PDA

View Full Version : will core 1.0 even match the anim capability of modo 401?



Pages : [1] 2

jin choung
04-12-2009, 03:09 PM
http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.animation.part.1/

good. good. this is very very good.

if anything's gonna light a fire under their as$ it's gonna be the fear that that core 1.0 won't even be able to match modo's anim capabilities!

part 2 of their anim reveal is upcoming....

jin

jin choung
04-12-2009, 03:24 PM
ugh... channel haul tool seems to be somewhat pointless right now.

it basically REPLICATES a menu that is ALREADY ON SCREEN to the right. in maya, you can just select those channels and MM drag to do the same thing without the brouhaha of another freefloating window... we'll see if these things actually come in handy later or if they will merely be as annoying as lw's sliders (albeit faster to setup).

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

channel link interface is basically maya's connection editor so that's good. but nothing really innovative and establishing set driven keys is perhaps more explicit but a bit slower for it.

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

user channel is just maya's "CREATE ATTRIBUTE"... again, nothing new but it wasn't broken to begin with so is good. these are good examples of where they are aping what they SHOULD. and this will be a fine way (as it is in maya) of creating controls for complex animation "machines" - as demonstrated in zipper vid.

jin

IMI
04-12-2009, 03:29 PM
You must have sent everyone in the world there to that link because I can't get that QT animation to play. It's been on perpetual load for over ten minutes now.
God, how I hate embedded QT animations that play in my browser...

jin choung
04-12-2009, 03:33 PM
really, i'm on the jack in the box vid now and they've been loading quick...

hmmmmm.....

jin

IMI
04-12-2009, 03:35 PM
Still no load for me, unless it's some other problem. I'll just have to check it out again later, I guess.
I think I understand what they're saying though.... animation channel linking? Sort of like parenting animation channels?

Sensei
04-12-2009, 03:39 PM
Still no load for me, unless it's some other problem. I'll just have to check it out again later, I guess.

Loaded here without problem..



I think I understand what they're saying though.... animation channel linking? Sort of like parenting animation channels?

Nothing important.. Just layered transformations in that video..

jin choung
04-12-2009, 03:43 PM
Sort of like parenting animation channels?

it's literally a combination of maya's CONNECTION EDITOR and their SET DRIVEN KEYS in that one interface.

so connection editor is just one to one mapping if ball y=10 then set it so that cube y=10 too....

for sdk, you can make it so that if the ball moves 1 inch in y, the cube moves 10inches or a mile or undulates 20 times or whatever... a non linear relationship between two values.

the only thing i'm smitten with and is at all new is the layered transforms... the ability to nest and then change nest order or stick in new transforms in the middle without parenting/unparenting while not revolutionary is really nice and something i have to deal with everyday in maya. and it can indeed help alleviate some of the mess in complex rigs so it's a nice feature.

actually, it would be nice if they came up with a way to "suck in" offset locators like on that first planet into the layered transforms if the locators are labeled properly. it might be easier to SET UP in actuality with the locators. but it might be nice as a final "clean up step" by a TD to "suck it into" layered transformations for rig USERS to operate. and then a way to "spit out" into locators again if revision or work needs to be done.

jin

cresshead
04-12-2009, 03:44 PM
modo's move into animation looks to be taking very considered steps that "do it right" and not "do it right now" which is good, yet i do wonder just when modo will get to a full app...2010 bones/deformers, 2011 particles, 2012 dynamics, 2013 fluids, 2014 cloth..npr renderer...

of course if you don't require all that then a 5 year wait is not a problem..to take 7 years to get a shadow catcher has amazed me though..if newtek took a similar time frame then 2022 for lightwave core would be about right...ouch...not so cutting edge if their base became 10 years old "before" it offered everything.

maybe lux is just too small a dev team..they have focussed on modeling and stills and the basic arch design walk thru needs and have done really well with that.

so what for newtek...do they also focus on a niche market and if so "which"?..or are they big enough to make core a full on app in less than 3 years [+ the 2 years of design already gone by..total time 5 years]

blender 2.5 can probably save a lot of lightwave or modo only users bacon once it ships in Q4..model in modo or lightwave or core...rig animate in blender...render out in lightwave/modo/core......

or it may just be blender steals the show altogether.

IMI
04-12-2009, 03:48 PM
Modo *seems* to be heading in the "full app" direction, but do we even know if they ever intend on putting CA into it? There's alot of need for animation that has no CA in it at all, and even limited FX.

jin choung
04-12-2009, 03:51 PM
Modo *seems* to be heading in the "full app" direction, but do we even know if they ever intend on putting CA into it? There's alot of need for animation that has no CA in it at all, and even limited FX.

my bet is that lux has been doing explicitly what newtek is loathe to attribute to core-

start with the modeler and then build in the rest after... in successive years.....

but lux are indeed taking their time as cress said and time will tell if that or the mad rush of core will result in a better app. but in any case, at least they're always being clear in what is being sold and that's aces in my book. we'll see how clearly newtek delineates the limitations of core when it is released 1.0 without all the expected bells and whistles of a traditional "1.0".

yah, my bet is that modo intends to be a full app.

jin

hrgiger
04-12-2009, 03:55 PM
If you listen to the modcast this week a few things are clear.

A) Modo 401 will not be a replacement for Layout yet. No dynamics, no particles and no complete bone or skinning solution.
B) Core intends to be a full app with character animation.

Brad said that they do not consider Modo 401 to be their character animation release. That implies that a character animation release is coming (possibly 501) but 401 aint it.

IMI
04-12-2009, 03:57 PM
my bet is that lux has been doing explicitly what newtek is loathe to attribute to core-

start with the modeler and then build in the rest in after.

but they are indeed taking their time as cress said and time will tell if that or the mad rush of core will result in a better app.

yah, my bet is that modo intends to be a full app.

jin

It does kinda look that way, especially since you point out what appears to be a setup planned from the beginning.
But putting it in the context of CORE and time.....
Wow, that's kinda scary all of a sudden. I hadn't really thought about it until now, but yeah, if CORE has been under development for only two years....... Hmmm, I can't complete that sentence. ;)

Thanks for the explanation, Jin, I get it now. :)

*************
The page loaded but all I see is the first frame of the video - it won't play. Very strange.

jin choung
04-12-2009, 03:59 PM
A) Modo 401 will not be a replacement for Layout yet. No dynamics, no particles and no complete bone or skinning solution.
B) Core intends to be a full app with character animation.


sure. but you don't know what modo intends to be. it sounds like they intend to be a full app too.

as for core.... sure, it "intends" to be those things (and you do know how i feel about "good intentions" don't you? : ) ). but by when? in the end, it might be a legitimate race to the finish line between core and modo!

as i said, good. good. this is good.

competition - especially between modo and core can only be good for us the consumer.

i'm like homer simpson in the stands screamin at his hockey kids, "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT FOR OUR LOVE AND AFFECTION! the winner will be showered with attention and praise while the loser will be ridiculed and booed until my throat is sore!"

jin

Mike_RB
04-12-2009, 04:01 PM
You guys are gonna dig the rest of the animation stuff in 401 if you think what's in the part1 reveal is good. :)

jin choung
04-12-2009, 04:04 PM
You guys are gonna dig the rest of the animation stuff in 401 if you think what's in the part1 reveal is good. :)

looking forward to it.

jin

IMI
04-12-2009, 04:07 PM
Unless CORE 1.0 or Modo 401 really wow me, I'm just planning on buying Softimage next year. Life is simpler, the more unknown variables you can remove from it. ;)

hrgiger
04-12-2009, 06:01 PM
looking forward to it.

jin

Same here.

lwanmtr
04-12-2009, 07:26 PM
Of course, we'll see if Lux can actually deliver what they're promising...remember, these are the same guys that developed LW and managed to miss alot of promises during their stay at NT....401 looks nice...but sheesh 301 is still buggy as hell..can they pull it off?

Of course, the new NT team has missed on some promises too, maybe they're suffering from the Amiga curse...lol

Perhaps a tally sheet should be started to see which one delivers less..Core1.0 or 401...Personally I hope they both manage to deliver because then we can have the '401 vs Core' threads pop up everywhere.

jin choung
04-12-2009, 07:43 PM
no matter what can be said about modo, the fact that motherfing PIXAR backs their product for modeling.... that's just fing huge in my book. praise from caesar indeed.

anyway, core has a big roaring sibling that's vying for feature parity (and then some) for their 1.0 release and this pleases me.

as they say on the school yard - FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!

jin

erikals
04-12-2009, 07:58 PM
Modo looks good, but hard to say which one will be better in 2 years.
Modo or Lightwave.

i have no idea, and i don't think anyone has a clue really...

they are starting to go in the same direction sort of, i can't help but feel Core will have a better foundation though.

sammael
04-12-2009, 08:06 PM
God, how I hate embedded QT animations that play in my browser...

I hear ya! Grrrr!!

adamredwoods
04-12-2009, 08:08 PM
It's been stated in Modo's modcast that there will be NO CHARACTER ANIMATION in modo 401.

jin choung
04-12-2009, 08:12 PM
It's been stated in Modo's modcast that there will be NO CHARACTER ANIMATION in modo 401.

i don't think anyone's said any different. but it DOES look like that modo intends on being a full app.

heck, and for that matter no one has said anything about the INCLUSION OF CHARACTER ANIMATION in core 1.0. (not to mention, physics, particles, etc etc etc).

as i said, the race is on. fight fight fight!

two apps enter, one app leaves!

we have appealed this to australia's highest court - thunderdome!

jin

erikals
04-12-2009, 08:23 PM
also remember supposedly anything is possible to make for 3drd party companies as the Core SDK is the same one that NT uses...

if that means what i think it means, there is basically no limits to what 3rd party ppl can make...

jin choung
04-12-2009, 08:40 PM
also remember supposedly anything is possible to make for 3drd party companies as the Core SDK is the same one that NT uses...

indeed. i hear that if you harness the core sdk just right, you can eliminate world hunger, eradicate global warming and bring peace to the middle east....

... or so the legend goes.

jin

hrgiger
04-12-2009, 09:10 PM
It's been stated in Modo's modcast that there will be NO CHARACTER ANIMATION in modo 401.

Actually, that's not precisely what Brad said. The wording was kind of vague and is open I think for interpretation. He said not to expect a full bone and skinning system in 401. Does that mean to expect a partially implemented one? He also talked about what a huge process it was to implement a good character animation system and that you have to lay the groundwork first (sound familiar?). It sounds to me like 401 is that groundwork. We still haven't seen the next pat of animation yet in 401 but I'm getting the impression that it's more impressive then what we saw in the first reveal.

erikals
04-12-2009, 09:31 PM
indeed. i hear that if you harness the core sdk just right, you can eliminate world hunger, eradicate global warming and bring peace to the middle east....

... or so the legend goes.

jin

...you forgot "and bring joy to the world"

sammael
04-12-2009, 09:31 PM
Actually, that's not precisely what Brad said. The wording was kind of vague and is open I think for interpretation. He said not to expect a full bone and skinning system in 401. Does that mean to expect a partially implemented one? He also talked about what a huge process it was to implement a good character animation system and that you have to lay the groundwork first (sound familiar?). It sounds to me like 401 is that groundwork. We still haven't seen the next pat of animation yet in 401 but I'm getting the impression that it's more impressive then what we saw in the first reveal.

Groundwork sounds like possibly IK type stuff? or does Modo have that already?

jin choung
04-12-2009, 09:44 PM
Groundwork sounds like possibly IK type stuff? or does Modo have that already?

now that WOULD be smart. so much of the fancy stuff is useless without a solid foundation on non-deforming stuff like ik, pole vectors, pivot point orientation and feedback, constraints, etc....

anyhoo, can't wait to see what next week brings.

jin

Sensei
04-13-2009, 05:35 AM
they are starting to go in the same direction sort of, i can't help but feel Core will have a better foundation though.

Core at least will have SDK for 3rd party developers..

phil lawson
04-13-2009, 07:04 AM
no matter what can be said about modo, the fact that motherfing PIXAR backs their product for modeling.... that's just fing huge in my book. praise from caesar indeed.


Well, that planet video was Rich. :)

jin choung
04-13-2009, 11:03 AM
Well, that planet video was Rich. :)

sweeeet.... didn't realize! he should make that his middle name "i'm with pixar"... wear it like an FBI badge or something. heck, i would. "ma'am, please step back... everything's in control... we're with pixar."

jin

GregMalick
04-13-2009, 11:40 AM
You guys are gonna dig the rest of the animation stuff in 401 if you think what's in the part1 reveal is good. :)

As a Modo user & LW user, the animation reveal #1 didn't blow me away.

But the Interactive BG Object constraint and other modeling improvements, the Presets, the render improvements, and all the stuff on the Light and Shadow page (love that Clear Coat) are enough to make me upgrade.

Then again, maybe I'm a push-over.

Glendalough
04-13-2009, 11:54 AM
As a Modo user & LW user, the animation reveal #1 didn't blow me away.

But the Interactive BG Object constraint and other modeling improvements, the Presets, the render improvements, and all the stuff on the Light and Shadow page (love that Clear Coat) are enough to make me upgrade.

Then again, maybe I'm a push-over.

Yes, I agree, same position here.

Some of the animation procedures appear really tedious and just hope they have some meaning down the line. The fiddling around with the graph editor stuff is just so 90's, Lightwave 5/6, hardly revolutionary.

IMI
04-13-2009, 12:22 PM
"ma'am, please step back... everything's in control... we're with pixar."

jin

:lol:

biliousfrog
04-15-2009, 01:54 AM
Core at least will have SDK for 3rd party developers..

Is an SDK always a good thing? Would creating an application that is open for 3rd party's to add to hinder development of the core application?

I have no idea how the SDK works but I wondered whether there's any compromise when making a user-friendly, open application that anyone can understand and create for rather than having just the developers working on the software without worrying about how others will add to it?

From a Lightwave perspective, I think that it's great that there's so many plugins available but I also wonder why most of them aren't part of the application. When you look at Modo, there's not much that 3rd party's would need to implement although there are still plugins available.

Just my 2c

Lightwolf
04-15-2009, 02:34 AM
Is an SDK always a good thing? Would creating an application that is open for 3rd party's to add to hinder development of the core application?
Not necessarily. It's just a matter of being open enough.
Even internally the developers will be coding on top of some kind of SDK.
The only reasons not to publish one are:
It's not properly documented (but should be for the internal team as well) It's likely to change a lot in the near future, causing frustration for third parties Trade secrets... Which doesn't stop any of the majors from shipping with one though



I have no idea how the SDK works but I wondered whether there's any compromise when making a user-friendly, open application that anyone can understand and create for rather than having just the developers working on the software without worrying about how others will add to it?

No, there isn't. Especially as a proper SDK (even just an internal one) will save them time in adding new features as well.


From a Lightwave perspective, I think that it's great that there's so many plugins available but I also wonder why most of them aren't part of the application. When you look at Modo, there's not much that 3rd party's would need to implement although there are still plugins available.

Modo has a load of stuff that could be improved upon or extended - Or even implemented ahead of the core (lux) team.
Why they aren't a part of the application? Again, there's a few reasons:
Some only cover a niche, but cover it well.
Some are nice ideas that the original team didn't come up with... or didn't think was needed.
Third parties also have the leisure of working on a single aspect for a fairly long time, thinking and developing it through (as opposed to adding one of many feature for the next upgrade). So you might get a feature similar to a native one, but brought to an entirely different level.
Some are just designed to speed up certain operations based on the original app.

I.e., looking at our products as an example and what modo offers:
infiniMap: That's something a few modo users would like to use, but we can't port as there is no shading SDK
shaderMeister: Not really needed due to the way the shading tree works in modo
exrTrader: Certainly offers more exr related feature than modo does, but is not strictly necessary

Then again, the last two don't really do anything you can't do with vanilla LW either, they just save (tons of) time in production.

Cheers,
Mike

dballesg
04-15-2009, 02:48 AM
Is an SDK always a good thing? Would creating an application that is open for 3rd party's to add to hinder development of the core application?

I have no idea how the SDK works but I wondered whether there's any compromise when making a user-friendly, open application that anyone can understand and create for rather than having just the developers working on the software without worrying about how others will add to it?

From a Lightwave perspective, I think that it's great that there's so many plugins available but I also wonder why most of them aren't part of the application.

Yes and SDK it is a great and fundamental idea. A modern application without an SDK it is like skimmed milk, looks like milk, but doesn't taste the same.

I do not see at all, how plugins like Sasquatch, FPrime, InfiniMap, exTrader, Easy Spline, etc.. hindered LightWave, I think in fact helped to improve it, and many of this tools avoided that Newtek needed to implement everything by themselves. That would be a monumental task.

True that you need to buy them. But if I take a free ones like Unreal Celshader, PICTRIX ones, PLG UV Tools, Denis and Pommfried ones, etc.. you don't hinder LW on any way. In fact improves it, again.

If they are not part of the application can be for many reasons, the authors didn't wanted to sell it to Newtek, NT wasn't interested on but them, or other economical reason that are absolutely off topic here.


When you look at Modo, there's not much that 3rd party's would need to implement although there are still plugins available.

Just my 2c

If Modo had an SDK I am sure other people added things like animation, bones, etc... to it long ago.

And what Modo has are LUA scripts?, like LightWave can have LScripts or CORE will have Python scripts.


David

phil lawson
04-15-2009, 03:40 AM
modo actually supports Perl, Python and LUA currently and has a file I/O SDK for exchange with other applications. Of course, a full SDK would be welcomed...

EDIT: Which is one of the reasons I've bought into CORE.

dballesg
04-15-2009, 05:45 AM
EDIT: Which is one of the reasons I've bought into CORE.

Bring the SDK Newtek! :D

jin choung
04-15-2009, 02:02 PM
I do not see at all, how plugins like Sasquatch, FPrime, InfiniMap, exTrader, Easy Spline, etc.. hindered LightWave

i do. third party plugins have had a HISTORY of hindering lw.

first, it should not be the purview of 3rd party developers to create functionality that SHOULD BE IN THE APP BY DEFAULT.

having a situation where something that should be in is NOT in and a 3rd party developer then creates a separate piece of software for it is an awful self propagating loop.

also, lite versions of apps like particle storm and sasquatch always hobbled lw because of the fact that newtek can SAY THEY HAVE SOMETHING even though what they have is just a lite version.

if lw did not have saslite or particlestorm lite, they would have had their own versions long before they ended up getting them because of the humiliation of having to say, "no we don't have that yet". again and again and again.

but the lite versions were always a shield and a facade they could hide behind.

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

having plugins and scripts provide for extra functionality is great. fprime is a good example.

but in my mind, there is a core set of features that a 3d app must have and when 3rd party creators step into make up for that lack like an overattentive mother, the app fails to grow.

jin

Lightwolf
04-15-2009, 02:41 PM
but in my mind, there is a core set of features that a 3d app must have and when 3rd party creators step into make up for that lack like an overattentive mother, the app fails to grow.
So, you're basically implying that people like me are stopping NT from developing their own solutions to problems that users, such as you, have?
What if third parties would stop developing and NT still didn'T have the insight, manpower or priorities to solve your issue?

Cheers,
Mike

lwanmtr
04-15-2009, 03:17 PM
Companies like NewTek have an almost sybiotic relationship to 3rd party plugin developers...if NewTek doesnt implement something, then generally a 3rd party will...
Fprime, Sas and HD Instance are good examples....of course, for the average user, the cost of these makes them hard to justify...

Though I can see the argument for having as much as possible already there..dynamics, fluids, instancing, etc...from a marketing standpoint it makes sense.
The more you can do out of the box, the more likely to bring in new users and keep the old ones..

NewTek should (if they arent already) work with the 3rd party dev's to make systems that will be integrated as part of the the Core package...and not Lite versions...
Even if NT makes it's own versions of what 3rd partys are doing now, the SDK should allow the 3rd party to be able to enhance whats there.

Lightwolf
04-15-2009, 03:24 PM
Fprime, Sas and HD Instance are good examples....of course, for the average user, the cost of these makes them hard to justify...
What is interesting is that, on the other hand, some plugins blow anything out of the water that is available as a built-in for any app.
HDInstance and MDDed instances being an example.

As for the symbiotic relationship... you should see ADs catalogue of partners(!). Sure, you pay for it(as a third party to advertize)... but it goes out to every customer.

Cheers,
Mike

lwanmtr
04-15-2009, 03:28 PM
AD's relationship to the 3rd parties is more like a pimp...they have to pay to develop for maya or max, and AD can deny them, if it conflicts with what AD wants....so with them it's symbiotic, its parasitic.

Lightwolf
04-15-2009, 03:30 PM
AD's relationship to the 3rd parties is more like a pimp...they have to pay to develop for maya or max, and AD can deny them, if it conflicts with what AD wants....so with them it's symbiotic, its parasitic.
That's ADs relationship with users as well though - except that third parties pay less and get more software :p

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
04-15-2009, 04:01 PM
So, you're basically implying that people like me are stopping NT from developing their own solutions to problems that users, such as you, have?

sometimes. not all the time. as i say, there are great plugins that provide extra functionality that goes above and beyond what what rightly "belongs in the app". your super scaling texture plugin is a great example of that. that's not something that any app company can be blamed for not having it "out of the box".

but, as you know, i'm not a fan of your openEXR plugin. THAT is functionality that i feel belongs in the app to begin with - with bells and whistles and all.

but i recognize that i'm playing with a moving target here - the concept of "this should belong in the base application".

but inasmuch as plugins get left behind or made incompatible (irrevocably so if development is abandoned), my argument is that if your app NEEDS that plugin to maintain its "image" and "prestige", nevermind functionality, then it needs to be part of the app.



What if third parties would stop developing and NT still didn'T have the insight, manpower or priorities to solve your issue?


again, this is my point about the LITES. we should never ever have lites because it is BETTER to not have something than have a bastardized version that the developers can hide behind.

the issue is pressure. if they don't have it and everyone feels they should, then i don't care if they don't have the wherewithal or resources - they better find a way.

OR

they get dragged through the mud until they do.

PRESSURE.

i don't like things that nullify that pressure.

jin

IMI
04-15-2009, 04:11 PM
again, this is my point about the LITES. we should never ever have lites because it is BETTER to not have something than have a bastardized version that the developers can hide behind.



Maybe it's just me, but I always looked at Saslite as an ad, a promo - a limited demo within Lightwave...

Lightwolf
04-15-2009, 04:14 PM
but, as you know, i'm not a fan of your openEXR plugin. THAT is functionality that i feel belongs in the app to begin with - with bells and whistles and all.
And even that surpasses what a lot of other apps have... and apparently is even loads better than what mr provides (not my words, customer comments).


but i recognize that i'm playing with a moving target here - the concept of "this should belong in the base application".
That's one thing. I've got more of a problem with the blame game ;)


again, this is my point about the LITES. we should never ever have lites because it is BETTER to not have something than have a bastardized version that the developers can hide behind.
Oh, absolutely.


the issue is pressure. if they don't have it and everyone feels they should, then i don't care if they don't have the wherewithal or resources - they better find a way.

OR

Since it's a free world and a free market... it provides an opportunity for somebody.


they get dragged through the mud until they do.

Well, or that ;)


PRESSURE.

i don't like things that nullify that pressure.

Don't blame the excuse for the deed that needs to be excused.

Cheers,
Mike

jin choung
04-15-2009, 04:29 PM
Don't blame the excuse for the deed that needs to be excused.

frankly i don't give a crap about blame.

do i blame plugin makers for trying to make a buck? he1l no.

but it can still create a bad situation where a "core feature" is has been deferred to a third party developer and thus never gets it on its own. i don't use the overprotective mother/frail baby that won't grow analogy for nothing.

overzealous plugin devs can be a CRUTCH for a weak app.

i don't care about blame. i just want a strong app that doesn't have smokescreens to hide behind or lame lites to buffer out bullet point lists with in brochures.

jin

Lightwolf
04-15-2009, 04:36 PM
overzealous plugin devs can be a CRUTCH for a weak app.

I'll try to reduce the usefullness of our plugins next time... but I'll also expect you to support our effort of increasing the pressure then by at least buying a license.
Hm, maybe hiking up the prices would increase the pressure as well (I'd also expect support from you then) :D

Or would you prefer good plugins to only appear on other, stronger platforms and not LW? ;)

Seriously though: My point is that it isn't the third parties fault. The main app developer can do whatever they think is necessary. AD has either bought or copied third party tools a lot of times, Apple does it, MS does it.

On the other hand, a healthy third party community can really boost an app to new heights (FPrime being a prime - excuse the pun -example. Which set standards for others to follow years later... within the main app).
Do you think FPrime will stop NT from developing their own solution? Or exrTrader will stop them from adding exr support in Core? I doubt it.
Will it be as good? That's a different question.

Cheers,
Mike

lwanmtr
04-15-2009, 05:21 PM
These are very good reasons why NT should (at least for the first release of Core) work closeley with the 3rd parties who have made some really cool plugs to get some of those (in full, not Lite, versions) so that they would become actually part of Core.

I saw some dynamics work being done by some guy (sorry, forget his name..oops) for LW, but then there was nothing (maybe was snatched up for Core, who knows)..But it would not only boost the 'out of the box' feature set, but may also shorten the amount of time that Core actually becomes usable.

I dont know the logistics involved, but I think it's an idea worth looking into.

jin choung
04-15-2009, 05:41 PM
Do you think FPrime will stop NT from developing their own solution?

as it pertains to particle storm lite and saslite - it HAS.

jin

lwanmtr
04-15-2009, 06:19 PM
as it pertains to particle storm lite and saslite - it HAS.

Yup, agree here...If we hadnt had those, it may have forced NT to develop their own integrated systems much earlier. I'm not saying those were bad plugs or anything, but what it ended up doing is making there no incentive to produced something new..and of course, those being 'lite' versions, you had to purchase the full versions to really be able to use them (which I always hated).

A Mejias
04-15-2009, 09:05 PM
NT's excuse could then be, "Well, there was already a product out there and this frees up time and resources for us to work on the core tools." Not that it succeed, but that's a valid argument.

jin choung
04-15-2009, 10:37 PM
NT's excuse could then be, "Well, there was already a product out there and this frees up time and resources for us to work on the core tools." Not that it succeed, but that's a valid argument.

that's fine. it really is.

but again, i'm talking about those things that "belong in the app" in the first place.

jin

Mike_RB
04-15-2009, 10:39 PM
that's fine. it really is.

but again, i'm talking about those things that "belong in the app" in the first place.

jin

That is a moving target, I remember buying a separate DOF and motionblur plugin for Ray Dream, then later buying their height field image displacement plugin. :)

jin choung
04-15-2009, 10:42 PM
That is a moving target, I remember buying a separate DOF and motionblur plugin for Ray Dream, then later buying their height field image displacement plugin. :)

and i totally agree that that is indeed a flaw in my opinion and i've said so myself. it TOTALLY is a moving target.

but still.

: )

jin

MrWyatt
04-16-2009, 02:38 AM
your super scaling texture plugin is a great example of that. that's not something that any app company can be blamed for not having it "out of the box".
jin

hmmmm.. well maya has it with .BOT files and mentalray has it with .MAP files and renderman uses .TEX files to do that. I have a colleague here who rendered the blue marble texture with no problem in 3delight. So as much as I love infinimap and as much as I praise the developer ( kudos to Mike) this is in fact a feature that every professional 3d app should do "out of the box"

Other than that I do think that plugin devs should hold themselves back, but I think NT should also not hesitate to either copy a plugin if it has proven usefull or buy it and build it in, like others do too ( maya and cmuscle for example ).

Lightwolf
04-16-2009, 03:10 AM
hmmmm.. well maya has it with .BOT files and mentalray has it with .MAP files and renderman uses .TEX files to do that.
Yup. Mind you, apparently infiniMap is a lot more efficient over a network than, say, .map files (and the conversion process is a lot easier). But that's a pre-requisite we have as a third party - we can actually push an idea all the way and don't (necessarily) need to stop to pursue other bullet points for the next release.

Cheers,
Mike

MrWyatt
04-16-2009, 04:05 AM
Yup. Mind you, apparently infiniMap is a lot more efficient over a network than, say, .map files (and the conversion process is a lot easier). But that's a pre-requisite we have as a third party - we can actually push an idea all the way and don't (necessarily) need to stop to pursue other bullet points for the next release.

Cheers,
Mike

That is certainly true. especially as .map files take a long time to convert and also like to be huge in size and when you have lots of them you end up writing scripts that first copy all needed .map files to the local drive befor rendering to minimize traffic. My only point was that at least maya and others have a system in place that works. it is not perfect and it could be improved en mass but at least it is built in. Working in animated features has tought me a few things regarding the amount of textures comlex scenes have to handle. Has anyone ever tried to render a scene with approximately 500 image textures between 1k and 8k in resolution in Lightwave? with maya software you can. with mental ray you can. with renderman you can. with vanilla LW you cannot. Good thing we have infinimap to close the gap. but there is no arguing that this is a must have feature for any app that wants to get used heavily in feature film.

I still am a big supporter of any developer who brings me features I need. Not every feature can be there "out of the box". if you want a feature that works but isn't implemented well enough, It stands a chance it never will improve once it is "off the to do list". If it is a 3rd party tool, it tends to get better and better with every incarnation.

3rd party rules, but a little effort from NT would also be highly appreciated.
:D

Lightwolf
04-16-2009, 04:11 AM
if you want a feature that works but isn't implemented well enough, It stands a chance it never will improve once it is "off the to do list". If it is a 3rd party tool, it tends to get better and better with every incarnation.
Hopefully ;)
You're right with "standard" features though, it is rare to see improvements once they're in... regardless of their state. Maybe a complete overhaul a couple of major releases later, but little in-between.

Cheers,
Mike

A Mejias
04-19-2009, 07:38 PM
That is a moving target, I remember buying a separate DOF and motionblur plugin for Ray Dream, then later buying their height field image displacement plugin. :)


OH SNAP! You used Ray Dream too? Man, that little app had some nice features way back then. Node texturing, vectory painting in many ways ahead of it's time. :)

I still remember the day my brother came to visit and saw me working on Ray Dream. He said to me, "Dude, drop that toy and get LightWave." LOL
:lol:

A Mejias
04-19-2009, 07:48 PM
that's fine. it really is.

but again, i'm talking about those things that "belong in the app" in the first place.

jin

I agree. I've spent quite a bit of money on plugins. 95% were functions that were nothing like what LightWave had or would have for a while. But the one plugin I SHOULD have bought, but never did was VertiBevel. Good beveling is something that LightWave SHOULD have had for a LOOONG time. It's an absolutely necessary fuction if you expect to produce good models. But it really annoyed me that I would have to pay extra for something that program SHOULD have already. Back around LW 5 or 5.6 there were rumors that NT was going to buy VertiBevel. Never happened At least if they had made something that was close. It wasn't till about 8.0 that Rounder came in. We're at LW 9.6 and Beveling STILL SUCKS!!!

erikals
04-19-2009, 09:55 PM
hehe... http://forums.cgsociety.org/images/smilies/smile.gif

rounder was actually a plugin they bought...
hm.... thinking....
the LW dynamics, "motion designer" was actually a plugin they bought...
hairFX "fiberFX" was actually a plugin they bought...


looks like LW is able to do what it does today because of plugins....

Sensei
04-20-2009, 06:07 AM
Node Editor is 3rd party plugin.
Relativity is plugin.
etc ;)

IMI
04-20-2009, 06:17 AM
Node Editor is 3rd party plugin.
Relativity is plugin.
etc ;)

The node editor is a 3rd party plugin? Who made it? Didn't know that about Relativity, either...

Well that's just great. So what else are 3rd party plugins? How much of LW was outsourced? Does this mean half of Core is gonna be written by 3rd party developers too?
Which half? The $1,500 initial half, or the $5,000 2nd half after you buy the 1st half? ;)

Lightwolf
04-20-2009, 06:25 AM
The node editor is a 3rd party plugin? Who made it?
It was never released though... and then integrated into LW. Antti initially coded it.

Didn't know that about Relativity, either...
Prem.

There's also HyperVoxels which were initially written by Gregory Duquesne.

Well that's just great. So what else are 3rd party plugins? How much of LW was outsourced?
It would only be outsourced if NT would actually award development contracts to external developers, which they haven't done so far.

And it seems that currently they will only add third party code if they can get the developer as well (FFX being an example).

Then again, it's nothing special. Look at some of features of all major packages and you're very likely to find stuff that was third party initially.

Cheers,
Mike

Sensei
04-20-2009, 06:25 AM
Check LW About window.. ;)
Antti Jarvela made nodes. He made CarPaint in 2004 (and it was added to Lw just in last release LW v9.6.. 5 years later after making it as 3rd party plugin.. ;) ) http://www.spinquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2747

Sensei
04-20-2009, 06:33 AM
So what else are 3rd party plugins?

Advanced Camera Tools (Perspective Camera and others non-classic). CCTV, and other things made by Jarno.

IMI
04-20-2009, 06:51 AM
It was never released though... and then integrated into LW. Antti initially coded it.

Prem.

There's also HyperVoxels which were initially written by Gregory Duquesne.

It would only be outsourced if NT would actually award development contracts to external developers, which they haven't done so far.

And it seems that currently they will only add third party code if they can get the developer as well (FFX being an example).

Then again, it's nothing special. Look at some of features of all major packages and you're very likely to find stuff that was third party initially.

Cheers,
Mike

Interesting stuff, thanks.
I think you took me too seriously though - I really was only messing around. :)

Lightwolf
04-20-2009, 07:06 AM
I think you took me too seriously though - I really was only messing around. :)
Don't

...

mess

...

with

...

the

...

wolf!

:D

Cheers,
Mike

IMI
04-20-2009, 07:08 AM
Sorry about that. :D

JeffrySG
04-20-2009, 07:10 AM
OH SNAP! You used Ray Dream too? Man, that little app had some nice features way back then. Node texturing, vectory painting in many ways ahead of it's time. :)

I still remember the day my brother came to visit and saw me working on Ray Dream. He said to me, "Dude, drop that toy and get LightWave." LOL
:lol:

Yeah, there are a bunch of us old RDD users around here!

IMI
04-20-2009, 07:14 AM
RDD was the first 3D program I ever saw being used, actually, and was what got me into 3D to begin with. :)
Wasn't mine, but belonged to a friend.

IMI
04-20-2009, 09:28 AM
Why did we call it RDD? Ray Dream Studio is what I meant.
Anyhow, just for the sake of nostalgia I went looking and found an active forum: http://www.raydream.org/
Well, not exactly *active*, but there have been recent posts.

Mike_RB
04-20-2009, 06:03 PM
I think it was called Ray Dream Designer for a bit.

Anyway, for anyone following the 401 preview stuff, The groups in 401 are very cool. Like maya character sets and maya layers + some goodness because you can make hierarchies out of them and override groups with more groups. Very neat.

evenflcw
04-20-2009, 07:24 PM
The groups did look great! Very nice generic implementation. Usable for alot of things and making it unnecessary to implement alot of proprietary features. They look especially nice when compared to the 3 different implementations of selection sets in LW classic. Talk about total opposites! One can be used for any element type and anything. Whereas the other only works for one item type at a time, is only for selection AND on top of that, there are 2 redundant implementations!

NT should implement something similar as soon as possible to save alot of work (, clutter and overlapping) later down the line. Hope they designed for it.

erikals
04-20-2009, 08:19 PM
yeah, wonder why they never did...
anyway,.. http://www.flay.com/getdetail.cfm?ID=2484

Mike_RB
04-21-2009, 08:12 AM
yeah, wonder why they never did...
anyway,.. http://www.flay.com/getdetail.cfm?ID=2484

That's a cool plugin. But groups in modo are rooted in Mark Brown's keytrak 'sets', functionally equivalent to both maya layers, maya character sets and motion mixer actors. The cascading hierarchy effects and the fact that you can add user channels to the group are the really cool things. Nesting groups in groups for keying or scene organization is very cool. And the ability to block the cascading effect for groups is great too, so you can keep the parent group from effecting one or all of its children or an entire branch.

Chris S. (Fez)
04-22-2009, 03:14 AM
Nesting groups in groups for keying or scene organization is very cool. And the ability to block the cascading effect for groups is great too, so you can keep the parent group from effecting one or all of its children or an entire branch.

Mike, does this also double as render pass management?

Can you, say, painstakingly check and uncheck the visibility of groups/shaders etc. and save/reload those particular selections?

GregMalick
05-01-2009, 05:02 PM
As a Modo user & LW user, the animation reveal #1 didn't blow me away.

But the Interactive BG Object constraint and other modeling improvements, the Presets, the render improvements, and all the stuff on the Light and Shadow page (love that Clear Coat) are enough to make me upgrade.

Then again, maybe I'm a push-over.

Now I'm impressed.

IK, dynamic parenting, path constraint.

Clearly a massive release.

Mike_RB
05-01-2009, 05:04 PM
Now I'm impressed.

IK, dynamic parenting, path constraint.

Clearly a massive release.

Constraints:
position
rotation
scale
direction
path
vertex
edge
polygon
and a few others

2 joint planar IK w/ik-fkblending built in
dynamic parenting
upvectors

Matt
05-01-2009, 05:39 PM
Just seen 401 latest reveal (Animation PT III) Gotta say, I'm more interested everyday.

hrgiger
05-01-2009, 06:09 PM
Just seen 401 latest reveal (Animation PT III) Gotta say, I'm more interested everyday.

Well, I bought a license of Modo today before the reveal. But if I hadn't, they would have had me with constraints.

cresshead
05-01-2009, 06:34 PM
so..401 seems to have everything except bones and particles now....ik looks easy to setup much like my other app

adamredwoods
05-01-2009, 06:44 PM
Does anyone feel like Modo just embarrassed LW with how soon they pulled IK-FK blend into the feature set?


....sigh....

adamredwoods
05-01-2009, 06:55 PM
Oh my.............!
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34128

hrgiger
05-01-2009, 07:05 PM
Oh my.............!
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34128

You remember the artist? He used to do just as incredible work in Lightwave. He went as The Ripper when he was on these forums.

And no, I don't feel like Modo has embarassed LW at all with IK/FK. After all, they still don't have bones....

erikals
05-01-2009, 07:07 PM
Oh my.............!
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34128

nice render, but no problem to pull that off in LW :)

as for the animation feature, i had a feeling this was close to a release.
but hey, it was about damn time though,...
http://www.luxology.com/modo/401.animation.part.3/

let's see how Core does by 2010...

these apps will soon compete.

cresshead
05-01-2009, 07:07 PM
Oh my.............!
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34128

planet of the apes anyone? :D

nice model/render..makin modo 401 look rather good.

cresshead
05-01-2009, 07:12 PM
You remember the artist? He used to do just as incredible work in Lightwave. He went as The Ripper when he was on these forums.

And no, I don't feel like Modo has embarassed LW at all with IK/FK. After all, they still don't have bones....

also only 2 point ik...no spline ik or such like...
does modo have lattice deformers btw?

very good marketing as usual

Mike_RB
05-01-2009, 07:24 PM
also only 2 point ik...no spline ik or such like...
does modo have lattice deformers btw?

very good marketing as usual

No deformers other than:
mdd
morphs
weightmap (which is essentially a cluster with a center).

this is not their 'deformation' release.

cresshead
05-01-2009, 07:32 PM
No deformers other than:
mdd
morphs
weightmap (which is essentially a cluster with a center).

this is not their 'deformation' release.

okay cool...modo401 looks amazing..i've just reccomended it in my shortlist for an ex student of mine as he's looking to step up from cinema4d8.5 and carrara...also put lightwave 9.6 and blender too btw!.......and zbrush!:D

Ivan D. Young
05-02-2009, 08:40 AM
what is the trick to seeing their website? no matter what computer I see it on, the webstie is always garbbled, WTH?

Mike_RB
05-02-2009, 08:50 AM
Never had a problem with their site. Try another browser?

erikals
05-02-2009, 09:05 AM
try another browser, i never run only ie anymore. ie sucks. [yes]

Ernest
05-02-2009, 09:47 AM
Oh my.............!
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34128His Lightwave gorilla was also amazing but I'm glad he showed the eyes on the chimp. No one renders eyes better than the Reaper.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=309253

Matt
05-02-2009, 11:01 AM
No one renders eyes better than the Ripper.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=309253

Agreed, the eye master! :D

adamredwoods
05-02-2009, 11:42 AM
You remember the artist? He used to do just as incredible work in Lightwave. He went as The Ripper when he was on these forums.

And no, I don't feel like Modo has embarassed LW at all with IK/FK. After all, they still don't have bones....

Well, modo has IK/FK even before they put in bones. Thinking ahead = quality software.

Ivan D. Young
05-02-2009, 01:25 PM
well I grudgingly give those folks at M*d* credit, they have in my opinion out flanked Newtek and may even be winning the mindshare war at the moment. They have some nifty looking tools and well presented, so I hope in the coming months that Newtek gets going. But with 8 months left to deliver version 1 of Core theoretically. That does not sound like a lot of time for a project so big and complex. Hmmmm?

hrgiger
05-02-2009, 03:07 PM
Well, modo has IK/FK even before they put in bones. Thinking ahead = quality software.

Well, let's not forget who made Lightwave in the first place.:devil:

Newtek has had to spend about as much time fixing Lightwave code as they have in creating it. Nobodys fault really, but LW has been working off some aging architecutre for years. Modo at least has the advantage of being fairly young and was able to build itself with a much more modern codebase.

We'll just see when CORE is released later this year just how much Newtek spent time thinking ahead.

jin choung
05-02-2009, 11:13 PM
wow... planar ik and constraints and maya like clusters. they're really nailing down the foundations.

very bad timing for core but very good timing for us. if newtek was thinking that they could roll out their generously titled "1.0" with less than "full capability" (ala maya 1.0), modo's really gonna make that prospect embarrassing.

modo's been very careful thus far about not claiming anything it's not (even now with their animation features they're careful to say this is not their big character animation release). if the supposedly "full app" of core 1.0 falls short of THAT... that's gonna hurt.

as always, pressure is good.

let them fight for our love and money!

fight! fight! fight! fight!

jin

jin choung
05-02-2009, 11:19 PM
holy crap and is that ik fing well done.

1. first it's 2 joint, planar. that's just about all i've EVER needed in 10+ years of working. so it's a GREAT PLACE TO START.

2. it has fing elbow/knee AIM (ala maya's "TWIST") and pole vector. this surpasses lw's ik right up to the last release that FINALLY gave it pole vector constraints and it's been something i've been asking for of lw for years.

very good places to start and shows a solid understanding of the fundamentals.

3. ik/fk blend.... beautiful.

jin

p.s. anyone know the workflow for joint/limb ORIENTATION in modo? this is something that lw always gave short shrift to and you could totally tell its lack from how most tutorials completely failed to mention it. and with ik, it's going to be an important thing for modo to have.

i.e. a knee and an elbow bends on a PLANE defined by 3 points (wrist, elbow, shoulder / ankle, knee, hip). to rotate outside of that plane is a flagrant mistake. but lw never had a good way of properly and quickly orienting joints (especially if arms and legs are not aligned with an orthogonal axis ala davinci pose (which it should NOT be for best deformations). is there good ways to do this in modo? hopefully with some kind of snappability?

Mike_RB
05-02-2009, 11:29 PM
i.e. a knee and an elbow bends on a PLANE defined by 3 points (wrist, elbow, shoulder / ankle, knee, hip). to rotate outside of that plane is a flagrant mistake. but lw never had a good way of properly and quickly orienting joints (especially if arms and legs are not aligned with an orthogonal axis ala davinci pose (which it should NOT be for best deformations). is there good ways to do this in modo? hopefully with some kind of snappability?

They have an align command that runs on a selected hierarchy to set this up. workflow is basically match locators to your geometry (or not if you havent setup the centers well, just place them). Parent them into a chain, run the align command and slap ik on it, done. Parent-in-place your geo to the control structure and your good to go.

You can align the actual geo but then it rotates likely to an angle you dont want if you have stuff already lined up, havent tried running it on just the pivots or centers, that might work.

I tend to want a control stucture seperate from the geometry, even if it isnt bones anyway. I almost never animate actual geometry in any app.

Mike_RB
05-02-2009, 11:53 PM
Hey Jin, that align command totally works with centers. So you can have a hierarchy and have nothing pointing at each other, then just select the centers of all the bits and run align and they get rotated to point at their child. Booyah. works on items or their centers (thereby leaving the geometry itself alone, basically aligning them then moving the polys back to their placement before the align). Works on pivots too if you dont want the centers moving...

jin choung
05-02-2009, 11:54 PM
Hey Jin, that align command totally works with centers. So you can have a hierarchy and have nothing pointing at each other, then just select the centers of all the bits and run align and they get rotated to point at their child. Booyah. works on items or their centers (thereby leaving the geometry itself alone, basically aligning them then moving the polys back to their placement before the align). Works on pivots too if you dont want the centers moving...

sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet....

that's all that's needed.

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

actually, one more thing is needed. so one axis should be pointing at the child but another axis (for a planar ik like elbow/arm) should be aiming PERPENDICULAR to the plane of rotation. as noted, this becomes an issue when you have a character modeled where arms aren't aiming straight along x axis or legs straight down y axis.

is there a ready way to do that?

jin

p.s. yeah, unless i'm doing something ridiculously quick and dirty, i don't animate geom either. keep it separate so that if you have to modify/remodel/re-uv, you don't run into issues or unnecessary pain with a swap out later.

Mike_RB
05-03-2009, 12:06 AM
actually, one more thing is needed. so one axis should be pointing at the child but another axis (for a planar ik like elbow/arm) should be aiming PERPENDICULAR to the plane of rotation.

Just tried this by running align on a chain with the middle offset to one side, the chains root z axis goes perpendicular to the plane and x points to the child. So it already does this.

jin choung
05-03-2009, 12:11 AM
Just tried this by running align on a chain with the middle offset to one side, the chains root z axis goes perpendicular to the plane and x points to the child. So it already does this.

wow!

that's prescient behavior! they assumed that more times than not you WANT that behavior and so they made that built in!

hahaha, that's BETTER than maya where the capability to do that is built in but you have get a (free) script to do it.

VERY nice.

jin

Nemoid
05-03-2009, 03:07 AM
Great ! Modo seems to grow quite well, they are setting up good foundations for character animation.
As for now, with these tools you can do good animation for rigid objects, mechanics, cars which is good stuff for sure. I also liked the IK with pole vector setup since the start.
Have to say the 401 release is a HUGE leap ahead for Modo, and reveals aren't fnished yet. If all tools are stable and reliable, it will be a fantastic release.

As for CORE, there will be surely huge competition between the two apps:

Newtek will have to show their capability to think ahead and design a good and modern app: i think they choosed a good foundation, with nodes, history, modifier stack and total flexibility at the base, which is great, but, obviously, the toolset and workflow are what's important for the end user.

Basically, i'm not so worried about modelling tools, and render engine, because these are areas in which Newtek has always been good, but since animation/character animation has always been Nt weakest area (yes, even when old team, now Lux was there) it will have to be redesigned for great efficiency.

However, i'd say that, since CORE has something like 2 years from planning, design and coding, while Modo has something like 7 years or so, it's quite early to compare the two, even because CORE is not a released product yet.

While i hope Newtek will be more rapid than Lux in CORE development, i think the best thing is working well.
Competition does wonders, too. So, lets see Nt reply ! :thumbsup:

pooby
05-03-2009, 03:11 AM
I have to say, I am very Impressed with Modo 401.

Those constraints, Ik and channel linking seem just great. The future for Lux is extrememely bright by the looks of it.

Apart from the excellent new rigging tools, the render previewer looks to have finally surpassed Fprime.

And with Fur and Volumetric lighting and Instancing with HDinstance-like powers all viewable in the previewer, wih fast GI and no inter-compatibiliy issues.

Well! hats off to them. Definately going to get it.

IMI
05-03-2009, 03:20 AM
Well, I bought a license of Modo today before the reveal. But if I hadn't, they would have had me with constraints.

You don't have time for Modo. You're one of the people I'm counting on to be helping to make CORE worth the upgrade in Q4.
Focus, man, focus. Don't get distracted. :twak:

hrgiger
05-03-2009, 04:39 AM
You don't have time for Modo. You're one of the people I'm counting on to be helping to make CORE worth the upgrade in Q4.
Focus, man, focus. Don't get distracted. :twak:

Well, hours just got cut at work (which is a good thing- I've been working 60 a week) so I have more time to diversify. I'm still fully behind CORE. I think in the long run, it can be a real contender. But I also need software I can use now for my own projects and frankly, CORE has a ways to go. Newtek said that CORE builds will come out every few weeks and then become more frequent as the year moves foward so right now, every few weeks seems like a lifetime and 302/401 seems to be a good place to spend some of my time right now.
But rest assured, I'm doing my part in the CORE forum.

cresshead
05-03-2009, 04:56 AM
core has a long way to go.

Mike_RB
05-03-2009, 08:37 AM
As for now, with these tools you can do good animation for rigid objects, mechanics, cars which is good stuff for sure. I also liked the IK with pole vector setup since the start.
Have to say the 401 release is a HUGE leap ahead for Modo, and reveals aren't fnished yet. If all tools are stable and reliable, it will be a fantastic release.

Yeah, the stuff they have yet to reveal is pretty fun. Mark (their animation guy) did a pretty good job getting all these basics in place. Some of it suffers a little from 'workflow cleanliness'. But that's because he wanted to get all the ground level stuff for animation, I think future versions will clean up any usability issues. Like the channel linking could really do with a graph view to help see connections and that's not in place yet, so its a bit of select channel then RMB and 'select input items'...

Nemoid
05-03-2009, 10:50 AM
Yeah, the stuff they have yet to reveal is pretty fun. Mark (their animation guy) did a pretty good job getting all these basics in place. Some of it suffers a little from 'workflow cleanliness'. But that's because he wanted to get all the ground level stuff for animation, I think future versions will clean up any usability issues. Like the channel linking could really do with a graph view to help see connections and that's not in place yet, so its a bit of select channel then RMB and 'select input items'...

yes , i do agree ! ground level is there for sure.

sometimes, i think Lux should add the more visual representation they can, for the features of the app as well as rmb based workflow.

sometimes they do great, tho, like for heads up displays and presets workflow, and also allowing render preview editor to work quite like a viewport.

They seem to rely bit too much onto list editors in some areas :
shader editor, for example, or form editor, too.

btw is not that those editors aren't powerful, but same things can be represented into visually different ways.

however, workflow enhancements always come after features implementation, and since many of them are actually well thought,
things will become better in time. :)

GregMalick
05-03-2009, 11:24 AM
Yeah, the stuff they have yet to reveal is pretty fun. Mark (their animation guy) did a pretty good job getting all these basics in place. Some of it suffers a little from 'workflow cleanliness'. But that's because he wanted to get all the ground level stuff for animation, I think future versions will clean up any usability issues. Like the channel linking could really do with a graph view to help see connections and that's not in place yet, so its a bit of select channel then RMB and 'select input items'...

And I keep think they are done with the reveals and the next announcement will be for the actual release. 401 really is a big release with a lot of great enhancements.

Mike_RB
05-03-2009, 01:11 PM
And I keep think they are done with the reveals and the next announcement will be for the actual release. 401 really is a big release with a lot of great enhancements.

Honestly, the stuff they have yet to reveal is some of my favorite things in modo401.

Andyjaggy
05-03-2009, 01:18 PM
Yeah Modo has really grabbed my attention. I'm actually wishing I had spent the 400.00 I did for core towards the purchase of Modo.

All they need now is some dynamics and particle systems and it would do everything I need.

pooby
05-03-2009, 01:26 PM
Honestly, the stuff they have yet to reveal is some of my favorite things in modo401.

Wow really? I already am a bit awestruck by 401.
I cant remember the last time I was so keen to get my hands on some new software.

hrgiger
05-03-2009, 06:20 PM
Yeah, I've never been overly tempted to buy into Modo before this 401 release. I'm excited to try some of these features out.

DennisVR
05-04-2009, 06:37 AM
Honestly, the stuff they have yet to reveal is some of my favorite things in modo401.

Now my expectations are going wild again :P

Nemoid
05-04-2009, 06:43 AM
http://www.simpleblack.com/Modo401_RichReRailing_01.mov

this is a link of a Rich Hurrey's mov, where he shows some mors stuff onto rigging. cool thing is that you can make a rig look even better through customization. surely very useful system for rigging mechancs and robots !

i think 501 will have CA heheh :agree:

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 07:38 AM
http://www.simpleblack.com/Modo401_RichReRailing_01.mov

this is a link of a Rich Hurrey's mov, where he shows some mors stuff onto rigging. cool thing is that you can make a rig look even better through customization. surely very useful system for rigging mechancs and robots !

i think 501 will have CA heheh :agree:

Gotta love Rich, he takes a 2 joint IK system and whips up a 3 joint dog leg. Nice.

prometheus
05-04-2009, 07:53 AM
At the rate luxology is adding modules, I wouldn´t be surprised if they
actually are putting in a volumetric shading system ala hypervoxels
before core actually gets it.

Michael

adamredwoods
05-04-2009, 03:44 PM
Are mesh deformers in Modo yet? In that "plug into outlet" video, they said it had a weight deformer on it. Is that already in Modo?

jin choung
05-04-2009, 03:49 PM
not sure if it's in there now but it sounds like it's definitely going to be in 401.

looks like maya's clusters. just a bunch of verts attached to a control object. but might allow for deforming anims as recommended circa maya 1.0.... i.e. rigid bind with lattice deformers to smooth it out....

like i say, good foundations.

jin

ericsmith
05-04-2009, 04:20 PM
From what I can see, weight map deformers aren't rigid. They fall off based on the value of the weight map. Go back and look at the Jack-in-the-box video to see what I mean.

Honestly, if you put all the pieces together, it would seem there's nothing stopping you from creating a fully rigged, deforming character. There's no bones specifically, but you can skin vertices to joints by hand, and then set up the hierarchy of those joints with IK or whatever, and there you go.

Eric

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 04:25 PM
From what I can see, weight map deformers aren't rigid. They fall off based on the value of the weight map. Go back and look at the Jack-in-the-box video to see what I mean.

Honestly, if you put all the pieces together, it would seem there's nothing stopping you from creating a fully rigged, deforming character. There's no bones specifically, but you can skin vertices to joints by hand, and then set up the hierarchy of those joints with IK or whatever, and there you go.

Eric

Sort of. There is order issues with the weightmap deformers and some rules to follow, but it's doable. Very clunky though.

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 04:25 PM
not sure if it's in there now but it sounds like it's definitely going to be in 401.

looks like maya's clusters. just a bunch of verts attached to a control object. but might allow for deforming anims as recommended circa maya 1.0.... i.e. rigid bind with lattice deformers to smooth it out....

like i say, good foundations.

jin

Jin, what did you think of Rich's little rigging vid? He's OCD on the locator shapes, but that's just him. :)

jin choung
05-04-2009, 04:32 PM
From what I can see, weight map deformers aren't rigid. They fall off based on the value of the weight map. Go back and look at the Jack-in-the-box video to see what I mean.

Honestly, if you put all the pieces together, it would seem there's nothing stopping you from creating a fully rigged, deforming character. There's no bones specifically, but you can skin vertices to joints by hand, and then set up the hierarchy of those joints with IK or whatever, and there you go.

Eric

isn't the jack in the box using morph targets?

and clusters in maya don't have to be 100% either but it's a pain in the butt to throw around weights so that they normalize (have 100% weight) between multiple clusters... usually it's just about falling off to the "base state"... not to other clusters... don't remember if i ever did that with clusters but it should be possible.

anyhoo, it's good in my mind that modo is not selling 401 as the CA version... but if the infrastructure is there such that one could still jury rig a character rig, that just adds up to gravy.

jin

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 04:34 PM
isn't the jack in the box using morph targets?
jin

Weight deformer.

jin choung
05-04-2009, 05:18 PM
Jin, what did you think of Rich's little rigging vid? He's OCD on the locator shapes, but that's just him. :)

actually i tried to watch it on my ipodtouch last night in bed but it wouldn't play... will view now....

jin

jin choung
05-04-2009, 05:32 PM
Jin, what did you think of Rich's little rigging vid? He's OCD on the locator shapes, but that's just him. :)

i've got it in the background without sound while i'm working (gotta watch it with sound when i get home) but it looks really awesome. the dog leg seems like he's combining reverse foot with two ik chains and if that's what it is, that's really clever!

gotta try that in maya when i get a chance.

jin

Zithen
05-04-2009, 06:23 PM
Sort of. There is order issues with the weightmap deformers and some rules to follow, but it's doable. Very clunky though.
Well, even though a good animation foundation has been laid with 401, I have not been blown away with their animation reveals. Without basic capability to deform characters and at least have some dynamics for the hair, I'm still wanting to wait until 402 or 501.
I just don't see the need, when you have Core, blender 2.5 and messiah as other options.

Modo is great for 3d illustration, marketing media, etc. But if you're looking to do character animation, you won't find it there, just like the old Lightwave use to be. At the rate they've been developing their animation tools and SDK, I don't sense animation is really something they want to be known for. Or need to be known for. It kind of reminds me of Lightwave: only more ergonomic and with no 3rd party support. It's classic LW to not be able to animate your modeling tools.

It's obvious to me now that the developers just don't seem to be that concerned with CA...it's not their passion and it shows...again. They just don't get it, no matter how many years they try or whatever new company they start. Modeling and rendering are their passion. Robotics. Number values. Mechanics. Design. And that's okay!
CA is definitely more of a organic process and I just don't believe I'll see that in Modo, for me. The personality really has a way of creeping your work, even programming, I guess.

I am hoping that the new developers for Core do like animating and facilitate organic workflows, as well as other things. What I really hope they get right is the referencing, rigging and deformation functionality and workflow. CA beyond that is basically being able to easily lay down a pose or motion and easily work with dynamics.

If they get referencing, rigging and deforming workflows down, and a good pose/motion NLA editing/composing, I think they would be in excellent shape and surpass Modo quite easily in that area.

jin choung
05-04-2009, 06:35 PM
I just don't see the need, when you have Core...

read the title of this thread.

whether CORE 1.0 will have even these features and at this level of polish (along with graph editors, timeline, etc etc etc) is in my mind an open question.

that is the peril that newtek currently faces - that a supposedly complete app (core 1.0) will fall short of the features of a self admittedly non-full 3d app (modo 401).

and also in my mind, this is a really excellent cattle prod.:devil:

jin

Zithen
05-04-2009, 06:57 PM
read the title of this thread.

whether CORE 1.0 will have even these features and at this level of polish (along with graph editors, timeline, etc etc etc) is in my mind an open question.

that is the peril that newtek currently faces - that a supposedly complete app (core 1.0) will fall short of the features of a self admittedly non-full 3d app (modo 401).
jin
Yes, I believe CORE 1.0 will match Modo 401 and maybe even surpass it animation wise. It is a different animal.
In my mind, it would be a disadvantage to release CORE without having good modeling and animation tools and workflows. They MUST have that, otherwise why release it if it isn't ready? That to me is common sense. Rendering, sculpting, painting, texturing...now that I wouldn't expect to see as polished or even available.

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 07:09 PM
Modo is great for 3d illustration, marketing media, etc. But if you're looking to do character animation, you won't find it there, just like the old Lightwave use to be. At the rate they've been developing their animation tools and SDK, I don't sense animation is really something they want to be known for. Or need to be known for. It kind of reminds me of Lightwave: only more ergonomic and with no 3rd party support. It's classic LW to not be able to animate your modeling tools.

Uhm. You need all that stuff they've put into modo FOR CA. Without a deep rigging base for mechanical stuff (like a skeleton) it doesn't matter how nice and squishy the bones make things. That's phase 2.

In fact that was Lw's biggest problem was that follower, ik, channel modifiers, none of that stuff talked to each other well...

And remember, they aren't done revealing things yet.

jin choung
05-04-2009, 07:10 PM
They MUST have that, otherwise why release it if it isn't ready? That to me is common sense.

: )

me too.

we'll see how much core 1.0 conforms to common sense.

jin

jin choung
05-04-2009, 07:46 PM
Modo is great for 3d illustration, marketing media, etc. But if you're looking to do character animation, you won't find it there, just like the old Lightwave use to be. At the rate they've been developing their animation tools and SDK, I don't sense animation is really something they want to be known for.

to concur with mike,

you need all this stuff to do CA and do it right. and not only that, why do ANY OF THIS STUFF if you're going to stop here? all the stuff with channel ordering and sorting and all of that. if it's for illustration or whatever, then all this is just pointless "flair".

also, i take it as meaningful when brad says that 401 is not their CA release.

listen to what is implied there.

i have very little doubt at this point that modo intends to be a full app and it's building it piece by piece with every brick of the foundation looking very sound indeed.

jin

Zithen
05-04-2009, 07:50 PM
Uhm. You need all that stuff they've put in FOR CA. Without a deep rigging base for mechanical stuff (like a skeleton) it doesn't matter how nice and squishy the bones make things. That's phase 2.

In fact that was Lw's biggest problem, follower, ik, channel modifiers, none of that stuff talked to eachother well...
Wow...I must have sounded really stupid. Forgive me. Of course you need a rig for CA. I said Lux laid down a good foundation, but without good deformers, you can do CA, just not with any characters made of flesh and bone.
Organic CA does not appear to be Lux's main focus and if it is, it seems they are taking a very long time to get it right. Personally, I'd rather not put up high expectations for that anymore. If I want to do some 3d modeling, rendering, motion graphics for marketing...Modo 401 is going to be an excellent choice. But CA? Sigh...perhaps I'm just really disappointed to see such good rigging tools for animation and yet no good deformers. It just makes no sense to me to go through all that work only to withhold deformation, but that's okay. Maybe they'll surprise everybody and make 402 they're character animation release. Chances are it will be 501, at least another year away.

Animation and modeling should be Newtek's main focus for CORE 1.0, so they should have some good CA tools available that Modo does not have in 401. If CORE does not even have what Modo has animation wise, then why buy CORE? I don't believe Newtek would set CORE to fall behind.

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 08:00 PM
They just want to do it right this time.

Zithen
05-04-2009, 08:02 PM
i have very little doubt at this point that modo intends to be a full app and it's building it piece by piece with every brick of the foundation looking very sound indeed.

jin
Indeed.

Modo is being built solidly brick by brick, year by year. Solid as it is, it's Modo's design and future capabilities that I'm questioning at this moment and whether I really want to invest my time to learn 401 and beyond when other options are on the table that may better suite the job.

While we're all not exactly sure how CORE will be built in its stages, I'm not too confused with its future and design.

It's all a matter of choice and hopefully CORE will offer something really interesting in 1.0. From what I "hear"...it's all seems good so far.

People gave Modo a chance. Maybe we can wait and see what CORE brings to the table...

Mike_RB
05-04-2009, 08:14 PM
People gave Modo a chance. Maybe we can wait and see what CORE brings to the table...

I love how modo is past tense in your post. :) I work daily doing kick *** stuff in modo, we even rendered 2 ad's using it. The new capabilities in 401 only make it more useful, and when they do get around to 'full CA' I'm sure it will kick butt.

Deforming characters is probably about 0.25% of the work I've done in my career.

I'm all onboard for core as well, I want to see it succeed, in fact, I think it's excellent we have 2 companies making software "built for Lw'ers". I like the stuff in the tech faq, looking forward to their implementation of that.

The next reveal for modo shows a glimpse at a system that gives some indication as to the future of animation in modo, if what you've seen already isn't cutting it.

Zithen
05-04-2009, 08:38 PM
I love how modo is past tense in your post. :) I work daily doing kick *** stuff in modo, we even rendered 2 ad's using it. The new capabilities in 401 only make it more useful, and when they do get around to 'full CA' I'm sure it will kick butt.

Deforming characters is probably about 0.25% of the work I've done in my career.

I'm all onboard for core as well, I want to see it succeed, in fact, I think it's excellent we have 2 companies making software "built for Lw'ers". I like the stuff in the tech faq, looking forward to their implementation of that.

The next reveal for modo shows a glimpse at a system that gives some indication as to the future of animation in modo, if what you've seen already isn't cutting it.
Sounds like Mark Brown's doing his Non-Linear Animation thing.

I had very high hopes for Modo when it first came out. Huge. Seen nearly all the tech demos and been waiting.

All the reveals cut it just fine. Without having seen the last reveal, I am disappointed there are no animation deform tools. And I am concerned as to why great care and work was put into the modeling tools and yet you can't animate them as with other items. Everything can be animatable and link except the modeling/deform tools. Does this mean they are not well integrated? I don't know its design, they haven't made that public. But it is a resounding disappointment if they are not because I thought their Nexus would have allowed for that by now.

CORE on the other hand actually looks to be the modeling/animation app I've always wanted to see, with that node connections, interoperability design. I really don't think I'll be disappointed this time. But time will tell...won't it?

pooby
05-05-2009, 02:15 AM
All the reveals cut it just fine. Without having seen the last reveal, I am disappointed there are no animation deform tools. And I am concerned as to why great care and work was put into the modeling tools and yet you can't animate them as with other items.

It would be a little odd to have animatable parameters exposed on modelling tools in an application without any rigging capabilities.
I'm sure that any tools relevant to animation will work with them when the appropriate time comes.
It does seem a little odd to me that they didn't put together a skinning solution for 401 as that would enable organic characters to be animated now.

---but then I suppose, it would be judged as a CA package which, about, LUX is being quite clear, it is not yet.
Everything I have seen, foundation wise, suggests to me that 501 onwards really is going to be quite something.

hrgiger
05-05-2009, 04:34 AM
Agree. It seems to me that Lux is doing it right by setting up animation in such a way. Lux is careful not to be classifying 401 as a character animation release and as such it won't be held up in comparison to those packages who have bones and other character tools. They've laid the foundation for a very robust CA package in 501. The constraint system in 401 is very respectable.

Matt
05-05-2009, 06:45 AM
Agree. It seems to me that Lux is doing it right by setting up animation in such a way. Lux is careful not to be classifying 401 as a character animation release and as such it won't be held up in comparison to those packages who have bones and other character tools. They've laid the foundation for a very robust CA package in 501. The constraint system in 401 is very respectable.

It's VERY clear to me the plan they are following, with every new release you can see the blocks going in place, and they make sense.

In fact, everything they've done regarding 401, the features, the way the reveal is being done, is a shining example of how to do it right.

Nicolas Jordan
05-05-2009, 07:15 AM
Sounds like some people think making a new program can be done almost overnight. I would be very surprised if Core 1.0 has even most of the features of modo 401. It will probably be more like 101 or 201 as far as features go. Modo has been in development for at least 9-10 years now including design phase and it's not even feature complete yet as a full pipeline. I expect Core to be a full pipeline in half that time. Two years have already been used in design and another 3 years of development should make it a full app. I think Core will develop much faster than modo did though. I would say Core should be close to being a full featured program around Core 3.0 or in 3 years from now. It seems to me that Core will not be developed as fast as the optimists among us predict but won't take as long as the pessimists suggest. That's my guess.

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 07:49 AM
And I am concerned as to why great care and work was put into the modeling tools and yet you can't animate them as with other items. Everything can be animatable and link except the modeling/deform tools.

I'm interested in their solution for this as well. Stuart has mentioned he has a plan for this, so we'll see it eventually... I'm guessing (I have no idea) that it might be a live 'tool pipe' modifier you stick on your object, which can be reordered. So it saves the state of all the attributes in one tool pipe 'session'. Shrug. We'll see.

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 07:50 AM
Modo has been in development for at least 9-10 years

101 released in september 04, with maybe a year or two before that in planning/initial work. So maybe 7 years.

Nicolas Jordan
05-05-2009, 08:56 AM
101 released in september 04, with maybe a year or two before that in planning/initial work. So maybe 7 years.

Here is a link to an interview with Brad Peebler in summer/fall 2001. I hope this is ok to post because it is public and has been public for some time.

Here is the link http://www.cgchannel.com/news/showfeature.jsp?newsid=287

Although no date appears on the interview I can remember I was attending 3D animation school when I read this and that was in late 2001. I think the last version of Lightwave the original team worked on was 7.0 and maybe a bit on 7.5. Luxology already existed under the Newtek banner for a short time in order to focus on the Lightwave rewrite before they went on their own shortly after this interview as a separate company. I also remember Luxology.net existed for a short time to provide Lightwave resources and training before Luxology.com was launched after the split. It is clear from this interview that developement on the next generation of Lightwave was well underway in the design process. This is what I used to estimate how long modo has been in development.

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 09:20 AM
Here is a link to an interview with Brad Peebler in summer/fall 2001. I hope this is ok to post because it is public and has been public for some time.

Here is the link http://www.cgchannel.com/news/showfeature.jsp?newsid=287

Although no date appears on the interview I can remember I was attending 3D animation school when I read this and that was in late 2001. I think the last version of Lightwave the original team worked on was 7.0 and maybe a bit on 7.5. Luxology already existed under the Newtek banner for a short time in order to focus on the Lightwave rewrite before they went on their own shortly after this interview as a separate company. I also remember Luxology.net existed for a short time to provide Lightwave resources and training before Luxology.com was launched after the split. It is clear from this interview that developement on the next generation of Lightwave was well underway in the design process. This is what I used to estimate how long modo has been in development.

Ahh right. So 9-7 then. Somewhere in there it went from ideas to code. Either way, this stuff takes a while.

cresshead
05-05-2009, 09:23 AM
currently i doubt core will ship in Q4 with a extensive feature/capability list, of course i HOPE it will..but it's what 8 months to catch up on 7 years of modo development and updates...looks near verticle to me never mind steep.

GregMalick
05-05-2009, 10:10 AM
It would be a little odd to have animatable parameters exposed on modelling tools in an application without any rigging capabilities.
I'm sure that any tools relevant to animation will work with them when the appropriate time comes.
It does seem a little odd to me that they didn't put together a skinning solution for 401 as that would enable organic characters to be animated now.

---but then I suppose, it would be judged as a CA package which, about, LUX is being quite clear, it is not yet.
Everything I have seen, foundation wise, suggests to me that 501 onwards really is going to be quite something.

I'll use this post a springboard for my opinion.

I believe Mike_RB has stated (and Brad too) that v401 is not the "deformation" release. I may even have read that v501 is the "deformation" release. I think that having seen the latest modeling BG constraint (which looks beautiful IMO) and having displacement maps and MDD since v301, that v501 is where we'll see most of the remaining CA added. This is all a guess, but it seems logical. I wouldn't be surprised if realtime softbody dynamics are included along since that's also a type of "vertex displacement". Probably also a form of HV's (since curve rendering and Hair both seem to be a type of voxel). v501 will also have further modeling and render enhancements to keep Modo's arch-viz contingent enthused.

CORE on the other hand is taking a different road. The direction I see is based upon LW's success with nodes. I believe the vision of CORE is an app that combines the procedural methodology of Houdini with the straight-forward tool based LW approach - combined with a history stack. Currently I see great effort in getting the UI right - and by that I mean a UI that will satisfy old-time LW users and even Houdini & Maya users - which are all participating in the hardCore program. Jay's latest build announcement clearly shows they are listening to the users in that forum and they are committed to delivering on promises made regarding the SDK.

Having said all that, I want to point out to Jin that NT & Lux aren't in a delivery race with each other. Both have clearly distinct road maps they are committed to. I not only respect that, I am very pleased. It shows a lot of Project Management restraint from both companies. It shows a commitment to lay the foundation correctly at the risk of losing customers to other apps. That takes guts and IMO is the proper course.

Anyway, short answer... No.
We won't see v1.0 of CORE match Modo's v401 animation features.
But that's a good thing. I don't want to see half-way solutions bolted on in order to compete.

OK.
I've said too much.
I haven't said enough.

Zithen
05-05-2009, 10:22 AM
Perhaps CORE leveraging Qt toolkit will speed development up a bit.

I don't anticipate CORE 1.0 to have the same mature, elegant, ergonomic GUI and enhanced workflows of Modo, though. That takes time and testing to perfect and Lux did a great job trying to perfect those issues. Newtek could always copy their workflows to make it easier on them.

But it looks like CORE will be different from Modo. Modo is like LW (no non-linear/animatable modeling), while CORE looks to be something between XSI and Houdini?

If Newtek wants to do it right, they'll have to master their own efficient workflows using their unique node-based arch. I do hope they get grouping, rigging, constraints, all that foundation laid down pretty good as well. They might be able to get some of that done in 1.0, I hope, because none of that is elegant in LW.

Nicolas Jordan
05-05-2009, 10:43 AM
Perhaps CORE leveraging Qt toolkit will speed development up a bit.


:agree: I think Qt will speed things up but I don't think it has as much flexibility as the custom UI system that's in modo but then again I don't know much about what Qt is capable of yet so maybe it will end up being better.

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 10:59 AM
i have very little doubt at this point that modo intends to be a full app and it's building it piece by piece with every brick of the foundation looking very sound indeed.

jinThis is an honest question, not a statement. Why is this any different then what NT is doing with CORE? How come when they mentioned they would be concentrating on modeling first, many people gave them grief. Yes they have been ambiguous about what to expect with CORE 1.0, but has Luxology been any less ambiguous with what it's delivering?

I have no plans to purchase Modo, with LW and Maya, I've got my hands full. That said, I do think Modo looks amazing, and Lux is doing a great job presenting it.

After reading this thread, it just seems a bit of a double standard with two companies, doing much of the same thing in regards to laying a solid foundation for a complete app.

So it goes back to my original question, why do you see Core so different in it's development? :question:

Andyjaggy
05-05-2009, 11:18 AM
No. I think the question Jin is asking is. Why should I go with Core when Modo is all ready 75% of the way to a full app, and Core is now 2% of the way there?

Yeah Core may develop faster then Modo but I highly doubt that Core is going to beat Modo to the full app finish line. It's going to be Modo crossing the line first or at the very best a close tie.

And the 2% vs 75% if pretty accurate in my opinion.

jin choung
05-05-2009, 11:23 AM
This is an honest question, not a statement. Why is this any different then what NT is doing with CORE? How come when they mentioned they would be concentrating on modeling first, many people gave them grief. Yes they have been ambiguous about what to expect with CORE 1.0, but has Luxology been any less ambiguous with what it's delivering?

aha. here's the crux.

yes. it's different.

modo initially sold itself for no more than what it intended to be. first a modeler. then a modeler with rendering. even at 401, they're saying "some animation features" but "still not the character animation release", etc.

it was the honesty that allowed me to balk ("$800 for an fing modeler?! f that....") until such a point that it would make sense for me (maybe now, maybe soon). it was never a bait and switch.

core 1.0 however was ALWAYS sold as a "complete 3d app" akin to "lightwave" and "maya 1.0". they NEVER said outright what the scope of core 1.0 was going to be or what it was NOT going to be (despite some typically vague qualifications). and being that they intended from day 1 to be a full app, they never said that they will either not be a full app by "1.0" (which makes the "1.0" moniker rather ridiculous in my mind) or that "it will be a full app by x.0". just too many fing smokescreens. and if it's not a blatant bait and switch, it's hiding behind a vagueness and muddledness of expression that seeks to avoid saying anything.

one is, if any "crime" is being perpetrated, delivering MORE than what is expected AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

if what greg says is correct, core will be delivering substantially LESS than what even zithen expected.

in my mind, that's the (rather clear) difference and is evidenced in the wide disparity of expectation from one lwer to another.

jin

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 11:38 AM
aha. here's the crux.

yes. it's different.

modo initially sold itself for no more than what it intended to be. first a modeler. then a modeler with rendering. even at 401, they're saying "some animation features" but "still not the character animation release", etc.

core 1.0 however was ALWAYS sold as a "complete 3d app" akin to "lightwave" and "maya 1.0". they NEVER said outright what the scope of core 1.0 was going to be or what it was NOT going to be (despite some typically vague qualifications). and being that they intended from day 1 to be a full app, they never said that they will either not be a full app by "1.0" (which makes the "1.0" moniker rather ridiculous in my mind) or that "it will be a full app by x.0". just too many fing smokescreens.

one is, if any "crime" is being perpetrated, delivering MORE than what is expected AT ANY GIVEN TIME.

if what greg says is correct, core will be delivering substantially LESS than what even zithen expected.

in my mind, that's the (rather clear) difference and is evidenced in the wide disparity of expectation from one lwer to another.

jinI agree on the ambiguity of what to expect for CORE 1.0. But I disagree that core 1.0 however was ALWAYS sold as a "complete 3d app" akin to "lightwave" and "maya 1.0".. You said yourself, that we still aren't sure what to expect for CORE 1.0. So how can it be sold as a full 3D app. and yet still not know what to expect? Not only that, NT said that they would be focusing on Modeling first, they said that LW v9 would be used in conjunction with Core, etc. So I think they've been pretty clear it won't be a full 3D app akin to Maya 1.0 or the present version of LW. Again, people still have no clue when/if Modo will have things like character animation, but (and this is were I see the double standard) people are quick to defend (rightfully so) it takes time, they're laying down the foundation to do it right, etc. etc. All the things I see NT doing with CORE.

Like I said, I think Lux is doing a great job with Modo, and make it very tempting to purchase, so this isn't a bash. It just seems like the two companies have very similar philosophies on how to produce a complete 3D app. from the ground up (starting with modeling tools first, laying a solid foundation,etc.), but NT is being judge much more harshly because they present have a full 3D app. where as Lux doesn't. So users are expecting much more in much less time.

Andyjaggy
05-05-2009, 11:39 AM
So watcha gonna do Jin? :) Join the Modo masses?

jin choung
05-05-2009, 11:40 AM
Yeah Core may develop faster then Modo but I highly doubt that Core is going to beat Modo to the full app finish line.

not only that... but modo has had time to POLISH what they implement.

if core is not finished ACTIVELY DEVELOPING ITS FEATURESET YET, then when in the world are they going to find time to ACTUALLY beta test and polish?

it seems like they are trying to do both simultaneously and that just doesn't ring true with me.

and it seems to me that core is trying to defy all the established conventions for what "1.0" or "2.0" or any of the version numbers actually mean to people such that 1.0 may be in reality a .25 and 2.0 may mean .6... that's not cool.

1.0 (of a full app) should be 1.0 (of a full app). and if it's not, that is not cool with me and neither is the lack of clarity.

jin

adamredwoods
05-05-2009, 11:41 AM
Modo is gaining interest. I spoke with an architect the other day and he was blown away by Modo and its ease of use.

Seems to me, its gaining momentum. So with that, and it's commonality to LW, I'd say its a good step career-wise. Having Modo as a technical skill would last a while, since LW Core is still an unknown.

jin choung
05-05-2009, 11:46 AM
I agree on the ambiguity of what to expect for CORE 1.0. But I disagree that core 1.0 however was ALWAYS sold as a "complete 3d app" akin to "lightwave" and "maya 1.0".. You said yourself, that we still aren't sure what to expect for CORE 1.0. So how can it be sold as a full 3D app. and yet still not know what to expect?

this is not a problem with me. this is the obfuscation of newtek communication.

yes. how can it INDEED!

again 1.0 must not equal .25

and if core 1.0 is not the full app MOST expect, then how dare it call itself 1.0? and NOT .25?

OR

CLARIFY SCOPE, go modo and clearly define what 1.0 will be (modeler only or modeler texture only).

the only thing that's clear now is how muddled newtek is trying to be.

jin

Chris S. (Fez)
05-05-2009, 11:48 AM
The potential for Core is quite simply staggering. As for the actual implementation...I suppose Core members will know soon enough.

Lightwave has a lot of fine legacy code to rely on that could conceivably be transferred/tweaked to be Core compatible. However, Jay and the team clearly weighed the strengths/weaknesses of competing programs when designing Core.

jin choung
05-05-2009, 11:52 AM
So users are expecting much more in much less time.

all newtek has to do is "fess up". all newtek has to do is define scope. all newtek has to do is BE CLEAR (for f's sake).

but it won't make it easy on itself. for some reason. ack.

jin

TheDynamo
05-05-2009, 11:54 AM
since LW Core is still an unknown.

I would suggest waiting till the feature list is finalized before making judgements. Speculating on anything before that is really just wasting time.

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 11:55 AM
I'm looking forward to this in core:

From the What is Core section of the core webpage:
LightWave CORE™ has a unified dynamics environment, which allows dynamics, physics, cloth, hair and other solvers to interact transparently with each other.

jin choung
05-05-2009, 12:02 PM
So watcha gonna do Jin? :) Join the Modo masses?

what core 1.0 ends up being will determine it for me. that'll probably tell me all i need to know.

but also, i may have no need to move on with any lw variant. i'm continually using maya at work, i use zb for hi poly, hi freq detail stuff and lw legacy and/or blender may fill the bill for the rest.

we'll see but it might be time for me to get off this particular upgrade treadmill.

jin

adamredwoods
05-05-2009, 12:02 PM
Potential vs. actual:

If Modo has recognition as being an industry standard before LW Core, then Modo would be an essential tool to know in order to market oneself better.

Personally, I have no immediate need for either, but I am looking at how to keep myself marketable, so I can withstand economic downturns.

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 12:09 PM
this is not a problem with me. this is the obfuscation of newtek communication.

yes. how can it INDEED!

again 1.0 must not equal .25

and if core 1.0 is not the full app MOST expect, then how dare it call itself 1.0? and NOT .25?

OR

CLARIFY SCOPE, go modo and clearly define what 1.0 will be (modeler only or modeler texture only).

the only thing that's clear now is how muddled newtek is trying to be.

jinBut this is still where I see the double standard, if you're not ok with your 2nd option. The comparison or definition of what constitutes a 1.0 release seems akin to compare it with present LW or Maya 1.0. Yet Modo, which people are swooning over (and as I've stated, rightfully so), at a 401 release is not a full 3D app.

So if you and others are okay with NT saying Core 1.0 will be modeler only or modeler/texture only and stop being so critical, then I'm good with that. But that's were I go back to to that NT (as ambiguous as they've been) has to some degree defined what to expect & what not to expect in CORE 1.0. They've said, modeler tools are the initial focus, users will need present LW v9.x in use with CORE, etc. This is not a full 3D app. as I believe you've defined. As a side note, I don't recall companies like Lux saying 8-9 months before a release what was going to be included.

I guess I just think people are way over critical of CORE and how NT has chosen to build a full 3D app. from the ground up, while praising another company for doing the same thing. I honestly believe it's because NT has a present and established 3D app. where as Lux does not. As a result, there is no expectations from Lux/Modo, where as people are expect too much in much less time from NT.


all newtek has to do is "fess up". all newtek has to do is define scope. all newtek has to do is BE CLEAR (for f's sake).

but it won't make it easy on itself. for some reason. ack.

jinI mean this in all honesty, would you be good with that? Meaning if they said hey, we're going the Modo way, modeler/modeler texture only for the 1.0 release?

And not just good with it meaning, glad they fessed up now I'm gone. But good with it meaning, I'm excited for CORE (a complete re-write of an app. I presently enjoy).

jin choung
05-05-2009, 12:20 PM
I mean this in all honesty, would you be good with that? Meaning if they said hey, we're going the Modo way, modeler/modeler texture only for the 1.0 release?

And not just good with it meaning, glad they fessed up now I'm gone. But good with it meaning, I'm excited for CORE (a complete re-write of an app. I presently enjoy).

see?

you DO understand what i'm saying. there is no double standard and you "get it" enough to ask your question.

as for the answer - not now.

i WOULD HAVE if they started off with that kind of openness and honesty. during the tease, they totally had me. but not now. too tired of all the smokescreens and bullsh1t.

at this point, that would elicit nothing more generous than an unspoken "i told you so". which is still pending if 1.0 shapes up in the neighborhood of my expectations.

jin

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 12:23 PM
But this is still where I see the double standard, if you're not ok with your 2nd option. The comparison or definition of what constitutes a 1.0 release seems akin to compare it with present LW or Maya 1.0. Yet Modo, which people are swooning over (and as I've stated, rightfully so), at a 401 release is not a full 3D app.

I think his point is simply that when you click the buy now button on lux's site you know you're getting a modeller + renderer + mechanical animation. (and for 101, just a modeller, back in the day). With core, you have bullet points about unified dynamics environments with hair and cloth solvers next to their buy now button.

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 12:30 PM
see?

you DO understand what i'm saying. there is no double standard and you "get it" enough to ask your question.

as for the answer - not now.

i WOULD HAVE if they started off with that kind of openness and honesty. during the tease, they totally had me. but not now. too tired of all the smokescreens and bullsh1t.

at this point, that would elicit nothing more generous than an unspoken "i told you so". which is still pending if 1.0 shapes up in the neighborhood of my expectations.

jinI'm not following you Jin. I was asking the question based up something you said. I agreed that there is ambiguity in what NT has stated what CORE will be and not be at the 1.0 release. But I disagree, that they've not, to some degree, been up front with us on certain expectations (some of which I've already stated).

The double standards I see are:

I've yet to see a company (Lux included) that has stated 8-9 + months in advance before a release what was going to be included.

Defining a full 3D app as a 1.0 release.

Both of which NT is being held to, while another company is not.

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 12:34 PM
Honestly I think it's the hardcore thing that's causing the confusion. If it was done and they were not disclosing what was in the app, you could just ask somebody. But it's the 'join the development' thing that's kind of weird. Cool, but weird from a 'not knowing what you're gonna get point of view'.

Zithen
05-05-2009, 12:35 PM
Modo has no SDK, no 3rd party support, no modifier stack, no nodal view/linking etc., no modeling/deform tools for animation.

All I can say is that it has not been stated CORE 1.0 will only do modeling, as Modo 101 did. I don't believe CORE will have just an animation timeline. Every function, including modeling tools, should be animatable. No one finds that interesting? You cannot do that in Modo, and probably won't for some time, as it appears it would require some new design work. I thought that capability would have been seen in Modo by now. Apparently, the reason why there are no animation deform tools ready for Modo 401 might have a lot to do with this same weakness that was inherent in the original LW design of seperate modeling/animation tools. As long as that exists in Modo, I will never be 100% satisfied with the program, even with the new cool animation reveals we have seen. It's almost like a mental block; don't want to invest any further because I know what it will not do. The problem lies in the architectural design and that cannot change without a lot of work and time.

The design of CORE is way different. It should be able to add functionality way faster and efficiently, for the simple reason that they'll have 3rd party support. You have to look beyond 1.0. For me, it becomes a question of what I want to invest my time in. I prefer to immerse myself in and master one app, with another few apps for other specialized tasks. But it takes time to learn an application. I'm looking at CORE or Blender 2.5 as the future now, because of their design and openness to 3rd party development.

If you want to model and animate, CORE 1.0 should be quite capable in many ways. But...there's more to it than 1.0, I think and I don't think you'd have to wait 6+ years for it either.

jin choung
05-05-2009, 12:35 PM
Defining a full 3D app as a 1.0 release.


i don't understand your objection here.

"3d app" 1.0 means something to most people.

"modeler" 1.0 means something ELSE.

if "3d app" 1.0 only has modeler then it is NOT 1.0.

xsi 1.0 i get it. maya 1.0 i get it. modo (modeler) 1.0 i get it. core 1.0... wtf?

and see mike's response as well.

i don't get what you're not understanding.

jin

Zithen
05-05-2009, 12:37 PM
Honestly I think it's the hardcore thing that's causing the confusion. If it was done and they were not disclosing what was in the app, you could just ask somebody. But it's the 'join the development' thing that's kind of weird. Cool, but weird from a 'not knowing what you're gonna get point of view'.
If I was not in Hardcore, I would be confused too.

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 12:42 PM
If I was not in Hardcore, I would be confused too.

Haha, I'm in hardcore and I'm stil confused as to where we're going to end up in december.

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 12:44 PM
I think his point is simply that when you click the buy now button on lux's site you know you're getting a modeller + renderer + mechanical animation. (and for 101, just a modeller, back in the day). With core, you have bullet points about unified dynamics environments with hair and cloth solvers next to their buy now button.And with that, I can agree with. The problem I still have is that this being their fourth release, it's still not a complete app by the definitions previously stated, yet if CORE isn't a full 3D app. by release 1.0 it's some how the doom!

Hind sight is 20/20, you only know what you're getting with Modo because it's been released. To hold this same standard to CORE 1.0 when it hasn't been released is the double standard I'm referring to. And even that we don't all what you're getting with 401 when you buy it because, up to this point, they've still not finished the reveals. My second thing is, at Modo 101 even knowing it was going to be a modeler, did they 8-9+ months in advance tell you all the features? Why should Core be held to that standard?

I whole hardly agree that NT should not market CORE as having things like unified dynamics, etc. Unless they plan on having it for the 1.0 release. At best, it should be something stated as a working for, or will have in the future, etc. So we agree there.


Haha, I'm in hardcore and I'm stil confused as to where we're going to end up in December.This is true. lol But for $395 of an app I've been happy with for many many years, from a new team that has shown their dedication to the user and app in the v9 cycle, I'm in for the ride. ;)

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 12:49 PM
This is true. lol But for $395 of an app I've been happy with for many many years, from a new team that has shown their dedication to the user and app in the v9 cycle, I'm in for the ride. ;)

Exactly. I think the original point of this thread was wondering if Core will have at least the same animation features as modo 401, and it's been fun to see what lux is coming out with... but until december we really won't know.

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 12:53 PM
i don't understand your objection here.

"3d app" 1.0 means something to most people.

"modeler" 1.0 means something ELSE.

if "3d app" 1.0 only has modeler then it is NOT 1.0.

xsi 1.0 i get it. maya 1.0 i get it. modo (modeler) 1.0 i get it. core 1.0... wtf?

and see mike's response as well.

i don't get what you're not understanding.

jinHere is my beef, and it's not directed at you in general. CORE/NT is being viciously critic for an approach and philosophy that is very similar to a product/company that is doing much the same.

If the argument is we know what were getting with X product release as Mike has stated, my argument is we'd know that because the product is released. I'd be willing to wager dollar for dollar (particularly on the present state of the 401 release) that what was going to be included in the 101 release of Modo was made known public in the same time frame you and others are expecting for Core. This is a double standard. And now, you're saying if you could have it your way (i.e. NT giving a complete reveal of what to expect well before release) you'd still be :cursin: ....

I guess my thing is, how can one be so critical of a product that hasn't been released, from a company that has a product that you seem to presently enjoy/use?


Exactly. I think the original point of this thread was wondering if Core will have at least the same animation features as modo 401, and it's been fun to see what lux is coming out with... but until december we really won't know.And if it would have been just that, a simple question...then I think it's legitimate. But it seems like it more then just a question "if anything's gonna light a fire under their as$ it's gonna be the fear that that core 1.0 won't even be able to match modo's anim capabilities!"

Which goes back to judging NT/CORE under different standards then the company/product being praised in this thread. That's all.

Nicolas Jordan
05-05-2009, 12:57 PM
Haha, I'm in hardcore and I'm stil confused as to where we're going to end up in december.

I would guess by the end of summer Core 1.0 features should be nailed down and we should have a better idea what the first release will have. I get the feeling the dev team are going to work their butts off and whatever they get done will be released when it's time for Q4 release. If there was specific goals for the Q4 release they probably would have told us by now. :D

Mike_RB
05-05-2009, 01:07 PM
And if it would have been just that, a simple question...then I think it's legitimate. But it seems like it more then just a question "if anything's gonna light a fire under their as$ it's gonna be the fear that that core 1.0 won't even be able to match modo's anim capabilities!"

Well, that part's just pure Jin.

Zithen
05-05-2009, 01:12 PM
xsi 1.0 i get it. maya 1.0 i get it. modo (modeler) 1.0 i get it. core 1.0... wtf?
jin

Ha, ha...this is a good point, Jin. This is a marketing issue.

CORE 1.0 is a new design for LW that seems initially be a bridge from LW 9.6 towards a new and complete application. It appears the bridge will involve modeling and animation functions, along with the Node workflow, similar to LW 9.6 for shading. It will also be a transition for 3rd party developers.

CORE 1.0 is probably more for LW artists than someone not familiar with LW, for it will not be a complete app by itself. It looks like you will be required to use LW 9.6 for much of the functionality. But LW CORE will have things you cannot do in LW or any other app, perhaps.

The development of Core feels very much like a community phenomenon if you get into Hardcore. You can just buy w/out being a member once Core 1.0 is released. But community seems to be a big part of the intent behind it; to make this a more of a community driven application with the Hardcore membership. This will continue beyond 1.0. It may even feel like an open-source app you have to pay for. It's a new thing I can't really compare it to, actually.

jay3d
05-05-2009, 01:19 PM
Just to mention that XSI 1.0 and Maya 1.0 was by no means a complete apps, it took them a 3 or 4 versions to be usable.

When XSI released, we were still using S|3D for a long period of time till ver 5 of XSI released, and Maya 1.0 did not even have SubDs, area lights and GI back then = not up to the standards.

What i mean is that we should not rush in expecting and cursing about something that it's still fetus, give it some time, and help the dev team to shape it, it's similar to what opensource dev model is, which is great direction (look at Blender).

Larry_g1s
05-05-2009, 02:06 PM
Well, that part's just pure Jin.Yeah...I guess I wouldn't expect anything different. :thumbsup:

cresshead
05-05-2009, 02:12 PM
Haha, I'm in hardcore and I'm stil confused as to where we're going to end up in december.

:agree:

same here...i simply have no idea what will or will not be in core by Q4 release date....not a single clue...not 1, none...zip.:cat:

cresshead
05-05-2009, 02:15 PM
Just to mention that XSI 1.0 and Maya 1.0 was by no means a complete apps, it took them a 3 or 4 versions to be usable.

When XSI released, we were still using S|3D for a long period of time till ver 5 of XSI released, and Maya 1.0 did not even have SubDs, area lights and GI back then = not up to the standards.

What i mean is that we should not rush in expecting and cursing about something that it's still fetus, give it some time, and help the dev team to shape it, it's similar to what opensource dev model is, which is great direction (look at Blender).

xsi 4 was stand alone..i didn't get softimage 3.4 bundled with it...

maya 1.0 had modeling, texturing, rigging animation and rendering
3dsmax 1.0 had modeling, texturing, rigging animation and rendering
xsi 1.0 had modeling, texturing, rigging animation and rendering

core 1.0?? no idea.

my take on this...blender 2.5 will kick modo and core a** all over the shop by Q4 2009

erikals
05-05-2009, 02:21 PM
well, they can reuse tons of the math from 9.6 (talking math, not code)
this will save them plenty of time when developing Core.
Also the Core foundation is the strongest foundation i've heard of, if the statements hold water.

bee patient. http://www.yessaid.com/forum/images/smilies/bee.gif

adamredwoods
05-05-2009, 03:27 PM
Every function, including modeling tools, should be animatable. No one finds that interesting? You cannot do that in Modo, and probably won't for some time, as it appears it would require some new design work.

I was not aware that Modo cannot animate deformations/modeling functions. Is this true? I need a Modo 401 demo, maybe I can get a studio down the street to show me.

adamredwoods
05-05-2009, 03:42 PM
Heads up:

Faking bones in Modo:
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34082

jin choung
05-05-2009, 04:28 PM
Just to mention that XSI 1.0 and Maya 1.0 was by no means a complete apps, it took them a 3 or 4 versions to be usable.

this is patently untrue.

they WERE complete apps. and they WERE usable. i particularly remember 3dsmax 1.0 and it was very very usable.

every app gets better with time. but that's not the issue. the issue is whether the app is FEATURE COMPLETE for version 1.0 or whether 1.0 is actually .25.

what you're saying is the equivalent of because we have porsche's now, the model-T was actually not finished.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

LET ME BE CLEAR:

some of you folks are saying, "work in progress" blah blah blah... every app gets better with time etc.

I AM NOT saying that a FORD MUSTANG 2008 must be as good, as fast, as powerful as efficient as a FORD MUSTANG 2030.

BUT

I AM saying that a FORD MUSTANG 2008 MUST BE FINISHED.

is that clear?

and the DIFFERENCE larry, between core and modo is that core is presented as being a FORD MUSTANG 2008 and it might not be FINISHED.

lux on the other hand has ALWAYS been careful to advertise itself as ENGNE 2008 and delivered on that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

yes, it has been pretty obvious to me that to a lesser or greater extent, newtek IS doing something similar to modo. that they HAVE TO.

but that makes them no less culpable.

you can be doing the same thing. both can be digging a grave. but if one is advertising itself as a landscaper, then you have a problem.

jin

cresshead
05-05-2009, 04:31 PM
Heads up:

Faking bones in Modo:
http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34082

is there a particular vid we're looking at as there's 4plus pages now..seems to be popular!:D

cresshead
05-05-2009, 04:39 PM
you can be doing the same thing. both can be digging a grave. but if one is advertising itself as a landscaper, then you have a problem.

jin

now that's FUNNY!:)

adamredwoods
05-05-2009, 04:41 PM
is there a particular vid we're looking at as there's 4plus pages now..seems to be popular!:D

http://www.warnermcgee.com/modo/shark_setup.mov

cresshead
05-05-2009, 04:44 PM
thanks for sorting the link out

..i'm watching a dvd and making some renders on a couple of pc's for my site's gallery so not too much time to surf as well...up n downstairs all night setting up stuff!

Zithen
05-05-2009, 06:20 PM
I was not aware that Modo cannot animate deformations/modeling functions. Is this true? I need a Modo 401 demo, maybe I can get a studio down the street to show me.
To specify, like LW, you cannot animate any modeling tools.
You can animate deformations of an object using the weight and morph maps and MDD.

Brad indicates that in a future release, there will be more tools that deal with deformations for CA. I have no doubt they'll do it well.

I don't believe CORE 1.0 will have the same limitation. You won't have a seperate set of deform tools that just do modeling and a seperate set of deform tools that modify for animation.

jay3d
05-06-2009, 12:24 AM
To specify, like LW, you cannot animate any modeling tools.
You can animate deformations of an object using the weight and morph maps and MDD.

Brad indicates that in a future release, there will be more tools that deal with deformations for CA. I have no doubt they'll do it well.

I don't believe CORE 1.0 will have the same limitation. You won't have a seperate set of deform tools that just do modeling and a seperate set of deform tools that modify for animation.

My biggest concern with modo now is they will partly repeat the history of LW, remember the bend, twist, pole, etc. in the Add Displacement in layout?

It could create the same confusion for people coming from -for example- MAX, one expects to use one Bend tool and in some moment press Animate and begin changing it's value over time, without the extra redundant tool used for animated deformations.

I think in 501 they have to rewrite AGAIN the modeling tools to support animation, and that means a modifier stack is a must.

Cheers
J

Nemoid
05-07-2009, 05:27 AM
From foundation standpoint, what's written in Newtek tech faq, CORE will be more powerful and flexible.

first off , they start saying that scene is based onto nodes, and that the structure of a scene can be represented into several ways. This, to me meas that the architecture of the app is inherently node based, and that there will be node editors, list based editors, and more. We also know nodes allow for total flexibility within the structure of the app, allowing connecting items and modifiers into a non linear way.
This is a good concept that means : flexibility

they also explain the power of a nodal/modifier and more structure, for TDs and developers,and for rigging /animation itself. Tds can make complex rigs for characters so that animators can work with only the controls they need, and more. These concepts are proper of apps like Maya, which are node based.

Then they go on talking about SDK. a very open one, made in C++, object oriented programming language, that allows a more efficient coding and
feature implementation ( incidentally, Modo is written in C, like Lw, instead).
SDK being very open, will allow for third party developers to integrate plugins within CORE, so they will act seamlessly, not interferring each other and exploit the app UI and customization possibilities through Qt tools.

so, they give users the freeedm to change alot of things, even quite deep, in CORE,and exploit the inherent base structure. plugins will also be multi platform.

even here, not to make a comparison, but Modo has not a released full SDK yet.

Then they talk about power. we do know, Lw has not a gigapolygon CORE, and that 64 bit version is good, but we also know from what Newtek showed that CORE manages huge amounts of polygons way more than what Lw offers now. this is very important for both managing large scenes , and complex models.

then they talk about python, even here, this is a very used scripting language, adopted in many apps, like XSI, and Maya, blender too. its quite an industry standard language , so will allow people coming from other apps, to script for Lw with no great effort. Its not something hthay will have to re learn.

file formats: even here they choose a quite standardized approach, with collada, which is a hugely adopted system. since CORE at the sytart will be used with lw too, i don't think they will drop Lwo or lws files format, it will however be a way to communicate for the 2 apps allowing core to exploit lw current capabilities for a transitional period.

unification : here they talk about what we've asked fro years, so, integration between modeler and layout into a single environment. and they clearly also say that, CORE is integrated, but that users will be able to work with it into flexible ways, using it as a modeler only, animate only, etc, or with a mixed workflow if they need.

to make things short, Newtek on paper seems to offer to users whats currently the best for a good app, flexibility, power, user customization, deep programmability and scriptability, standards widely adopted from the industry.

if they reach to couple these characteristics with the goodnes of Lw ease of use, good modelling and animating workflows , ergonomics for an artistic approach to DCC, allowing the users to accomplish complex things into a simple way, CORE will become a fantastic application, because i'd say that so far, i've seen a bit of this only in XSI and not in all of its areas.

this is very very important,i'd say fundamental, because, many other apps offer the same level of flexibility and power, but not the same speedy workflow as Lw and Modo. Artist oriented approach will be a HUGE benefit.

this means: interactive and flexible tools, straightforward -logic workflow and organization of the app for simple/common tasks, very manageable rendering engine (we have that one currently), good editors, focus into viewport direct interaction for most tasks, and last but not least good and comprehensive documentation for the program.

About developing : i do think the best approach they can have, is to keep users updated with core developing in time.
They also should add at least rendering or animation to 1.0 release just for the fact that they won't be able to sell a "modeler" even if very advanced and with a bright future, with that price tag, currently.

If they reach to offer all base foundation for different areas, as Jin says, it would be better, but here depends from what they have in mind.

sorry for long post. :hammer:

Lightwolf
05-07-2009, 05:31 AM
( incidentally, Modo is written in C, like Lw, instead).
Not quite, afaik. Compiled as C, but written using a custom extension to C.

Cheers,
Mike

mav3rick
05-07-2009, 05:51 AM
Haha, I'm in hardcore and I'm stil confused as to where we're going to end up in december.

probable making snowman in d snow

Nemoid
05-07-2009, 05:30 PM
Not quite, afaik. Compiled as C, but written using a custom extension to C.

Cheers,
Mike

hey thanks for correcting me ! Didn't know about custom extension.

however i did read explainations from Stuart Ferguson, about why he likes more to use C language, in general.
Its not a great prob per se, but may be C++ is better to code with?

Lightwolf
05-07-2009, 06:08 PM
however i did read explainations from Stuart Ferguson, about why he likes more to use C language, in general.
Its not a great prob per se, but may be C++ is better to code with?
I've seen them as well... and I had one or two exchanges with him on the matter. I think some a few his points are valid, but a most are moot nowadays (such as C++ language and library compatibility across compilers, which isn't much different from C compatibility).

I found that C++ requires a different approach, a different way of thinking and design to use properly. It also allows for some really nice concepts (some of which I'm only now starting to grasp and use fully).

Cheers,
Mike

JeffrySG
05-07-2009, 07:10 PM
Well, I bought a license of Modo today before the reveal. But if I hadn't, they would have had me with constraints.

I think if the price was a bit lower I'd probably get a copy too. I just can't justify the 895 right now. And I don't really do animation much either so that stuff is just a bonus for me. Do you guys know if they have a competitive upgrade for modo?

Also, does anybody know of any free modo video tutorials? I'd love to watch some to really get a better look of the app. I know I can download the demo, but it's nice to watch some one work in it who knows what they are doing.

Mike_RB
05-07-2009, 07:23 PM
I think if the price was a bit lower I'd probably get a copy too. I just can't justify the 895 right now. And I don't really do animation much either so that stuff is just a bonus for me. Do you guys know if they have a competitive upgrade for modo?

Also, does anybody know of any free modo video tutorials? I'd love to watch some to really get a better look of the app. I know I can download the demo, but it's nice to watch some one work in it who knows what they are doing.

http://www.luxology.com/training/

And email them directly to inquire about competitive upgrade deals.

hrgiger
05-07-2009, 08:05 PM
:agree: with Mike.

There is a lot of video training that comes with Modo and it runs directly from the help menu in the program. Very nice.

JeffrySG
05-07-2009, 08:53 PM
http://www.luxology.com/training/

And email them directly to inquire about competitive upgrade deals.

Cool, thanks, Mike. I'll think about sending them an email regarding an crossgrade.

I watched this video:
http://www.luxology.com/training/video.aspx?id=207
And I couldn't help but feel that it behaved essentially like a nice update to LW modeler.

Snosrap
05-07-2009, 09:47 PM
I think if the price was a bit lower I'd probably get a copy too. I just can't justify the 895 right now. And I don't really do animation much either so that stuff is just a bonus for me. Do you guys know if they have a competitive upgrade for modo?

Lux originally had some kind of "friends of Luxology" upgrade in which they had a pretty sweet upgrade for LWers. I got in on it at the time for $295 for version 101 of modo. Not sure if they've offered that since then. I'm on the fence with 401. I like the profiles feature, but from what they showed I feel LWCad is more robust in that area. LWCad uses actual created geometry for the profiles and it looks as if 401 uses .eps files. Not crazy about that as I need profiles scaled to our many manufacturing profiles. Maybe 401 has that covered, but I didn't see it in the preview video.

Mike_RB
05-07-2009, 09:54 PM
Lux originally had some kind of "friends of Luxology" upgrade in which they had a pretty sweet upgrade for LWers. I got in on it at the time for $295 for version 101 of modo. Not sure if they've offered that since then. I'm on the fence with 401. I like the profiles feature, but from what they showed I feel LWCad is more robust in that area. LWCad uses actual created geometry for the profiles and it looks as if 401 uses .eps files. Not crazy about that as I need profiles scaled to our many manufacturing profiles. Maybe 401 has that covered, but I didn't see it in the preview video.

Profiles can be saved from 2d curves or polygon shapes out of modo.

Snosrap
05-07-2009, 10:00 PM
Profiles can be saved from 2d curves or polygon shapes out of modo.


Oh that's good. Is there a "set original dimensions" button ala LWCad? Most important for my work. Also can the profile follow a curve? Are you a beta tester for Lux or something?

Mike_RB
05-07-2009, 10:11 PM
Oh that's good. Is there a "set original dimensions" button ala LWCad? Most important for my work. Also can the profile follow a curve? Are you a beta tester for Lux or something?

I work for The Embassy, and yes we use the beta. Not sure about the scale thing.

jin choung
05-16-2009, 12:54 AM
ANIMATION IV

cool... a little new, a little old....

old would be "channel modifier" system... seems very very remniscent of lw's "motion modifier". but that system is accessible and so not necessarily a knock.

something new would be for all intents and purposes, maya's CONNECTION EDITOR! very nice and something that is absolutely necessary in this day and age.

good stuff.

jin

p.s. man, that's an awesome tank rig but it's chugging like a mother in modo... is it primarily because of screen cap or is it actually that boggy? not that it can be blamed (a lot going on) but i hope there's a way to turn off evaluation of different calculations so that an animator can work quickly and then turn things back on for final check and/or render.

p.s.2. so while modo has a lot of nicely refined interfaces like the CONNECTION EDITOR and channel layers, it doesn't seem to be able to do anything lw can't... which is fine. but then, the question remains whether CORE will be able to match modo's animation features.

p.s.3. the tank rig as well as rebel hill's recent rigging demos really hilight how important a well thought out and knowledgeably made rig is. lw animation in general seems to have been hampered in the past by approaching rigging not as a discipline to be mastered but an odious task to be avoided....

adamredwoods
05-16-2009, 04:24 PM
I was watching the bumper vid and he was using UNDO a lot. Must be nice...

hrgiger
05-16-2009, 05:54 PM
I was watching the bumper vid and he was using UNDO a lot. Must be nice...

It will be nice in CORE too.

IMI
05-18-2009, 11:12 PM
Is modo 401 going to have any improvements in the sculpting and painting department?
Painting at least should be seamless across different materials, like in Deep Paint 3D. In modo 302 you have to manually select a different image map, so if you're painting a model, when you cross from one materiel assignment to another you have to stop-select-continue. In DP 3D, it does it automatically and there is zero lag. And modo 302's painting in symmetry mode seems to create artifacts on the side you're not actually painting on, even if the symmetry is perfect.

Sculpting in modo 302 is good, but it could be alot better, like in ZBrush or Mudbox. I'm hoping along with all the nifty new stuff, the old stuff is also being worked on. :)

Cageman
05-19-2009, 03:09 AM
p.s. man, that's an awesome tank rig but it's chugging like a mother in modo... is it primarily because of screen cap or is it actually that boggy? not that it can be blamed (a lot going on) but i hope there's a way to turn off evaluation of different calculations so that an animator can work quickly and then turn things back on for final check and/or render.

I have made a very similar rig in Maya with pretty much the same types of control, and the threads are the ones in Maya that eats resources. So, I made a set of static threads that I use when animating; hiding all those real threads.



p.s.3. the tank rig as well as rebel hill's recent rigging demos really hilight how important a well thought out and knowledgeably made rig is. lw animation in general seems to have been hampered in the past by approaching rigging not as a discipline to be mastered but an odious task to be avoided....

Yeah. The cod-rig I did was mostly an exercise in how much I can do in LW in terms of control, and I have to say I was surprised on how much you can do in LW if you put some thought into it. Granted, the TD-rig of the COD is very slow and heavy, but even so, the concept of using an animation-friendly rig that later is transfered over to the real deal is pretty easy to do and can be achived without any frustrations.

There are a couple of third party developements on the way to ease up rigs that relies heavily on motionmodifiers/deformers, making it easy to lock off parts of a rig so that it doesn't evaluate if you want to work on a particular part of the rig; speeding up the interactivity ALOT.

Here is a thread showing ef_PluginManager in action. (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92594&highlight=videodemo)

Nemoid
05-19-2009, 04:16 AM
Is modo 401 going to have any improvements in the sculpting and painting department?
Painting at least should be seamless across different materials, like in Deep Paint 3D. In modo 302 you have to manually select a different image map, so if you're painting a model, when you cross from one materiel assignment to another you have to stop-select-continue. In DP 3D, it does it automatically and there is zero lag. And modo 302's painting in symmetry mode seems to create artifacts on the side you're not actually painting on, even if the symmetry is perfect.

Sculpting in modo 302 is good, but it could be alot better, like in ZBrush or Mudbox. I'm hoping along with all the nifty new stuff, the old stuff is also being worked on. :)

hope they will enhance them as well, it would be awesome! Btw Dp is a dedicated app, as ZB is they are more powerful, but if lux enhances painting and sculpting it would be actually killer!

hrgiger
05-19-2009, 06:20 AM
There's some talk over on the Lux boards about it. From what I've gathered, there has been some improvements to the painting engine but to what extent, I haven't seen yet.

Mike_RB
05-19-2009, 08:40 PM
ANIMATION IV

cool... a little new, a little old....

old would be "channel modifier" system... seems very very remniscent of lw's "motion modifier". but that system is accessible and so not necessarily a knock.

It's not a channel modifier system. It's full on nodes that process inputs and have output channels, independant of the object you attach them to. Maybe you didn't watch the vids... There is just no graph view for them in 401.

jin choung
05-19-2009, 08:55 PM
It's not a channel modifier system. It's full on nodes that process inputs and have output channels, independant of the object you attach them to. Maybe you didn't watch the vids... There is just no graph view for them in 401.

ah... yeah, i didn't see those vids. just going by the front end which looks very very similar to how lw does it.

jin

GregMalick
05-19-2009, 10:21 PM
It's not a channel modifier system. It's full on nodes that process inputs and have output channels, independant of the object you attach them to. Maybe you didn't watch the vids... There is just no graph view for them in 401.

Hi Mike,

I watched the videos and don't recall an output being attached to multiple inputs. Would you point me to the video that showed that?

BTW, the modeling, presets, rendering, and painting enhancements are what sold me on the $295 upgrade... The animation stuff is still unclear to me and will probably remain that way until Andy Brown does a tutorial on it.

jwiede
05-19-2009, 10:44 PM
If the argument is we know what were getting with X product release as Mike has stated, my argument is we'd know that because the product is released. I'd be willing to wager dollar for dollar (particularly on the present state of the 401 release) that what was going to be included in the 101 release of Modo was made known public in the same time frame you and others are expecting for Core. This is a double standard. And now, you're saying if you could have it your way (i.e. NT giving a complete reveal of what to expect well before release) you'd still be :cursin: ....

I guess my thing is, how can one be so critical of a product that hasn't been released, from a company that has a product that you seem to presently enjoy/use?

And if it would have been just that, a simple question...then I think it's legitimate. But it seems like it more then just a question "if anything's gonna light a fire under their as$ it's gonna be the fear that that core 1.0 won't even be able to match modo's anim capabilities!"

Which goes back to judging NT/CORE under different standards then the company/product being praised in this thread. That's all.Larry,

The big difference, in my mind, is that Newtek started taking money as preorders for CORE 8-9 months before release, and the closest thing resembling a feature list next to their "Buy now!" button makes some pretty extreme claims about things like fully working and interoperational dynamics, hair, and so forth. In other words, strong indication that it will be a "full, modern 3D application" by most standards.

Lux might not have defined Modo101 any better than CORE did 8-9 months before release, but they also weren't accepting customer orders and money. By the time they had put up a "Buy now!" button, Lux had clearly defined the scope of what Modo pre-orderers were getting for their money.

There is no double-standard, both are being evaluated based on the claims being made to customers around the time they started taking customers' money for the product.

If Newtek is being scrutinized earlier because they're selling earlier, so be it. They chose to accept customer money earlier, and in doing so accepted the associated responsibilities.

Zithen
05-20-2009, 12:47 AM
Hi Mike,

I watched the videos and don't recall an output being attached to multiple inputs. Would you point me to the video that showed that?

Yes, please...
As far as I can tell, workflow seems very similar to LW using deform and motion modifiers on a per object basis.

Mike_RB
05-20-2009, 06:33 AM
Hi Mike,

I watched the videos and don't recall an output being attached to multiple inputs. Would you point me to the video that showed that?

BTW, the modeling, presets, rendering, and painting enhancements are what sold me on the $295 upgrade... The animation stuff is still unclear to me and will probably remain that way until Andy Brown does a tutorial on it.

Not sure if that was shown, but you can do it. No connections are made when you add a 'modifier' in modo. You hook it up however you want and upstream branching is fine.

jwiede
05-21-2009, 02:56 AM
I'm interested in their solution for this as well. Stuart has mentioned he has a plan for this, so we'll see it eventually... I'm guessing (I have no idea) that it might be a live 'tool pipe' modifier you stick on your object, which can be reordered. So it saves the state of all the attributes in one tool pipe 'session'. Shrug. We'll see.You know, the more I think about this, the more it seems (to me, at least) that the toolpipe functionality demonstrates the modifiers already ARE animation-ready. The fact that you can make a tool pipe today, and thereby vary the parameters dynamically handed to a modifier (and how it uses them) means they already support the majority of necessary functionality for animated modifiers. Undo/redo ubiquity in Modo could also imply the association code is already present -- there are algorithmic similarities between how undo/redo of modifiers & toolpipes on geometry typically works, and how you'd want animated modifiers to work driven by animation.

So, Modo might be missing the ability to stack and associate those pipe-configured modifiers with geometry (depending on undo code), and is missing the part to drive them with animation channels (because the channel functionality didn't adequately exist until 401). Now that channels are sorted out, all that's really needed for animation of modifiers is a way (as you described) to associate toolpipes with geometry (which might just be undo code reuse), and a clean UI way to wire up channels as the inputs to toolpipes, and create/modify those animation toolpipes.

To me, that doesn't sound like a huge programming effort, the real difficulty lies in getting the UI and workflow down. And again, until 401, and all the new channel-related UI stuff, making a decent UI and workflow for animated modifiers just wasn't feasible. With those pieces now in place, the grunt work of wiring up UI to connect toolpipes to associative datastructures shouldn't be too herculean, IMO. Certainly not the scope of task some here are portraying.

Time will tell. Either way, it's a good time to be a 3D consumer. :boogiedow

Nemoid
05-25-2009, 09:06 AM
It's not a channel modifier system. It's full on nodes that process inputs and have output channels, independant of the object you attach them to. Maybe you didn't watch the vids... There is just no graph view for them in 401.

tHis is a great thng to know ! So, I assume in the future of Modo, nodes will be exposed where there's the need of them, UI/workflow wise. right now, since Modo is made for mechanical stuff and some more, i think what's exposed is enough.:thumbsup:

LightWuv
05-26-2009, 02:31 PM
It's VERY clear to me the plan they are following, with every new release you can see the blocks going in place, and they make sense.

In fact, everything they've done regarding 401, the features, the way the reveal is being done, is a shining example of how to do it right.

I've always thought Lux has had their marketing down pretty well. I mean the web presentations and reveals. Their site is an example to follow in many ways.


They just want to do it right this time.

Lux and NT both :D



that is the peril that newtek currently faces - that a supposedly complete app (core 1.0) will fall short of the features of a self admittedly non-full 3d app (modo 401).
jin

Basic and important point, I think, that bears repeating.


currently i doubt core will ship in Q4 with a extensive feature/capability list, of course i HOPE it will..but it's what 8 months to catch up on 7 years of modo development and updates...looks near verticle to me never mind steep.

What kind of vertex is a verticle? :neener:


I'm looking forward to this in core:

From the What is Core section of the core webpage:
LightWave CORE™ has a unified dynamics environment, which allows dynamics, physics, cloth, hair and other solvers to interact transparently with each other.

Me too!

Nicolas Jordan
05-26-2009, 03:34 PM
I suspect that Core 1.0 will be very similar to what was present in modo 101 minus some modeling features but with a few other areas slightly opened up like surfacing and maybe some limited rendering ability. I will be surprised if Core 1.0 even has the variety of modeling features that modo 101 had but who knows. Hey only 6 more months now and we will know what constitutes Core 1.0.

Mike_RB
05-27-2009, 08:53 AM
I suspect that Core 1.0 will be very similar to what was present in modo 101 minus some modeling features but with a few other areas slightly opened up like surfacing and maybe some limited rendering ability. I will be surprised if Core 1.0 even has the variety of modeling features that modo 101 had but who knows. Hey only 6 more months now and we will know what constitutes Core 1.0.

That seems like such a short time....

Andyjaggy
05-27-2009, 10:58 AM
That seems like such a short time....

Yeah when you think that we spent a whole 6 months just beta testing 9.6, you start to wonder how in the world NT is going to pull it off, let alone have any time to do any sort of testing to get a stable application......... I'm feeling pretty good about my modo purchase. :)

Mike_RB
05-27-2009, 11:20 AM
Yeah when you think that we spent a whole 6 months just beta testing 9.6, you start to wonder how in the world NT is going to pull it off, let alone have any time to do any sort of testing to get a stable application......... I'm feeling pretty good about my modo purchase. :)

Yeah, hopefully having it testing now will help that somewhat. Also getting an early SDK out might really help flush out missing functionality. December should be pretty interesting.

erikals
05-27-2009, 11:33 AM
did they promise it by December?
can't remember...

Mike_RB
05-27-2009, 11:36 AM
did they promise it by December?
can't remember...

Dec 31 is the end of q4. So yes Core 1.0 sometime in Dec. :)

Nicolas Jordan
05-27-2009, 11:39 AM
edit: double reply

Mike_RB
05-27-2009, 11:44 AM
Looks like they posted the full rez version of the tank Rich and I did. (72mb, rightclick save as if you don't want it in the browser)

http://content2.luxology.com/modo/401/video/animation_4/rich_hurrey_TankFinal.mov

Fun to watch.

erikals
05-27-2009, 12:30 PM
Cool :0

ehh,.. do those tank threads have dynamics??

Mike_RB
05-27-2009, 12:37 PM
Cool :0

ehh,.. do those tank threads have dynamics??

No, they are just well rigged.

hrgiger
05-27-2009, 01:06 PM
Yeah those were done with the new constraints and new animation capabilities of 401. Good stuff.

jay3d
05-27-2009, 01:14 PM
BTW, Mike, with 401 close to release, any chances getting those glitches in IC GI fixed in this bug fixing period? http://forums.luxology.com/discussion/topic.aspx?id=34110&page=1

This is really needs to be fixed to bring modo's renderer to a production quality one.

Animation can be done one way or another, but the final output that matters.

Mike_RB
05-27-2009, 01:41 PM
I haven't taken the time to see if the new controls in 401 can address the issues with that scene. But 401 is all locked down now anyway, they are just working on some remaining stability issues at this point.

hrgiger
05-27-2009, 04:51 PM
BTW Mike, where does the sound come from in the tank clip?

3dWannabe
05-28-2009, 05:02 PM
I've been reading the posts on Modo with interest.

As we seem to be about 2 weeks away from the release:

1. What kind of things would Modo 401 do better than LW 9.6?

2. What does LW 9.6 do better than Modo?

I gather from their forums it won't work well with RealFlow (or at least the older version won't) so there are certainly limitations and issues.

Price concerns aside, how would you use Modo 401 with LW 9.6?

Cageman
05-28-2009, 06:12 PM
I've been reading the posts on Modo with interest.

As we seem to be about 2 weeks away from the release:

1. What kind of things would Modo 401 do better than LW 9.6?


Well, for starters, LW doesn't have anything similar to make tankthreads similar to how you can do it in Maya (which is very similar to the video showing the rig in Modo).



2. What does LW 9.6 do better than Modo?

To much to list, but mainly it is related to animation/rigging/shading. The nodal workflow in LW is superior at the moment. In many cases, it rivals Maya as well.

Example:

In Maya, you don't have a Vector Add node.. so, you can't add, lets say, two bumpmaps together with ease. Not to mention LWs nodal displacements.... just wow! (slow though).




I gather from their forums it won't work well with RealFlow (or at least the older version won't) so there are certainly limitations and issues.

Price concerns aside, how would you use Modo 401 with LW 9.6?

Well... I don't need Modo, so I will not be using it with LW9.6. :)

JeffrySG
05-29-2009, 11:38 AM
Looks like they posted the full rez version of the tank Rich and I did. (72mb, rightclick save as if you don't want it in the browser)

http://content2.luxology.com/modo/401/video/animation_4/rich_hurrey_TankFinal.mov

Fun to watch.

I'm not sure if I missed it somewhere, but what is the tank animation from? was it talked about on a modocast somewhere or on the forums?

ps. and it looks friggin' cool!

Mike_RB
05-29-2009, 11:43 AM
I'm not sure if I missed it somewhere, but what is the tank animation from? was it talked about on a modocast somewhere or on the forums?

It's on the last reveal page, it's something Rich Hurrey and I did in our spare time using 401. Brad called us up and did a modcast on it as well.

hrgiger
05-29-2009, 11:44 AM
I'm not sure if I missed it somewhere, but what is the tank animation from? was it talked about on a modocast somewhere or on the forums?

It was part of the 401 reveal videos that Mike and Rich did. It is showing the power of some of the new animation controls/constraints in Modo 401.

robertoortiz
05-29-2009, 11:53 AM
I am sorry I am going to post something that will not be popular at all,
but I have to say this, because this has been bugging me for a while.

Why is this thread here at all?
There is constructive criticism of what Core might do or not,
and then there is the excuse to market of a competing piece of software on Newtek home turf.

This type de-constructive criticism I call it the "taste test" where one piece of software is unfairly pitted against another.


The only result of this is rile the masses, market a competing piece of software and frankly create false expectations.
there are more constructive ways to express ideas and suggestion and concerns about CORE, and honestly this is not it.

And for me this whole slanted thread is just an excuse to market a competing piece of software.
A good one at that, but come on.

Marketing is marketing.

Why is it at all at the Lightwave forum?

We might as well ask if Core will be as good as Cinema 4d in the particle department, and its interaction with After Effects?
Or if Core will interact as well with renderrman as Maya?
Will core be able to do scripting as well as Houdini?
Will Core be able to do better models than Z-Brush?
Or if Core will have the same effect in the game market as Max?
Of if Core will do my taxes next year?

It is not fair.

And neither is this thread.

JeffrySG
05-29-2009, 11:56 AM
It's on the last reveal page, it's something Rich Hurrey and I did in our spare time using 401. Brad called us up and did a modcast on it as well.


It was part of the 401 reveal videos that Mike and Rich did. It is showing the power of some of the new animation controls/constraints in Modo 401.

OK, cool... thanks guys... :)
Really great work Mike!! :thumbsup: