accurate modelling tools. I can't say that Modo has all the functions of LWCAD built in but it certainly has most of the features that I ever use in LWCAD.

As for Kray and Fry...well there's nothing stopping you from using LWO's from Modo. In fact, Modo's renderer is just as good as Kray from what I've seen.

...and the final part, 'LW 9.6 now, and soon CORE in a much wider measure, are more complete and powerful solutions for production.'

...well, the CORE part - that's just nonesense unless you've actually used it because all I've seen is the ability to create a box by drawing a circle and move some tabs about.

So, although I respect your right to disagree, your argument was a waste of server space. :neener:

cresshead
02-06-2009, 10:26 AM
...well, the CORE part - that's just nonesense unless you've actually used it because all I've seen is the ability to create a box by drawing a circle and move some tabs about.

So, although I respect your right to disagree, your argument was a waste of server space. :neener:

no one except those at newtek could come and disagree or agree on that currently..and actually even when core is downloadable people can only discuss on the beta forums...we'll have to leave it to newtek to show you the goods in future video's and screengrabs on web pages.

I hope it's cool...it certainly looks a great starting point for a new vrsion of lightwave.

Riff_Masteroff
02-06-2009, 10:29 AM
Not being a programmer kind of guy, I was just trying to get a handle on Jay's intentions on just how open LightWave might become to others.

Long ago Brad Peebler said that he still supported and felt he was part of the LightWave community. From what others say Modo has some better modeler stuff than 9.6. LWCAD also has some better modeler stuff than 9.6. LightWave's modeler has stood the test of time but has not been further developed very much. Modo users currently export their work to other apps for hair and animating.

So could it be possible for Modo ppl to create their meshes within the LW framework. Then use other parts of LW for other processes. If so, Lux could still earn a living. The long standing spit/rent in LightWave's developer fabric could be healed (?). And I prolly would fall on the floor rolling and laughing.

Pavlov
02-06-2009, 10:35 AM
You do realise that your argument that Lightwave has better features was just a list of expensive, third party plugins?

Did you read my post ?
I didnt say anything bad against Modo, i observed that LW is a better production tool than Modo by now, even in archviz area.
I never mentioned pricing: it's hardly a matter for a pro, and anyway LW and its plugins are very cheap.
I explicitly said i dont care if these are plugins; i said that using LW i have access to more power and resources than using Modo, which is a non confutable argument.
If pricing is an issue for you or if you absolutely need native tools to work, that's fine but this wont touch what i said.
Regarding Fprime, we use it currently with no particular issue; regarding Kray, as b-tester i can grant you it's one of the best engines out there, it exceeds Modo's one by several lenghts.
Regading Core, i just said a pair of words which are aligned with papers, and anyway it was not... the "core" of my arguments.
Modo is a pretty app, this was not a bashing, and there are very few arguments against what i'm saying. Please avoid trying to bring the discussion where it was not meant to go.

Paolo

beverins
02-06-2009, 10:43 AM
I wrote this on the Lux forums... just rewrite it here..

I think that Luxology should take a long hard look at the new SDK for Core. If not in 401, then for 402 or as a plugin intermediary a-la VueXstream. Basically, I think that Luxology should make Modo with a live streaming update engine for Core.

Basically, just like Vue Xstream or Messiah. Both are their own program. You don't need Lightwave to run either one. However, they both include a thinclient plugin that allows the data to stream to the LW application.

Basically, what I would hope is that Modo - using the new SDK - would be able to essentially "replace" the existing modeler. I know, Core has a new modeler of its own, with some nice features. But here's the visuals...

You make something basic in Core... pass it on to Modo using the plugin. The mesh loads into Modo. You use whatever tools Modo has that Core doesn't (if there IS anything, or maybe you just prefer Modo to do what you want). Any and all activity on the mesh is immediately shown up in Core including bitmaps and surfaces as possible. You then place a keyframe in Core. You UPDATE the model in Modo. You keyframe that update. You place bones into the mesh in Core. You render in Core.. or maybe you prefer rendering in Modo... Maybe now you load in VueXstream or maybe Kray or Maxwell. Now you've got all these programs working simultaneously with their particular strengths playing to your final product.

Note that at no time is Modo subverted. Neither is Core. Both programs make money. Both companies can still have their "competitor's product" stance.

adamredwoods
02-06-2009, 11:11 AM
I've seen more of Modo 401 than of LW Core, so far...

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 11:16 AM
Kfinla, I hope you don't mind my using your quote, but it gives me an opportunity to address this impression. LightWave has always been targeted more towards artists than the uber tech types that Maya serves. We will not change our focus to be more technical than necessary; that said, in order for us to meet the requests of all of the customers who have commented, we need a modern, stable and capable platform. In order to do so, we have to expand the technical abilities and range of that platform. As a result, you get the scripting, full access for the SDK, and so on.

We are not stopping there, however, but rather using that approach as a beginning. The whole idea is to base new technology on a very versatile platform, but to acknowledge and embrace why people are using products like this in the first place: to create. Creation is an inherently artistic pursuit.

By building a base that can handle anything, that is versatile, fast, and so on, we can leverage that base to explore interesting, artist-centric workflows; we can do this, and at the same time, offer the more technically-oriented the type of access and capability that Maya offers. The benefits here allow for LightWave CORE, via python, SWIG, our new file formats, and so on, to more easily integrate into existing pipelines built with Maya as the basis. So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.All the reasons why I'm excited about CORE. :thumbsup:


Even though CORE is still a year away (whatever they supply by then) it's still a HUGE application that has been built in just 3yrs by a small team, I read somewhere that XSI took over 4yrs to develop.

Personally, I'm extremely skeptical that CORE will be anything more than an unstable tech demo by the end of the year but I'd like to be proved wrong.Ahh biliosfrog...always the pessimist...
And this is not aimed entirely at you, but it drives me crazy this repeated pessimistic attitude about LW from some 'users' on this forum. The constant complaining is baffling to me...if you feel it's that bad, don't use it. You do realize no one is forcing you to use it, right? I understand your concern to a degree about CORE because NT hasn't revealed everything yet. BUT GO READ THE TECH FAQ's, it's amazing!!! No sane 3D user (and LW user especially) could not be excited about the possibilities.

So either NT is just bold facing lying, or they've really got something here. And after this last 9 cycle, I think the evidence is in favor that they really do have something.

biliousfrog
02-06-2009, 11:42 AM
hehe...well, I think that in the grand scheme of things there needs to be a few people trying to keep the others grounded. In all honesty, ANY company, even myself with no coding knowledge whatsoever, could release a spec list and ask for money to help develop it but very few people outside of the Lightwave community would jump at the chance before seeing the actual product.

PMG's press release sums it up nicely. Until there's some hard facts and solid proof the words on the tech faq's are just a list of features that might get included along the line...maybe not for years...maybe, in the case of UV tools in 9.6, not at all.

It's not a case of NT lying, it's a case of people reading too much into a press release that just lists some potential features of a product that hasn't been released yet.

Am I excited by the possibilities of CORE - yes...but I'm also excited by the possibility of flying cars and day trips to mars.

adamredwoods
02-06-2009, 11:47 AM
I'm with you, bfrog, I think the hype and marketing is great, but I'm not drinking the kool-aid just yet. Maybe I'll pay for the early beta-testing, but I'm not holding my breath for an earth-shattering application.

LW Core sounds great on paper, but Modo401 has eye-candy to back up their claims. Still, chances are I'll probably purchase core, just whether it's now or in two years is the question.

I'm waiting for more demos before any money leaves my mattress.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 12:10 PM
hehe...well, I think that in the grand scheme of things there needs to be a few people trying to keep the others grounded. In all honesty, ANY company, even myself with no coding knowledge whatsoever, could release a spec list and ask for money to help develop it but very few people outside of the Lightwave community would jump at the chance before seeing the actual product.

PMG's press release sums it up nicely. Until there's some hard facts and solid proof the words on the tech faq's are just a list of features that might get included along the line...maybe not for years...maybe, in the case of UV tools in 9.6, not at all.

It's not a case of NT lying, it's a case of people reading too much into a press release that just lists some potential features of a product that hasn't been released yet.

Am I excited by the possibilities of CORE - yes...but I'm also excited by the possibility of flying cars and day trips to mars.I understand your concern, really, I wish NT would just shut some peoples mouths and show more videos. But I think were your analogy falls apart is that this isn't just some company. They've been in business for many years now, and not just that...proven themselves with a solid & complete product, and particularly with this last 9 cycle have proven themselves. It's why I said I think the evidence is in favor that they really do have something.

I don't think it's a matter of people readying to much in to it, it's not speculation anymore. We're going off of what they have posted. So the only two options are: NT is just bold facing lying, or they've really got something here. I've been a very happy LW user for about 9yrs now. It isn't perfect, but no app is. But being a happy LW user for many years, NT's commitment to it's users, accompanied with a Tech Spec. like that makes me very excited.

beverins
02-06-2009, 12:41 PM
I'm waiting for the EDU pricing to buy Core... I wish they'd HUIRRY UP WITH THAT...

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 01:11 PM
Basically it is a silly idea as subpatched geometry isn't fully interchangeable between the two applications due to differences in algorithms. Let's say I create a subpatch model in modo and load it into LightWave. The model will look identical at first glance, but upon closer inspection the model will be all wonky in places and no longer resemble what you modeled in modo. This problem gets worse the more complex and detailed your mesh is.

I would be surprised if subd smoothing was identical in Core and modo, seing as it isn't the case now.You could also just un-subpatch in Modo, export out, and sub-patch in Core.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 01:27 PM
The whole point is that once subpatched the topology will be different due to differences in the smoothing algorithms.

The poly mesh will be identical in the two applications until it is smoothed.But if it's better, or even as good in CORE, what difference would it make if it's 'different'?

leuey
02-06-2009, 01:28 PM
Hey JBT27, I noticed you're using a Quadro 3400 - I think that's probably your problem with modo. modo is very finicky with graphics cards...and I don't think that's one of the 'good ones'. modo has no excuses for not working with all cards, but that's kind of the reality. I have a gforce 8800 GT on my Mac Pro (XP and Vista 64 via bootcamp) and modo is very fast and stable with it. If you're serious about modo I would probably get a new card. It would be better if modo 'just worked' - I kind of feel like the minuses of VBO's outweight the pluses (super fast item movement of giant items...I was rm spinning 2 million poly objects at at least 30fps in Vista 64 with the 401 beta easily) but the wrong card and it's slowville...

Kind of hard to compare 401 to Core....401 is just an upgrade to an evolving product that will be in people's hands before too long...it's kind of hard to tell what Core is capable of yet but it certainly seems like the right direction.

anyway..

-Greg


Yes, I remember - those images are stunning!

I have to wonder, genuinely, if it's simply my older hardware.

It's not that I cannot use Modo, and for simpler things it's great, it's just that it bogs down alot sooner than LW.

I really wish I could get it to work like others say it does :)

But still, when (and if) I ever get some more up-to-date gear, we shall see then :D

Julian.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 01:49 PM
Define better ... ? There isn't necessarily a "better" in this case.

The difference matters because my current modo models look like crap if I load them into LightWave and apply subd smoothing there. This is no fault of LightWave's! The smoothing algorithm is simply different and this difference matters a whole lot as you will get a ton of "bad areas" on tight subd models. Particularly anything hard surface with many parts and intersections.

This difference very much matters.

better
Pronunciation: \ˈbe-tər\
Function: adjective

1. Improved.
2. more advantages

:p (I'm just messing with you)

My point is, you're assuming that it won't look as good in CORE if something was written to make the two apps talk. I think it's just that...an assumption. Luxology seems to think it's not that way with their partnering up with DS such and such, and Bently yada yada.

JBT27
02-06-2009, 01:58 PM
Hey JBT27, I noticed you're using a Quadro 3400 - I think that's probably your problem with modo. modo is very finicky with graphics cards...and I don't think that's one of the 'good ones'. modo has no excuses for not working with all cards, but that's kind of the reality. I have a gforce 8800 GT on my Mac Pro (XP and Vista 64 via bootcamp) and modo is very fast and stable with it. If you're serious about modo I would probably get a new card. It would be better if modo 'just worked' - I kind of feel like the minuses of VBO's outweight the pluses (super fast item movement of giant items...I was rm spinning 2 million poly objects at at least 30fps in Vista 64 with the 401 beta easily) but the wrong card and it's slowville...

Kind of hard to compare 401 to Core....401 is just an upgrade to an evolving product that will be in people's hands before too long...it's kind of hard to tell what Core is capable of yet but it certainly seems like the right direction.

anyway..

-Greg

That's useful - thanks very much :thumbsup:

I have half-suspected it might be the card - there was talk of such things around the Modo 301 days, if not before, which probably accounted for some having blistering performance out of Modo, and others doing treacle-wading.

It's an academic point, and I have nothing to compare it with, but as I say, moving actual polys around in groups of tens of thousands can be very painful!

I'll look into getting one of these then.

Can anyone else confirm Greg's idea, out of interest? .....I know, wrong forums, but since I'm here..... :D

Julian.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 02:01 PM
Heh, I'm really not sure that you are reading what I write. Try reading my posts again :)

It is not about looking "good". It is about producing 100% identical results when subd smoothing polygons. Currently this is not the case, and I don't see it changing. Luxology uses an in-house custom smoothing algorithm based on Catmull-Clark as far as I understand. NewTek uses different algorithms for LightWave. As long as they are not using the exact same algorithm you won't get 100% identical results and in the worst cases the meshes really mess up in tight spots.I understand your point. But what I'm saying is so what if it's not 100% identical IF the result looks as good if not cleaner. It's the result your after right?

gerry_g
02-06-2009, 02:24 PM
For one, different smoothing algorithms interpret the limit surface in different ways, some create an implicit surface that lies entirely within the boundary of the limit surface others may go way up to it even cross it causing the model to be physically larger or smaller depending on which is used. Lightwave has CC's, Modo keep implying there gonna implement the same but haven't done it and worse Modos subs have interpolated uv's where as Lightwave only allows interpolation in it's native sub mode so there is zero common ground between the two cutting you off from all of Modos most useful tools. So unless you're working on a frozen mesh there's little common ground to be had.

Andyjaggy
02-06-2009, 02:47 PM
What is everyone's strange fascination with merging modo and core??? I don't understand where people are coming up with these ridiculous ideas, are you smoking something?

calilifestyle
02-06-2009, 02:55 PM
What is everyone's strange fascination with merging modo and core??? I don't understand where people are coming up with these ridiculous ideas, are you smoking something?

Sharing is caring.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 03:02 PM
What is everyone's strange fascination with merging modo and core??? I don't understand where people are coming up with these ridiculous ideas, are you smoking something?I don't want to, I don't even own it. I'm using LW and Maya.

hrgiger
02-06-2009, 03:06 PM
If Newtek does indeed have Core released by Q4 (which I'm skeptical) and it's pretty much a full program, then I wouldn't want NT and Lux to merge anyway. They're too slow over there.

Limbus
02-06-2009, 03:11 PM
:lol:
FPrime doesn't currently work with 9.6 unless you restrict yourself to extremely basic surfaces and the old lights...Modo has a realtime previewer built in.
Modos Realtime Previewer is rather slow and it really brings down Modos speed as well. In most scenes I work on I ahve to tunr it off to get a good feedback speed in modo. And I really dont understand why you say that you have to restrict yourself to "extremely basic surfacing" with fprime and 9.6. The old layer system works and it is by no means extremely basic.


LWCAD was created to make up for LW's terrible snapping and lack of accurate modelling tools. I can't say that Modo has all the functions of LWCAD built in but it certainly has most of the features that I ever use in LWCAD.

For me Modo does not come close to what LWCAD does. Especially the snap funcions are much better in LWCAD.


As for Kray and Fry...well there's nothing stopping you from using LWO's from Modo. In fact, Modo's renderer is just as good as Kray from what I've seen.
Then maybe you should use them both. Kray is lightyears ahead of modo when it comes to GI with lots of bounces and blurry reflections. Caustics are also very nice in Kray.

I really hope blurry reflections and GI (especially more than 3 bounces and sample placement)are improved in Modo 401.

Cheers, Florian

Andyjaggy
02-06-2009, 03:14 PM
Yeah they are both great applications, but I really don't see any reason to merge them, that's just silly talk.

Besides it will never ever ever happen.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 03:18 PM
For me Modo does not come close to what LWCAD does. Especially the snap funcions are much better in LWCAD.
Cheers, FlorianLWCAD is AMAZING! (yes I'm yelling it)

JBT27
02-06-2009, 03:21 PM
Modos Realtime Previewer is rather slow and it really brings down Modos speed as well. In most scenes I work on I ahve to tunr it off to get a good feedback speed in modo. And I really dont understand why you say that you have to restrict yourself to "extremely basic surfacing" with fprime and 9.6. The old layer system works and it is by no means extremely basic.

<snip>

Cheers, Florian

Sorry....can't resist....."Modo's Realtime Previewer is rather slow"..... :D

I love irony!

Julian.

Andyjaggy
02-06-2009, 03:26 PM
I just model in notepad by writing the coordinates for each vertex by hand.

jasonwestmas
02-06-2009, 03:33 PM
Kfinla, I hope you don't mind my using your quote, but it gives me an opportunity to address this impression. LightWave has always been targeted more towards artists than the uber tech types that Maya serves. We will not change our focus to be more technical than necessary; that said, in order for us to meet the requests of all of the customers who have commented, we need a modern, stable and capable platform. In order to do so, we have to expand the technical abilities and range of that platform. As a result, you get the scripting, full access for the SDK, and so on.

We are not stopping there, however, but rather using that approach as a beginning. The whole idea is to base new technology on a very versatile platform, but to acknowledge and embrace why people are using products like this in the first place: to create. Creation is an inherently artistic pursuit.

By building a base that can handle anything, that is versatile, fast, and so on, we can leverage that base to explore interesting, artist-centric workflows; we can do this, and at the same time, offer the more technically-oriented the type of access and capability that Maya offers. The benefits here allow for LightWave CORE, via python, SWIG, our new file formats, and so on, to more easily integrate into existing pipelines built with Maya as the basis. So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.


Beautiful balancing act Jay! Beautiful frame of mind. I didn't realize this was in NT's plans but once I saw the presentation it was a Little more obvious.

Larry_g1s
02-06-2009, 03:33 PM
I just model in notepad by writing the coordinates for each vertex by hand.:lol:

GregMalick
02-06-2009, 03:38 PM
Hey JBT27, I noticed you're using a Quadro 3400 - I think that's probably your problem with modo. modo is very finicky with graphics cards...and I don't think that's one of the 'good ones'. modo has no excuses for not working with all cards, but that's kind of the reality. I have a gforce 8800 GT on my Mac Pro (XP and Vista 64 via bootcamp) and modo is very fast and stable with it. If you're serious about modo I would probably get a new card. It would be better if modo 'just worked' - I kind of feel like the minuses of VBO's outweight the pluses (super fast item movement of giant items...I was rm spinning 2 million poly objects at at least 30fps in Vista 64 with the 401 beta easily) but the wrong card and it's slowville...

Kind of hard to compare 401 to Core....401 is just an upgrade to an evolving product that will be in people's hands before too long...it's kind of hard to tell what Core is capable of yet but it certainly seems like the right direction.

anyway..

-Greg

Hey! I'm listening to you on the Lux modcast right now.
Nice to see you around.

Limbus
02-06-2009, 03:48 PM
Sorry....can't resist....."Modo's Realtime Previewer is rather slow"..... :D

I love irony!

Julian.

Compared to FPrime it is.

Limbus
02-06-2009, 03:49 PM
I just model in notepad by writing the coordinates for each vertex by hand.

Hey, that is how I started in 3D with POVRay on an awesome intel 286 computer with two 30 MB harddrives.

jasonwestmas
02-06-2009, 03:57 PM
Hey, that is how I started in 3D with POVRay on an awesome intel 286 computer with two 30 MB harddrives.

That's exactly why I didn't get into modeling till Zbrush 1.5 came out.:thumbsup:

lwanmtr
02-06-2009, 04:29 PM
I wrote this on the Lux forums... just rewrite it here..

I think that Luxology should take a long hard look at the new SDK for Core. If not in 401, then for 402 or as a plugin intermediary a-la VueXstream. Basically, I think that Luxology should make Modo with a live streaming update engine for Core.

Note that at no time is Modo subverted. Neither is Core. Both programs make money. Both companies can still have their "competitor's product" stance.

The fact is that Modo IS competing against LW and as such I really doubt that Lux would make such a plugin. Really, look at exhisting apps..how many of the 3D packages communicate in this way? None. (youcant include things like Vue, MB, etc.. as those arent the same thing). I can honestly see no advantage to it because you'd have to have modo and core loaded..and weren't people screaming for a unified app to avoid that?

Besides, while I think Modo is a decent program, I can see no real advantage to using it, if Core is all it's being tauted as.
As for 401, the pics are neat..but I'm not holding my breath for a timely release...The guys at Lux are not known for being quick. hehe.

ncr100
02-06-2009, 04:51 PM
as for my wife, she will ask me..do you really need it? and ill force a tear or two out of my eyes, look so much a little boy i can and with a weak, sniffle ill say "...yes, it is very important for me"..and when she is looking at me with disqust, ill dry my tears and say, now with a manly voice " ILL MAKE MONEY WITH IT!!...ILL BUY JEWELS AND SHINY THINGS WITH THE MONEY I MAKE WITH THE CORE!!

it should work :D

if it doesnt..ill just order it and say nothing lol

I think you are an admirable hubby.

Stooch
02-06-2009, 06:25 PM
I just model in notepad by writing the coordinates for each vertex by hand.

oh yeah. I carve my models out of diamonds and then digitize their negative molds. I do all of this while being hard.

Earl
02-06-2009, 06:31 PM
I do all of this while being hard.
Whoa. Too much information. :stop:

cresshead
02-06-2009, 06:42 PM
just listened to the latest modcast and was quite abit dedicated to lightwave core in it...brad peebler seem pretty good on the release as he said it get the world interested in 3d which helps everyone really

JMCarrigan
02-06-2009, 06:45 PM
Whoa. Too much information. :stop:

Dang Earl. Warn me when you're gonna bring funny!:ohmy:

Earl
02-06-2009, 08:52 PM
Dang Earl. Warn me when you're gonna bring funny!:ohmy:
Sorry. My bad.

Stooch
02-06-2009, 09:29 PM
Sorry. My bad.

lol.

dang... earl...

digefxgrp
02-07-2009, 03:14 AM
i do think that history and a stack should be high priority for lux on thisThen you need to listen to Fridays Modcast, because the way they were discussing it...it isn't a priority. Sounds like they've taken more of a "lets see how Newtek can pull this off and actually make it work..." stance.

Frank_Geppert
02-07-2009, 03:58 AM
Compared to FPrime it is.

I see this very economical. I got Modo for a reduced price around christmas. It was a similar price compared to FPrime. But I get not only a preview renderer, I also get a better modeler, sculpting, 3d-painting, better real-time preview in the modeling viewport (displaying bump maps, spec and more). So I really could improve and get a good add-on to my lightwave.
FPrime would only do the realtime rendering.

For me, Modo is a much much better deal than FPrime, even if there is a slight speed difference. I could extend my options a lot, I get a much wider set of features if I use Modo + LW9.6 instead of FPrime + LW9.6

silviotoledo
02-07-2009, 05:06 AM
For me MODO is the perfect MODELER and have better render than lightwave itself.

The bad news is that is doesn't have the nodal elements lightwave has. Don't have the filters and the animation capabilities that comes with lightwave.

Bones probably on MODO 501 only. So MODO Is a choice for modelers and illustrators, not for animators.

MODO and Lightwave can life together. I really want the best for both! I really love both!

lwanmtr
02-07-2009, 05:16 AM
Better render than LW? I havent seen a single render from Modo that makes me say 'wish lw could do that..'

cresshead
02-07-2009, 05:29 AM
Then you need to listen to Fridays Modcast, because the way they were discussing it...it isn't a priority. Sounds like they've taken more of a "lets see how Newtek can pull this off and actually make it work..." stance.


yeah Brad P is not convinced that having a stack or history help with modeling in many situations..sometimes it does but you also lose the pixel like editing speed/ease/capability of modo and lightwave 9,8,7,6,/5 etc...

i use 3dsmax and lightwave and find having stack for modeling is just fine and i now prefer it overall compared to lightwave 9, so i'm looking forward to playing with lightwave core in a couple of weeks.

Mike_RB
02-07-2009, 06:17 AM
Better render than LW? I havent seen a single render from Modo that makes me say 'wish lw could do that..'

Micropolygons
Billions of polys through instances/replicators/fur?

silviotoledo
02-07-2009, 06:41 AM
Modo uses better the photon maps and is better for interior rendering than Lwave

Also Modo have less GRAIN and is quicker than Lw render.


I also preffer modo renderings in terms of realism, althought it has limited materials.

cresshead
02-07-2009, 06:44 AM
modo also has a bucket renderer like vray, brazil, final render and mental ray

kfinla
02-07-2009, 08:09 AM
I really love that copy/paste pixel treatment of geometry in LW and Modo so I hope that doesn't get lost in LWC. I always miss it in other apps. I can appreciate the complexity of geometry carrying around history and transform nodes though so hopefully there is a way to preserve that or collapse the data on new sections on only the affected sections.

I don't agree about Modo having less grain, I would hold LW's renderer above Modo's for many things, DOF and MB come to mind. They are different, modo's is a bucket renderer so it is inherently better at some tasks ie. astronomical polycounts, huge resolutions.

From the last modcast I would not expect to see history or nodal anything in Modo since the president, vp of marketing and a beta tester all didn't seem to be fans of those workflows. They seemed to be a proud alternative to those methods. I don't think modo has the architecture for it frankly. I was pretty shocked when the material layer system was rolled out in 201. It didn't seem like a very modern approach, and they have certainly had their share of complaints about it and requests for it to be node based, or in my case a hybrid like LW9 that is as powerful, or simple/fast to work with as you need it to be. I'm excited about what appears to be nodal everything in LWC because I feel the Material node workflow in LW9 is handled better than Maya's hypershade ever was.

The INTEGRATED previewer in Modo was a big selling point to me. I have been a Fprime owner since day 1 and really hope LWC has an INTEGRATED equivalent! I don't think I've used viper since LW7, and most seem to agree it is long overdue to be replaced with an improved technology. I'm pretty tired of the continual game of catch-up, and the caveats of what doesn't work now, plus paying extra for Fprime. I Don't like the idea of waiting for a Fprime update that may or may not come for LWC. There was a leaked/found video of an minor Fprime update that worked with HV's in realtime in dec 08 but it was very much based in the LW9 world. I am a bit confused after all the SDK additions in LW 9.6 specifically for Fprime and now with LWC it seems like a huge re-write of the plugin would be necessary. Also confused about Jay Roth's mention of additional updates to the LW 9.x series, at least for Hardcore members. Unless that is a 64bit OSX build it seems a bit like wasted effort to me plus nothing is gonna be compatible with it. Are E-on, Worley or happy digital gonna make 64 bit osx plugins for the LW9 series with a totally new architecture in LWC sitting in the wings?

cresshead
02-07-2009, 08:21 AM
well lw 9.6 is THERE to bridge the gap with a production worthy app until lightwave core has enough stability/features to stand on it's own...that may not be untill end of 2009/start of 2010.

kfinla
02-07-2009, 08:38 AM
well lw 9.6 is THERE to bridge the gap with a production worthy app until lightwave core has enough stability/features to stand on it's own...that may not be untill end of 2009/start of 2010.

Lets hope it is that fast! It is highly likely I will upgrade, but like many I need more info on what is there in LWC, and planned to be done by the 10.0 release. It could very well be a very stripped down app compared to 9.6. I hope not, but it is a real concern. When XSI was re-written it was a real mess till 3.0 which would be like LW 12.0. Sorry I seem to be pessimistic this morning :)

mav3rick
02-07-2009, 09:04 AM
Micropolygons
Billions of polys through instances/replicators/fur?

ffx, hd instance, kray , sasq .........

mav3rick
02-07-2009, 09:08 AM
Modo uses better the photon maps and is better for interior rendering than Lwave

Also Modo have less GRAIN and is quicker than Lw render.


I also preffer modo renderings in terms of realism, althought it has limited materials.

we could discuss this all night long.. 9.6 has really elastic render not to mention save cache and interpolation ... i am sure u didn't even tried to use it..

Nemoid
02-07-2009, 09:25 AM
I think new CORE can allow Newtek to keep part of 9.x code and put it in the new environment.
If possible, this could speed up thngs alot, so that the q4 release date can be respected even if its a complex job. To be realistic i expect a good technology preview this Siggraph and a further release in Q4 or Q1 2010.

About sdk and f prime.

Completely opened sdk is very very VERY important especially for an app like Lightwave which has great plugin authors, like True art ,Pictrix, Viktor(LwCAD) and Pontonnier. i can just imagine what they could be able to do with this new SDK, since they did wonders with the current one.

FPrime. it is a great external renderer and previewer.

Tho, i'd like to see something proprietary and integrated completely within LwCORE.
Also currentv Lw 9.6 render engine is very fast even compared to Fprime, so that preview becomes somewhat more important than F Prime rendering engine itself
New SDK will surely allow Worley to do wonders, but since we do have many apps having a built in preview yet, i'd like better if Newtek engine could be used for that.

More relieable, not coded by an external developer which could slow development, and such.:thumbsup:

Lw current rendering engine is way better than current Modo one it is more refined and used in high level productions (300, dark knight, etc)

last but not least, Modo and LwCORE are totally different products and they'll never merge into one.

Frank_Geppert
02-07-2009, 09:56 AM
Micropolygons, Billions of polys through instances/replicators/fur?


ffx, hd instance, kray , sasq .........

Maverick, can you tell me how much it costs to get all these tools? I do not know it but I am sure Modo is a good and affordable option to have all this in one application, lower price and smoother workflow.

Of course there is always a bigger fish in the sea. ZBrush is better in sculpting, Bodypaint does better painting and some super specialized renderers create better images. But if you want to work on your model as fast and as easy as possible then a software like Modo is very interesting.

It is a tool and not everybody can buy the latest Buford 2000. But often a much cheaper alternative is only a little bit behind the most expensive one.

Limbus
02-07-2009, 10:23 AM
Modo uses better the photon maps and is better for interior rendering than Lwave



Modo has no photon maps. This is a feature that will come in the next version.

Intuition
02-07-2009, 10:34 AM
......snip

By building a base that can handle anything, that is versatile, fast, and so on, we can leverage that base to explore interesting, artist-centric workflows; we can do this, and at the same time, offer the more technically-oriented the type of access and capability that Maya offers. The benefits here allow for LightWave CORE, via python, SWIG, our new file formats, and so on, to more easily integrate into existing pipelines built with Maya as the basis. So, the tech side of the fence should be happy, because they can jump in and get their hands dirty immediately, and the artistic side of the fence can explore and create with an application that understands their needs and preferences.


Yeah, Jay, you guys are going for gold here.

I have seen many places use Maya because they can plug in their own custom tools via mel and/or python.

Having Core opened up like that will put LW up for the same candidacy.

Also, the linux version will make the guys at DD happy since much of the pipeline is based in linux. Houdini, maya, vray, etc.

It will be nice to see how lw fits in the DD tool pipe once its in the linux environment and opened up to the DD code teams.

Intuition
02-07-2009, 10:43 AM
yeah Brad P is not convinced that having a stack or history help with modeling in many situations..sometimes it does but you also lose the pixel like editing speed/ease/capability of modo and lightwave 9,8,7,6,/5 etc...

i use 3dsmax and lightwave and find having stack for modeling is just fine and i now prefer it overall compared to lightwave 9, so i'm looking forward to playing with lightwave core in a couple of weeks.

I am on a project using max/vray this month (all the Vray/maya licences are used up on another project). I was thinking that if Lightwave comes over to Linux that leaves only modo and max stuck in windows. Particularly max since modo has a macOS version.

I use modo for modeling but would use LWmodeler over max for many things since I never did get used to modeling in max quickly.

I always have to FBX objects into max and use the "multi-sub material" to setup the vray materials. I always felt that max could be made much easier in the surfacing department.

Particularly the material browser. I mean, I like the material menu. I really like it but I wish I could set up the materials to show based on object selection or similar. I always use show by "scene" so it shows what materials are in the scene. Then I pick the material I want to tweak, it loads into the material slot I had selected and I start tweaking the material. This was always really slow even though it works. I'd prefer a window that showed materials the way maya's hypershade window works. You just see all the scene materials. This is also how XSi works.

In modo (on topic) I do think the shader tree could be improved but I can use a filter to "show only selected" which helps reduce confusion.

ufo3d
02-07-2009, 10:43 AM
I really love that copy/paste pixel treatment of geometry in LW and Modo so I hope that doesn't get lost in LWC. I always miss it in other apps. I can appreciate the complexity of geometry carrying around history and transform nodes though so hopefully there is a way to preserve that or collapse the data on new sections on only the affected sections.

I don't agree about Modo having less grain, I would hold LW's renderer above Modo's for many things, DOF and MB come to mind. They are different, modo's is a bucket renderer so it is inherently better at some tasks ie. astronomical polycounts, huge resolutions.

From the last modcast I would not expect to see history or nodal anything in Modo since the president, vp of marketing and a beta tester all didn't seem to be fans of those workflows. They seemed to be a proud alternative to those methods. I don't think modo has the architecture for it frankly. I was pretty shocked when the material layer system was rolled out in 201. It didn't seem like a very modern approach, and they have certainly had their share of complaints about it and requests for it to be node based, or in my case a hybrid like LW9 that is as powerful, or simple/fast to work with as you need it to be. I'm excited about what appears to be nodal everything in LWC because I feel the Material node workflow in LW9 is handled better than Maya's hypershade ever was.

The INTEGRATED previewer in Modo was a big selling point to me. I have been a Fprime owner since day 1 and really hope LWC has an INTEGRATED equivalent! I don't think I've used viper since LW7, and most seem to agree it is long overdue to be replaced with an improved technology. I'm pretty tired of the continual game of catch-up, and the caveats of what doesn't work now, plus paying extra for Fprime. I Don't like the idea of waiting for a Fprime update that may or may not come for LWC. There was a leaked/found video of an minor Fprime update that worked with HV's in realtime in dec 08 but it was very much based in the LW9 world. I am a bit confused after all the SDK additions in LW 9.6 specifically for Fprime and now with LWC it seems like a huge re-write of the plugin would be necessary. Also confused about Jay Roth's mention of additional updates to the LW 9.x series, at least for Hardcore members. Unless that is a 64bit OSX build it seems a bit like wasted effort to me plus nothing is gonna be compatible with it. Are E-on, Worley or happy digital gonna make 64 bit osx plugins for the LW9 series with a totally new architecture in LWC sitting in the wings?


That is why I am not going to upgrade my 30X license to 401 anymore.
Many people complained about the scene management and no nodal, I was pretty shocked when they introduced the layer system before 201 released. I also agree that they seemed to be proud of those methods and I don't think they are gonna change it. It just make me feel that they are very stubborn sometimes. That may be the reason why LW had so many stupid problems before they quited. unlike the new LW team, once Lux is happy with the tools they created, no matter how many users reqested, don't expect they will change it or improved it.

Brad Peebler mentioned about a client asking Lux to add a new feature to modo, Brad wondered why the client need such funtion and the client said" you don't have to care, I asked for it". It sounds sometimes developers might not understand why ppl need it but Lux is willing to listen the feeback from users, but I've never seen these happen. However , Allen is a really good guy and he always help us to fix some rendering problems in Lux forum.
btw, Referecing is totally rubbish and unstable in 30x, 303 is definitely necessary. Newtek is much more responsible to the users during v9 cycle.

evenflcw
02-07-2009, 12:33 PM
That client was wrong in not explaining why! Developers don't just need to know what you want but also why you need it and want it for. It is not always obvious why something is needed, neither to the developer NOR the person asking! And they ARE developers, perhaps they can think of a better solution than the one you are accustomed to from another program!? That is what alot of feature requests are missing. They shouldn't primarily be asking for this or that function from this or that program. They should be asking for a solution to a specific problem. If they give some references to existing functions or propose a solution, that is good though. It's brilliant if they also supply arguments why those solutions are the ones to go for.

Earl
02-07-2009, 12:41 PM
Micropolygons
Billions of polys through instances/replicators/fur?
If you're going to include 401 features yet to be released, than you might as well include instancing in LWC, in which case your point is moot.

Right now, Modo 302 does indeed support rendering of more geometry using their current (and limited) instancing engine. However, LW Modeler and Layout can generally handle and render far more raw polygons than Modo, in part due to the 64-bit versions.

Mike_RB
02-07-2009, 01:47 PM
If you're going to include 401 features yet to be released, than you might as well include instancing in LWC, in which case your point is moot.

Right now, Modo 302 does indeed support rendering of more geometry using their current (and limited) instancing engine. However, LW Modeler and Layout can generally handle and render far more raw polygons than Modo, in part due to the 64-bit versions.

True, I was talking about 401 a bit there. But those instances are fun. 301: 3.7billion polys:
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/37B.jpg
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/3point7billion.mov

I'm excited to see this stuff coming to LW without plugins.

Earl
02-07-2009, 02:33 PM
True, I was talking about 401 a bit there. But those instances are fun. 301: 3.7billion polys:
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/37B.jpg
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/3point7billion.mov

I'm excited to see this stuff coming to LW without plugins.
There might be more rhinos in that video than actually exist in the wild!

The "Where's Nancy?" image was also impressive. I think that we may have to hold a Nancy/Rhino stand off once 401 and Core are both out. ;D

jasonwestmas
02-07-2009, 02:50 PM
A billion polygons when rendering in LW, that would be prityyyy impressssive.

Larry_g1s
02-07-2009, 04:20 PM
Alright...I had a chance to listen to Firday's Modcast, and all I've got to say (even as a hardcore LW fan for many years) is that I have a lot of respect for Brad Peebler and the team over at Luxology. They were extremely respectful, talked about the pros & cons, of LW Core, and where still able to talk about their new features. I have zero reason to leave LW, I've been happy for many years and with the Tech FAQ's on core even less reason to leave, but even knowing that, Luxology does a good job at making Modo tempting to use. It looks like they've got some really solid features in their app. I agree with Brad that's it's just an exciting time for 3D even with these two announcements, and I wish them the best of luck as well as the NT team.

lwanmtr
02-07-2009, 04:41 PM
That is why I am not going to upgrade my 30X license to 401 anymore.
Many people complained about the scene management and no nodal, I was pretty shocked when they introduced the layer system before 201 released. I also agree that they seemed to be proud of those methods and I don't think they are gonna change it. It just make me feel that they are very stubborn sometimes. That may be the reason why LW had so many stupid problems before they quited. unlike the new LW team, once Lux is happy with the tools they created, no matter how many users reqested, don't expect they will change it or improved it.

Brad Peebler mentioned about a client asking Lux to add a new feature to modo, Brad wondered why the client need such funtion and the client said" you don't have to care, I asked for it". It sounds sometimes developers might not understand why ppl need it but Lux is willing to listen the feeback from users, but I've never seen these happen. However , Allen is a really good guy and he always help us to fix some rendering problems in Lux forum.
btw, Referecing is totally rubbish and unstable in 30x, 303 is definitely necessary. Newtek is much more responsible to the users during v9 cycle.

While I respect Brad, Alan and Stuart and am impressed that Modo has gotten where it has...these are the kinds of things that make me uninterested to buy Modo...I have tried every demo version they've put out and while its fast (in some respects), it's just not worth another $900.

They are stubborn, and I'm assuming that is why every innovative coder that NT brought in on LW didnt last long..because they were presenting new ways to do stuff...IKB anyone? They also didnt like to listen to the users, specially users who werent part of a big studio. They have their way of doing things.

They were great back in their day, and do hope they are succesful with Modo (although, they should have made it a dedicated modeler, rather than trying to move into rendering). I will keep looking at Modo, but they havent yet shown me anything that even slightly makes me want to buy into it.

As for Brad and them commenting on pros and cons of Core...What?

Mike_RB
02-07-2009, 05:13 PM
As for Brad and them commenting on pros and cons of Core...What?

The pros and cons of tackling what is in the tech faq and the development direction.

lwanmtr
02-07-2009, 05:27 PM
Ahh...havent seen the modcast.

Yep, Core is ambitious, to be sure...but doable..especially once you get 100 beta testers with no real life who can pound away at it 24 hours a day. :D

But we'll see what happens....

cresshead
02-07-2009, 05:55 PM
I am on a project using max/vray this month (all the Vray/maya licences are used up on another project). I was thinking that if Lightwave comes over to Linux that leaves only modo and max stuck in windows. Particularly max since modo has a macOS version.

I use modo for modeling but would use LWmodeler over max for many things since I never did get used to modeling in max quickly.

I always have to FBX objects into max and use the "multi-sub material" to setup the vray materials. I always felt that max could be made much easier in the surfacing department.

Particularly the material browser. I mean, I like the material menu. I really like it but I wish I could set up the materials to show based on object selection or similar. I always use show by "scene" so it shows what materials are in the scene. Then I pick the material I want to tweak, it loads into the material slot I had selected and I start tweaking the material. This was always really slow even though it works. I'd prefer a window that showed materials the way maya's hypershade window works. You just see all the scene materials. This is also how XSi works.

In modo (on topic) I do think the shader tree could be improved but I can use a filter to "show only selected" which helps reduce confusion.

there's a new material scene browser coming for 3dsmax 2010 due out around march/april

as for 3dsmax being 'stuck' on windows...actually autodesk are working on that with virtualisation for mac osx...that was posted just today on ken's blog..it won't be out for max 2010..but they are looking into it for a future update if possible.

hope that helps a little...now back to our main topic...modo!:D

cresshead
02-07-2009, 05:57 PM
Ahh...havent seen the modcast.

Yep, Core is ambitious, to be sure...but doable..especially once you get 100 beta testers with no real life who can pound away at it 24 hours a day. :D

But we'll see what happens....

the modcast is audio only...always has been i think...next one is due friday..

Ivan D. Young
02-07-2009, 07:34 PM
......:devil: I don't understand why all this Modo nonsense. I don't see any Maya, Max, Xsi, Blender, Houdini, and Cinema 4D users making this much talk about the whole Core thing. Why Modo users so much?
Look it is good Modeling app, fine go model and leave LW alone? Why is that so hard?

Look for Old School LW'ers I realize it is hard because of what the Luxo guys mean to LW, but it is now getting on to some years. Can we move forward and leave all of this old stuff behind. There is enough 3D for everyone. May the second best app win, since it looks like Maya ain't going no where fast.

lwanmtr
02-07-2009, 07:40 PM
The Luxo guys mean nothing to me, Im glad they're gone..hehe

But the reason there is so much cross posting about modo/core between the two is because alot of modo users came from lw (both old and new).

And yes, there is alot of chatter among the other app's users about core..its just not a loud...yet...hehe

leuey
02-07-2009, 07:41 PM
Hey guys, I was the tester on the last modcast with Brad and Bob. I hope I didn't come off as being 'anti-history' - I was just wondering if LW will manage to keep the simple cut/copy/paste/delete/transform..etc..poly workflow they've always had (and that modo shares). I was a LW guy for a long time and left for modo/maya during the 'dark ages' (around the 8.0 cycle..). I'm just curious if they will be able to institute a history without killing that workflow. If they do - great! I'm all over that.

Also, my point about the nodal workflow is more about looking for something that is better (and doesn't exist yet). Nodes are not a new idea - they've been around *forever* and although they may be the most flexible way of working yet they aren't the fastest and can become cumbersome (I would rather work in the shadertree than the hypershade 90% of the time...it's that 10% where something becomes undoable in the shadertree where nodes show their strength). Anyway, the shadertree was an attempt at something new, it's a global shading system that can do certain things trivially that would take a ton of node-wiring to accomplish...it's just not very well understood yet and hasn't blossomed to it's full potential (from a features standpoint).

In terms of render speed modo is blazing for 'product-type' shots, basically a skydome, 1 bounce - not very geometry heavy. IR caching GI is probably the fastest thing around for this kind of rendering and I really doubt LW (or anybody else) is faster at it....it's one of the reasons (among many) that the renderer was chosen for Solidworks. But modo's renderer does get it's *** kicked on interior scenes with multiple light bounces or scenes with a lot of geomtery (like foiliage) where IR caching loses all it's advantages. In terms of quality it's right up there with the best. Quite frankly if you can't get a good image out of modo, LW, MR or C4D then you have more to worry about than your software. I've seen great art on all these companies websites...

Also, Preview is quite a bit more flexible than FPrime...you can model..or sculpt or paint displacements - all with a preview window open and updating. It's even faster in 401 and there's some new workflows gleaned from the PhotoView 360 app that will make it even faster. It works with everything in the app and is the same as the final render (vector displamements, fur, volumetrics..etc.). You can view any channel or render output indepentdently and open several right next to each other (or as many as you want) to do things like check the reflectivity amount on a incidence angle gradient will viewing the final shading right new to it updating at the same time. Render out quick test animations...etc. etc. FPrime doesn't have to deal with the type of scene graph updating that Preview does...so we'll see how fast things are when it does (presumably with core). Worely does deserve the credit (imo) for launching this revolution...and I do think having a 'real-time' preview window open all the time is the most important rendering revolution in a long time.

-Greg

edit: and yes, the reason there's a lot of cross talk between LW and modo users is because a lot of us use both programs...or did at one point. I think it's nice...

ncr100
02-07-2009, 07:45 PM
FPrime. it is a great external renderer and previewer.

Tho, i'd like to see something proprietary and integrated completely within LwCORE.


I expect FPrime to easily integrate itself into the UI. (NOT free $$$, but a better plug in UI) The SDK is open, they demonstrated a web browser integrated into a viewport. I expect FPrime could do the same!

:)

hrgiger
02-07-2009, 09:14 PM
In terms of render speed modo is blazing for 'product-type' shots, basically a skydome, 1 bounce - not very geometry heavy. IR caching GI is probably the fastest thing around for this kind of rendering and I really doubt LW (or anybody else) is faster at it....

What about Fprime? Fprime may be in need of an update to take advantage of more recent developments in Lightwave but it is still very good at MC radiosity. Even with multiple bounces and hundreds of thousands of polygons in the scene, it is blazingly fast. Indoor or outdoor scenes.

It remains to be seen if Fprime will be a previewer/renderer for Core or if Newtek will implement their own or even if we'll have one. But if Worley does develop a preview renderer for Core, I would expect it to be one of the better ones around.

GregMalick
02-07-2009, 09:27 PM
True, I was talking about 401 a bit there. But those instances are fun. 301: 3.7billion polys:
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/37B.jpg
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/3point7billion.mov

I'm excited to see this stuff coming to LW without plugins.

Man! If you could only animate all those objects!
That would really be something.

ufo3d
02-08-2009, 09:28 AM
....
Also, my point about the nodal workflow is more about looking for something that is better (and doesn't exist yet). Nodes are not a new idea - they've been around *forever* and although they may be the most flexible way of working yet they aren't the fastest and can become cumbersome (I would rather work in the shadertree than the hypershade 90% of the time...it's that 10% where something becomes undoable in the shadertree where nodes show their strength). Anyway, the shadertree was an attempt at something new, it's a global shading system that can do certain things trivially that would take a ton of node-wiring to accomplish...it's just not very well understood yet and hasn't blossomed to it's full potential (from a features standpoint).
..

I don't agree at all. I am not looking for a new idea, I am looking for a better, usable idea. I just don't care nodes are not a new idea or shader tree is a new idea, I just care which one is effective and flexible. I don't like Hypershade too, but I like LW hybrid shading system, unlike Hypershader, the one in LW is pretty straigh forward. if you have any problem with nodal, fine, you can use the layered system. It just show how stubborn Lux they are. Many people requested nodal in LW before , and we finally saw nodal in v9 after those developer quitted. How about Lux? they built the system from scatch though, but we have been still using that awkward layered system, it is b'cos they just didn't listen anything from users, unless you are ILM or Pixar.

With layered system, it is very hard to find out which layer is the problematic since the layer could affect all the layers underneath, not mentioned the layered system is darn buggy, the rendered image could be totally wrong until you drag some layer up or down to update the shader tree, esepcially when you have tons of layers with tons of layer mask. It could take you a very long time to find a the problem. with Nodal, it is much more easy to debug visually.

If Shader tree is really that good, why so many users requested nodal and complained about the shader tree it in Lux forum? how about Lightwave? since they added nodal to LW, some might not like nodal but they still have choice to use the layer system, but what I saw is many people realized the real power of nodal could achieve, no one complained nodal nor layered system since Lw has both. NT utilize much more nodal concept in LWC, just b'cos they understood the power of node from LW9.

archijam
02-08-2009, 09:29 AM
Great to read some of the comments here.

I had been avoiding the 'smug-casts' for a while now, after a few listens and far too many legacy gags (even when they were meant to be talking about Wall-E, what was that about?), but it really sounds like something is changing .. great news.

Seriously considering using both apps in the future, as they should really declare their strengths and get on with it.

Limbus
02-08-2009, 03:46 PM
Hey guys, I was the tester on the last modcast with Brad and Bob. I hope I didn't come off as being 'anti-history' - I was just wondering if LW will manage to keep the simple cut/copy/paste/delete/transform..etc..poly workflow they've always had (and that modo shares).

I dont see how a history or modifier stack needs to compmlicate things. I am sure it can but it does not need to. Just imagine you could model like no in modo and then could add modifiers on top if you need them. I would love to be able to add microbevels as a modifier on top so I could turn them of for better viewportspeed or on objects that are only scene in reflection or in the backround. Just one example where this would be cool. For the main part I would like to keep the direct aproach of modo and LW too.


Also, my point about the nodal workflow is more about looking for something that is better (and doesn't exist yet). Nodes are not a new idea - they've been around *forever* and although they may be the most flexible way of working yet they aren't the fastest and can become cumbersome (I would rather work in the shadertree than the hypershade 90% of the time...it's that 10% where something becomes undoable in the shadertree where nodes show their strength).

I really think that LWs way of a nodal shading system is good for easy and complex surfaces alike. If you don't need the power of nodes you can just use the materials or a layer node. And you can still turn to all the other nodes if needed.


Anyway, the shadertree was an attempt at something new, it's a global shading system that can do certain things trivially that would take a ton of node-wiring to accomplish...it's just not very well understood yet and hasn't blossomed to it's full potential (from a features standpoint).
I still find node based aproaches much easyer to understand than layer based. Especially if you work on large material setups or have to work on a scene you did not set up.


In terms of render speed modo is blazing for 'product-type' shots, basically a skydome, 1 bounce - not very geometry heavy. IR caching GI is probably the fastest thing around for this kind of rendering and I really doubt LW (or anybody else) is faster at it....it's one of the reasons (among many) that the renderer was chosen for Solidworks. But modo's renderer does get it's *** kicked on interior scenes with multiple light bounces or scenes with a lot of geomtery (like foiliage) where IR caching loses all it's advantages.

And sample placement could use some big improvements as well. Hope these issues will be addressed in 401.

Cheers, Florian

DennisVR
02-12-2009, 12:58 PM
new features announced:
http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.light.and.shadow/

more to come next week.

cresshead
02-12-2009, 01:18 PM
looks good, i didn't know that modo din't have the ability to catch shadows...
[matte shadow material]

still they've got that working now so alls good.

IMI
02-12-2009, 01:39 PM
Wow, caustics and dispersion!
Say, whatever happened to good caustics in LW? I guess they decided it was a bad idea and just said to hell with it?

beverins
02-12-2009, 01:43 PM
Pretty much for me I just use Modo as Modeler: Special Edition and leave it at that. Since Modo doesn't interface with Vue Xsteam, I don't find it useful for rendering. Yes, I use Xstream quite a bit :D

I hope that when Core arrives that Luxology will delve deep into the SDK for some nice transparent workflows.

Andyjaggy
02-12-2009, 01:44 PM
Now that's how it should be done. Here is a new feature. Here are some examples of that new feature. Everyone smiles and is happy. Yay.

beverins
02-12-2009, 01:47 PM
Some nice new surfacing and lighting options there in 401! Very nice reveal, I must say. Keeps you coming back.

colkai
02-12-2009, 01:50 PM
Yup, Lux do know how to show things off.

Stooch
02-12-2009, 02:04 PM
Hey guys, I was the tester on the last modcast with Brad and Bob. I hope I didn't come off as being 'anti-history' - I was just wondering if LW will manage to keep the simple cut/copy/paste/delete/transform..etc..poly workflow they've always had (and that modo shares). I was a LW guy for a long time and left for modo/maya during the 'dark ages' (around the 8.0 cycle..). I'm just curious if they will be able to institute a history without killing that workflow. If they do - great! I'm all over that.
...

Actually you do come off very anti history but in a passive aggressive kind of way. The real question is what makes you think that adding history will somehow hurt your cut/copy/paste/delete/transform workflow?

I posted in the lux forums one proposal that would keep that workflow... im sure there are MANY more.

leuey
02-12-2009, 02:27 PM
ahh Stooch, well if you think I come off as passive aggressive then I must be EXTREMELY passive aggressive. : )

I've just never seen it done yet (preserving the speed of throwing around polys like in LW and modo), at least not very well. What I would like to see is a new approach - not just another 'look we do history too' or 'we do nodes too' type of approach (just IMO). I think this area could use some new and innovative thinking. I saw your post in the Lux forums but I don't remember what you said (something akin to using weight maps to store data?). I think there's probably a number of ways to do it....the trick is doing it well.

I just got back from a week demoing at Solidworks world. Believe me, there's things that program can do that are just unbelievable...and really show off the power of procedural modeling unlike anything we have over here in the DCC arena. I'm certainly a believer in the power - whether or not it's applicable or possible to bring some of those workflows into modo is beyond my knowledge though.

-Greg




Actually you do come off very anti history but in a passive aggressive kind of way. The real question is what makes you think that adding history will somehow hurt your cut/copy/paste/delete/transform workflow?

I posted in the lux forums one proposal that would keep that workflow... im sure there are MANY more.

Zithen
02-12-2009, 04:08 PM
I understand people's trust in Newtek. I have high hopes. The reality is nothing significant was really shown and this is basically a whole new program. Luxology's Modo, for instance, has been in development for over 6 years...and they still don't have CA tools yet.

An architecture by itself is one thing, it's another thing to implement the workflow in a workable program with all the tools you expect. On the site, it said basically that they are still doing research into UI implementation. I would be fine if they had more to show, but apparently, they are not ready to show it. This is unfortunate, for it most likely means that it may be realisitally 2 years away from becoming something comparable to what's out there already.

I was willing to gloss over the scant Core demo, but now with absolutely nothing else shown on the table as a follow up, I've lowered my expectations, unfortunately...

Hey, we'll see...

*Pete*
02-12-2009, 04:32 PM
for me, the motivation is different.

I have 9.6 and i can use it for my needs for several more years.

but the opportunity to take part in the birth of a new application is important for me, i will learn its features in a much deeper way than i would do if i would buy a more complete product two or three years from now.

that said, i do not think CORE will be much worse than 9.6 to begin with...i expect it to have many of the qualities that 9.6 has now as well.
for my needs, or atleast current needs..i need a good solid modeller, strong renderer and good lighting and surfacing posibilities.
animation is not so important for me, yet...so Core will have to really suck badly in those areas important to me if i am to decide not to get it.

Zithen
02-12-2009, 04:33 PM
ahh Stooch, well if you think I come off as passive aggressive then I must be EXTREMELY passive aggressive. : )

I've just never seen it done yet (preserving the speed of throwing around polys like in LW and modo), at least not very well. What I would like to see is a new approach - not just another 'look we do history too' or 'we do nodes too' type of approach (just IMO). I think this area could use some new and innovative thinking. I saw your post in the Lux forums but I don't remember what you said (something akin to using weight maps to store data?). I think there's probably a number of ways to do it....the trick is doing it well.

I just got back from a week demoing at Solidworks world. Believe me, there's things that program can do that are just unbelievable...and really show off the power of procedural modeling unlike anything we have over here in the DCC arena. I'm certainly a believer in the power - whether or not it's applicable or possible to bring some of those workflows into modo is beyond my knowledge though.

-Greg
I got the impression you don't need or want history or node editing as well. To me, without saying what/how you'd like to work with that functionality, it makes no progress. There are only a few ways to display how one thing connects to another, like in geometry it's all about points and lines or splines. I guess you could always connect nodes in 3d, just like modeling objects. But if that type of functionality (using nodes and history) isnt's for you, that's okay, but I suggest just saying that because there are plenty of people that would love to have that non-linearity in their workflow. I'm sure if there was another way to use nodes, it would have been invented by now, in a siggraph paper or something.

I don't see why a program can't have the copy/paste/transform workflow you like and still have node/history editing as well.

leuey
02-12-2009, 06:26 PM
No, I'm all for nodes and history as long as it isn't at the expense of what we've got - which is why I'm interested in seeing if 'CORE' can pull it off without ruining the current modeler workflow. I'm a long time Maya user and am quite familiar with and reliant on nodes and history for certain projects...

I'm just calling for a little innovation on what is a very old idea (nodes...) - that's all. ; )

-Greg


I got the impression you don't need or want history or node editing as well.

-----

I don't see why a program can't have the copy/paste/transform workflow you like and still have node/history editing as well.

Stooch
02-12-2009, 06:31 PM
ahh Stooch, well if you think I come off as passive aggressive then I must be EXTREMELY passive aggressive. : )


I do have a knack for understatement.

Earl
02-13-2009, 12:09 AM
Luxology's Modo, for instance, has been in development for over 6 years...and they still don't have CA tools yet.
I don't think Luxology's rate of development has anything to do with NewTek's rate of development. We really don't have the info required to determine who's architecture is actually faster to build off of, and we also don't have any way to know how easily NewTek can adapt and reuse their current animation toolset.

There are too many unknown variables in play to baselessly claim LW Core will take as long as modo's animation tools.

While we don't know the details on Core yet, I would be surprised if NewTek released a partial product a la modo.

lwanmtr
02-13-2009, 01:12 AM
Exactly...they are 2 different app and companies...so we'll see..

frantbk
02-16-2009, 09:15 AM
The only thing I have to add to this is that I think Bob Bennett is doing a fine job of controlling the old style of over-hyping of modo. There is a clam at the Lux site because of the smooth flow of information. :thumbsup:

cresshead
02-20-2009, 05:17 AM
another cat is being released from the feature list 'bag' on modo today...

i wonder what it will be?....bones maybe?

IMI
02-20-2009, 05:31 AM
another cat is being released from the feature list 'bag' on modo today...

i wonder what it will be?....bones maybe?


I would kind of doubt they're ready to go in that direction just yet. Modo 501 maybe, but I doubt we'll see bones in the 400 series.

kfinla
02-20-2009, 06:49 AM
I hope its something new. So far its all been repackaging of info they released in August. Bones will defiantly get an upgrade from me, and a few hints point to major animation enhancements if you listen to the modcasts. Rich Hurrey has been working on a 401 demo for several weeks, he's a TD at pixar by job title, and apparently Lux/Brad feel the need to outsource the demo then do it themselves. Brad said he had been watching the animators survival kit. And also has mentioned meetings in the past regarding animation development. The quote something for everyone in this release. Particles or Character animation still seem a possibility for the 40x series even though I initially wrote that idea off a few months ago.

cresshead
02-20-2009, 08:50 AM
not long now till the friday update's live...and a modcast too!

frantbk
02-20-2009, 11:19 AM
I hope its something new. So far its all been repackaging of info they released in August. Bones will defiantly get an upgrade from me, and a few hints point to major animation enhancements if you listen to the modcasts. Rich Hurrey has been working on a 401 demo for several weeks, he's a TD at pixar by job title, and apparently Lux/Brad feel the need to outsource the demo then do it themselves. Brad said he had been watching the animators survival kit. And also has mentioned meetings in the past regarding animation development. The quote something for everyone in this release. Particles or Character animation still seem a possibility for the 40x series even though I initially wrote that idea off a few months ago.

Maybe the reason Rich Hurrey is doing the demo is because the technology is from Pixar. remember a couple of years ago Lux and Pixiar entered into a technology exchange agreement. Most of the stuff Lux couldn't talk about should be incorporated into modo by now. Because of the Pixiar/lux deal modo seems to be gaining on some functions. Which asks the question - how much of Pixiar is in modo?

Frank_Geppert
02-20-2009, 03:13 PM
It is revealed now:

http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.preview.and.final.rendering/

Next reveal on 5th March 2009.

cresshead
02-20-2009, 04:00 PM
preview render viewport looks ace...just like fprime but not a plugin..."all in"

DennisVR
02-20-2009, 04:03 PM
wow, that's a fast previewer.

hrgiger
02-20-2009, 04:05 PM
I'd be mad if I was a Modo user. People have been waiting for this release for quite some time and are expecting big things. One week, you find out it's getting volumetric lights and Instancing with a fancy name. The next week you find out it's getting motion blur, depth of field, and the ability to render curves. Groundbreaking stuff there, woo hoo.

Andyjaggy
02-20-2009, 04:09 PM
Wait. They haven't had those things yet?

cresshead
02-20-2009, 04:10 PM
I'd be mad if I was a Modo user. People have been waiting for this release for quite some time and are expecting big things. One week, you find out it's getting volumetric lights and Instancing with a fancy name. The next week you find out it's getting motion blur, depth of field, and the ability to render curves. Groundbreaking stuff there, woo hoo.


at least they now KNOW what they're getting in 401 rather than the blindfolded 'hook a duck' sessions we're having trying to tease some basic info out of what maybe in core!:lol:

hrgiger
02-20-2009, 04:10 PM
Well, at least the preview renderer looks nice.

Mike_RB
02-20-2009, 04:13 PM
Wait. They haven't had those things yet?

Direct curve rendering is new. The DOF has much better sampling and more samples available, so that's a 'big improvement' but not 'new'. And 302 only did linear motionblur. The big one on that page is the preview honestly. It's fast. I hope in the future they make the preview a draw mode for a viewport and draw wireframes, selections, and tool handles over it. It's fast enough to BE a viewport draw mode.

hrgiger
02-20-2009, 04:15 PM
at least their getting to KNOW what they're getting rather than the blindfolded 'hook a duck' sessions we're having trying to tease some basic info out of what maybe in core!:lol:

We know just about as many things about Core that Modo users know about 401. We know we're getting instancing, history, modifier stack, dockable panels and tear aways, completely open SDK, python scripting, gizmos, application GPU awareness....

In fact, we probably know MORE about Core then Modo users know about 401.

Frank_Geppert
02-20-2009, 04:16 PM
I cannot complain. They reveal every few weeks a few new or improved features in such a nice and appealing way. It feels exciting and interesting to me. And the images are inspiring how to use these features.
This is a good way to present the news.

cresshead
02-20-2009, 04:18 PM
We know just about as many things about Core that Modo users know about 401. We know we're getting instancing, history, modifier stack, dockable panels and tear aways, completely open SDK, python scripting, gizmos, application GPU awareness....

In fact, we probably know MORE about Core then Modo users know about 401.

hey i'm already onboard the newtek core mystery train trip!

i'd just like to know if we get to visit r.e.n.d.e.r at any point before v1.0 gets put into the cot and fed some 3d models everyday as it grows into v2!:stumped:

cresshead
02-20-2009, 04:20 PM
I cannot complain. They reveal every few weeks a few new or improved features in such a nice and appealing way. It feels exciting and interesting to me. And the images are inspiring how to use these features.
This is a good way to present the news.

yeah lux marketing is up there alongside apple...shame i don't find the prospect of dropping tools and no modifers not that appealing, otherwise i may have jumped onboard.

Frank_Geppert
02-20-2009, 04:26 PM
...otherwise i may have jumped onboard.

I did and I do not regret. Yesterday it saved me. I could not load a certain FBX file in Lightwave. LW always loses the uv-map from FBX. So I opened it in Modo and saved as LWO.

But besides that it is just very similar to Lightwave, similar workflow, similar but improved and more powerful modeler (including sculpting and painting) plus nice rendering.

It is the best plugin I bought for my Lightwave ;)

jin choung
02-20-2009, 04:34 PM
to a certain extent, comparison of an upgrade's new feature to other apps is valid. it is. but consistency would demand that the same kind of eye be applied across the board as well.

sure, lux is just now getting features that we've had for a long time now.

but the same things can be said for the core stuff... "python... oh THAT's new! history stack... oh how quaint.... construction plane and "items"? taking hints from modo are we?" etc... there's not a lot in the core vids that haven't been seen ad-nauseum elsewhere either. and yet we're impressed.

both viewpoints (impressed and unimpressed) is valid for both modo and core.

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

i've never been a big fan of lux. but been listening to their modcasts and despite their being really entertaining and informative and well produced (with good music to boot), i am really impressed with how "non-partisan" brad peebler is. lw is not at all the "name that shall not be mentioned" and he is very magnanimous with everything including the ... problematic ... core launch.

very classy and they have my respect.

jin

Lewis
02-20-2009, 05:01 PM
That modo new previewing looks awesome, it's up to FPRIME speed now from what I can see and even can move through scene and not just image pan/zoom. That IS innovative. I hope NT will do some innovations in CORE as soon as it starts.

DennisVR
02-20-2009, 05:14 PM
Modo401 hair render:
http://content.luxology.com/modo/401/img/401_HairStrand.jpg

Larry_g1s
02-20-2009, 05:17 PM
i've never been a big fan of lux. but been listening to their modcasts and despite their being really entertaining and informative and well produced (with good music to boot), i am really impressed with how "non-partisan" brad peebler is. lw is not at all the "name that shall not be mentioned" and he is very magnanimous with everything including the ... problematic ... core launch.

very classy and they have my respect.

jinI wrote this same thing earlier on this thread. I've been very impressed by what class the Brad/Lux team, as well as Jay here have been about each others apps.

hrgiger
02-20-2009, 06:01 PM
Modo401 hair render:
http://content.luxology.com/modo/401/img/401_HairStrand.jpg

Can the hair be seen in the preview window as well. Are there any limitations to what the previewer/renderer can see?

Mike_RB
02-20-2009, 06:04 PM
Can the hair be seen in the preview window as well. Are there any limitations to what the previewer/renderer can see?

Yes to hair visible, and no to limitations. That's not my render but I setup that hair scene and passed it on to Lux to test hair rendering with. I kept the preview open to tweak the clumping and growth jitter.

hrgiger
02-20-2009, 06:06 PM
Yes to hair visible, and no to limitations. That's not my render but I setup that hair scene and passed it on to Lux to test hair rendering with. I kept the preview open to tweak the clumping and growth jitter.


Nice. Is the hair actual geometry (maybe replicators?) or is it some other shading method?

Mike_RB
02-20-2009, 06:08 PM
Nice. Is the hair actual geometry (maybe replicators?) or is it some other shading method?

Its rendertime created geometry, not unlike replicators. I imagine that it leverages similar code underneath. millions of polys.

Larry_g1s
02-20-2009, 06:10 PM
Nice example Mike RB

jasonwestmas
02-20-2009, 06:34 PM
Its rendertime created geometry, not unlike replicators. I imagine that it leverages similar code underneath. millions of polys.

Those hairs are polygons? EEK!

frantbk
02-20-2009, 08:34 PM
That modo new previewing looks awesome, it's up to FPRIME speed now from what I can see and even can move through scene and not just image pan/zoom. That IS innovative. I hope NT will do some innovations in CORE as soon as it starts.

I watched the same video. The only question I had was what type of machine is this running on? If this is on one of the high-end of the high-end of 3D machines then just wait when everyone on a mid-end of the high-end are carping about the sluggishness that the video did show.

Besides remember back when Lux first showed the render it was fast. Then changes were made and the render slowed down due to overhead from the changes. People pointed out the slow down which gave Lux some time to fix it (some). Show me this video again just before the release of 401 along side the finished product.

kfinla
02-20-2009, 09:06 PM
Those hairs are polygons? EEK!

Modo is a bucket renderer so its capable of rendering billions of polys with instances on 32 bit machines, and even into the trillions of polygons with instances. (not sure if trillions needs 64 bit memory space). Not sure how many "real polys" 401 can handle in 32 bit.. 302 was about 30 million in my tests.

jin choung
02-20-2009, 09:19 PM
listening to this weeks's incorrectly labeled modcast... was brad ever a broadcaster? dj or something?

he may have missed his calling.

or rather, it's cool that he can utilize all his talents at lux.

jin

IMI
02-20-2009, 09:42 PM
I'd be mad if I was a Modo user. People have been waiting for this release for quite some time and are expecting big things. One week, you find out it's getting volumetric lights and Instancing with a fancy name. The next week you find out it's getting motion blur, depth of field, and the ability to render curves. Groundbreaking stuff there, woo hoo.

If people are "expecting big things" it's because people tend to expect too much. The evidence of that can be found all over this board, particularly before and after every LW major and point release over the last few years...

I'm a modo user and I'm not mad. ;)
I'd say they've been consistently offering "big things" ever since the get-go, considering modo started as a badass modeler, and little else.

No, it's not "groundbreaking stuff there", but it IS a big step in the right direction. Although so far my reaction to what I've seen is in fact, "woohoo". :thumbsup:

In any event, I'll bet you the hair and fur actually work for everyone once it's released.... I'll bet you the modo.. *ahem* ... built-in preview render actually renders everything. I doubt we modo uses will be anxiously awaiting an MPrime which is never updated and is never delivered....

hrgiger
02-20-2009, 09:58 PM
In any event, I'll bet you the hair and fur actually work for everyone once it's released.... I'll bet you the modo.. *ahem* ... built-in preview render actually renders everything. I doubt we modo uses will be anxiously awaiting an MPrime which is never updated and is never delivered....

Yes, the previewer is nice. Of course, after 7 years, they should have a couple nice things.

Drocket
02-20-2009, 10:31 PM
I am a modo user too and think the previewer looks pretty darn nifty but as soon as I heard about CORE I plonked my money down with Newtek, basically because of what they delivered in the 9.0-9.6 cycle and I believe they will come through with CORE at the end of the year.

To be honest the development paths between Newtek (LW 9+) and Lux (201-302) have been light and day. I have always felt there should be a couple more releases between major upgrades with modo but they always seem to stop short (203, 302) plus the speed of development isn't the greatest, just look at what Andrew can do with 3DCoat (actually think he is a machine the speed he develops things :))

I doubt I will upgrade to 401 this time, wait and see what 501 brings but by then I probably won't need or want it because CORE will be at least two years into releases, I am really looking forward to the release in March and can't wait to start playing with the modeler.

Fun times ahead :)

Limbus
02-21-2009, 02:26 AM
Speed up in Preview looks great but I had hoped for some improvements in the GI department as well. Hope this still will come.

Cheers, Florian

ingo
02-21-2009, 02:44 AM
Indeed the previewer looks nice, but with only one object in the scene it really tells not that much about speed. Would be nice if all the buildings around are 3D modells too, and than some trees with clipmapped leaves.... :hey:

Hmm, that http://video.luxology.com/modo/401/video/preview401_fast.mp4 looks not really fast in my eyes, well not faster than with FPrime i guess.

COBRASoft
02-21-2009, 03:58 AM
The previewer looks nice and fast, but don't forget they are on a 8-core Mac... I wonder the speed on the laptop Jay is using in 32 bit. I suppose it would be a lot slower.

The caustics are nice though, I wish CORE does a much better job there once finished.

phil lawson
02-21-2009, 04:56 AM
Indeed the previewer looks nice, but with only one object in the scene it really tells not that much about speed. Would be nice if all the buildings around are 3D modells too, and than some trees with clipmapped leaves.... :hey:

Hmm, that http://video.luxology.com/modo/401/video/preview401_fast.mp4 looks not really fast in my eyes, well not faster than with FPrime i guess.

Really? Using a similar setup to what Brad used there:- ~1080p res window | GI | HDRI (sIBL)| and SSS (simple skin node) - Fprime was slower cleaning up the noise for me but both were very similar in display the initial geometry. I tried to keep the render settings similar, though it cant be 100% accurate.

Also keep in mind that the screen capture software for the video is also running in the background capturing the ~1080p content.

Mike_RB
02-21-2009, 06:39 AM
Indeed the previewer looks nice, but with only one object in the scene it really tells not that much about speed. Would be nice if all the buildings around are 3D modells too, and than some trees with clipmapped leaves.... :hey:

Hmm, that http://video.luxology.com/modo/401/video/preview401_fast.mp4 looks not really fast in my eyes, well not faster than with FPrime i guess.

that was me playing around, on my 4 core box. With Irradiance Cached-GI, HDR based lighting, refractions, blurry reflections, micropoly displacement all running while captureing at 1920x1200. It's very fast. If you work in the GL view the preview waits for mouse up to update. If you are navigating the preview its quite smooth.

Mike_RB
02-21-2009, 06:54 AM
Speed up in Preview looks great but I had hoped for some improvements in the GI department as well. Hope this still will come.

Cheers, Florian

The sample placement for IC has been improved. And the shader item can now force the GI method on a per poly basis. So you can have a room with a pile of ivy over the window, using MC-GI for the ivy and IC-GI for the rest of the room. So you regain the speed you would lose using IC on detailed geometry stuff with lots of variance in normal direction. Works well for hair/fur too.

archijam
02-21-2009, 07:05 AM
So you can have a room with a pile of ivy over the window, using MC-GI for the ivy and IC-GI for the rest of the room. So you regain the speed you would lose using IC on detailed geometry stuff with lots of variance in normal direction.

Sounds very nice.

I like the way the previewer can also look at any of the comps, like specular, reflection etc... fprime/core could to well to look at this direction.

ingo
02-21-2009, 08:30 AM
that was me playing around, on my 4 core box. With Irradiance Cached-GI, HDR based lighting, refractions, blurry reflections, micropoly displacement all running while captureing at 1920x1200. It's very fast. If you work in the GL view the preview waits for mouse up to update. If you are navigating the preview its quite smooth.

Okay, thanks for enlighten me. So if i use only the previewer to update lighting or textures it will run faster. Looking at the 8 spheres video it seems that M... uses a slightly different algorythm than FP...., in FP.... the update runs pretty linear all over the time while in M... you can see the update runs in little steps (or do i drink to much coffee ?).

Mike_RB
02-21-2009, 08:40 AM
Okay, thanks for enlighten me. So if i use only the previewer to update lighting or textures it will run faster. Looking at the 8 spheres video it seems that M... uses a slightly different algorythm than FP...., in FP.... the update runs pretty linear all over the time while in M... you can see the update runs in little steps (or do i drink to much coffee ?).

Yeah, updating geometry is the slowest thing it does, in particular rendertime created geo as it can't cache it when you're changing it (like the micropolys in my example). Moving lights is fast.

frantbk
02-21-2009, 09:35 AM
I doubt I will upgrade to 401 this time, wait and see what 501 brings but by then I probably won't need or want it because CORE will be at least two years into releases, I am really looking forward to the release in March and can't wait to start playing with the modeler.

Fun times ahead :)

You've made a very good point. If NT doesn't drop the ball on Core 1.x release Lux will probably see a shift away from modo. Question 64 bit in 401? I doubt it. In all fairness to the modo fanboy's I don't think NT will have a smooth roll out of Core 1.x in the 4Q. Then again another question is will NT make the 4Q roll out of Core 1.x? :twak: :devil:

Pavlov
02-21-2009, 09:52 AM
Mike, interesting.
Remember Fprime is single-threaded up to refinement level 1 in preview mode, so it can look way slower than it is in render mode. I hope Core will bring fprime full multithread capabilities, this means Fprime preview's updating will be 8x faster on an 8 core machine.
Regarding Modo's forcing GI methods, it's quite interesting and for sure it's a good way to speedup GI, i guess LW will go this way too - controlling GI on surface basis with nodes should be easy.
Anyway it looks there are still small steps into Lightmapping (or Photonmap) irradiance - correct me if i'm wrong - which is the true next-step to higher speed-quality levels.
Kray can already use Photonmapping (cached or uncached), path-tracing (cached or uncached) or filtered irradiance on a surface basis, and it can adjust FG rays too. It gives excellent results on instanced vegetation with few rays on leaves, and it's pretty fast.

EDIT - Modo stuff is interesting but there's one thing i dont understand about Luxology's demoing policy. They seem to delay stuff so they can keep attention for a longer period, and just for a case it's same period NT is introducing CORE. So, imho, one of the two is true: they started immediately after CORE reveal to "grab" attention, but they werent really ready so they're deaying other intros, OR, *if* they were ready, they are dealying intentionally stuff so they can "cover" next CORE demos. Both are unelegant. Can someone explain me why i'm wrong on this, if i am ?


Paolo

Limbus
02-21-2009, 10:06 AM
The sample placement for IC has been improved. And the shader item can now force the GI method on a per poly basis. So you can have a room with a pile of ivy over the window, using MC-GI for the ivy and IC-GI for the rest of the room. So you regain the speed you would lose using IC on detailed geometry stuff with lots of variance in normal direction. Works well for hair/fur too.
Sounds cool. Thanks for the info.

Cheers, Florian

Frank_Geppert
02-21-2009, 10:31 AM
I hope Core will bring fprime full multithread capabilities, this means Fprime preview's updating will be 8x faster on an 8 core machine...Kray can already use Photonmapping (cached or uncached)...

EDIT - Modo stuff is interesting but there's one thing i dont understand about Luxology's demoing policy. They seem to delay stuff...

While a combination of a not yet existing Core with a not existing FPrime for Core and a not existing Kray for Core sounds interesting, it is highly hypothetical and expensive. I had to pay more than $2,000 for these 3. Modo is much more affordable and already existent.

I did not understand your point regarding the delays. They announced the partial releases and they kept the date. The last release was exactly 20th of February just like described. The next one is 5th of March.

phil lawson
02-21-2009, 10:33 AM
EDIT - Modo stuff is interesting but there's one thing i dont understand about Luxology's demoing policy. They seem to delay stuff so they can keep attention for a longer period, and just for a case it's same period NT is introducing CORE. So, imho, one of the two is true: they started immediately after CORE reveal to "grab" attention, but they werent really ready so they're deaying other intros, OR, *if* they were ready, they are dealying intentionally stuff so they can "cover" next CORE demos. Both are unelegant. Can someone explain me why i'm wrong on this, if i am ?


Paolo
Hi There

Brad had mentioned in a sept 2008 modcast once that they would be rolling 401 info out in Q1. Now, I can't say if they had planned the exact release date for starting the info release, but they had planed a weekly release of information exactly like they did for modo 201 and 301.

Kray: Yeah, I've always been impressed with the quality of its output, If I had the cash at the time, I would have invested for sure.

frantbk: modo 401 range will be 64bit on Windows with the mac ver to follow soon after. Brad talked about this in his recent modcast if you want more information on the subject.

Cheers

Pavlov
02-21-2009, 10:52 AM
Hi There
Brad had mentioned in a sept 2008 modcast once that they would be rolling 401 info out in Q1. Now, I can't say if they had planned the exact release date for starting the info release, but they had planed a weekly release of information exactly like they did for modo 201 and 301.

Hi,
thanks for the info.. i seemed to find more than one casuality in timing and modes.


thanks,
Paolo

cresshead
02-21-2009, 11:06 AM
EDIT - Modo stuff is interesting but there's one thing i dont understand about Luxology's demoing policy. They seem to delay stuff so they can keep attention for a longer period, and just for a case it's same period NT is introducing CORE. So, imho, one of the two is true: they started immediately after CORE reveal to "grab" attention, but they werent really ready so they're deaying other intros, OR, *if* they were ready, they are dealying intentionally stuff so they can "cover" next CORE demos. Both are unelegant. Can someone explain me why i'm wrong on this, if i am ?


Paolo

maybe your chin is too close to the bark [wood, trees etc]

many people are showing new apps and releases around this time..look at autodesk..they teased out their 3dsmax design 2010 over several days/weeks around the same time..and will also follow up with 3dsmax 2010 soon too...

also messiah had a few new tools, corel painter looks to be just about to announce a new version [maybe]

some people announce new versions around the end of the year, some just after start of year, some at the march/april time and some wait till siggraph [maya, mudbox, motion builder etc]

i prefer the modo marketing teases..they look waay slicker than core has so far, though i do like the HC forum chats with the newtek dev team and first goodies we get to talk about..:thumbsup:

and the autodesk blog is very cool about the new stuff arriving in 3dsmax 2010 design...

all do it 'their way' some parts are better than others...

all good in the end i thnk.:thumbsup:

Pavlov
02-21-2009, 11:16 AM
i prefer the modo marketing teases..they look waay slicker than core has so far

ok, ok.. i didnt mention quality or other issues.
Please let's avoid to pump this into a flaming war, it was not my intention ;)

Paolo

frantbk
02-21-2009, 12:46 PM
frantbk: modo 401 range will be 64bit on Windows with the mac ver to follow soon after. Brad talked about this in his recent modcast if you want more information on the subject.

Cheers

I knew when I posted that I would probably ding myself. I'm behind on listening to the modcast for this week. :D

frantbk
02-21-2009, 06:30 PM
So after listening to the modcast, anyone know what is the time line for Apple? If you know when Apple is releasing 401 shouldn't be to far behind right? :stumped:

Captain Obvious
02-21-2009, 07:19 PM
So after listening to the modcast, anyone know what is the time line for Apple? If you know when Apple is releasing 401 shouldn't be to far behind right? :stumped:
I'm guessing Apple are NEVER releasing 401, seeing how it's a Luxology product.



Modo is a bucket renderer so its capable of rendering billions of polys with instances on 32 bit machines, and even into the trillions of polygons with instances. (not sure if trillions needs 64 bit memory space). Not sure how many "real polys" 401 can handle in 32 bit.. 302 was about 30 million in my tests.
modo's ability to render a whole heap of polygons has little to do with the fact that it's a bucket renderer, as such. modo has memory cycling (meaning it dumps geometry out of memory and tesselates as required), and bucket rendering does help with that, but if you've got GI and stuff it doesn't really matter.

I've rendered hundreds of billions of polygons in modo, by the way, using instancing (with 32-bit software, obviously). As for "real" polygons, it depends on what you mean by "real." Displacement polygons in modo have no smoothing (they're always faceted), and use a fair bit less memory than regular polygons. And if modo's memory cycling comes into play, then it's theoretically possible to render any number of polygons. A friend of mine managed to render about 4 billion displacement polygons without using instancing. It was probably quite slow, because it had to dump all the polygons and retesselate all the time, but it worked.

frantbk
02-21-2009, 08:52 PM
I'm guessing Apple are NEVER releasing 401, seeing how it's a Luxology product.

You never disappoint in living up to your name :agree:. Wasn't it speculated at the Lux site that the 301 release was held up because of Apple's problem releasing its OS (or was that 201?) Seeing that lux is an Apple centric company it sounds like, from the modcast of 2-19-09, that Apple was the major problem for 64 bit modo. You are listening to the modcast? or are you not listening to the modcast and this is a repeat of the time when you didn't know Brad referred to the different section in modo as studios?

Cageman
02-22-2009, 04:51 AM
Well... I've been spending some time watching through all the stuff that Lux has released regarding 401 and I really like what I see. I'm especially impressed with the rendering and the fur. Their realtime/interactive renderer has really got an overhaul and is impressive, to say the least.

I have to stress that I really like the fact that NewTek and Luxology seem to have something really good going for them now. Both packages are relatively cheap compared to the competition, and both seem to feed new innovation into the field of 3D.

What innovations you may ask? 1 example from each:

Modo 401 interactive renderer is amazingly fast now and seems to support everything you can throw at the renderer. I said "Wow" out loud when I saw the presentation. Not a "new" feature, but still impressive advancements.

CORE supports scripting in any type of inputfield (as I understood it, instead of typing in a translate x value, you can paste a Python script directly in the inputfield). I havn't seen that one before.

Frank_Geppert
02-22-2009, 05:23 AM
I agree with you Cageman, that is why I have licenses of both, LW and Modo. I simply have to support the last front against Autodesk ;)

Captain Obvious
02-22-2009, 05:46 AM
You never disappoint in living up to your name :agree:.
I've been meaning to change it to Captain Pedantic.



Wasn't it speculated at the Lux site that the 301 release was held up because of Apple's problem releasing its OS (or was that 201?)
There was a lot of that, yes: speculation.



Seeing that lux is an Apple centric company (...)
They're not, so the rest of this sentence is irrelevant. As for 64-bit Mac modo, well that's going to be a while. Apple decided to not release a 64-bit Carbon API. modo uses Carbon. It will have to be "re-written" for Cocoa.



CORE supports scripting in any type of inputfield (as I understood it, instead of typing in a translate x value, you can paste a Python script directly in the inputfield). I havn't seen that one before.
Houdini basically does that too, I believe.

frantbk
02-22-2009, 07:55 AM
There was a lot of that, yes: speculation. Wow, which means that my original state hold water. That Lux might have held-up the release of modo because of Apple's problems releasing their OS.
They're not, so the rest of this sentence is irrelevant. As for 64-bit Mac modo, well that's going to be a while. Apple decided to not release a 64-bit Carbon API. modo uses Carbon. It will have to be "re-written" for Cocoa.

Is the rumor still alive that Apple is a silent shareholder in Luxology. Has Luxology denied a close relationship with Apple. How many times in a modcast has Brad hype apple products and his visits to Apple? Five times that I can remember. How many times has Brad returned the favor for Microsoft - none that I can remember.

If you would stop posting and listen too the modcast you would have found out that Lux spent some time & money a build 64 bit to carbon, just to have Apple pull its usual screw-the-vendors trick. Yes C.O. if you had listen to Brad you would know that they are currently working on Cocoa and are having some problems. Problems with Apple. Brad already has stated that 64 bit modo is in place for Microsoft OS'. So once again the question is, will 64 bit modo be released for 401 - and if anyone wants to figure it out it will probably be based on Apples release of the next OS.



Houdini basically does that too, I believe.

houdini $99.00 Student $1995.00 basic $7996.00 advance. Lightwave Core 1.x $1495.00. Which will be the better buy in the 4Q of 09?

Ooo by the way modo has a construction plane too.

Ooo by the way 3D max has a mirroring tools & a deformation stack too.

Ooo by the way Silo has a bush tool too.

Ooo by the way Houdini uses python scripting too.

Ooo by the way Maya has nodes too.

Ooo by the way Softimage has history too.

Ooo by the way Vue has work layers too.

What is the point of your statement? That because someone already has a function people shouldn't be happy to see the same function in Lightwave?

colkai
02-22-2009, 09:16 AM
I've been meaning to change it to Captain Pedantic.

Better than Captain Tightpants. ;) :D

phil lawson
02-22-2009, 10:19 AM
If you would stop posting and listen too the modcast you would have found out that Lux spent some time & money a build 64 bit to carbon, just to have Apple pull its usual screw-the-vendors trick. Yes C.O. if you had listen to Brad you would know that they are currently working on Cocoa and are having some problems. Problems with Apple. Brad already has stated that 64 bit modo is in place for Microsoft OS'. So once again the question is, will 64 bit modo be released for 401 - and if anyone wants to figure it out it will probably be based on Apples release of the next OS.


The Windows modo 401 release will be 32bit/64bit as discussed in the modcast - the mac 64bit release will happen sometime after - I don't see how Apple releasing snow leopard would have any influence at all with the rollout of the modo 401 product...never had in the past. It would be a smart business move to aim for a mac modo 64bit release for sl launch though as users want to test the new os with new software.

Cheers

mav3rick
02-22-2009, 10:28 AM
interesting times ahead.

phil lawson
02-22-2009, 10:54 AM
interesting times ahead.

Indeed - as a customer of both products, it gives alot of options to complete various tasks. Its win win for the users! :)

frantbk
02-22-2009, 11:06 AM
The Windows modo 401 release will be 32bit/64bit as discussed in the modcast - the mac 64bit release will happen sometime after - I don't see how Apple releasing snow leopard would have any influence at all with the rollout of the modo 401 product...never had in the past. It would be a smart business move to aim for a mac modo 64bit release for sl launch though as users want to test the new os with new software.

Cheers

I can't see Lux releasing 64 bit PC modo and a 32 bit mac modo in someones account. If Lux did that then people would want to know if they get the 64 bit Mac when it is ready. Luxology would have to say no, not if you take the 32 bit Mac. You would have 3 programs for the price of 2. Most Modo users have stayed on the upgrade path, so why would Lux sell 3 programs for $395.00 upgrade cost? :confused:

kfinla
02-22-2009, 11:17 AM
I'm hoping there is a 64 bit Mac build of Modo by September. An older Modcast perhaps in December 08 made it sound like the WIN 64 version would not be out till 402.. and September is what I thought back then for OSX. Low and behold 401 is gonna be 64 bit now for WIN, so it was obviously expedited. Hopefully they can do the same on OSX.

I own LW 9.6 and Modo 302 and expect Modo sales to skyrocket as result of the latest Core info personally. Modo will be half the price of Core and have way more functionality. The $1500 price tag for Core confuses me. Part of me thinks its to scare people into buying in early. I'm really torn about the info. I think in the long run Core could be the better product for sure with the tech choices and path they are pointing down. But I think people are kidding themselves with what they expect Core 1.0 (Q4 09') to be capable of. If Q4 Core has all the functionality Modo 201 had I will be very impressed. If it has the functionality of 301 ( I can keyframe a box from point A to point B) I will be shocked.

Creating a 3d app takes several years. Look at your history books, XSI 1.0 took 4 years and had holes. Core is just past year 2. Core sounds akin to the Nexus architecture Modo is built from to accelerate their own development and they are in year 5 or 7 depending who you ask and they still don't have CA or particles (at least as of the last modcast). Modo was also "time enabled" in Version 301.. similar to what Jay said about being able (i.e. possible down the road) to animate anything in modeler. The possibility will be there from the start.. not yet the ability. Core is all very Modo deja vu to me. I expect core 2.0 to focus on rendering, so we can make stills with it. Core 3.0 basic object animation. I hope I'm wrong but I feel were 3 years away from having what we had in 9.6, as far as the type of work we'll be able to do with it. Jay also said something to the tune of "some of Core (1.0) will be more capable than 9.6, other parts it will not be. Core 1.0 will be a better modeler than 9.6. These are my perceptions after all the info I have seen and looking at the time lines of other products.

The hard thing for me is I've used LW forever, and like that NT listen, but I own a lot of software and don't see a product I will benefit from for a few years. Which is where the wierd pricing comes in; (NT already said core 2.0 will also be $395 to upgrade to if you are part of hardcore) so its gonna be cheaper to buy and upgrade core 3 times and have something that sits on the shelf than wait and buy at version 3.0.

DennisVR
02-22-2009, 11:28 AM
I can't see Lux releasing 64 bit PC modo and a 32 bit mac modo in someones account. If Lux did that then people would want to know if they get the 64 bit Mac when it is ready. Luxology would have to say no, not if you take the 32 bit Mac. You would have 3 programs for the price of 2. Most Modo users have stayed on the upgrade path, so why would Lux sell 3 programs for $395.00 upgrade cost? :confused:


When buying a license for a Modo release you can download and use both the Windows and Mac version. I don't see them changing this policy for the 32bit vs 64 bit version. Luxology has always been very flexible with their licensing.

phil lawson
02-22-2009, 11:29 AM
I can't see Lux releasing 64 bit PC modo and a 32 bit mac modo in someones account. If Lux did that then people would want to know if they get the 64 bit Mac when it is ready. Luxology would have to say no, not if you take the 32 bit Mac. You would have 3 programs for the price of 2. Most Modo users have stayed on the upgrade path, so why would Lux sell 3 programs for $395.00 upgrade cost? :confused:

You get the 32bit & 64bit modo for both win and mac when you buy, but since the 64bit mac isnt ready, it will be announced and appear in all 401 accounts when it is released. - NT have a similar approach so I don't know why your confused... I pay the same upgrade price or there abouts for LW and get 32bit windows & 64 windows & mac releases currently.

Mike_RB
02-22-2009, 11:33 AM
I can't see Lux releasing 64 bit PC modo and a 32 bit mac modo in someones account. If Lux did that then people would want to know if they get the 64 bit Mac when it is ready. Luxology would have to say no, not if you take the 32 bit Mac. You would have 3 programs for the price of 2. Most Modo users have stayed on the upgrade path, so why would Lux sell 3 programs for $395.00 upgrade cost? :confused:

They don't sell licenses for different bit depths or OS types independently. Buy modo, you can run it on whatever you want and on as many machines as you want of any type, just one at a time.

archijam
02-22-2009, 12:29 PM
interesting times ahead.

No they're not.

frantbk
02-22-2009, 01:30 PM
You get the 32bit & 64bit modo for both win and mac when you buy, but since the 64bit mac isnt ready, it will be announced and appear in all 401 accounts when it is released. - NT have a similar approach so I don't know why your confused... I pay the same upgrade price or there abouts for LW and get 32bit windows & 64 windows & mac releases currently.

As far as I know you don't get 32 bit Lightwave when you buy 64 bit Lightwave from NewTek. We are also talking about out right purchase of Lightwave at full price, or half. If you've been able to down load all version of Lightwave because of upgrade pricing then it is no wonder NT with with HardCore member.
I haven't heard anything from Brad that said they would package 32 & 64 PC with 32 & 64 Mac (then again I missed a couple of modcast). From a marketing point it sounds crazy to do that. Also what does that say about modo's pricing? Eight hundred ninety-five dollars divided by four = $223.75 per program. No wonder Brad didn't need to up modo's price.

frantbk
02-22-2009, 01:33 PM
They don't sell licenses for different bit depths or OS types independently. Buy modo, you can run it on whatever you want and on as many machines as you want of any type, just one at a time.

When you buy modo from 101-302 all versions have been 32 bit. I doubt 32 & 64 bit versions of mac and pc will be packaged together after 09. It's crazy marketing and sends a message just how cheap it is to build modo. :tsktsk: