PDA

View Full Version : "Core" be careful what you wish for.....



Snosrap
02-08-2009, 01:49 PM
I've been following and reading about this Core news from a lot of different sources. There's much to consider and dissect! I've been a LW user for quite some time and remember what a big change LW 6 was in comparison to 5.6. But at the end of the day it was still Lightwave only better. I agree that LW needs a new foundation, especially in the area of Modeler. But I gotta say the history stack kinda concerns me. While the concept sounds great the actual implementation of such a feature and housekeeping it takes to make it useful concern me especially when it comes to currently simple tasks as cut and paste. Nothing can take the place of good planning when modeling. Even though Modeler is the cluster #$% it is, it is extremely fast and simple to use. Another concern of mine is Newtek's time-line. In my wildest imagination I cannot believe they can have a complete solution (same feature set as in 9.6) available by Q4. Is this another modo on the making? Modeling up front but an eternity for character animation, volumetrics, dynamics etc.? Use Core to model and supplement your other work with 9.6? If not, why is NT saying they will be adding features to the 9 series? Why spend any more resources on it? The only reasoning that comes to mind is that some of the new features that have been added to 9.6 have been written in a manner that are usable in Core. And the recent improvements to the render engine and indeed the separation of the render .dll from the base code possibly makes the render engine drop in compatible with Core with a few minor tweaks. This is the only reasoning that makes sense to me. Hopefully in the end it will still be the Lightwave we all know and love, delivered in a timely manner, only better!

Cheers
Snosrap

KillMe
02-08-2009, 01:56 PM
i to have some concerns about how the stack will be implemented - i'm hoping you can effectively disable it and work as we are used to doing if we want - that aside i think your fears are abit premiture and i dont think they are actively developing 9.6 now just bug fixes and maybe the odd implimentation of stuff for core than can work as a plugin in 9.6

i also see improvements to things like fiber effects as things that will not be platform specific - so the improvements being done in that area will apply to core aswell as 9.6 just needing compiled differently for each or something

at least thats what i hope anyway

hrgiger
02-08-2009, 02:03 PM
Another concern of mine is Newtek's time-line. In my wildest imagination I cannot believe they can have a complete solution (same feature set as in 9.6) available by Q4. Is this another modo on the making? Modeling up front but an eternity for character animation, volumetrics, dynamics etc.?

Well, I for one am expecting that you will not see the most complete application by Q4. I mean, that would be nothing short of a miracle to have a completely re-written app in such a short timeline. And that's ok with me because I've wanted them to address the SDK issue for so long that I'm willing to wait for such a good move on Newteks part to bear fruit. I personally think it will be an exciting ride with lots of new things being added to Core and being a member, I'll get to experience them as they happen. But on a sidenote, I don't think it will be another Modo. I think you'll see a full application for the most part, but it may be feature limited at first. I'm hoping that you'll see some of those original shortcomings being made up for by third parties with the new and very accessible SDK.

Mike_RB
02-08-2009, 02:17 PM
reposted from the FAQ thread:

This makes perfect sense if at first they are planning of polishing only one piece of core for q4 this year (maybe a bit of everything, but good at one). Then they make a 9.7layout with special loaders for whatever that chunk of core they polished up is. Fantasy speculation hat on.... Say core has killer dynamics and medium everything else, they may have it all exportable and have a 9.7 or a 9.6 plugin for loading core dynamics info onto 9.6 objects. So you could use core in production even though all the pieces might not be there to use it alone.

Silkrooster
02-08-2009, 02:48 PM
Without seeing core, I don't know if it is really fair to come it to other programs. Just because one programs has difficulty with the history stack does not mean that Newtek will have the same issue. May be they will be slow, but I just think it is best to wait and see.

Roly
02-08-2009, 06:05 PM
In my wildest imagination I cannot believe they
can have a complete solution (same feature set as in 9.6) available by Q4.
Is this another modo on the making? Modeling up front but an eternity for
character animation, volumetrics, dynamics etc.? Use Core to model and
supplement your other work with 9.6?Snosrap



With a retail price of US$1495 I don't think is just going to be a modeling
application. :thumbsup:

rakker16mm
02-08-2009, 06:46 PM
I really don't see how the history stack will encumber anyone's workflow. After all if you plan well and don't use it... well it's just there and not being used. I suspect however that once people get used to it being there they will wonder how they ever got along without it.

As far as implementation goes I don't see any reason to believe it would be any more of a concern than any other new feature. Features are either well implemented or they are not. In the 9.5 cycle Newtek pulled the UV Unwrap feature because it was not performing properly. If history stack is problematic I suspect they will either fix it or pull it until it is ready. I'm just guessing but it looks like that was one of the features they had enough confidence in to demonstrate during the reveal.

When it comes to house keeping I seem to use incremental save a lot more than I do in any of my other software programs. Part of that is because I like having different versions of my models and scenes but a lot of it has to do with not being sure I will be able to get back to where was previously. Now there's nothing wrong with having all the different versions of a model but there are times when i may have forgotten to do an incremental save, and so I have to go back open one of those earlier versions.... which may lack several of the latest operations I did want. This is where the history stack would be working in my favor. With this in mind I have to say that the History Stack is one of the features I am really looking forward to.

Hopper
02-08-2009, 06:53 PM
Fantasy speculation hat on.... Say core has killer dynamics and medium everything else, they may have it all exportable and have a 9.7 or a 9.6 plugin for loading core dynamics info onto 9.6 objects. So you could use core in production even though all the pieces might not be there to use it alone.
You have a good point there. Maybe this is what NT means by HardCore members getting certain upgrades to 9.6. Maybe these upgrades will enable work to be shared by both applications so 9.6 can pick up the slack for features not yet implemented in Core. This would be a good path to take considering the goal of beta testing is to have us use the product as much as possible.

hrgiger
02-08-2009, 07:09 PM
With a retail price of US$1495 I don't think is just going to be a modeling
application. :thumbsup:

That's a good point and I honestly didn't think of that. Newtek has to know that not very many people would pay that kind of money for just a modeler then you can go right next door and get Modo.

Riff_Masteroff
02-08-2009, 07:16 PM
My guess is that I will not be able to change over to Core from 9.6 until 2011. I can't imagine that all needed functionality will be available soon. Like LWCAD.

Hopper
02-08-2009, 07:19 PM
It sounds bad, but I hope all the plugins don't get converted "too" soon. I can't justify spending another $300+ for FPrime again anytime soon. Maybe it will come out just after a Q4 release so I can sneak a bit out of my tax return to get it. That's the only reason I bought into the membership... I had to do it fast before the wife got to it.. :)

lots
02-08-2009, 08:41 PM
How long has NT been working on Core? If its been in some form of development since 9.x started, I'd imagine that they're relatively close to being ready to release it.

It almost seems to me, that they would try out ideas and new features in 9.6. Take the lessons learned from it, and implement it in Core. Assuming Core's framework was written from the ground up to be easily extended, I could see NT developing features very rapidly. Also, assuming its easily extended, two or three years of development sound like they could go a long way, especially if alot of features from the 9.x series were programmed with Core in mind and thus, easily brought over. The renderer comes to mind..

Then again, that could all be wishful thinking ;)

ItsPete
02-08-2009, 08:45 PM
i imagine it started prior to 9 and yeah 9 has been a testing grounds. betting i could use it in my pipeline day 1.

but then again, yeah, could be wishful thinking ;)

Snosrap
02-08-2009, 09:11 PM
With a retail price of US$1495 I don't think is just going to be a modeling
application. :thumbsup:

Neither do I. But by Q4? I have my doubts.


You have a good point there. Maybe this is what NT means by HardCore members getting certain upgrades to 9.6. Maybe these upgrades will enable work to be shared by both applications so 9.6 can pick up the slack for features not yet implemented in Core.

Wow that's a scary thought. But no less plausible.


I really don't see how the history stack will encumber anyone's workflow. After all if you plan well and don't use it... well it's just there and not being used. I suspect however that once people get used to it being there they will wonder how they ever got along without it.

But if extra data is required to implement a history stack, i.e.geometry isn't just points and polys in X,Y,Z space, but instead some kind of entity - won't that make simple things like cutting and pasting points and polys cumbersome?


It sounds bad, but I hope all the plugins don't get converted "too" soon. I can't justify spending another $300+ for FPrime again anytime soon.

My hope is that a 3rd party FPrime like previewer won't be necessary, it should be included in the base package.

For me the information Newtek feeds us in the next few weeks is big. Personally my choices are to upgrade to modo 401 or go the Core route, I can't do both. So I would need to make my decision before the price increase to $495. As far as my professional work goes my company would not bat an eye to upgrade at the full upgrade price of $695. However I have considerable influence at work as to what 3D package we use and if I decide to drop LW personally and get deep into modo, I can see myself making that recommendation at work as well. 11 seats at stake. I hope NT can provide the information in the coming weeks to make an informed decision.

Cheers
Snosrap

dhath45
02-08-2009, 10:09 PM
Hi. I usually don't reply in the forums, although I'm constantly lurking in the background somewhere, it's pretty much of an obsession with me. I've been using Lightwave from versions 5.6 to 9. The past couple of years I've been working in Softimage XSI. One of the things that made me convert was the fact that there was no version of history, only a certain amount of undo's in Lightwave, and not all the undos are accessible to all functions in the application. In XSI, I can work on a project, confident that if I mess up at some point, I can always go back to that point in history, and tweek or modify that certain parameter, freeze the history to that point or simply delete the history. I currently can't do that with Lightwave. I can still cut, copy and paste, and do everything that I can with Lightwave with the added confidence that all of my moves have been recorded, in case something dreadful happens. And if you don't want history on, just turn it off (that's called their "immediate" mode). Never once has XSI slowed me down because of history. Once I heard of Lightwave Core and what it might be possible to do in the future (and not just because of history), I was very excited, and will be subscribing to Newtek's Hardcore soon.

rakker16mm
02-08-2009, 10:46 PM
But if extra data is required to implement a history stack, i.e.geometry isn't just points and polys in X,Y,Z space, but instead some kind of entity - won't that make simple things like cutting and pasting points and polys cumbersome?

I don't think so. If engineers of other software packages have failed to make the process of copying and pasting geometry easy it is really a problem related to the intelligent and thoughtful development of their UI. A polygon is after all a discrete thing. It has a number of vertices which must still occupy positions in X,Y,Z space. These things are knowable. Indeed they must be known for the software to function at all. Having a memory stack does not changes this. The memory stack is really just more information and therefore this is an issue of filtering what information you would like to copy and paste and what information you don't.

Great software makes such things seem easy. A well implemented UI can really be thought of as a very complex filter. It shows you what you need to see when you need to see it and filters out all the extraneous information that you don't want to deal with. After all you and I are not speaking in in 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100010 01100001 01110010 01111001 or 48 45 58 or even QkFTRTY0. This happens so seamlessly that we forget only a few years ago this was all just an idea in some one's head. If Newtek does their job right, the Memory Stack will be just as intuitive us as typing out a reply on this message board. Actually I will go further and say it will be easier because I actually had to give this response more thought than I would want to doing any copy and paste operation.

KillMe
02-09-2009, 02:48 AM
For me the information Newtek feeds us in the next few weeks is big. Personally my choices are to upgrade to modo 401 or go the Core route, I can't do both. So I would need to make my decision before the price increase to $495. As far as my professional work goes my company would not bat an eye to upgrade at the full upgrade price of $695. However I have considerable influence at work as to what 3D package we use and if I decide to drop LW personally and get deep into modo, I can see myself making that recommendation at work as well. 11 seats at stake. I hope NT can provide the information in the coming weeks to make an informed decision.

Cheers
Snosrap

i think the problem might be that most of the info released might be for hardcore (wish they had come up with a better name - dread to think what people will think if they have that on the package when it arrives) members only

said in that vid that hardcore members would have access to more videos etc to come - didn't mention if everyone else would get to see them or not

Riff_Masteroff
02-09-2009, 03:17 AM
Sorry to say that the lack of a memory stack never bothered me. And also, I rarely use the LW undo command (u). But I do create a whole lot of sequential saves. And I rarely need to access them. I also create objects and scenes with other information pertaining to the 'real' objects and scenes (like 'geometry' objects that show circles and center points).

But then again, I have never used an app that had a history stack. Maybe I should kick myself.

*Pete*
02-09-2009, 04:10 AM
i rarely use undo more than once or twice, and i use incremental saves seldom...and even then only for major design changes.

If i f-up my model, i usually fix it right away..

Im not sure what to expect of history stack or how it will help me to modell.
But seeing so much intrest towards it gets me curious.

colkai
02-09-2009, 05:31 AM
To me, I see the history stack more a way of allowing model changes design wise, not as a 'fix problem' assistant. There will be cases I think where the stack really doesn't server any useful purpose but there are others where it may be a real boon.

So long as there is the ability to freeze, or auto-freeze each action (effectively nullifying the stack) I think it will be a real asset.

Imagine you're building something, then realise the part is still visibly segmented but is 'hard' geometry, you use the stack/history to simply up your 'base' items resolution but don't need to step through the whole process again.

cresshead
02-09-2009, 05:45 AM
currently we don't know if lightwave core is in 'alpha', 'beta' or nr complete and just wants a few bug fixes before launch.[python editor example]

at rrp $1495 it better be a full app..just $500 below maya complete.

we should know much more this week anyhow over on the HC forums..currently we're in the same boat as everyone else.

Q. why did newtek reveal lightwave core 'now'...they could have waited until siggy 2009

cresshead
02-09-2009, 05:50 AM
from what we've seen about the u.i. so far it looks pretty complete to me so far...

file menu
new
open
save
save as
import
export
export selected
project
exit

edit menu
undo
redo
history prev
history next
cut
copy
paste
delete
parent
unparent
preferences
keyboard shortcuts
plugin manager
theme manager


display menu
HUD>grid/construction plane
u.i. elements>timeline/toolbar/toolbox/atribrute editor/history stack/modifier stack/outliner/hide all/show all
viewports>3d/2d/image editor/connection editor/hiearchy editor/outline???/browser/split vertical/split horozontal
hide
show
frame all
frame selected
frame hiearchy

window menu [no dropdowns show in the video]
i would guess this is where some goodies are!!!...like scene editor, graph editor and render settings...

selection menu
point
edge
face
part
material
item
select all
deselect
invert selection
select hiearchy
selection set

mode menu [no dropdown shown]
mode maybe either modeler/layout or the mode we already have in modeler...

help

Nemoid
02-09-2009, 08:09 AM
Realistically speaking, i think that, for Q4 release, we just need a very good foundation for the modern app Lw CORE wsill be. After all, what's more important is the structure, to override current Lw limitations-

A good foundation is the first thing to nail correctly, and its probably the point in which Newtek is now (further vids could show this better, btw)

So, foundation implementing things like unlimited undos, handling of items like edges and objects within the same -common - platform, build up the basis for every simple thing which, extended , can be useful into several ways.

small example: we do now have 2 apps .Modeler and Layout. transformation tools, like move , rotate scale, aren't the same tools in Layout and Modeler.

having the very same tools for all the app given the fact that's actually ONE app is very different : the same tool you use to translate an object, is the one you will use to move a vertex.

another thing most people seems to forget, in CORE is the disappear of HUB program.:thumbsup: Hub was a workaround to make Layout and Modeler work together, it can cause slowdown and other problems too it's not the most efficient way to make 2 apps work together, either.

A new foundation can make things easier. A modern CORE should be able to manage all items into a more flexible way, being them meshes, shading nodes, plugins , scripts, commands, and more. all these things shouldn't interfere each other and this is possible with a nodal, flexible structure at the base of the core itself.

Also object oriented programming help building things into a more efficiant way so good choice to go C++ :thumbsup:

with such a foundation, you can then build up good tools, refine them in time. even if core wouldn't be astonishing from day 1, its not a problem as the wise says : Rome wasn't built in a day

lots
02-09-2009, 09:47 PM
To me, I see the history stack more a way of allowing model changes design wise, not as a 'fix problem' assistant. There will be cases I think where the stack really doesn't server any useful purpose but there are others where it may be a real boon.

So long as there is the ability to freeze, or auto-freeze each action (effectively nullifying the stack) I think it will be a real asset.

Imagine you're building something, then realise the part is still visibly segmented but is 'hard' geometry, you use the stack/history to simply up your 'base' items resolution but don't need to step through the whole process again.

Exactly, I would love to, say, create a spline to maybe make some piping, spline cages for a car body, etc. Put the polys on it, see how it shapes up. If I don't like the shape, I can go back and modify the splines and see how the new geo looks as I change the base shapes. It would also be great in a studio environment where the concept art for a specific model may change on the fly, and some major changes to the basic shape need to be made. To me that is a big time saver for some types of modeling, and a feature from XSI and other apps that I've wanted for quite a while..

dwburman
02-10-2009, 12:16 AM
...and theoretically, you will be able to animate the spline modifications to change the shape over time.

lwanmtr
02-10-2009, 12:34 AM
I rarely used Maya's history...there are some things that it didnt actually store for some reason...Anyway, I'm not against a stack, as long as it doesnt really interfere with my workflow..I will probably play around with it, to be sure..hehe.

I only used XSI once or twice, so I'm not sure of what (if any) differences in it's stack is compared to Maya..but one thing i dont like is the way maya displays the history..all across the component window, so you have to click the dang arrow button till you get back to where you want

dhath45
02-10-2009, 02:06 AM
History is much easier to follow in XSI. You basically follow whats called the explorer, which gives you a tree view of everything that's going on inside your scene. If you right click on any of it's parameters, you can see all your options for that parameter.

Frank_Geppert
02-10-2009, 02:37 AM
With a retail price of US$1495 I don't think is just going to be a modeling
application. :thumbsup:

Yes, for sure. It has to be a full package for this price.

But I also cannot imagine how this happens in this year. The menu structure posted in this thread shows only some basic modeling tools.

But I can imagine how this could be solved: You will get not only Core for 1495, you will simply get an improved LW 9.6 as well. Maybe both will still share data via Hub. So you can model in Core but do rendering and animation in LW9.6 for a long time. So it also makes sense why NT said that Core owners get more LW9.x Updates. It is needed for communication.

This way Core might indeed become some kind of Modo in the beginning. But Modo with a free 9.6 license for new customers. You could also imagine Core as a Modeler replacement in its first generation. Layout will be your friend for a longer time though.

I am just guessing, we will see.

rakker16mm
02-10-2009, 11:11 AM
...and theoretically, you will be able to animate the spline modifications to change the shape over time.

Even drive them with other nodes perhaps. Muscles anyone?

the3dwiz
02-10-2009, 03:44 PM
Hey cresshead you seam quiet shure about the buildingstage of LWCORE. Do you have some more infos that i maby have missed? I only have seen the Video on youtube? Are there some more infos other than on the HP?

KillMe
02-10-2009, 05:07 PM
http://www.newtek.com/core/techfaq.php think thats the only other info currently

the3dwiz
02-10-2009, 05:35 PM
Thanks for the link, i allready read them. Sounds nice from platform and technical standpoint, but actualy i like to know a little more about whats in allready (Start of the Beta) and whats planed to be in in Q4 (Release V.1) Only to knowwhats going on. This seams important to me! If LW9.6 only gets minor Updates and bugfixes in the future and the LW Core has a to slow developement, NT will loose even more terrain to AD (AKA The Dark Side) If you look at History you can see this with Softimage. It was the leading 3D App. then got a total rewrite and lost a lot of ground to Maya! Actualy it never gain its leading role back. And will hardly, as i think. There are just not enaught Softimage User i think ( Have a look who is selling the Software, there are not to many Companys(At least in Europe)

dwburman
02-10-2009, 05:38 PM
I don't think the first release of core will simply be a modeler if only for the reason that there is no "modeler" and "layout" as separate entities. I'd be very surprised if the new renderer and lighting API aren't already in core as it was developed for 9.6 while core was underway. It wouldn't make sense to do all that work if you knew you had to redo it in the near future. Of course, they may have to modify those things but I doubt they'd have to start from scratch on all of the stuff they've written in the last year.

I'm not saying that LWCORE 1.0 will have all the functionality and features of LW9.6 but I like to think that it will have basic modeling tools, rendering and lighting and at least some animation capability. It'll be interesting to see what the dynamics system will be like.

I hope to be amazed at how complete CORE will be at release time, but I don't know if I'll have the $$ to upgrade just yet anyway.

the3dwiz
02-10-2009, 05:53 PM
Hi dwburman I think you are right.
I only feel strange with all this stuff going on (Countdown, big reveal of CORE... that not was...) Then bam. Nothing..... Did they realy wanted to show more, or was the stream realy all? If it was not all they wanted to show, why one or to small videos in the last 6 Days? Im only wondering from a customer standpoint and from a marketing standpoint. I

mccabejc
02-10-2009, 07:46 PM
I'm not saying that LWCORE 1.0 will have all the functionality and features of LW9.6 but I like to think that it will have basic modeling tools, rendering and lighting and at least some animation capability. It'll be interesting to see what the dynamics system will be like.

What are you basing this supposition on? The Core system is based upon a completely different architecture and language. Do you honestly think that you can convert the existing code to the new Core system by merely waving your hands? I'm not a programmer, but from what little C/C++ programming I've done, and reading about object-oriented programming, it seems to me to be a HUGE undertaking. More like starting from scratch than just making some quick cosmetic changes.

Where do you folks get the idea that Core will be up and running with LW 9.6 functionality anytime soon? Much less adding lots of new features...

lots
02-10-2009, 08:47 PM
If Core's core (;D) was designed right, developing features and tools should be relatively fast, compared to previously in the 9.x and earlier versions of LW. Basically if Core's framework handled all of the hard stuff such as memory allocations, dealing with platform specific problems, and so on, then it would be (and should be) pretty fast and simple (in comparison to 9.x) to create tools and features for the app. on top of that framework, since the programmer wont have to worry about all the nitty gritty stuff, and can just focus on the functionality of his tool. Also, from a high level POV, the design of the tools and utilities in LW 9.x should be applicable to Core, even if the underlying language is not. Because the high level design is already worked out, it should be easier/faster to develop the Core version because you know what hurdles there are already, and how to get around them, at least in terms of the high level design.

I don't honestly know what features to expect in Core when it ships. My hopes are for a fully funcitonal application with an easily extendable code base. I think once a few plugin writers get their hands on Core's SDK, we'll know just how easy (or difficult) it is to bring new features in. And since this is the same tool set that NT uses to create Core's built in tools, we will have an idea how fast we can expect updates.

In either case, during the video, they said "LW Core supports Dynamics (physics, cloth, hair), Rendering, modeling" etc... Though I'd like more solid evidence :) Hopefully NT will release more info before that March 31 deadline. Otherwise, I don't see them getting much in the way of "pre orders"

mccabejc
02-10-2009, 09:05 PM
If Core's core (;D) was designed right, developing features and tools should be relatively fast, compared to previously in the 9.x and earlier versions of LW.

I'm sure you're right, but let's keep in mind that LW has been in development for decades. So while "relatively fast" might be true, 5-10 years would certainly count as relatively fast for LW.

cresshead
02-10-2009, 09:36 PM
History is much easier to follow in XSI. You basically follow whats called the explorer, which gives you a tree view of everything that's going on inside your scene. If you right click on any of it's parameters, you can see all your options for that parameter.

i only have xsi 4.2 foundation [and max n lw] but i find the history to be a bit lacking...could well be me not knowing how to use it as i've only dabbled with it but unlike 3dsmax i couldn't mute an operator in the middle of the history stack..in max you can turn a modifier on or off...in the hisory in xsi it behaves like the history in photoshop..everything after what you select is stopped too...there is a mute...but it was always greyed out....couldn't find a way to turn it on...:)

so personally i'm hoping the 'stack' works like max not xsi...

dwburman
02-10-2009, 09:42 PM
What are you basing this supposition on? The Core system is based upon a completely different architecture and language. Do you honestly think that you can convert the existing code to the new Core system by merely waving your hands? I'm not a programmer, but from what little C/C++ programming I've done, and reading about object-oriented programming, it seems to me to be a HUGE undertaking. More like starting from scratch than just making some quick cosmetic changes.

My supposition is based on my inadequate knowledge of the subject matter. :D I'm not a coder so there's much I don't know about the process. Of course, there's more to development than just the code so perhaps the algorithms at least don't need to be rewritten, just the way they are implemented.


Where do you folks get the idea that Core will be up and running with LW 9.6 functionality anytime soon? Much less adding lots of new features...

Well, for my part, I don't know when LW core will have full functionality... I hope it'll be soon, but we've seen very little in the demo video. Sure there are lots of menu buttons but we don't know if the ones that weren't used in the video are even hooked up to anything.

Silkrooster
02-10-2009, 09:45 PM
@ cresshead

It may be a bit of both. If you recall in the video he mentioned that the core will have modifiers and history stack. Modifiers would effect each one locally while the history stack is more global.
One thing I noticed the second time around is the core has an object tree. Which pretty much renders layers useless which of few of the members were saying. But I am hopeing the layers will stay in for while give us the chance to try out both more or less.

cresshead
02-10-2009, 09:57 PM
@ cresshead

It may be a bit of both. If you recall in the video he mentioned that the core will have modifiers and history stack. Modifiers would effect each one locally while the history stack is more global.
One thing I noticed the second time around is the core has an object tree. Which pretty much renders layers useless which of few of the members were saying. But I am hopeing the layers will stay in for while give us the chance to try out both more or less.

cheers yeah as we wait for 'some'news on core i'm having a play in xsi 4.2 i think the history in that app is difficult to understand what the point is of it... say if the 3rd thing i did was to add an edge loop and then the 4th thing was to extrude the end polys of a cylinder i'd like the option to turn off that inserted edgeloop...with my limited knowledge in xsi i just can't seem to find out how or IF you can do this..yeah i know...go to the xsi forums!!1..well i'm just playing i've no interst currently to learn xsi and i'm just using this as a surragate replacement for the lack of lightwave core to play in!!!.

Roly
02-10-2009, 10:26 PM
Yes, for sure. It has to be a full package for this price.

But I also cannot imagine how this happens in this year. The menu structure posted in this thread shows only some basic modeling tools.

But I can imagine how this could be solved: You will get not only Core for 1495, you will simply get an improved LW 9.6 as well. Maybe both will still share data via Hub. So you can model in Core but do rendering and animation in LW9.6 for a long time. So it also makes sense why NT said that Core owners get more LW9.x Updates. It is needed for communication.

This way Core might indeed become some kind of Modo in the beginning. But Modo with a free 9.6 license for new customers. You could also imagine Core as a Modeler replacement in its first generation. Layout will be your friend for a longer time though.

I am just guessing, we will see.


"We have just scratched the surface of lightwave Core. There is more, just
not today, in coming presentations we'll show you other aspects of Core
like lighting, surfacing, rendering, animation and more."

From what is talked in the video I don't think is going to be some kind
of Modo in the beginning, and yes, looks like the version of python is going
to be 2.5.x or 2.6.x, and yes, manipulators or widges are on the video too.

Frank_Geppert
02-11-2009, 12:50 AM
"We have just scratched the surface of lightwave Core. There is more, just
not today, in coming presentations we'll show you other aspects of Core
like lighting, surfacing, rendering, animation and more."

From what is talked in the video I don't think is going to be some kind
of Modo in the beginning...

This sounds perfectly like Modo to me. It has all of these features mentioned. Maybe you are right, we will see.

Regarding coding: I also think this is not as easy as you imagine to convert C code from Lightwave to the new C++ API from Core. Even C and C++ are compatible, but the design of the new core is just different. It is more optimized to take multi threading into account. So it has to split many jobs into micro jobs. The new node structure needs a new approach in your software design. Even the modifier stack could change the way how you have to start and finish a certain task in Core.

We better should not underestimate the huge amount of work. But on the other hand there is a capable team.
This is interesting, I would really like to know more about this.

lwanmtr
02-11-2009, 01:13 AM
Modo..ugh..good program, but yeesh..enough modo already...lol

I serioulsy doubt that we'll be seeing another m*d* situation...

Core is esentially being presented as the replacement for LW9.x (and earlier), so for
them to release without the level af capability that 9.6 has would be a foolish move..
I'm sure that at release Core will be a capable platform (though I plan to keep 9.6 around for a while, till I am confident that Core can perform).

My opinion is that NT must be feeling confident that Core is at least ready for beta, or they'd have waited before going public. I think that with the beta program, they will have even a good chance of making their target release date (or within a month or so). thats just based on speed at which 9.6 was completed from beta.

But, like everyone else, its all just speculation..and yeah..I wanna see more info :)

Frank_Geppert
02-11-2009, 01:34 AM
But then please explain me why they are offering Core-subscribers special LW9.x updates? Why not publishing new updates for free to everyone? It must be related to Core and my guess is that it is to communicate between both applications. The old customers do not need these features but will get regular bug fixes if existent.

lwanmtr
02-11-2009, 01:44 AM
HardCore subscribers will have access to the beta section, so the special 9.x updates are beta builds, the rest will have to wait until the official releases of 9.x. Of course, that may just be a miscommunication.

I doubt that much work will be done to make Core communicate with 9.x ...it wouldnt make sense from a development standpoint, given that Core will be the replacement for 9.x....9.x will most likely only see bug fixes.

Frank_Geppert
02-11-2009, 05:42 AM
I disagree. Here is the sentence from the FAQ:
"There is a series of benefits exclusive to HardCORE™ participants including: ...Continued updates to LightWave v9"

There is nothing written about: "You get beta versions earlier than other ones". And why should I want to have another beta version?
And it also implies that the other ones (non-subscribers) do not get "continued updates for v9" but maybe bug fixes, I dont know. This is a bit confusing.
But the communication between hub and core makes sense here.

Besides that you wrote:

I doubt that much work will be done to make Core communicate with 9.x ...it wouldnt make sense from a development standpoint...

It will be much easier. They dont have to communicate a lot with Layout, they communicate with the HUB. The set of communication functions is already there and it is no problem whether Core is a new package or not. They just communicate through a given interface, no matter how it looks behind that, just telling each other to update or re-load models and materials.

shrox
02-11-2009, 05:53 AM
For me, a stack is frak. The stack is the main reason I don't like 3DMax. It can be very confusing if you have to work on a model someone else made. In Lighwave it doesn't matter, it just a mesh or a motion path. I don't like having to figure out what someone else was thinking when they last worked on a stacked file.

lwanmtr
02-11-2009, 02:11 PM
I just hope that using a stack will be optional. I'm not a fan of stacks..and yeah it can be confusing when using someone elses model..specially the Maya handles it. At least with Max it's laid out in a window from top to bottom..Maya just has it in the title bar or a menu sorta thing.

Frank, communicating with Hub would be quite a task...there are time that Layout and Modeler dont communicate rght through it, so I dont see how trying to force feed more advanced information from Core through it would make things easier.

hrgiger
02-11-2009, 02:20 PM
I just hope that using a stack will be optional. I'm not a fan of stacks..

I always liked the stack in XSI and will probably use it in Core, but from what I remember, there was an option for it not to save your modifications into the stack(hence turning it off).

lwanmtr
02-11-2009, 02:22 PM
Well, I suppose a worse case scenario is do what I do in Maya and freeze it occaisionally.
Not saying it's completely crap there, just can be confusing to find a specific operation since they put not only history there, but each material and so on...wee....

dhath45
02-11-2009, 02:30 PM
There's the "immediate" mode in XSI, it turns history off; any edits you do in that mode don't get recorded to history.

Frank_Geppert
02-13-2009, 01:01 AM
Frank, communicating with Hub would be quite a task...there are time that Layout and Modeler dont communicate rght through it, so I dont see how trying to force feed more advanced information from Core through it would make things easier.

Another application cannot send "more advanced" data through the HUB. If there is a certain interface then you have to send the data structures HUB expects to receive, nothing advanced will be allowed, just the same stuff modeler is sending.

And I have no problems with the HUB in 9.6, but I remember there were issues with my 8.x version.

wsantiago
02-13-2009, 01:43 AM
Does anybody know if ikboost is going to be supported in Core?

ericsmith
02-19-2009, 10:54 AM
It's pretty clear that nothing from the current animation code will be in CORE. Everything in that respect will be re-written. So the current IKB will be gone, along with all other animation features (with the possible exception of some of the new stuff in 9.6).

Whether or not Newtek will re-create a new version of IKB is another question altogether, and considering how little they've shown at this point, kind of a premature one.

Eric

frantbk
02-19-2009, 07:43 PM
Well there is nothing from NewTek giving anyone a solid point of reference date for the 2 years of research before one line of code was written. For all anyone knows NewTek has spent the last 1 1/2 years writing code and are ready for beta testing. this would explain why they release information on core - for beta testing.

I'm pretty sure that any additions to Lightwave 9.x were built with inclusion to Lightwave core. also Core is an Object Oriented program (oops) what prohibits NT from wrapping 9.x tools sets into object containers and calling on them?

:argue: :stumped: :argue: Only time and a core release will tell the truth.