PDA

View Full Version : Dear Newtek, where's 9.6.1?



Thomas M.
05-01-2009, 02:17 PM
I know that quite a lot of you will be busy with developing Core, but FFX for example needs some serious bugfixes/updates.

Why is there a texture editor for cluster radius if it doesn't effect the cluster radius at all? Gradients with weight maps don't affect my base value at all. Neither in Alpha nor multiply mode. Procedurals like value, NO EFFECT (e.g. in normal mode). Nothing works, except from the base value. BUG!!!

Kink in combination with weight maps is totally unusable as it will produce ugly hairs (just sticking out of the rest of hairs) where you wouldn't expect it. Nice smooth transitions aren't possible with this bug.

The combing mode in layout could be great, BUT where is the symmetry button?

Why do I comb all the guides through the whole body if I just want to comb those on the front of my object, not those on the back of it? A workaround is to comb the guides in a tangential way, but that works only sometimes. ALMOST UNUSUABLE FEATURE!

And why isn't there a collision detection for the guides? Do you know how much fun it is to try getting the hair guides out of the object afterwards without destroying the whole hairdo?

I don't ask for top notch features, just for a working hair solution.

Cheers
Thomas

P.S.: The way to style the hairs in modeler is a total pain and for producing a nice hairstyle, e.g. hair on animals, neither efficient nor possible as cluster radius hair won't start on the surface of the object, but parallel to the strand. This way you'll end up with a lot of floating hair.

P.P.S.: The shading of the hairs is very nice!!!

jayroth
05-01-2009, 02:56 PM
It's coming soon.

jasonwestmas
05-01-2009, 03:00 PM
I have to admit I like FFX too and I am looking forward to FFX fixes.

Thomas M.
05-01-2009, 05:02 PM
Hope to see some cool updates and fixes for FFX. It got potential and the quality is really nice, but the styling lacks some features (clump radius, clumping across polygons) which makes it really hard to get the look you want. What about a gray map which will determine the angle of the hair? One for heading, one for pitch? If you'll take over a few more of the Sas settings it'll become a nice feature of LW.

Cheers
Thomas

GraphXs
05-01-2009, 08:53 PM
Thanks Jay! Thats great, looking forward to the next update. LW 9.6 is the best version of LW ever, glad to hear that fixes are coming. Oh and can't wait to see whats in store for CORE!

Nicolas Jordan
05-01-2009, 09:12 PM
Looking forward to the update for 9.6! I'm hoping Fiber FX is getting some polish and some fixes. :thumbsup:

zapper1998
05-01-2009, 09:57 PM
It's coming soon.

cool...

you said tommorrow????

na just kidding:thumbsup:

Kuzey
05-02-2009, 06:02 AM
I thought it was going to be just bug fixes and no new features, but knowing Newtek, I wouldn't be surprised if they sneaked in one or two :D

Kuzey

sampei
05-02-2009, 07:02 AM
It's coming soon.
:bowdown:

Mrjack
05-02-2009, 07:14 AM
guys believ me im using lightwave for 10 years i have always problems,
and now im using XSI for 2 month, in production.
the only word i can say, is i lost 10 years of my life.

IMI
05-02-2009, 07:17 AM
Well "coming soon" is good enough for me. I'm patient. Thanks for updating us on that, I was starting to get worried FFX was being forgotten about. :)

jay3d
05-02-2009, 07:54 AM
guys believ me im using lightwave for 10 years i have always problems,
and now im using XSI for 2 month, in production.
the only word i can say, is i lost 10 years of my life.

Why not say u learned and gained knowledge in 3D in 10 years, and say thanks to LW instead of that, seems more polite in my book.

And again YOU are the artist and NOT the tool. be it XSI, LW, Blender, ...

grow up!

sampei
05-02-2009, 08:05 AM
And again YOU are the artist and NOT the tool. be it XSI, LW, Blender, ...


totally agree and there's loads of successfull LightWave users who produce amazing work with ease, and are successfull in this very competitive industry.
:lightwave

Mrjack
05-02-2009, 08:22 AM
Why not say u learned and gained knowledge in 3D in 10 years, and say thanks to LW instead of that, seems more polite in my book.

And again YOU are the artist and NOT the tool. be it XSI, LW, Blender, ...

grow up!


10 years of experience was enough for me to know which software will help me in this compititive industry, yes! lightwave is a good soft but in production things are bit different, you need to be more productive than artist. please say those kind words to pooby and werner who were an excelent lightwave artist, leaved lw to xsi.

it's only my opinion, and please don't take it as an offense, i only found a better TOOL. :)

toby
05-02-2009, 10:22 AM
Nothing wrong with leaving one soft for one you like better ( I'd rather that than a lot of the bickering that we hear ), and you don't deserve to be belittled for it.

The problem I'd have with XSI is mental ray's motion blur. How do you deal with that MrJack?

Mrjack
05-02-2009, 10:41 AM
yes the motion blur in MR is a big probléme, but i usualy use "ReelSmart motion blur vector plug" its an exelent alternative, just add motion passe and real smart extract information and do the job for u ;)

Thomas M.
05-02-2009, 10:44 AM
totally agree and there's loads of successfull LightWave users who produce amazing work WITH EASE, and are successfull in this very competitive industry.
:lightwave

Ha, ha, ha .... With ease?! Ha, ha, ha .... Best joke ever ....

toby
05-02-2009, 11:21 AM
yes the motion blur in MR is a big probléme, but i usualy use "ReelSmart motion blur vector plug" its an exelent alternative, just add motion passe and real smart extract information and do the job for u ;)
Ugh, 2d motion blur... :P
Well I guess if it works for you :)
Don't worry, I'm not trying to say one app is better than another because of a single issue.
Actually, if they fixed the motion blur, I'd champion MR myself :)

sampei
05-02-2009, 11:54 AM
Ha, ha, ha .... With ease?! Ha, ha, ha .... Best joke ever ....
damn you're polite :lol:
well I shouldnt even answer, but 2 examples are the teams at SDM and Pixel Magic who worked on 300 and William Vaughn who amongst his many successes has worked in Pixar's latest short film.

adamredwoods
05-02-2009, 11:56 AM
It's good to see Lightwave Classic still getting some love...

Thomas M.
05-02-2009, 11:55 PM
What I forgot to mention:

Kink works in the WRONG WAY. Currently the settings apply a total number of hard edges to each hair. This way the long hair doesn't have any visible amplitude, while the short ones look like a compressed accordeon. This needs to become a frequency (amplitudes per distance).

Layout guides should get at least one point in the middle for combing. A small check box which enables the tip point or/and the center point would be great. Other wise it's really, really hard to comb the guides so that they are bend.

Cheers
Thomas

P.S.: I wouldn't mind if somebody from NT gets in contact with me directly to discuss these matters so I could give them my impressions in a more detailed way.

Captain Obvious
05-03-2009, 05:36 AM
So, where should I email my dozens of crash logs so they can get fixed for 9.6.1?

Silkrooster
05-03-2009, 07:48 PM
So, where should I email my dozens of crash logs so they can get fixed for 9.6.1?

Aren't you clicking the send button? for awhile I was just clicking ok button until I realized there was a send button. The OK button should say cancel.

G-Man
05-03-2009, 10:54 PM
In order to get bug fixes and new updates to 9.6 I believe we have to be members of the Hardcore program isn't that correct?

geothefaust
05-03-2009, 11:46 PM
In order to get bug fixes and new updates to 9.6 I believe we have to be members of the Hardcore program isn't that correct?


No.

geothefaust
05-03-2009, 11:46 PM
So, where should I email my dozens of crash logs so they can get fixed for 9.6.1?

Submit your bugs in fogbugz.

Link is in my sig.

JBT27
05-04-2009, 02:18 AM
It's coming soon.

..... I think that's all we need to know for now :)

I'm easily pleased, clearly ..... :D

Julian.

JBT27
05-04-2009, 02:21 AM
In order to get bug fixes and new updates to 9.6 I believe we have to be members of the Hardcore program isn't that correct?

Although notorious for getting the wrong end of the stick, I do have a memory that kind of says this ..... but no, I don't think that CAN be correct, can it?

NT being considerably more generous and ethical than others we could mention, that hardly seems likely.

Julian.

Phil
05-04-2009, 06:10 AM
You will get the fixes even if you are not part of HC. The difference is that you may not get a chance to participate in the testing - you'll simply get the release (when it surfaces). Basically, back to the old way of doing things (before 9.0 OB started) - you simply get a bundle of fixes at some random point in the future, with no influence other than filing bug reports and praying that NT will get to your report.

Kuzey
05-04-2009, 06:15 AM
Although notorious for getting the wrong end of the stick, I do have a memory that kind of says this ..... but no, I don't think that CAN be correct, can it?

Julian.

I think they tried to use it to get more Mac users into the Core...and that the original idea was for it to be a paid upgrade, since that isn't the case anymore it has left 9.6 in limbo as far as access to non Core members.

That it the next question we need answered..I have this fear all existing bugs will be rubber stamped fixed because the original bug reporters aren't in the Core to test them out.

Having said that, I'm kinda at a crossroads when it comes to having access to the 9.6.1 beta or not. One part of me wants to beta test but the other side is still run down from the last beta process :hey:

Kuzey

Lewis
05-04-2009, 06:19 AM
So, where should I email my dozens of crash logs so they can get fixed for 9.6.1?

Send BUG reports to FogBugz system, same as it was with 9.x OB series.

JeffrySG
05-04-2009, 09:03 AM
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73226
This thread has all the info you need to submit bugs/features, etc.

Captain Obvious
05-04-2009, 09:32 AM
Aren't you clicking the send button? for awhile I was just clicking ok button until I realized there was a send button. The OK button should say cancel.
I have no internet connection on my workstation.


I'll FogBug or whatever all my crash logs tomorrow, then. There's a lot of stuff there, primarily related to node tree crashes. When the node tree undo stack gets too big, LW crashes... I've got maybe 20-30 crash logs from it happening. Should be a doozie to fix.

IMI
05-04-2009, 12:51 PM
I have no internet connection on my workstation.


I'll FogBug or whatever all my crash logs tomorrow, then. There's a lot of stuff there, primarily related to node tree crashes. When the node tree undo stack gets too big, LW crashes... I've got maybe 20-30 crash logs from it happening. Should be a doozie to fix.

What's that, a memory buffer limit or something? I haven't ever seen that but it sounds like you're using the undo a whole lot more than I do.

Captain Obvious
05-04-2009, 01:04 PM
No, the undo stack grows regardless. We're just using more nodes than you are — most surfaces have over 200, some over 300. We have to use Pom's get/store material combo to get the objects to save at all to work around the subchunk size limit (nodes in the LWO are stored as a subchunk in the surface chunk — subchunks are limited to 64 kilobytes).

The workaround is to click "purge" every now and then.

IMI
05-04-2009, 01:16 PM
No, the undo stack grows regardless. We're just using more nodes than you are — most surfaces have over 200, some over 300. We have to use Pom's get/store material combo to get the objects to save at all to work around the subchunk size limit (nodes in the LWO are stored as a subchunk in the surface chunk — subchunks are limited to 64 kilobytes).

The workaround is to click "purge" every now and then.


Oh right, I should have seen that. Of course the stack groes, else there'd be nothing to undo. :o

Yeah, I don't think I've ever exceeded maybe 50 nodes at the most. Thanks for the info, btw. :)

Thomas M.
05-04-2009, 01:17 PM
No, the undo stack grows regardless. We're just using more nodes than you are — most surfaces have over 200, some over 300. We have to use Pom's get/store material combo to get the objects to save at all to work around the subchunk size limit (nodes in the LWO are stored as a subchunk in the surface chunk — subchunks are limited to 64 kilobytes).

The workaround is to click "purge" every now and then.

Glad to hear that I'm not the only one. I suffer from the beginning of nodes from this bug. I already reported it years ago to NT, but without any interest from them. Workflow today: Change 5-10 nodes, press reset undos, change a few nodes, reset undos, ... That's lame.

Even more horrible are the node connection issues I suffered from. Big node tress, 150 nodes and more, lost all connections on reopening the scene. You saved everything correctly, than you would suffer from a funny crash, open your scene again, open the surface node and funnily all the connections were gone. Hundred of unconnected nodes. No way to get the connections back. Saving out the node tree as a .srf file didn't help. NT, NT ...

If god or some other higher creatures would have taken my curses then more seriously, there probably wouldn't be one living NT staff member left. This issues where/are embarrassing.

Captain Obvious
05-05-2009, 07:53 AM
https://secure.newtek.com/FogBugz/default.asp?pg=pgPublicView&sTicket=22778_cmjg

There we go!

Captain Obvious
05-06-2009, 05:28 AM
https://secure.newtek.com/FogBugz/default.asp?22799_iuna

https://secure.newtek.com/FogBugz/default.asp?19704_tg5kb7ml

https://secure.newtek.com/FogBugz/default.asp?20143_l5fqou2j

Chuck
05-07-2009, 05:21 PM
I think they tried to use it to get more Mac users into the Core...and that the original idea was for it to be a paid upgrade, since that isn't the case anymore it has left 9.6 in limbo as far as access to non Core members.

Tried to use what? A v9.6.1 update? That would not be correct. At the same time we announced LightWave CORE and the HardCORE membership program, we also specifically stated that there would be at least one and potentially more bug-fix updates for v9.6 that would be available to all v9 owners.


That it the next question we need answered..I have this fear all existing bugs will be rubber stamped fixed because the original bug reporters aren't in the Core to test them out.

No reported bug is ever marked fixed unless it actually is fixed. When practical, we do have the reporting party confirm the fix, but the fact is that anyone who can duplicate the bug can confirm the fix, meaning we can confirm within staff, within the closed beta group, and within the HardCORE group, before ever getting to the point of listing a bug as fixed for the general public.

Silkrooster
05-07-2009, 05:42 PM
I have no internet connection on my workstation.


I'll FogBug or whatever all my crash logs tomorrow, then. There's a lot of stuff there, primarily related to node tree crashes. When the node tree undo stack gets too big, LW crashes... I've got maybe 20-30 crash logs from it happening. Should be a doozie to fix.

Sorry about that. I have a nasty habit of assuming things.

Chuck
05-07-2009, 05:42 PM
Glad to hear that I'm not the only one. I suffer from the beginning of nodes from this bug. I already reported it years ago to NT, but without any interest from them. Workflow today: Change 5-10 nodes, press reset undos, change a few nodes, reset undos, ... That's lame.

Even more horrible are the node connection issues I suffered from. Big node tress, 150 nodes and more, lost all connections on reopening the scene. You saved everything correctly, than you would suffer from a funny crash, open your scene again, open the surface node and funnily all the connections were gone. Hundred of unconnected nodes. No way to get the connections back. Saving out the node tree as a .srf file didn't help. NT, NT ...

If god or some other higher creatures would have taken my curses then more seriously, there probably wouldn't be one living NT staff member left. This issues where/are embarrassing.

A lot of the thousands of bugs, many of them long-standing legacies from before any of us came aboard, that this team has fixed over the years were no doubt very frustrating for end users. We would hope the relief from those we've fixed is what's held the curses leveled over other bugs at bay from our benighted, lame, sorry-little-excuses for heads. :)

I find just one bug report from you in the database. From the description I seem to recall that we'd worked on similar problems where saved nodes were losing connections and we'd gotten them resolved, with confirmations from users, but apparently those fixes did not cover your case. I've nudged the assigned programmer to follow up on your report for the next update.

If you will get any other issues that you have with the node editor (or anything else for that matter) reported via fogbugz, we'll do our best to address all that we reasonably can. Any detail you can provide will certainly be appreciated, and please do provide content and steps to duplicate any bugs reported.

3dworks
05-08-2009, 02:06 AM
please can you fix FBX import for 9.6.x?

fogbugz 15679: relevant commercial assets from axyz (FBX rigged animated people) cannot be used in LW 9.6, because FBX import fails completely.

those FBX rigged assets are important for architectural animations. afaik, it's the only simple way to use sets of rigged low polygon people assets in LW - apart the 2 older MDD driven assets from the same company (see 'plug and play'), but those are limited to the motion loops which are delivered with them.

cheers

markus

cresshead
05-08-2009, 02:11 AM
also hope to see a fix for psd files being used for displacements from zbrush as currently they explode the polygons [tif are okay btw]

Kuzey
05-08-2009, 05:23 AM
Tried to use what? A v9.6.1 update? That would not be correct. At the same time we announced LightWave CORE and the HardCORE membership program, we also specifically stated that there would be at least one and potentially more bug-fix updates for v9.6 that would be available to all v9 owners.

That's true, but the announcement also said the Core Members will be the first to get their hands on the Cocoa version and without any clarification or explanation, it seemed a way to pull in Mac users to the Core. Yes...they get to use the Cocoa version first, but how long would it take for it to trickle down to non Core members...a month...3 months...a year...during the beta..after the beta etc. This wasn't made clear and so it looked like a gimmick...that's all :D



No reported bug is ever marked fixed unless it actually is fixed. When practical, we do have the reporting party confirm the fix, but the fact is that anyone who can duplicate the bug can confirm the fix, meaning we can confirm within staff, within the closed beta group, and within the HardCORE group, before ever getting to the point of listing a bug as fixed for the general public.


Well, I have a different experiences on that matter. One that was reported fixed twice but wasn't until a sample scene was supplied...which is fine. The other was about the command key shortcuts and in such a case there can't be content supplied, yet it took 3 efforts to fix because a) it wasn't reproducible on the your Macs or b) it seemed to be working fine.

It's the confirmation bit I'm worried about, no confirmation equals no bugs as far as I can see. Especially, when you don't have the same or similar Mac model to the one the bugs are reported on.

I don't have a problem with the going back and forth until the bugs are fixed...that's all part of a normal process and I'm happy with it. We still don't know if we will get access to the Cocoa beta process to make sure bugs are fixed or wait until it goes gold to check.

Kuzey

jburford
05-08-2009, 05:47 AM
Personal attacks removed - user sent to the sad corner for 7 days.

Kuzey
05-08-2009, 05:51 AM
Personal attacks removed - user sent to the sad corner for 7 days.

IMI
05-08-2009, 07:26 AM
perhaps i wait first at my plate for days while my diaper fills. . . ..

I wouldn't recommend that, but if you feel it's necessary, go for it.

************************************************** ************

I would like to second Kuzey's reply. :D

adamredwoods
05-08-2009, 10:55 AM
Please do not feed the trolls.

Tranimatronic
05-08-2009, 12:16 PM
the announcement also said the Core Members will be the first to get their hands on the Cocoa version Yes...they get to use the Cocoa version first, but how long would it take for it to trickle down to non Core members...a month...3 months...a year...
Kuzey

Core members will be the first to get their hands on a Cocoa version of Core. Non core members will not get a cocoa version of core because they havent paid for it. Current version of Lightwave was not written in Cocoa therefore doesnt exist. You want a Cocoa version you buy Core.

Or am I totally missing the point ??

toby
05-08-2009, 01:03 PM
Core members will be the first to get their hands on a Cocoa version of Core. Non core members will not get a cocoa version of core because they havent paid for it. Current version of Lightwave was not written in Cocoa therefore doesnt exist. You want a Cocoa version you buy Core.

Or am I totally missing the point ??
Where he says 'cocoa' he means 9.6 cocoa.
There'll be only one version of core anyway -

jayroth
05-08-2009, 01:07 PM
Well, I have a different experiences on that matter. One that was reported fixed twice but wasn't until a sample scene was supplied...which is fine.

Kuzey

Yes, and I hope you understand why that is. Without content that explicity illustrates the issue, the report is up to interpretation. Many times, bugs can exhibit themselves in a variety of ways. The engineer fixes the case that they encounter following the report, but that may not yield all cases of the actual bug. Content really helps to rectify this.

In some cases, bugs can be hard to kill even with content. This occurs when the system config is so unique, or the user neglects to say that a third party app or plug in was involved (likely because the reporter did not understand the impact that such had on the actual bug.)

Note that each time you resubmitted the bug, headway was made, but not actually resolved until you submitted the actual content...

Tranimatronic
05-08-2009, 02:18 PM
Where he says 'cocoa' he means 9.6 cocoa.
There'll be only one version of core anyway -

www.newtek.com/core
"LightWave CORE™ is multi-platform. LightWave CORE™ operates under all modern Windows flavors, from XP to 7, from 32 to 64. LightWave CORE™ is also a Macintosh COCOA application, and last, but certainly not least, Linux."


If you have a look there are currently FOUR versions of Core.

Macintosh COCOA applications do not run under windows. It will have to be its own version. Windows 32 and 64 bit applications will be different versions. To get a Cocoa version of lightwave9.6 you would have to totally re-write lightwave from the ground up. Sound familiar ?

toby
05-08-2009, 02:35 PM
www.newtek.com/core
"LightWave CORE™ is multi-platform. LightWave CORE™ operates under all modern Windows flavors, from XP to 7, from 32 to 64. LightWave CORE™ is also a Macintosh COCOA application, and last, but certainly not least, Linux."

Macintosh COCOA applications do not run under windows. It will have to be its own version. Windows 32 and 64 bit applications will be different versions. To get a Cocoa version of lightwave9.6 you would have to totally re-write lightwave from the ground up. Sound familiar ?
Wow, relax, I meant there'll be only one version of Mac core, and that's the cocoa version. Kuzey was talking about 9.6 cocoa.

http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98479

Tranimatronic
05-08-2009, 02:48 PM
okay i get what you meant now..... sorry !! :D

JonW
05-09-2009, 11:34 PM
I have found 9.6 Modeler crashes a lot more than 9.5, using XP64 on E5450 V8, But only my Mac is connected to the internet.

Captain Obvious
05-10-2009, 12:43 PM
Dear NewTek,
Please stop calling it "COCOA." It's not an acronym.

kthnx

Tranimatronic
05-10-2009, 10:14 PM
Dear NewTek,
Please stop calling it "COCOA." It's not an acronym.

kthnx

maybe theyre SHOUTING ? :hey:

Silkrooster
05-10-2009, 10:42 PM
Dear NewTek,
Please stop calling it "COCOA." It's not an acronym.

kthnx

Am I misunderstanding you?

http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/CocoaFundamentals/WhatIsCocoa/WhatIsCocoa.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002974-CH3-SW16

Tranimatronic
05-11-2009, 08:38 AM
Cocoa not COCOA

Tranimatronic
05-11-2009, 09:29 AM
I have found 9.6 Modeler crashes a lot more than 9.5, using XP64 on E5450 V8, But only my Mac is connected to the internet.

Just curious - when you say crashes alot - how often is alot ? Hourly ? Daily ? weekly ??
For me LW 9.6 is the most stable yet..... I AM using win32 though

JonW
05-11-2009, 10:33 AM
9.5 basically never crashed. 9.6 about 2 to 6 times a day. I have become very good at saving! Layout never crashes.

Also, all my files are very carefully named & in the correct locations for Screamernet.

Chuck
05-11-2009, 02:08 PM
Dear NewTek,
Please stop calling it "COCOA." It's not an acronym.

kthnx

I brought this to the attention of Marketing and they have corrected the case usage.

Matt
05-11-2009, 02:16 PM
I brought this to the attention of Marketing and they have corrected the case usage.

While you're at it Chuck, can you get someone to correct this:

http://www.newtek.com/news/pressrelease.php?viewpr=96

"... said Matt Gorner, denior industrial designer, Creactive Design, UK"

?!?!? ;)

Chuck
05-11-2009, 03:53 PM
While you're at it Chuck, can you get someone to correct this:

http://www.newtek.com/news/pressrelease.php?viewpr=96

"... said Matt Gorner, denior industrial designer, Creactive Design, UK"

?!?!? ;)

Some reason you don't ping Ben upside the head to get that corrected? :)

Chuck
05-11-2009, 04:08 PM
Matt, fixed. :)

jasonwestmas
05-11-2009, 04:20 PM
While you're at it Chuck, can you get someone to correct this:

http://www.newtek.com/news/pressrelease.php?viewpr=96

"... said Matt Gorner, denior industrial designer, Creactive Design, UK"

?!?!? ;)

denior creactive person, hey that's me.:help:

Matt
05-11-2009, 04:56 PM
Some reason you don't ping Ben upside the head to get that corrected? :)

???

Didn't know who to ping, but seeing your reply to the other post reminded me.

Captain Obvious
05-11-2009, 05:07 PM
I brought this to the attention of Marketing and they have corrected the case usage.
Hey, that was quick! :thumbsup:

GraphXs
06-01-2009, 09:33 PM
Any update on "how soon" the next version of 9.X?:D

Julez4001
06-08-2009, 07:19 PM
IS it gonna be a siggraph release... thats August.

Thomas M.
06-22-2009, 01:45 PM
So, where are the 64bit and 32bit bugfixes? How much longer?

jwiede
06-22-2009, 03:19 PM
So, where are the 64bit and 32bit bugfixes? How much longer?
NewTek's estimate as of May 12th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of May 19th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of May 27th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of June 2nd: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of June 9th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of June 16th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.

I'm guessing the answer to your question is that they believe they're currently about four to eight weeks from beta.

Draw your own conclusions.

Julez4001
06-22-2009, 10:18 PM
siggraph is first week of august

there u go!
4 to 6 weeks

DrStrik9
06-22-2009, 11:32 PM
I know they're furiously working on it; I got multiple emails today asking for content to prove their bug fixes are good ...

So I'm confident it's coming ... :-)

serge
06-23-2009, 09:16 AM
So, where are the 64bit and 32bit bugfixes? How much longer?
Here: link (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=879220&postcount=2)

jasonwestmas
06-23-2009, 11:06 AM
Here: link (http://www.newtek.com/forums/showpost.php?p=879220&postcount=2)

Lol.:thumbsup:

littlewaves
06-23-2009, 11:25 AM
NewTek's estimate as of May 12th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of May 19th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of May 27th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of June 2nd: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of June 9th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.
NewTek's estimate as of June 16th: Four to eight weeks out from beta.

I'm guessing the answer to your question is that they believe they're currently about four to eight weeks from beta.

Draw your own conclusions.

oh well, at least they're consistent in one sense.

I guess tomorrow never comes

Chuck
06-23-2009, 11:43 AM
oh well, at least they're consistent in one sense.

I guess tomorrow never comes

Sometimes development hits stages where the estimate doesn't shrink for a while. We've been in one of those. Each of those estimates was actually accompanied by a post with a reasonable amount of information on the team's activities and specifically what was taking longer than expected, what was added into the mix as a task, and what made a given week unlikely to allow for coding progress, such as last week when the team met in San Antonio for the week and spent the majority of time on further work on the designs and implementations for LightWave CORE.

TeZzy
07-10-2009, 03:07 AM
FFX fixes are definitely a wanted welcome.....you get a surprise(and not the good type) every once in a while when rendering.

speismonqui
07-10-2009, 03:27 PM
...such as last week when the team met in San Antonio for the week and spent the majority of time on further work on the designs and implementations for LightWave CORE.

It would be great to have at least some pics from this meetings on the core website, Im not asking for NEW Core Videos or screenshots or a new features list (or maybe i am) but, everyday i check the core website and i would be very happy if one day (soon) itīll get updated with at least a couple of pics of the development team or wathever... Itīll make my day

Stooch
07-10-2009, 09:55 PM
yes the motion blur in MR is a big probléme, but i usualy use "ReelSmart motion blur vector plug" its an exelent alternative, just add motion passe and real smart extract information and do the job for u ;)

actually mental rays motion blur is quite nice.

if you dont want super high accuracy and see every single speck, just use the rasterizer renderer. WIth a little tweaking you can get very impressive speeds and most of the time the quality is more than adequate. just crank up the visibility shading and rate, very competitive with lw if not faster. the optional 2D blur also offers a very fast solution and is adequate very often for me.

Stooch
07-10-2009, 09:57 PM
Ugh, 2d motion blur... :P
Well I guess if it works for you :)
Don't worry, I'm not trying to say one app is better than another because of a single issue.
Actually, if they fixed the motion blur, I'd champion MR myself :)

lol start championing it then. its working great for me.

TeZzy
07-11-2009, 07:02 AM
oh and I want to add to my previous post...hopefully the FFX problem with transparency is fixed in the next update and coming really soon

toby
07-11-2009, 12:59 PM
lol start championing it then. its working great for me.
If you spin anything fast enough, like the wheels on a car, they shrink; if they're also going by camera fast enough, they don't blur along a straight path, it's influenced by the spin, because MR doesn't track the arc of motion of geometry in sub-frames. Trying to use motion vectors and post-blur for car wheels doesn't work either, that only blurs in a straight line; the wheels are spinning fast enough that the blur spreads them outside the wheelwell.

Raytraced reflections rendered with the rasterizer will motion blur at the speed of the object they're on, instead of the object that it's reflecting; your reflection in a passing bus will be blurred as much as the bus, even though you and the camera are standing still.

It probably is faster than lw, but it's not as accurate. But full 3d motion blur is pretty slow when you have to render thousands of 2k frames, which is why MR offers the 2 1/2d motion blur, just like renderman. MR still needs to track those sub-frame arcs though, then I'll champion it. It's the one thing that makes it less preferable to work with than renderman.

Stooch
07-11-2009, 03:13 PM
try increasing the motion samples. it steps only with a single motion sample by default, since there is only one sample it can only have one vector...

rasterizer render engine used with full 3d motion blur is very fast though. it achieves the speed through smarter sampling that omits tiny details, but with motion blur shots you dont really need tiny details anyway. Im rendering at 2k resolution and the render times are very reasonable.

toby
07-11-2009, 03:53 PM
Oh I've been through all the settings, the max 15 steps doesn't do it, only tracking the arcs on a subframe basis will fix this. But the last v. I used was 3.6 beta, full 3d motion blur wasn't available with the rasterizer either, maybe they've added it recently.

If you can get these to render correctly it would be great to know how.

allabulle
07-14-2009, 02:14 PM
it's only my opinion, and please don't take it as an offense, i only found a better TOOL. :)

And you need everyone to know your "new" found tool. OK. Thanks.

Seriously, I don't get it.

TeZzy
07-14-2009, 09:17 PM
well, considering how some features that are suppose to work are poorly implemented. Again, FFX is horrible....first there was all these limitations I discover(and once you started with it in production it's hard to go back especially if you have had partial sign off....found out it was buggy as hell after unfortunately) and now I found out even bias vmaps don't save....OMG

jaxtone
07-23-2009, 10:25 AM
Markus!

I put LW to rest for a while now since it felt like a total rip-off when upgrading it to version 9.x. I am sad to hear that stuff I asked for in the past still isnīt possible to manage in LW. And even more sad is to hear that no one at LW even take this critisism seriously.

I donīt give a damn about CORE until itīs released and proved to work 100% without any bugs or anything else that delay my deadlines. The annoying fact is that whatever people wenīt so happy about when CORE were announced we who work with LW in productions only have 9.6 to use by now. Thatīs why I feel frustrated when the support team doesnīt even get rid of those bugs that make life complicated for their users.


please can you fix FBX import for 9.6.x?

fogbugz 15679: relevant commercial assets from axyz (FBX rigged animated people) cannot be used in LW 9.6, because FBX import fails completely.

those FBX rigged assets are important for architectural animations. afaik, it's the only simple way to use sets of rigged low polygon people assets in LW - apart the 2 older MDD driven assets from the same company (see 'plug and play'), but those are limited to the motion loops which are delivered with them.

cheers

markus

3dworks
07-23-2009, 11:25 AM
...and, indeed, after so many months this fundamental bug is still open! maybe this could be a good reminder for NT to fix this with 9.6.1, finally.

does anyone still wonder why we don't see many complex archviz animations with moving characters rendered in LW?

cheers

markus



Markus!

I put LW to rest for a while now since it felt like a total rip-off when upgrading it to version 9.x. I am sad to hear that stuff I asked for in the past still isnīt possible to manage in LW. And even more sad is to hear that no one at LW even take this critisism seriously.

I donīt give a damn about CORE until itīs released and proved to work 100% without any bugs or anything else that delay my deadlines. The annoying fact is that whatever people wenīt so happy about when CORE were announced we who work with LW in productions only have 9.6 to use by now. Thatīs why I feel frustrated when the support team doesnīt even get rid of those bugs that make life complicated for their users.

-EsHrA-
07-23-2009, 12:00 PM
"does anyone still wonder why we don't see many complex archviz animations with moving characters rendered in LW?"

because jimmyrig is only just out?!..


:)

mlon

jaxtone
07-23-2009, 05:28 PM
Well... itīs not hard to guess why. Lightwave have by tradition made it very complicated to use itīs interface on the depth for users that donīt like to educate themselfe into highly qualified programmers.

For common users, artists or creative minds that just wanīt to get things done the easy way Lightwave has never been an option, at least not when it comes to rigging and animating characters.

I know that of course are super-users that will say the opposite becuase they have managed to find out how to work around Lightwaves backward system to get things done. But these are rather exceptions than standard users. Otherwise I guess we had seen much more Character Animation made by Lightwave users during the years.

Jimmyrig is a step in the right direction, and RebelHills tutorials another positive move. But Lightwaves tech- or support teams intentions have at least not earlier been interested to listen to critics about the weak system when it comes itīs poor Character interface.


...and, indeed, after so many months this fundamental bug is still open! maybe this could be a good reminder for NT to fix this with 9.6.1, finally.

does anyone still wonder why we don't see many complex archviz animations with moving characters rendered in LW?

cheers

markus

toby
07-24-2009, 03:28 AM
Well... itīs not hard to guess why. Lightwave have by tradition made it very complicated to use itīs interface on the depth for users that donīt like to educate themselfe into highly qualified programmers.Lightwave... complicated?? First time I've heard that from a non-noob. It's actually just the opposite, it's dumbed-down, so that one person can do everything from beginning to end, and they can do it fast.


For common users, artists or creative minds that just wanīt to get things done the easy way Lightwave has never been an option, at least not when it comes to rigging and animating characters.
And rigging in Maya is easy?? Seriously, what are you comparing LW to? I can make a basic human rig very easily in LW, and I'm not a rigger at all. It won't be a great rig, but I don't rig for movies anyway.


I know that of course are super-users that will say the opposite becuase they have managed to find out how to work around Lightwaves backward system to get things done. But these are rather exceptions than standard users. Otherwise I guess we had seen much more Character Animation made by Lightwave users during the years.
"Super-users" will also use different software when LW doesn't fit the bill. You shouldn't be so reluctant to do the same.


Jimmyrig is a step in the right direction, and RebelHills tutorials another positive move. But Lightwaves tech- or support teams intentions have at least not earlier been interested to listen to critics about the weak system when it comes itīs poor Character interface.
NT does listen. But they don't have as many people or resources as Autodesk, so they can only do so much. But you know what? People still complain about Autodesk products.

I gotta know - what software is it that's so simple any non-technical person can use the most cutting-edge features easily, from modeling to effects, dynamics, rendering and CA, and with no bugs at all, for 800 bucks?? I'll go out and buy it right now.

I'm not even defending LW - I've been b|itching about it a lot lately, but your expectations are beyond any 3d app being made today.

3dworks
07-24-2009, 04:34 AM
i'm doing quite complex viz work with LW and i know why i'm sticking it - probably for the same reasons why a lot of other professional users are doing so! ;)

on the other side, there are so many small workflow stoppers in LW because of only partially implemented and never fixed features. i'm simply expecting from a 'pro' software that all implemented features work in a 100% reliable way. if not, then i expect an exact description of the limits in the manual, so i can plan alternative workflows without wasting time by testing rubbish.

so, there's a much advertised new FBX import feature in version 9.x? i expect it to load everything as it should do. not just *some* assets and others not. i've tested those FBX assets not loading correctly in LW by importing them into ...C4D. guess what? C4D imported them ALL and correctly rigged. that's the way professional software should work! btw. i've even added a screenshot of that C4D import in my fogbugz report, som e months ago.

what i'm expecting from 9.6.1, being probably the last incarnation of LW (which we will have to use for some time now, until core will be a viable solution) is that at least those import/export plugins are working perfectly, because if some features in LW are still missing/incomplete, we can move data in and out to other programs to complete the work over there. i know, i'm repeating the obvious over and over again, but this is essential to all production workflow.

cheers

markus

Phil
07-24-2009, 05:30 AM
Lightwave... complicated?? First time I've heard that from a non-noob. It's actually just the opposite, it's dumbed-down, so that one person can do everything from beginning to end, and they can do it fast.

That depends on what you want to do. Adjusting deformation issues on rigs in LW is a complete pain. Working around issues in the LScript based expression system is tedious (why does it hate object names that begin with numbers, or that have spaces in them?) and yet necessary because NT never opened Relativity to LScript (making Relativity inaccessible to Maestro or Vehicle Rigger).

Trying to get access to post-IK data from Relativity's channel modifier is a battle.

You cannot get volumetrics out as a separate buffer from LW.

You cannot have inter-scene references - everything has to be imported into your current scene, and you need to remember to re-import everything in case a tweak has been made (if you are collaborating).

You cannot access a huge range of settings from the spreadsheet/scene editor system, making batch editing a chore. You cannot copy/paste settings between panels, either, so if you need to adjust settings that are not exposed by an envelope, and are not in the editor, you can suck it up and do it manually, hundreds or thousands of times. Pray you don't miss one.


And rigging in Maya is easy?? Seriously, what are you comparing LW to? I can make a basic human rig very easily in LW, and I'm not a rigger at all. It won't be a great rig, but I don't rig for movies anyway.

Hmmm. I use The Setup Machine in Maya and Maestro in LW, so rigging is as easy as those tools make it. The Setup Machine is faster to set up, for me, because it involves moving, rotating and scaling fit geometry. Then you select and define your character and you're good to go, bar some vertex exclusion tweaking.

Maestro is more versatile in what it can control, but it involves mucking around with skelegons and you need to manually create any weightmaps that are involved (as opposed to positioning containers around vertices that should be weighted automatically by the autorigger). Maestro also relies on LW's LScript-based expression system because NT didn't make Relativity LScript-accessible.
You also have to trudge back and forth between Modeler and Layout to tweak weightmaps, etc. and have no ability to tweak vertices in Layout to cope with deformation issues, unless you create morph maps in Modeler and then, in Layout, apply these manually or use Relativity to automate them with joint angles. There's no way of linking morphs to skelegon angles in Modeler, which would have been interesting workflow.
It's also impossible natively to take bone adjustments in Layout and apply the changes back to the skelegons in the original object. You'll have to note what you changed, go back to Modeler and adjust the skelegons in the mesh to match. Ugh.

Whilst I appreciate NewTek's difficulties, these kind of fundamental things should have been caught in the implementation stage way back with LW6. I hope the new process with Core will avoid the same mistakes being made.


"Super-users" will also use different software when LW doesn't fit the bill. You shouldn't be so reluctant to do the same.

If the Valkyrie module worked as advertised, that would indeed be easy. Right now, though, LW is still not suited to a multiple app environment - it still doesn't import or export what it should do, and what it does export seems to be busted in all cases that I have experienced. NewTek will have to fix this if they intend to market Core to work alongside LW in the future (until Core is ready to replace LW).
It may be that 9.6.1 will bring the required fixes, but that makes 9.6.1 even more of a priority for those 'super-users' you mention.

toby
07-24-2009, 03:13 PM
That depends on what you want to do. Adjusting deformation issues on rigs in LW is a complete pain. Working around issues in the LScript based expression system is tedious (why does it hate object names that begin with numbers, or that have spaces in them?) and yet necessary because NT never opened Relativity to LScript (making Relativity inaccessible to Maestro or Vehicle Rigger).

Trying to get access to post-IK data from Relativity's channel modifier is a battle.

You cannot get volumetrics out as a separate buffer from LW.

You cannot have inter-scene references - everything has to be imported into your current scene, and you need to remember to re-import everything in case a tweak has been made (if you are collaborating).

You cannot access a huge range of settings from the spreadsheet/scene editor system, making batch editing a chore. You cannot copy/paste settings between panels, either, so if you need to adjust settings that are not exposed by an envelope, and are not in the editor, you can suck it up and do it manually, hundreds or thousands of times. Pray you don't miss one.
Absolutely. These are results of dumbing down. Programmers are routinely frustrated by LW's sdk. And I've seen NT come under pressure to make things easier/faster/easier/faster still. You simply can't have it both ways, for 800 bucks.

clagman
07-24-2009, 03:26 PM
I definitely am willing to shell out the extra $$ to avoid using AD products at any cost.

Scazzino
07-24-2009, 03:29 PM
I don't think LightWave's been "dumbed-down". It's just been pushed, added to and had so many features bolted-onto an underlying foundation that was programmed well before such features were even dreamed of, never mind implemented. The endless nip-tuck of piling new features on top of a rickety old foundation that was never designed to handle such features could only go on for so long... that's why they are starting with a new foundation in CORE...

:)

BTW: CORE will also ship with LightWave HC. So we won't be losing what LightWave can already do, we'll just be getting a brand new CORE to go with it that will eventually replace everything LW can do and more. :beerchug:

toby
07-24-2009, 06:05 PM
I don't think LightWave's been "dumbed-down". It's just been pushed, added to and had so many features bolted-onto an underlying foundation that was programmed well before such features were even dreamed of, never mind implemented. The endless nip-tuck of piling new features on top of a rickety old foundation that was never designed to handle such features could only go on for so long... that's why they are starting with a new foundation in CORE...

That's partially true, it wasn't designed with openness in mind, but there's more recent things like the Null creator, and cached radiosity that won't let you turn off the creation of new fg points, etc.

jaxtone
07-26-2009, 08:24 PM
Maybe this whole situation wouldnīt had been so infected if NT had been totally true about the product for their users. For me as a long term user it would have felt more honest if the catastrophically weak foundation in my long time loved software had been brought into broad daylight.

It was only about 6 months ago this truth was revealed to me, at this great forum. My earlier suspicious thoughts where confirmed with a very brutal reality. (This sounds like a scripts for a very dramatic thriller or horror movie. Sorry, I blame this on the fact that itīs only four o' clock in the morning here, hehehe...) Earlier I only had a weird inner feeling of that something was completely wrong with the software because there were too many dead ends when you wanted to get further or manage stuff that was easily done in competative softwares.

I finally came to insight about what might have caused so much burnt energy on many times small processes in my software. In the aftershock of this new information it became more understandable why earlier support teams of Lightwave was mostly known for the lack of a decent of a two way communication, especially if you were a Europeean user. But honestly, what could these guys really manage to do if the basic software was written to fit ancient decades rather than modern times? Well now we all know the thruth, they went on building and adding stuff on top of an instable and probably unsure basement.

What I donīt like is that NT and Lightwave for a long time used marketing methods that presented the software with updated functions and as a product that made things easy for their users without letting us now exactly what was going on. Personally I would have felt even more ambitious and fatihful to stay with Lightwave and probably been more understanding for their efforts to make things better. But their marketing didnīt mention a word about the real condition and this happend each time a new realease where ready for the final purchase process.

I hardly disagree with all your praises about that Lightwave have been taken down to a dumb-*** level where the sun always shine on summerblue skies. I am neither a dumb-*** or a genoius but have been dragged down into this softwares rabbit-holes too many times.

An example in 9.6 is the new feature Relativity when it are companied with such things as import of scene modules, merge with other plugins and many frames on the time line. I know that there are work arounds and I have had many suggestions from people more skilled than me. But to be totally true the bug related issues had taken more time to sort out than the project it self and my customers will definitely not pay me for weeks and months of investigations that wouldnīt have been necessary if the software had lived up to itīs marketing campaigns. In this perspective nothing of what you say convince me about that Lightwave is a

I think that "Phil" described some very thinkable and unnecessary complicated/strange behaviors in the Lightwave process/workflow that mildly can be described as negative, you donīt seem to have any problems with his distincted inputs at all! So why are you trying to convince me about that Lightwave is fully functional and have no weaknesses at all?

"3DWorks" mentions "workflow stoppers" and this is probably the expression that describes what I mean more than anything else!

P.S. I havenīt rigged in Maya since 2000 but in comparizon with Lightwaveīs own character interface I felt that Maya was more comfortable and easy to use. Unfortunally I experienced Maya as a software written by scriptmakers for scriptmakers with a very lousy render machine. When Maya became an Autodesk product itīs also was totally uninteresting to invest in. IMHO AD are cold bloodsuckers and not the kind of company I would like to deal with. AD more reminds me about a rental service for softwares and support.

jasonwestmas
07-26-2009, 08:31 PM
Maybe this whole situation wouldnīt had been so infected if NT had been totally true about the product for their users. For me as a long term user it would have felt more honest if the catastrophically weak foundation in my long time loved software had been brought into broad daylight.

It was only about 6 months ago this truth was revealed to at this great forum and my earlier suspicious thoughts where confirmed with a very brutal reality. Earlier I only had a weird inner feeling of that something was completely wrong with the software since there were too many dead ends when you wanted to get further, import/export or manage stuff that was easily done in competative softwares. There were too many questions without answers about the softwares functions and condition that left a black hole in my mind.

I finally came to insight about what might have caused so much burnt energy on sometimes small parts in the software. In the aftershock of this new information it became more understandable why earlier support teams of Lightwave was mostly known for the lack of a decent of a two way communication, especially if you were a Europeean user. Honestly what could these guys really manage to do if the basic software was written to fit ancient decades rather than modern times?

What I donīt like is that NT and Lightwave for so long time used marketing methods that presented the software with updated functions and as a product that made things easy for their users. And this happend each time a new realease where ready for the final purchase process. I disagree that Lightwave made my life easier since all rabbit-holes have stolen time and pressed my customer related deadlines, not always because of my lack of knowledge, but rather because the software had a very instable interface when new features were added.

An example in 9.6 is the new feature Relativity when it are companied with such things as import of scene modules, merge with other plugins and many frames on the time line. I know that there are work arounds and I have had many suggestions from people more skilled than me. But to be totally true the bug related issues had taken more time to sort out than the project it self and my customers will definitely not pay me for weeks and months of investigations that wouldnīt have been necessary if the software had lived up to itīs marketing campaigns. In this perspective nothing of what you say convince me about that Lightwave is a

I think that "Phil" described some very thinkable and unnecessary complicated/strange behaviors in the Lightwave process/workflow that mildly can be described as negative, you donīt seem to have any problems with his distincted inputs at all! So why are you trying to convince me about that Lightwave is fully functional and have no weaknesses at all?

"3DWorks" mentions "workflow stoppers" and this is probably the expression that describes what I mean more than anything else!

Lightwave is a three sided coin, always has been, and which side comes up is often determined by the context of the project.

jasonwestmas
07-26-2009, 08:34 PM
I don't think LightWave's been "dumbed-down". It's just been pushed, added to and had so many features bolted-onto an underlying foundation that was programmed well before such features were even dreamed of, never mind implemented. The endless nip-tuck of piling new features on top of a rickety old foundation that was never designed to handle such features could only go on for so long... that's why they are starting with a new foundation in CORE...

:)

BTW: CORE will also ship with LightWave HC. So we won't be losing what LightWave can already do, we'll just be getting a brand new CORE to go with it that will eventually replace everything LW can do and more. :beerchug:

And this I quote for agreement and the answer to all that is problematic within lightwave. I wish core was started a while earlier than it was. I'm just glad it is in progress now.

Simply said, lightwave was hardly designed to support modern features without a major rewrite. Aparently things were too jumbled in the original LW classic code to justify staying with it any longer. There are much newer platforms to spring from that do not coincide with older code.

toby
07-27-2009, 12:39 AM
So why are you trying to convince me about that Lightwave is fully functional and have no weaknesses at all?
I'm not. As I said :


I'm not even defending LW - I've been b|itching about it a lot lately, but your expectations are beyond any 3d app being made today.

When you say things like :


"work 100% without any bugs"

"I donīt see the point in spending months in mastering each module of your software. If you wanīt to get further or deeper it shall rather be optional than forced."

"as long as the developers at LW not "only" listen to the old LW-narcissists that wanīt everything to be as complicated and traditional as possible because they might believe that the world "easy" is the same as locking the door to the underworld of scripts and codes in Lightwave"

It's clear to me that you want LW to be as easy to use as Photoshop but have the power and flexibility of Maya.
And going around insulting people, just because they don't agree with that absurd idea, is not cool.

Panikos
07-27-2009, 02:40 AM
CORE should start after 5.6

LW6.0 was not a rewrite.
At the very bottom of LW's, there is still Amiga's time tricks.

Rewriting today is an extremely demanding ambition that personally I do not have time or resources to spend. As written before, if and when CORE releases, I will see if it fits me.

kolby
08-09-2009, 11:41 PM
It's coming soon.

Dear Jay, what you mean, if you say "soon" ?

TeZzy
08-10-2009, 01:51 AM
more than a quarter of the year I guess :D

Limbus
08-10-2009, 04:01 AM
Any update on the "soon" to be released 9.6.1 would be great.

I hope NT can at least fix the PSD exporter Object ID and Surface ID bug. This has been broken since 7.5 days and was reported long ago:
https://secure.newtek.com/FogBugz/default.asp?17999_lpr9h4e1

Cheers, Florian

Julez4001
08-10-2009, 05:23 AM
Wow. Siggraph have come and gone

Kuzey
08-10-2009, 05:30 AM
Any update on the "soon" to be released 9.6.1 would be great.

Cheers, Florian

Should be a week or two, maybe when Jay gets back from holidays ??

Kuzey

kolby
08-12-2009, 08:23 AM
more than a quarter of the year I guess :D

:agree:
Yes, and maybe even longer, as always. :grumpy:

Thomas M.
08-12-2009, 09:40 AM
Yep, there is "soon" and Newtek "soon".

jasonwestmas
08-12-2009, 09:54 AM
Soon can mean up to 3-6 months.

Albertdup
08-12-2009, 10:40 AM
Maybe Jayroth have been visiting Africa, for African time and Newtek time seems to be very compatable. Tommorow is another day so why rush today - African time.

greent
08-12-2009, 11:43 AM
Many companies have their definition of soon... Here's Blizzards (http://www.wowwiki.com/Soon) :-)

jwiede
08-19-2009, 02:11 PM
When Blizzard says it, it's irony. Just look at their WoW update/upgrade history. In general, WoW's ongoing operations makes a very compelling argument that software scheduling can work.

toby
08-19-2009, 03:47 PM
When Blizzard says it, it's irony. Just look at their WoW update/upgrade history. In general, WoW's ongoing operations makes a very compelling argument that software scheduling can work.
I heard they haven't updated the game in ten years / since it was new

jasonwestmas
08-19-2009, 05:16 PM
I heard they haven't updated the game in ten years / since it was new

The code? Well they upped the graphics requirements (larger textures etc.) a little but not sure what else that means.

jwiede
08-23-2009, 05:30 AM
In software terms, every patch they do is an update. With those games, the scripted content is as much a key to the overall function as the engine itself, if not more. Think something vaguely similar to how various text adventure interpreter engines work in concert with the scripted "code" of the specific adventure to generate a cohesive overall environment. Only in the case of modern game engines, scripting goes way beyond the level of complexity possible in text adventure engines.

They've updated the engine as well over the years, graphics updates, audio updates, and better OS integrations mostly. Overall, they've run a remarkably tight ship in terms of maintaining software quality and schedule (esp. given the complexity of system involved), and deserve much credit for it.

The big MMORPGs approach financial-system-level complexity, combining immense databases across dozens of discrete servers and millions of client terminals. Whether engine script or compiled binaries (and the boundaries can get pretty blurry), it all plays into the "health" of the system, which demonstrates the quality of their software. Keeping those systems healthy and running nigh-constantly requires very high quality standards at all levels.

IMI
08-23-2009, 05:34 PM
You know, the more I think about it, they do give us an awful lot in between upgrades, as point releases. Most other companies only give you bug fixes and patches, but look at all the stuff we got between 9.0 and 9.6.

It's really quite a bit they added, from new nodes to better and faster radiosity and rendering, to FFX. And whatever else I'm leaving out. OK, the FFX only works partially, but still...

And almost a full DVD of high quality, excellent free video tutorials from William Vaughan along the way too.
I think we should all be glad they're not Autodesk or E-on. ;)

Thomas M.
08-24-2009, 12:19 AM
You know, the more I think about it, they do give us an awful lot in between upgrades, as point releases.

Yes, but that's because they are almost never able to deliver the stuff they promised for a full release. Although these things don't give us any special weapons compared to the rest, but they try to catch up which what is the standard nowadays.

The very annoying thing is that you could hardly ever rely on what NT said or promised regarding almost everything. I still like their product (very much), but Chucks initial statement is almost four month old (FOUR!). I don't bother if they are developing something new now, because I need to work with a buggy piece of code for month now.

Cheers
Thomas

Panikos
08-24-2009, 05:52 AM
The LW8.* series didnt include much.
Mostly decoration UI stuff, Null plugins etc

IMI
08-24-2009, 06:13 AM
Ok, points taken. :D

I too am anxious about 9.6.1 or whatever they're going to call it. Mostly so I can actually use FiberFX, which mostly just crashes on me or gives strange results when it doesn't crash.
Strangely enough, the FFX example files in the 9.6 Content don't crash, and run fine, but my own stuff hasn't worked well.
Although I've never been able to get the grass tutorial to do what Proton shows, even following it exacly. He was using a beta for that one though, and it broke before the release.
I'd like to see them un-break the Sigma 1 node, too, which got hosed somewhere between 9.2 and 9.5.

I just figured I'd mention all the stuff they did with LW between 9.0 and 9.6, all of which was free and most of which is good.

mav3rick
08-24-2009, 06:22 AM
CORE should start after 5.6

LW6.0 was not a rewrite.
At the very bottom of LW's, there is still Amiga's time tricks.

Rewriting today is an extremely demanding ambition that personally I do not have time or resources to spend. As written before, if and when CORE releases, I will see if it fits me.

you are very smart nowadays

geo_n
08-24-2009, 06:23 AM
probably comes with core on q4 :D

Chuck
08-25-2009, 11:43 AM
The LW8.* series didnt include much.
Mostly decoration UI stuff, Null plugins etc

Just grabbing the short lists from a few of the press releases:

For 8.2:

UV Map handling system completely revised.
Added UV Interpolation Modes
Added Tearoff UV Island
Added ability to change resolution on the fly without re-rendering to Viper
Added Mosaic Mode to Viper
Added Ghost Mode to IK Booster, and new menu options and controls
Added PLD AA system to Renderer
Added Reconstruction Filters to Renderer: Box, Gaussian, Mitchell, Lanczos
Added new menu options and controls to Dope Track (Rt-click and Rt-click-and-drag menus).
22 SDK Enhancements


For 8.3:

Multi-core processor support
Improved Vector Blur routines and documentation detailing how to get the best result from these new capabilities
PSD Import/Export revised to include a variety of new options, filters and controls, as well as enhanced processing of LightWave's internal buffers for better compatibility on export
EPS Importer updated to support Import options for EPS files up to Illustrator CS and AI files up to version 8
New "Relative Particle Age" gradient option for HyperVoxels
New "Blending" surface-tension control for HyperVoxels allows users to keep surface HyperVoxels from connecting when in close proximity.
HyperVoxels now work in combination with fog
HyperVoxels refraction now works in combination with dissolve and fog
Point limit per polygon increased from 1024 to 16383.
New "Text Layers" tool for creating text with a variety of controls and options



For 8.5

Added GLSL Hardware Shader in Layout
Increased accuracy of Particle Dynamics, enabled large dynamics scenes to load 10x faster
Added Multishift tool for Modeler
New Photoshop-style texture blending modes
New Parts-to-Surfaces tool allows for easier integration of 3D objects created in other applications.
Dynamics now launch a control window that allows you to switch to other applications while calculating dynamics in LightWave.
78 new configurable keyboard shortcut options.
Release of 64-bit version for Windows XP x64 Pro.



Ok, points taken. :D

Maybe not so much, you know? ;)

Chuck
08-25-2009, 12:09 PM
Yes, but that's because they are almost never able to deliver the stuff they promised for a full release. Although these things don't give us any special weapons compared to the rest, but they try to catch up which what is the standard nowadays.

We've routinely delivered the majority of our projected features for ordinal releases. Over the years the point releases have on many occasions brought things to LightWave that were in no other application yet. It's also the case that the point releases have always brought a lot more to the table than just whatever projected features for a .0 release had not made it in. We like to be aggressive about advancing the product.


The very annoying thing is that you could hardly ever rely on what NT said or promised regarding almost everything. I still like their product (very much), but Chucks initial statement is almost four month old (FOUR!). I don't bother if they are developing something new now, because I need to work with a buggy piece of code for month now.

Cheers
Thomas

We make projections and estimates, not promises, but we do work hard to meet those estimates and projections where we can, though historically we have not been good at estimating the times on releases. Open Beta hopefully has offered some relief as we can get completed work out while still working on other areas.

The Cocoa conversion has been proceeding for a long time on it's own track, and the work of integrating it into the 9.6 code since the release of 9.6 has taken all these months since. It is in Beta now and when we get a few more things cleaned up, it will begin Open Beta. The MIS staff needs to make the Registration system ready again for Open Beta, but as soon as they have that done, we'll commence. They say another week or two.

Albertdup
08-25-2009, 01:17 PM
Today was a big day at Hardcore regarding Lighwave not Core. Especially for the Mac guys. Lets just say that things are moving along and some promises were kept.

IMI
08-25-2009, 02:49 PM
Maybe not so much, you know? ;)

You're right about that. I knew there was still a good amount added 'tween 8.0 and 8.5, but I had forgotten about just how much.
Mostly I just didn't feel like arguing. ;)

geo_n
08-25-2009, 10:38 PM
Biggest difference for me is improved opengl. editing high poly object in modeller is only possible in lw 9. rotating high poly object in lw 8.5 is super sloooooow.

toby
08-25-2009, 10:43 PM
Today was a big day at Hardcore regarding Lighwave not Core. Especially for the Mac guys. Lets just say that things are moving along and some promises were kept.
That's awesome
Thanks for the note

Panikos
08-26-2009, 12:32 AM
Chuck, comparing the progress of LW9.* cycle with the LW8.* cycle, the entire LW8.* one was like LW8.1

Otterman
08-26-2009, 05:44 AM
Today was a big day at Hardcore regarding Lighwave not Core. Especially for the Mac guys. Lets just say that things are moving along and some promises were kept.

Hum reading between the lines that sounds like hardcore members have gotten their greasy mits on a 64bit mac version....but i speculate of course!

Thomas M.
08-26-2009, 06:28 AM
Chuck, I didn't ask for a Cocoa version. I asked for bug fixes. There's no excuse to postpone these fixes for month because there's is something else cooking.

If you don't have any clue when these fixes will be done, don't tell us it'll be soon. Tell us that you don't know or that it'll take about half a year. But this way of communicating is what makes people angry, as soon doesn't bear any meaning. It's this "Honey, will you take out the garbage!?" soon, which won't help anybody who needs to work with LW.

Chuck
08-26-2009, 10:10 AM
Chuck, I didn't ask for a Cocoa version. I asked for bug fixes. There's no excuse to postpone these fixes for month because there's is something else cooking.

A lot of our other customers did ask for Cocoa, and it is among the commitments we had for the v9.x series. You can choose to feel you were denied something due to the way scheduling has turned out, and you certainly have the luxury not to care what anyone else asked for or what other commitments we might be keeping. However, we're not at such liberty.


If you don't have any clue when these fixes will be done, don't tell us it'll be soon. Tell us that you don't know or that it'll take about half a year. But this way of communicating is what makes people angry, as soon doesn't bear any meaning. It's this "Honey, will you take out the garbage!?" soon, which won't help anybody who needs to work with LW.

Those of us who have responsibilities for communicating with the public do the best we can with the information that we have at any given time. Circumstances very often mean that schedules change and "soon" turns out not to be when the developers and managers had originally hoped, and ends up being a pretty abused term, as you have observed. That's certainly not the outcome anyone wants, and we are reviewing and looking for better ways to communicate.

Since the communication here four months ago that you refer to, I have in fact been posting regular progress updates for months in Mac Support to let folks adjust expectations to be more in keeping with current events in development and among the other areas affecting the schedule, such as when IT, which removed the Open Beta capability from Registration at the close of the last Open Beta, will get around to reinstating that capability. I had suggested that we also do a more generic update in the 3D announcements section each week, but the consensus was that the weekly updates in Mac Support would be noticed and filtered out to the community, and the duplication of effort would not be needed. I don't think it has worked that way to the extent that was hoped, so maybe we need to reconsider that one. In the meantime, folks interested in the progress of the update should drop in to the Mac Support section and check the weekly updates there.

GraphXs
08-26-2009, 12:51 PM
Besides Mac updates, what of the overall 9.6.x update, is their any info that can be shared for that or is that somehow tied to other things?

IMI
08-26-2009, 12:52 PM
Maybe it's taking longer than people expect because they're adding GoZ to it.
Well if it's not true, at least it's a nice thought. :)

IMI
08-26-2009, 02:12 PM
Did someone improve the caustics along the way between 9.2 or so and 9.6?

It seems better, more accurate and faster, easier to get a good effect from.

mav3rick
08-28-2009, 06:44 AM
my oh my what this turned into

v1u1ant
09-02-2009, 12:54 PM
Well whenever i submit a response for a bug report i get good service, a quick reply and usually a nice little email exchange with the (de)bugger....

But then i cant afford to swap apps, not that i think i would swap if i had the money, id just buy them all......but wouldnt we all????

From my last bug submission, 9.6.1 open beta sounds damn close....