PDA

View Full Version : Should I jump ship



dankayaker
06-16-2009, 08:26 AM
I've been using LW for a few years (on a very part time basis) . . .never mastered it, often frustrated by it, but know just enough to be dangerous.

My question is, given that I don't have that much time invested in LW yet . . should I jump to another package ? I really want to get competent in 3D.
I come from the video production world and am fluent in AE, FCP . . .etc . . . . but I really want to learn a package that allows for particle generation and special FX plus the obvious high quality 3D functionality.

I took a stab at Maya a couple years back, and have a current version . . should I try again ?

Guidance needed.
thanks

PS. I'm on Macs.

Nicolas Jordan
06-16-2009, 08:37 AM
In my opinion if you can't stick with one program and learn it then you won't stick with any of them to learn them to a good level of proficiency. Just my thoughts based on what i have seen over the years. If it's particles you want to play with then Lightwave has them and they should be adequate for most of your needs. I say stick with Lightwave and learn it especially if you have already invested your money in it.

Matt
06-16-2009, 08:39 AM
Honestly, we can't answer this for you.

Figure out what you want to do.

Find the packages that fit the bill and allow you to do what you want to do.

Try out the demos until you find a match for your workflow.

It's the only way.

- - -

Which is why I use _LightWave_ I find it's workflow to be the best for what I want to do, should that change drastically and offer nothing better in future, I'll probably look at Modo 401.

But that's just me, each to their own and all that.

dankayaker
06-16-2009, 08:43 AM
In my opinion if you can't stick with one program and learn it then you won't stick with any of them to learn them to a good level of proficiency. Just my thoughts based on what i have seen over the years. If it's particles you want to play with then Lightwave has them and they should be adequate for most of your needs. I say stick with Lightwave and learn it especially if you have already invested your money in it.


I'll disagree on that point . . .I'm highly proficient in may apps and have stuck with them. It's the constant frustration with LW on a Mac that makes me consider other options.

Chris S. (Fez)
06-16-2009, 08:44 AM
My question is, given that I don't have that much time invested in LW yet . . should I jump to another package ? I really want to get competent in 3D.


Newtek is investing heavily/wholeheartedly in the future of Lightwave with Core. Stay with Lightwave.

hrgiger
06-16-2009, 08:45 AM
Having used a handful of 3D applications including Animation Master, Lightwave, XSI, and most recently Modo I can tell you that the grass always looks greener from the other side. And in some areas it actually is. But then you'll end up missing something that was in the other application. But if you don't have much time invested in Lightwave and you are often frustrated by it, my feeling is you won't feel much different in another package. My thoughts are that LW has been one of the easiest applications to get up to speed in.
Of the things you listed you are looking for in a 3D application, what is it that you don't feel Lightwave can do? Lightwave is very capable of high end high quality work.

dankayaker
06-16-2009, 09:05 AM
Having used a handful of 3D applications including Animation Master, Lightwave, XSI, and most recently Modo I can tell you that the grass always looks greener from the other side. And in some areas it actually is. But then you'll end up missing something that was in the other application. But if you don't have much time invested in Lightwave and you are often frustrated by it, my feeling is you won't feel much different in another package. My thoughts are that LW has been one of the easiest applications to get up to speed in.
Of the things you listed you are looking for in a 3D application, what is it that you don't feel Lightwave can do? Lightwave is very capable of high end high quality work.



Good points.
Some of the things that have been frustrating:
1. The F-keys not working properly
2. Perspective view often gets jammed up and I loose the ability to move the way I want.
3. The use of only small amounts of available RAM for rendering and calculating.
4. Viper (no quick preview)
5. Crashing for no apparent reason.


Now, I admit, some of this frustration could be because of my limited knowledge, but I've seen others complaining too. Since I have current projects with LW models I need to continue using it for a while. But I want to try another app. so I know first hand.

prometheus
06-16-2009, 09:12 AM
I believe it will take some time before advanced particles and fx stuff like fluids are incorporated in lw core, you might stick to maya or take a look at Houdini and 3d max wich in it´s current state are much further developed with particle flow tools, fume fx for max..and pyro fx tools for fluids in houdini, and those seem to rock..cant´see anything like it coming to lightwave in a near future from what Ive heard and seen.

Michael

Twisted_Pixel
06-16-2009, 09:20 AM
1. In what way are the keys not working? What do you expect to be happening?
2. If you are using the icon to rotate and you get gimbal lock, use the Alt + mouse to rotate instead, the lock will instantly dissappear. You can use this method to rotate all the time, if you find it comfortable.
3. Others can probably give more definitive answers to any restrictions with the system.
4. Viper works for some things, but yes is somewhat limited. Others will probably point you to FPrime.
5. Almost all software crashes, usually for obscure reasons. If it's repeatable, the bug should be reported, so dev team can look into the issue.

CGI Addict
06-16-2009, 09:38 AM
Good points.
Some of the things that have been frustrating:
1. The F-keys not working properly
2. Perspective view often gets jammed up and I loose the ability to move the way I want.
3. The use of only small amounts of available RAM for rendering and calculating.
4. Viper (no quick preview)
5. Crashing for no apparent reason.


Now, I admit, some of this frustration could be because of my limited knowledge, but I've seen others complaining too. Since I have current projects with LW models I need to continue using it for a while. But I want to try another app. so I know first hand.

Hey dankayaker, I've heard similar horror stories from other Mac users but honestly I don't get those issues. I can't tell you the last time LW crashed it's been so long ago. I understand the RAM limitation and Viper issues, but these are hardly a reason to walk away from an app you say you are pretty proficient at. NT is working to release v9.6 64 bit and most (I think) users don't even use Viper anymore.

My only wish is that NT would modernize their CA tools (most likely in CORE). I'm using LW for some CA in my short film but am also learning Maya. It seems more now than ever that you just can't have it all in one app these days. Blender is certainly trying to change that though.

I wish you well in your decision.

RebelHill
06-16-2009, 10:38 AM
All the main 3D apps are capable of pretty much the same level of quality and output... give or take. some apps do this better, some do that better. Switching apps wont necessarily help you. I was gonna say that LWs probs one of the easist, and if ur having trouble getting to grips with that then u got no hope with something like maya..

However ur complaints seem to edge more toward functionality...

Most of your points have been answered... but to take on particularly 2. memory.

LWs only available in 32bit for mac atm... and all 32bit applications are limited to using 2gb of ram max.... and thats gonna be the same for any other package thats 32... again, u mention maya... only available in 32 for mac.... so ull get the exact same ram limits with that.

jasonwestmas
06-16-2009, 11:02 AM
If you don't like anything you are getting with LW then get out of 3D all together. Not helpful advice? Then learn 2 apps is my other suggestion; one that you love to use, the other should be for getting work if you interested in that.

Nicolas Jordan
06-16-2009, 11:17 AM
If you really want to try a different 3D program I recommend Blender since it requires no $ investment and makes up for some of Lightwaves shortcomings.

adamredwoods
06-16-2009, 11:23 AM
You could also try Zaxwerks. It's good for easy 3D stuff in AfterEffects.
http://zaxwerks.com/proanimator/index.shtml

But if you still want another crack at Lightwave, try asking specific questions in the Mac support forum, they'll help you out. Also be aware the Cocoa version's in progress, again check the Mac section in the forums.

And lastly, if you're still frustrated, check out Cinema4D. It's expensive but offers a great UI. A lot of motion graphic artists use Cinema4D.

Dexter2999
06-16-2009, 11:47 AM
LW will meet the needs of just about everything a beginner is going to come up with. That is the whole concept behind 3D arsenal which operates on v7.5. Does it have issues with character animation? Yeah, but I consider that an advanced function.

Also if you are just learning LW seems to have a relatively low learning curve compared to some other applications.

For particle effects LW is good. I'd recommend looking at Red Giant plug in's for After Effects. They generate alot of the "streak" effects that are popular right now.

Anther person mentioned Blender, I think it doesn't hurt to add more tools to your skillset and Blender is pretty powerful and it is free. The only cost is in time spent on learning another application.

cresshead
06-16-2009, 12:02 PM
i'd say get some training vids/books on lightwave rather than stumbling around in the dark as often many things people struggle at are just a lack of good guidence that can be found in training videos.

lightwave has been pretty amazing for some particle fx in TV shows of late and in the past so it's def capable.

if with particles your refering to fluids rather than smoke/explodsions/flames then i'd say go install blender [it's free so no cost to you] and just learn how to set up fluid sims in blender and how to transfer to from blender to lightwave for rendering back over in lightwave.

currently lightwave has a few gaps that can be filled with blender..note blender is good but also has it's share of gaps and rather wacky way of working, i'd say blender offers fluids, sculpting and some rigging/animation tools that can be a real help for lightwave artists.

intro to sculpting with blender for lightwave artists
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8QZmw_Da7s

use both and you'll be quite happy!...remember to go search for some videos/books on the subjects your wanting to cover in lightwave and you be much more succesful

SplineGod
06-16-2009, 03:08 PM
Id also recommend C4D if youre into motion graphics. It will export an AE project.
Its a bit pricier but sometimes you can find a copy floating around on ebay etc.

monovich
06-16-2009, 03:43 PM
c4d has a competitive cross-grade right now if you want to learn it. I've always wanted to learn it, but 9.6 is working too well for me to look around at the moment

DrStrik9
06-16-2009, 03:48 PM
Good points.
Some of the things that have been frustrating:
1. The F-keys not working properly
2. Perspective view often gets jammed up and I loose the ability to move the way I want.
3. The use of only small amounts of available RAM for rendering and calculating.
4. Viper (no quick preview)
5. Crashing for no apparent reason.


Now, I admit, some of this frustration could be because of my limited knowledge, but I've seen others complaining too. Since I have current projects with LW models I need to continue using it for a while. But I want to try another app. so I know first hand.

As a fellow Mac user, I had many of the same frustrations as you list. But believe me, there are simple solutions to each issue in LW, and after wrestling with some of these, I am DEFINITELY in love with Lightwave! :-)

If the apps you're proficient in are 2D graphics apps, then you need to realize that 3D is many times more complicated than 2D. Add to this truth that Lightwave is very powerful, and with power comes complexity. Accept it, learn it, get used to it.

There's also the reality that 3D in general is by nature on the "bleeding edge" of graphics, so there will always be things you have to work hard (or preferrably smart) to overcome or work around. It's just the nature of the beast, and it has been for as long as I've done anything in 3D. Again, accept it, learn it, get used to it. :-)

I've used LW on both PC and Mac. But with roots from "way back" in graphic design, I have a huge investment in other Mac apps and FONTS (10,000+), plus a gigantic archive of Mac-based files. So at this point, I'm using LW on the Mac. There are some fantastically FAST and powerful PC's out there too (far better than the hardware Apple is offering, to be honest), but depending on your investment/commitment to the Mac, you may wish to continue with it for valid reasons. Assuming you're sticking with Mac, first make sure you're using a relatively recent computer. I recommend the Mac Pro with at least one quad core Xeon. More cores are better, and faster is ALWAYS better. :-) This allows you to use the Universal Binary version of LW, which is a lot faster and more stable than the older CFM (Power PC) version of LW. Gratz to NewTek for its commitment to the Mac!

Regarding F-keys, under System Prefs (assuming you're using the most recent MacOS 10.5.7), under Keyboard & Mouse, Keyboard tab, check "Use all F1, F2, etc. keys as standard function keys." Problem solved.

The perspective view "jamming up" makes me think you're using an older computer (?) -- On a Mac Pro, I have NO problems with views. This is probably a monitor card issue. Upgrade your hardware.

Regarding the "small amounts of ram for rendering and calculating," I'm not sure what you mean exactly. But RAM is cheap. Buy MORE. I'm using 10 GB and it's been adequate so far. Many Mac users are satisfied with less.

Regarding Viper, buy FPrime (www.worley.com). It's the best fast preview available for LW, and WORTH THE MONEY, imo.

"Crashing for no reason" never happens. There's ALWAYS a reason. lol Again, upgrade your hardware and RAM, and you will crash far less.

That's the best I have to offer; I hope it helps some.

Cheers

JonW
06-16-2009, 04:48 PM
Run LW on a PC, its not going to cost any more unless you need to by a new box. If you need a new box you can put together an i7 920 12 gb ram, there is now a US$169 Motherboard, or go to a small computer shop to get it built for you. You could put together a pair of E5520 cpus (au$600ea) on an Intel motherboard SC5650WS (au$800) in an Intel box SC5650WS (au$620). Ram is now cheap as chips.

I’d go for a 920 or 940.

In AU$ you can have a new i7 920 box for about $225 per Ghz per box & if you do a small over clock to 3.15 Ghz it works out to about $189 per Ghz. The i7 CPUs scream! or a E5520 V8 for about AU$230 per Ghz per box. (I have had my OC 920 & 940 running 24/7 using 10 of the 12 gb of ram for 3 weeks on the standard heat sink & through one hot day over 40 degrees)

I use Macs & PCs & still do a few small LW things on the MAC, they both work well together. Have the best of both worlds!

http://3dspeedmachine.com/?page=3&scene=39


Any software will take years to learn proficiently, but if it is the wrong software for your work then you do need to buy something else & most importantly put in thousands of hours to develop your skills.

cresshead
06-16-2009, 05:23 PM
c4d has a competitive cross-grade right now if you want to learn it. I've always wanted to learn it, but 9.6 is working too well for me to look around at the moment

c4D [maxon cinema 4d] is incredibly expensive to keep upto date so just so you know beforehand upgrades are 2x the cost of say subs on 3dsmax for example and the full version of cinema4d costs MORE than 3dsmax and offers much less...

point updates are charged fuly for unlike lightwave, the base package has a really basic renderer that's pretty usless for photoreal as there's no volumetrics, ambient occlusion, global illumination or radiosity at all so you HAVE to buy and upkeep the ADD ON renderer as well as the base package..EXPENSIVE.

you have been warned!:D

dankayaker
06-19-2009, 06:12 AM
Wow . . thanks guys . . I appreciate all the input.

I should have mentioned I'm using a few new MacPro's (8 core , dual 2.26 Nehalem processors) with 6 gigs ram.

DrStrik9: Thanks for all the tips, I'll take care of the F-keys right away.

Kuzey
06-19-2009, 06:29 AM
Also...things should improve greatly once the Mac Cocoa 64bit gets out into beta in a month or two.

Newtek is working hard on it, they are posting weekly updates on the progress in the Mac section of the forum.

Kuzey

Otterman
06-19-2009, 06:36 AM
Also...things should improve greatly once the Mac Cocoa 64bit gets out into beta in a month or two.

Kuzey


Your not wrong-in the meantime i just hope they deliver a more stable mac 9.6 with their hotfix version :D

Kuzey
06-19-2009, 06:54 AM
Your not wrong-in the meantime i just hope they deliver a more stable mac 9.6 with their hotfix version :D

From what I understand, the hot fix and the beta could be the same thing. Depends on how well they are progressing...I guess. Either way, I can't wait to get my hands on it or both :D

Kuzey

Intuition
06-19-2009, 04:15 PM
This topic is hard to answer clearly in any forum.

On one hand you'll have the bias of the forum you ask the question in. Typically the users of one package (of said forum) will point you towards said forum's package.

Then you'll get those who use multiple apps and will try to give you a better perspective of how each app handles different tasks. The pros and cons of each app's workflow, etc.

I use Maya, Max, XSI, Lightwave, modo on a regular basis, though LW gets less attention these last few years. But, thats usually due to the situational circumstances that point to LW or other apps.

No matter what anyone says, you really can get most stuff done really well in Lightwave. Many here will tell you that and it is true to a certain extent.

Yet when you start to use other apps you will first hand start to see the benefits of each package.

Really, the best way for me to answer your original question is for me to understand what you are going for. Charaters, fx work, motion graphics, archviz, automotive, etc. Animation.... still frames. There are many parameters that can make a person decide what is the best on top of the fact that knowing the best means knowing the apps well enough.

I would start by saying that for character animation you have a tie between XSI and Maya. Both have great IK/fk tools that are easy to setup and get running with right away and I don't mean just the pre-built rigs in XSI either but a tool set that is good to get custom rigs up from scratch fast with simple skin binding and weight map painting.

Motion graphics can be done in any app but I have seen stuff whipped up effortlessly in houdini (co workers) in an hour that would take any of the other apps a week of careful setup.

Archviz and Automotive can be done in any package equally well but I find that the render engine defines how much time it takes to tune a good render. Vray/mental ray do well in the areas with Vray being easier then Mray. Maxwell render is very good for this stuff if you only need stills since it looks really good a the cost of lots of time.

FX work can be done in any app but houdini, maya and XSI have really nice built in tools for this kind of work and max has some great plug-ins like thinking particles and fumefx which are really great and fast.

In LW you can achieve all of these things as long as you just strap in a learn the app well. In my line of work I have been lucky enough to have all the apps available at a click so I've been enabled to find the quickest solution for my clients with he most effective tools. Most people will not be able to do this so they may have to pick one or the other.

In my own personal opinion LW lacks in character rigging/animation tools and workflow though by 9.6 it is much much better. LW hypervoxels have gotten a little long in the tooth compared to other particle tracers in other apps but, I still see great creative solutions for HVoxels in lw that amaze me. Most of this stuff I saw at Battlestar Galactica VFX when I worked there. I wussed out and used max's fumeFX for a few things but the other guys made some neat stuff with classic Hvoxels that looked good.

LW has its own star tools like f-prime and kray and of course many of the tools/plugs by Sensei.

Lightwave has some things that are just better then the other apps ands down. First and formost is the navigation of moving objects lights and cameras. No matter how used to max, maya, XSI I am I still find that Lighwave's method of x and Z on the mouse move and Y on the right click the easiest way to get objects animated quickly.

In my own experience it was a situational decision to use another app besides lightwave due to time constraints. XSI for instance allows me to do many many near real time dynamics simulations, for hard, soft, cloth and hair fx. So I use XSI for that stuff unless the job is based in maya in which I use Maya's own dynamics, fur, cloth.

With automotive work I knew Vray would be able to get the look I needed so I went with max. Here is a spot I did for Lincoln at DD. The exterior car renders were all Vray in max.

http://www.vimeo.com/3948145

Yet the next month we did a Video game cinematic all animated in maya but the mental ray licenses where all used on features so we used Lightwave for final rendering. Its for a game called "The Agency" which may show at e3.

So, to sum up, LW is capable. Sure other things may be faster here and there at said tasks but in the end, just having determination to make it all look good is really up to you, .... in any app.

colkai
06-20-2009, 04:45 AM
So, to sum up, LW is capable. Sure other things may be faster here and there at said tasks but in the end, just having determination to make it all look good is really up to you, .... in any app.

Truthsay!
Dedication, practice, practice, practice some more, then, when you've finished, go and practice. :p

Nothing like doing something day in day out to give you the edge, be you using Maya, Lw or Blender. I've no doubt there are people using free software who can run rings around folks using high-end simply because the former uses it constantly and the latter does not.

I include myself in the latter bracket! ;) I *should* be much better at LW but simply put, I don't have the time to put the time in, if you do, the rewards are yours for the taking. :thumbsup:

Cageman
06-22-2009, 05:23 AM
Yet the next month we did a Video game cinematic all animated in maya but the mental ray licenses where all used on features so we used Lightwave for final rendering. Its for a game called "The Agency" which may show at e3.

Is this the trailer?

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-09-the-agency/50841

lwaddict
06-22-2009, 07:56 AM
I'll disagree on that point . . .I'm highly proficient in may apps and have stuck with them. It's the constant frustration with LW on a Mac that makes me consider other options.

If this is true...
then learn Lightwave AND Maya AND some others.
Why not?

If the above is true, then you already know that leaning too hard on a single application results in nothing but grief anyways right?

So...
the real question is...
Why bother posting this on a board?

Kuzey
06-22-2009, 08:04 AM
If this is true...
then learn Lightwave AND Maya AND some others.
Why not?

If the above is true, then you already know that leaning too hard on a single application results in nothing but grief anyways right?

So...
the real question is...
Why bother posting this on a board?

Well...to be honest, the Mac version is no where near the PC version...in terms of stability and or having a 64bit version. It can be a pain to use...we just have to wait for the Cocoa version and then things will be a rocking :hey:

Kuzey

virtualcomposer
06-22-2009, 12:10 PM
I'll disagree on that point . . .I'm highly proficient in may apps and have stuck with them. It's the constant frustration with LW on a Mac that makes me consider other options.

I feel that way about 3D Max and Maya. For some reason I just can't get my head around the interface. Lightwave was a bit difficult at first but now I wouldn't go to any other 3D package...well, ok, I've been flirting with Blender but only for fun. Once Lightwave clicks, you'll realize just how user friendly it is...especially when you compare it to other 3D packages.

virtualcomposer
06-22-2009, 12:13 PM
Truthsay!
Dedication, practice, practice, practice some more, then, when you've finished, go and practice. :p

Nothing like doing something day in day out to give you the edge, be you using Maya, Lw or Blender. I've no doubt there are people using free software who can run rings around folks using high-end simply because the former uses it constantly and the latter does not.

I include myself in the latter bracket! ;) I *should* be much better at LW but simply put, I don't have the time to put the time in, if you do, the rewards are yours for the taking. :thumbsup:

I agree. Practice practice practice and you'll begin to put two and two together. It is funny how that works and once you'll wake up and say "I get it now" and the rest is history. Stick with Lightwave. The team is great and Newtek is always there when you have questions. I guess I'm totally dedicated to Lightwave. :thumbsup:

cresshead
06-22-2009, 12:43 PM
sorta going off topic i know but i hope that the next version of lightwave has the renderer and the camera setting in ONE panel/area, currently having the render panel and the camera split is annoying, i also hope that we can multiple camera views and so have more than ONE camera displayed at a time in the viewport layout.

IMI
06-22-2009, 01:37 PM
sorta going off topic i know but i hope that the next version of lightwave has the renderer and the camera setting in ONE panel/area, currently having the render panel and the camera split is annoying, i also hope that we can multiple camera views and so have more than ONE camera displayed at a time in the viewport layout.

Well you can have the Render Globals and the Camera Properties panels open at the same time at least. Looks like you could even use only the Render Globals panel if you wanted to stick to the Classic camera. I just noticed that all the "old" AA settings are in the Render Globals panel. Shows how much I use "render globals" for camera settings. ;)

But I see what you're saying and emphatically agree. :agree:

I guess you mean by more than one camera displayed in a viewport that you'd like to be able to set other viewports to different camera views. That I could definitely go along with. While we're at it, we shouldn't be limited to only 4 viewports maximum. We should also be able to set each viewport to anything, such as graph editor, scene editor, properties, render globals or anything like that in the same way that can be done in Maya through the hotbox.
But we should also be able to tear off windows and also be able to change them to anything, in the way you can do that with Modo, including multiple camera views.
Although really, it's not too bad to just keep the "current item" box for cameras open and click through them, or keep the scene editor open and do the same.

cresshead
06-22-2009, 02:31 PM
my view on this thread>> we seem to be feeding a....

cresshead
06-22-2009, 02:37 PM
Well you can have the Render Globals and the Camera Properties panels open at the same time at least. Looks like you could even use only the Render Globals panel if you wanted to stick to the Classic camera. I just noticed that all the "old" AA settings are in the Render Globals panel. Shows how much I use "render globals" for camera settings. ;)

But I see what you're saying and emphatically agree. :agree:

I guess you mean by more than one camera displayed in a viewport that you'd like to be able to set other viewports to different camera views. That I could definitely go along with. While we're at it, we shouldn't be limited to only 4 viewports maximum. We should also be able to set each viewport to anything, such as graph editor, scene editor, properties, render globals or anything like that in the same way that can be done in Maya through the hotbox.
But we should also be able to tear off windows and also be able to change them to anything, in the way you can do that with Modo, including multiple camera views.
Although really, it's not too bad to just keep the "current item" box for cameras open and click through them, or keep the scene editor open and do the same.

i hope lightwave core will solve many of these workflow issues:thumbsup:

Intuition
06-22-2009, 04:06 PM
Is this the trailer?

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-09-the-agency/50841

Damn, I can't see it since I am in linux. :devil:

If it has a cook, a hot girl with a blender gun, and some slow-mo plate shattering matrix ripoff scenes that ends with a snow machine then, yes, its the one.

Mray and Vray lic were all used up in other projects so.... LW came to the rescue. Err, with XSI for plate exploding dynamics ;).

It was a fun project and the look was such that LW render engine could be tweaked to the LWF to give it a nice mid tone. We have a whole LWF for LW here at DD that renders the exr files to Nuke so we can see them in the proper color space the way we would do it in Mray or Vray.

IMI
06-23-2009, 10:19 AM
i hope lightwave core will solve many of these workflow issues:thumbsup:

Agreed. :agree:

Well, you're a HardCORE Super Member, aren't you?
If they're reluctant, don't hope - *insist*. Be forceful, assertive and even mean if you have to. ;)
But I'm counting on you to make it so...

cresshead
06-23-2009, 11:26 AM
Agreed. :agree:

Well, you're a HardCORE Super Member, aren't you?
If they're reluctant, don't hope - *insist*. Be forceful, assertive and even mean if you have to. ;)
But I'm counting on you to make it so...

"so say we all"

dankayaker
06-23-2009, 12:29 PM
If this is true...
then learn Lightwave AND Maya AND some others.
Why not?

If the above is true, then you already know that leaning too hard on a single application results in nothing but grief anyways right?

So...
the real question is...
Why bother posting this on a board?



I thought this was a "discussion" forum . . .that's why I posted it.
I don't have time to learn more than one 3D app.

cresshead
06-23-2009, 12:40 PM
I thought this was a "discussion" forum . . .that's why I posted it.
I don't have time to learn more than one 3D app.

you can always make time if it's important to you...either to learn more about 1 app or pick up other apps.

i'm learning lightwave, 3dsmax, zbrush, toon boom studio, flash as well as playing in maya, xsi, blender, painterx, art rage, corel draw,....on n on....

if you want it enough you'll put in the hours!:D

no one says CG is easy...if you want 'easy' work in a burger bar...

IMI
06-23-2009, 05:37 PM
you can always make time if it's important to you...either to learn more about 1 app or pick up other apps.


Well that's no fun. Too much work. Instant gratification, and all.
BTW, how is that new "Make Cool Object" feature in CORE working out? ;)



i'm learning lightwave, 3dsmax, zbrush, toon boom studio, flash as well as playing in maya, xsi, blender, painterx, art rage, corel draw,....on n on....


You're entirely too modest, Steve! I'd say you have at least LW, Max, and Zbrush pretty well figured out, and suspect the same for Blender too, at least. ;)

cresshead
06-23-2009, 06:37 PM
Well that's no fun. Too much work. Instant gratification, and all.
BTW, how is that new "Make Cool Object" feature in CORE working out? ;)



You're entirely too modest, Steve! I'd say you have at least LW, Max, and Zbrush pretty well figured out, and suspect the same for Blender too, at least. ;)


always learning with 3d...the subject is simply massive and as deep as you want to go in any particular area you hold an interest in.

IMI
06-23-2009, 06:41 PM
always learning with 3d...the subject is simply massive and as deep as you want to go in any particular area you hold an interest in.

:agree:
Just like almost any subject, really. You get out of it what you put into it. :thumbsup:

Mr Rid
06-23-2009, 10:34 PM
I dont see any point in learning LW since it is all going to be different in Core. While waiting, you might as well go learn something like Maya with far more job opportunites. I am not saying you have to leave NT behind, but why not broaden your horizons?

geo_n
06-23-2009, 11:43 PM
I dont see any point in learning LW since it is all going to be different in Core. While waiting, you might as well go learn something like Maya with far more job opportunites. I am not saying you have to leave NT behind, but why not broaden your horizons?

Hmmm...
I'm using max at work but right now for personal use I'm undecided between continuing lw or getting modo. if core would be too different to lw then lw would be dead tech in a few years. modo is growing and a some lw users have switched(some familiar faces at lux forum already) BUT it doesn't have all what lw has at this time and waiting for it to catch up could have been spent on learning lw all 100% which is still very fast and easy to work with.
I considered blender but job prospects are zero and companies here tend to look at free software as for hobbyist. :screwy:
In a perfect situation NT would just keep improving lw until, core equals it, right now all I hear from people here is that lw is dead tech and workflow.

For a new lw user next year to have what other software have by default
lw + fprime ipr+ kray gi+ hd instance + janus render management or shadermeister + butterfly net render
modo would be cheaper but until they have particles,dynamics and all that lw has its still probably another 3-4 years before its a complete package considering how slow it was developed.:dance:

By adding atleast an IPR, similar features to other renderers (bucketrender, backburner, render management, etc), good hair solution, etc. there's a list out there(Lw has those but most have to be bought separately), and wishful thinking to have someting like character studio or CAT to make rigging less painful. I wouldn't even consider modo.

colkai
06-24-2009, 02:19 AM
:agree:
Just like almost any subject, really. You get out of it what you put into it. :thumbsup:

Indeed, stop learning, start dying. I am approaching the big-50 rapidly but still love learning new stuff. Heck, I think I actually thrive on it now far more than I did when I was younger.

Not just 3D, we are learning/developing in a new language at work and I've also set myself the task of learning to play some stuff on the guitar I think is out of my range. How else can you progress if you stick with what you know? ;) :D

IMI
06-24-2009, 04:19 AM
Hmmm...
I'm using max at work but right now for personal use I'm undecided between continuing lw or getting modo. if core would be too different to lw then lw would be dead tech in a few years. modo is growing and a some lw users have switched(some familiar faces at lux forum already) BUT it doesn't have all what lw has at this time and waiting for it to catch up could have been spent on learning lw all 100% which is still very fast and easy to work with.


I've mentioned here and there on these forums for the last few months that this is why I think we need to be kept up to date on CORE's progress, or at least get a projected roadmap for CORE.
Yes, I know NT shies away from the roadmap idea, having had it bite them in the past, but they could include a big, bold text disclaimer that it's only an estimate, not de facto. And if people don't understand such a disclaimer, it's their problem, not NT's.

But my point is, I'm seriously considering buying Softimage in early 2010, or whenever the next major release comes out. (I don't know if that will be called Softimage 2010, or Softimage 8, obviously)

When CORE is officially released to the public in Q4, we already know that it's not going to be ready for prime time. We DO know it will be utilizing some mysterious form of "LightWave 3D" as a companion until it IS ready to stand on its own, but we don't know how it is going to be interacting with it. Remember, the whole point of CORE is to update the code; the current LW code apparently has too many obstacles to work around, so it's probably safe to assume that any future iterations of "LightWave 3D" to be used with CORE or not, will not be a perfect solution.

So therefore, by the time CORE 1.0 is released, we all need to know exactly where it's going and how long it's going to take to get to the point where it can stand on its own.
I don't mind waiting for CORE, if I know the wait won't be too long, or have a general estimate to go by. If CORE 1.0 comes out and it's basically modo, AND they're still being tight with the plan for CORE 2.0/no roadmap/no guesstimate, it will not really be worth considering or even thinking about, as far as I'm concerned.

If I DO end up buying Autodesk Softimage 2010/Softimage 8 because NT failed to keep me interested in CORE, I won't be going back any time soon. At that point, they'll have to wow me into it.

And I'm just a hobbyist, albeit a hobbyist with aspirations to do some professional work. The working pros who rely on complete, working software will be far less forgiving, far less inclined to wait around.

We all know the target for CORE, it's eventual goal - to become a complete, production-ready 3D package. But we have no idea when, no idea at all. I very much doubt the HardCORE people even have an idea of *when*, although by now I'm sure they could make an educated guesstimate.
IMO, if they don't start putting some info out here soon, all they're going to be left with is the fanboys and the HardCORE members who paid up and have to see it through.

cresshead
06-24-2009, 05:02 AM
for non hardcore users , yes it's gone quite 'dark' in much the same way sumatra did [xsi] when xsi was in development behind closed doors in reality i'll 'guess' that core will be useable in a similar timeframe, maybe just like xsi will also lose some users like what softimage did and eventually become the 3d app once it's matured like what xsi did eventually.

that's my take on it.

join HC and you can help steer the development

don't join and you'l be in for a dark period of time from newtek where lightwave 9.6 may not be updated and you might start to look elsewhere...

cheapest wayforward?

stick with lightwave 9.6 as it's VERY usable right now...
add blender 2.5 when i comes out and add blender 2.49 now and start to learn it...

next year..core will be out and usable..so upgrade to it then..

modo is still not a full app..no bones, particles, cloth, fluids so plenty for them to work on and maybe 1 or 2 major releases before it's a full app
and no history/stack and interactive tools so really modo still need to be propped up with another app be it maya, lightwave 9.6, blender, max, cinema4d or xsi.

both lighwave and modo can do well with the help of blender be it for characters, fluids, scupting etc.

meshpig
06-24-2009, 06:03 AM
Indeed, stop learning, start dying. I am approaching the big-50 rapidly but still love learning new stuff. Heck, I think I actually thrive on it now far more than I did when I was younger.

Not just 3D, we are learning/developing in a new language at work and I've also set myself the task of learning to play some stuff on the guitar I think is out of my range. How else can you progress if you stick with what you know? ;) :D

Yeah, but "Art" isn't an accumulative form of knowledge; Galileo complained towards the end of his life that he found it hard to understand what he was on about in his 20's... whereas Titian say, managed to begin over and over continuously into his late 90's.

The latter of course is near impossible these days. With the Guitar though you just get bored with the instrument, it's had it's day... next!

frantbk
06-24-2009, 06:29 AM
Maybe, just maybe if you guys stopped obsessing about what core will, or will not be; NT might feel the need to give information to the general public to generate interest in lightwave core.

Since March the majority of you have stayed on the forums and gone on, and on about core. Why would NT feel the need to release information about core when you've whimpered for 4 months about the need for core information.

If you are not a HardCore member NT doesn't care (at this point in time) if you know anything about core. That was the whole point of buying into the membership.

rknuckalls
06-24-2009, 06:37 AM
OTOH, and a different viewpoint, I was pretty good at Autodesk products, and jumped for LW, because there's something... more personal and inspiring about it. A slippery reason, perhaps, but solving that problem in LW is much more satisfying than on the dark side. Errrr. I guess the fact that I acquired an 8-Core Mac Pro at the same time didn't hurt. I have none of the problems you describe.

colkai
06-24-2009, 07:26 AM
With the Guitar though you just get bored with the instrument, it's had it's day... next!

Blasphemy! - Why, the next thing you'll be saying is Bacon butties are passe and we should all be eating Tofu! :devil:

Suffice to say, I ain't in your camp. :p My axe will be torched right alongside me when I go. :D

As to art, theory may have it's limits, but unless you're a master in every medium, I think the amount you can learn is far more than most people could achieve in a lifetime.
This said, learning 3D packages isn't about art, it's about learning tools and workflows, the art part comes in what you do once you've learned 'em, (depending on who you talk to). ;)

IMI
06-24-2009, 11:53 AM
Maybe, just maybe if you guys stopped obsessing about what core will, or will not be; NT might feel the need to give information to the general public to generate interest in lightwave core.

Since March the majority of you have stayed on the forums and gone on, and on about core. Why would NT feel the need to release information about core when you've whimpered for 4 months about the need for core information.




Yeah, right, that's what it is. It's just spite. They know people want to know about CORE, so they're intentionally holding back, doing the opposite, just because maybe it amuses them or something. Or no, maybe they're punishing us for showing interest. :rolleyes:

Nice to see you again, frankie. I was afraid maybe you'd disappeared somewhere, like maybe you forgot to lay out breadcrumbs and couldn't find your way back or something.

I see you haven't lost your unique ability to type without saying anything, or to say things that make no sense whatsoever. Keep working at that - you have a genuine gift. :thumbsup:

Chuck
06-24-2009, 01:29 PM
I dont see any point in learning LW since it is all going to be different in Core. While waiting, you might as well go learn something like Maya with far more job opportunites. I am not saying you have to leave NT behind, but why not broaden your horizons?

LightWave 3D actually has plenty of job opportunities, so any time spent learning it is not wasted, by any means. Even with LightWave CORE in development now, LightWave 3D is likely to get plenty of exercise in production in a lot of fields where 3D is used, for many more years to come. That's just a practical truth, especially given that it is still in development in it's own right, with a maintenance update currently in the works that includes conversion to the Mac Cocoa API and thus the first 64-bit Mac version.

We've stated in our LightWave CORE introductory materials that LWCORE will have very flexible UI and workflows that allow for providing the LightWave 3D experience users are already familiar with, so it really will not be the case that what you learn in LightWave 3D will not carry over to LightWave CORE; your LightWave skills will carry over very well indeed. There will also be newer, innovative approaches to workflow that you can ease into at your own pace.

Mr Rid
06-24-2009, 05:17 PM
LightWave 3D actually has plenty of job opportunities, ...

You also have to regard what kind of opportunity and where it is located.

I watch CG job listings in southern California closely as well as listening to the grapevine. VFXpro and Creativeheads post jobs in many areas of entertainment including programming, adminstrative as well as CG. In the CG listings, the number of times 'Lightwave' appears as a software requirement has dwindled in recent years down to zero most months. I receive a weekly update with dozens of new Maya jobs and the same one LW listing for someplace in Dubai over and over. Flay may have three or four listings that are usually in London. Over and over I see 'software requirements: Maya, Maya, Maya...'

VFXpro job search by software:
Maya - about 50 job listings in the last month.
Lightwave - 14 jobs in all of 2009. None in the last month.
(try not to count double listings, unpaid, or posts in the wrong place)

A Creativeheads job search by software:

'Maya' returns 60 listings in the last month
'Max' returns 28 listings.
'Lightwave' shows 5...
One is scientific visualization, three are at the same Reno company making graphics for casino gaming machines (emphasis on logos and scripting), the other is that Dubai place doing commercials.

VFXpro job listings one month in December of '06:

Maya - 22
XSI - 7
Max - 6
LW - 4 (2 in the U.S.)
C4D - 4
Poser - 1
Unspecified - 5


Job listings one month from June of 07:

Maya - 41
Max - 11
XSI - 4
LW - 1
C4D - 2
Houdini - 4
Massive - 1
Unspecified - 10

Jan of '09:

Maya - 17
Max - 7
XSI - 1
LW - 0
Houdini - 3
Mudbox - 1
Zbrush - 1
Unspecified - 3

Some friends in the L.A. area who primarily know LW and work in production have been desperate to find work of late. Two of them went into compositing. One could no longer afford housing and had to move in with the inlaws. Others are turning to Maya or Max.

Economic times being what they are, it only makes sense to learn something other than Lightwave, be it 3D, 2D, scripting or air conditioner repair. People always need air conditioning.

My point is not about ego, but about surviving today. If 3D is your primary source of income, you gotta look at some facts.

jasonwestmas
06-24-2009, 05:43 PM
Ya, I'm not about to move to New Zealand to use Lightwave. . .yet.

cresshead
06-24-2009, 05:48 PM
well Maya does seem to be the app in demand in your listings...though you'd also say that lightwave, cienma4d and xsi look to be on the down turn and not just lightwave..

modo wasn't even listed....eeek!

zbrush are mudbox are on the up...
3dsmax is a constant second to maya.

if you have a copy of maya ple could be an idea to spend some time learning it as it's free.

also would be an idea to pick up zbrush or mudbox as they are both relativly cheap compared to maya or 3dsmax.

modo seems a dead duck job listing wise.

cresshead
06-24-2009, 05:50 PM
Ya, I'm not about to move to New Zealand to use Lightwave. . .yet.

splinegod's out in new zealand...:thumbsup:

jasonwestmas
06-24-2009, 05:53 PM
splinegod's out in new zealand...:thumbsup:

Yeah that's kinda why I said that, plus I see a lot of job listings for that country LOL.

Not to mention AutoDuck seems to be dominating the 3D market in the U.S. Lightwave seems to be more fully appreciated by companies outside the U.S. Less bias out there in the U.K. I suppose.

Mr Rid
06-24-2009, 06:08 PM
well Maya does seem to be the app in demand in your listings...though you'd also say that lightwave, cienma4d and xsi look to be on the down turn and not just lightwave..

modo wasn't even listed....eeek!

zbrush are mudbox are on the up...
3dsmax is a constant second to maya.

if you have a copy of maya ple could be an idea to spend some time learning it as it's free.

also would be an idea to pick up zbrush or mudbox as they are both relativly cheap compared to maya or 3dsmax.

modo seems a dead duck job listing wise.

I find that most CG jobs are filled thru word-of-mouth. Usually somebody knows somebody else. But job posts still represent the market. Modeling jobs are less app specific since the models may be exported in common formats.

IMI
06-24-2009, 06:30 PM
if you have a copy of maya ple could be an idea to spend some time learning it as it's free.


AutoRape discontinued the Maya PLE with Maya 2008, when they replaced it with the 30 day unlimited demo. So the last PLE version was 8.5. The only PLE download link I was able to find was at CNET, and their link now goes to the Maya 2009 trial page.
Just FYI. :)

cresshead
06-24-2009, 07:05 PM
yeah i have maya ple installed on a couple of pc's...and the ple was surposed to be making a comeback...but hasn't for whatever reason..
so it's always good to keep such older installs handy is it not?

btw it's Autodesk not autoduck or whatever...don't want to confuse people searching for a non existant company eh?:D

people should really try to rise above name calling as it doesn't help anyone i'm sure the people coding such apps work as hard as any company does to make a good and useful 3d app.

the eula and pricing is just one aspect of the software...it like other 3d apps can create compelling visual fx and help to tell out of this world stories in film, tv and games...they all make pretty pictures don't they?

IMI
06-24-2009, 07:16 PM
yeah i have maya ple installed on a couple of pc's...and the ple was surposed to be making a comeback...but hasn't for whatever reason..
so it's always good to keep such older installs handy is it not?


Probably a good idea. I still have it on a CD... somewhere buried in my stack of 5,000 CD's.





people should really try to rise above name calling as it doesn't help anyone i'm sure the people coding such apps work as hard as any company does to make a good and useful 3d app.



Let's see... how many things have you called Vista other than "Vista" just in the last couple of months? ;)

jasonwestmas
06-24-2009, 07:19 PM
Oh we aren't poking fun at the programmers, they just work for a living . . . you know that.

cresshead
06-24-2009, 08:05 PM
Probably a good idea. I still have it on a CD... somewhere buried in my stack of 5,000 CD's.



Let's see... how many things have you called Vista other than "Vista" just in the last couple of months? ;)


well...max, maya, cinema4d etc actually "work"...unlike blista!:D

those coders on blista should work harder and fix bugs and NOT introduce stupid ways of workin!
:D:)...i know i know...pot calling kettle black n all that bongo beating and rice pudding coated microwave oven!

IMI
06-25-2009, 02:51 AM
well...max, maya, cinema4d etc actually "work"...unlike blista!:D

those coders on blista should work harder and fix bugs and NOT introduce stupid ways of workin!


See though, I think it's funny. Coming from you, that is, since unlike alot of people, you always seem to have a sense of humor about it at least. :thumbsup:

Anyhow, I apologize for insulting your AutoDESK. I know how much they mean to you, how warm and fuzzy they make you feel inside, and it was terribly obnoxious of me to mock their good name.

Jason, you should apologize too, for calling them AutoDuck. That was just rude and uncalled for. ;)

PS: :neener:

IMI
06-25-2009, 08:52 AM
So I just spent the last few hours modeling something in Modeler, but came across a few things I thought might be easier to do in Maya.
So I saved out an OBJ file and sent that to my other computer that has the Maya 2009 demo installed on it... tried to remember how to do the things I wanted to do, figured that out after half an hour, decided while I was there in Maya I'd mess around with Mental Ray and some ZB displacements and normal maps... loads of fun. :bangwall:

So I sent all my files back to my main box and put it all back in LW, where it belonged. And you know what? It's easy to forget some times, but LW really kicks @ss. :)

meshpig
06-25-2009, 09:00 AM
Blasphemy! - Why, the next thing you'll be saying is Bacon butties are passe and we should all be eating Tofu! :devil:

Suffice to say, I ain't in your camp. :p My axe will be torched right alongside me when I go. :D

As to art, theory may have it's limits, but unless you're a master in every medium, I think the amount you can learn is far more than most people could achieve in a lifetime.
This said, learning 3D packages isn't about art, it's about learning tools and workflows, the art part comes in what you do once you've learned 'em, (depending on who you talk to). ;)

Mmm, I knew you were going to say that somehow? No, not at all...

- Science and Art should be distinct because they're two different modes of thought.

Yes, the art part is when you find a zone amidst the instrument itself. Depends too on what you call Art but you know it when you have it in any case and with something like the guitar your capacity to be affected by it increases exponentially.

Learning the instrument is a mixed business for both scientists and artists alike, but nothing to die for. The Guitar has had it's day, simple observation.

IMI
06-25-2009, 09:22 AM
The Guitar has had it's day, simple observation.

That's what they said back in the mid 70's during Disco... and then again in the early 80's with "New Wave", and then again with Rap and electronic music and who knows what else in the future.

The simple observation actually is, fads come and go and have their day, but pure mechanical instruments and straightforward music always wins out.

And the funny thing is, I feel I can say with 100% absolute certainty, a thousand years from now someone else will be saying the same thing to someone else. Probably it will be another guitar player, like me, saying it. ;)

jasonwestmas
06-25-2009, 09:33 AM
Jason, you should apologize too, for calling them AutoDuck. That was just rude and uncalled for. ;)

PS: :neener:

I will never apologize for goofy name calling that fits the goofy strategies of a company.:cool:

IMI
06-25-2009, 09:41 AM
I will never apologize for goofy name calling that fits the goofy strategies of a company.:cool:

Well since you put it that way, how about "AlienationDesk"? :D

Chuck
06-25-2009, 10:00 AM
You also have to regard what kind of opportunity and where it is located.

I watch CG job listings in southern California closely as well as listening to the grapevine. VFXpro and Creativeheads post jobs in many areas of entertainment including programming, adminstrative as well as CG. In the CG listings, the number of times 'Lightwave' appears as a software requirement has dwindled in recent years down to zero most months. I receive a weekly update with dozens of new Maya jobs and the same one LW listing for someplace in Dubai over and over. Flay may have three or four listings that are usually in London. Over and over I see 'software requirements: Maya, Maya, Maya...'

[snipped for brevity]

Some friends in the L.A. area who primarily know LW and work in production have been desperate to find work of late. Two of them went into compositing. One could no longer afford housing and had to move in with the inlaws. Others are turning to Maya or Max.

Economic times being what they are, it only makes sense to learn something other than Lightwave, be it 3D, 2D, scripting or air conditioner repair. People always need air conditioning.

My point is not about ego, but about surviving today. If 3D is your primary source of income, you gotta look at some facts.

A few anecdotes put together is not sufficient to indicate anything substantive about the situation. With little to no effort anyone can find and quote stories about users of any package struggling for work.

As you noted elsewhere, most jobs in the field are filled through word-of-mouth, and from my experience that's certainly the case with most LightWave jobs. I keep in contact with a lot of LightWave users in the VFX field and they keep very busy. A lot are steady at particular houses, but those that move around and work project to project have pretty much zero down time between. A number of houses have added LightWave divisions this past year, and in general if there were in fact more people developing LightWave skills, the industry would like to have them. I hear this both from houses in Vancouver and in California.

In the most recent industry study across all 3D segments for which I've heard results (about 3 years back, I think), of the commercial packages Max had the most seats overall (based largely on strength in games, which dwarfs all other segments), and LightWave was second overall, and well ahead of Maya. Maya does have a solid lead in the film segment but the numbers for second and third in that segment were in fact very respectable.

For more than a decade and a half artists using LightWave 3D have been bringing home Emmy awards, because LightWave gets a lot of use in television effects and animation. At most times it's been the dominant package in terms of seats in that industry, and when it hasn't been at the top it has been a very close number 2. And there is a lot of work to be had there, and growing.

Skills in more than one package would be a good choice, given the common presence of multiple packages, each used for their strengths, in modern production pipelines. However, there is plenty of demand for good LightWave artists, and no one should be reluctant to learn it on the grounds of employability. It's not the case, and never has been. To the contrary, there is good reason to make it one of the packages you are skilled in.

RebelHill
06-25-2009, 11:05 AM
if there were in fact more people developing LightWave skills, the industry would like to have them.

Hello!!! Over here... Rig Much??


In the most recent industry study across all 3D segments for which I've heard results (about 3 years back, I think), of the commercial packages Max had the most seats overall (based largely on strength in games, which dwarfs all other segments), and LightWave was second overall, and well ahead of Maya.

I assume this is referring to the roncarelli report... at least thats where I last heard these same figures... and its a pretty accurate and thorough evaluation that robbi fella seems to deliver.

Nicolas Jordan
06-25-2009, 12:14 PM
As you noted elsewhere, most jobs in the field are filled through word-of-mouth, and from my experience that's certainly the case with most LightWave jobs.

Yep I definitely agree with that. For the most part Lightwave users are a tightly nit community and most times a job is filled without any need to post it. I live up here in the middle of nowhere and make a decent living using Lightwave for the past 2 years at a local company I hooked up with through these very forums. :)

colkai
06-26-2009, 02:17 AM
The Guitar has had it's day, simple observation.

We shall agree to disagree then.
I'll take it over 2 minutes of throwaway sampling any monkey can do anyway. :)

I am curious though, if you think little of them, why have one as your avatar? :p

meshpig
06-26-2009, 02:32 AM
The simple observation actually is, fads come and go and have their day, but pure mechanical instruments and straightforward music always wins out.

And the funny thing is, I feel I can say with 100% absolute certainty, a thousand years from now someone else will be saying the same thing to someone else. Probably it will be another guitar player, like me, saying it. ;)

I agree just that you most likely won’t see another Jimi Hendrix or another round of the guitar heroes of the 70’s ( I mean some people still play a mean Accordion you know...? ).

- There's a guitar piece at the end of Steve Reich's "Different trains"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmzcieeF9TU

I think it's Pat Metheny from memory, (haven't heard it for years) which would have been unimaginable in the 70's. "Had it's day" in as much as
not many que up to see a guitar in action.

meshpig
06-26-2009, 04:51 AM
We shall agree to disagree then.
I'll take it over 2 minutes of throwaway sampling any monkey can do anyway. :)

I am curious though, if you think little of them, why have one as your avatar? :p

Synchronicity? I asked myself the same question but it isn't that I think so little of them. I just don't have anything much more to do there apart from the odd evening where we sit around singing Motown songs and whatever just for fun.

Making a living out of it is a different story as you probably know but yeah, the technique is a fabulous thing just that I hate the sound of the guitar mostly. Like John Cage's prepared piano, all you hear now is the mechanism.

- The piano was designed to bend your ear to a perfect octave but it's just as bendable to a 7 note one and even the rhythm of a tumble drier or a washing machine can affect your musical channels, so to speak. Sound! Ironically, the traditional orchestra had a much better handle on it than modern acoustics.

I'll leave that one with you.

colkai
06-26-2009, 07:12 AM
Heh, as I say, we'll never agree, but I'm the same when it comes to stuff like the 'sampling' that passes for music now, can't stand the sound.
Doesn't matter who does it or what..ahem.."song"..it is supposed to be, all the same, as if there is only 3 patches in the world.

I do lose some of the sound now, since I became deaf in one ear, but I get more out of my guitar now than recorded music. Can't even have music in the car now as the sonics combined with road noise just make me feel sick. :(

Anyhoo, I fear I have derailed this thread long enough. :p

meshpig
06-26-2009, 08:01 AM
Heh, as I say, we'll never agree, but I'm the same when it comes to stuff like the 'sampling' that passes for music now, can't stand the sound.
Doesn't matter who does it or what..ahem.."song"..it is supposed to be, all the same, as if there is only 3 patches in the world.

I do lose some of the sound now, since I became deaf in one ear, but I get more out of my guitar now than recorded music. Can't even have music in the car now as the sonics combined with road noise just make me feel sick. :(

Anyhoo, I fear I have derailed this thread long enough. :p

Apparently not, but you might be overly subjecting yourself to an English myth?
If you live long enough you'll be able to see the "Beatles" as just an extension of "keep the home fires burning"... or as in still parked in a wine bar in Paris after closing time, a sing-song.

- As an Australian what the furk are you supposed to sing? As an Englishman "Hey Jude" will do nicely:D

An FM radio logo here, dumb **** for a winged phallus...

Andyjaggy
06-26-2009, 08:12 AM
You won't go wrong learning LW but.......................

I would NOT make it the only application you know. I would pair Lightwave with Maya, Max, or XSI.

colkai
06-26-2009, 09:04 AM
If you live long enough you'll be able to see the "Beatles" as just an extension of "keep the home fires burning"... or as in still parked in a wine bar in Paris after closing time, a sing-song.

As I don't like the Beatles, I'm probably a heretic hereabouts anyhoo! ;)


- As an Australian what the furk are you supposed to sing?
Waltzing Matilda? :p

3dWannabe
06-26-2009, 09:19 AM
In the June issue of Computer Graphics World, LW was used in Angels & Demons by CIS for one part they didn't use Maya for. I've seen that it was used in IronMan, Speed Racer, and a host of other major flicks - as well as almost ALL of the special effect TV shows on today.

So LW continues to be relevant.

I am exploring other tools, and recently purchased Modo 401, with the intention of using it along with LW to model - but using LW to surface, animate and render.

But - I'm very new to all this. Has anything changed in 401 that would alter this?

I know LW is the spot on winner for animation, but I'm curious about Modo's new surfacing.

Even if Modo had a great renderer (wasn't that one of their weak points), would you be able to render using Modo node surfaces created in LW (one of LW's strong points, I gather)? And can LW render a surface created in Modo?

So, I'm very interested in how others are using LW 9.6/Modo 401 combination (as I'm in so far over my head with LW/Modo and RealFlow, that I think I'll actually try to learn these tools before looking at anything else).

meshpig
06-27-2009, 05:05 AM
As I don't like the Beatles, I'm probably a heretic hereabouts anyhoo! ;)


Waltzing Matilda? :p

Ha! Pretty sure I've never actually engaged it in song. Besides, Australians can't sing as a rule so it's doubly ugly.

Ah, I remember what it was about the guitar... Brian May atop Buckingham Palace doing "Bohemian Rhapsody".

Mmm, r&r will never die because Sir Elton, Sir Paul and Sir Mick and in the name of St Michael and St John...

Uriens: "What , a noble knight give service to a Squire"?

Arthur: "You're right I am not yet a Knight, you Uriens will Knight me".

cresshead
06-27-2009, 05:23 AM
You won't go wrong learning LW but.......................

I would NOT make it the only application you know. I would pair Lightwave with Maya, Max, or XSI.

wow an on topic post...so surprised i nealy fell off my chair!

meshpig
06-27-2009, 06:02 AM
wow an on topic post...so surprised i nealy fell off my chair!

Mmm, hopefully not too badly? Maybe you shouldn't drink so much when you view posts?:D

- If you want all on topic, go visit the Architectural and Visualization or the Game Development section where you're lucky to get 1 response period.

m

cresshead
06-27-2009, 05:57 PM
okay, marv take his name & number...we'll call you if we need you...

next...

Mr Rid
07-06-2009, 08:07 PM
A few anecdotes put together is not sufficient to indicate anything substantive about the situation. With little to no effort anyone can find and quote stories about users of any package struggling for work.

I put a little bit more info together in that post than a few anecdotes. And to clarify those anecdotes- LW friends used to not have trouble finding work and could even afford to be picky about the type of work. Lately, the situation changed here around the entertainment capitol. LW work is getting a little harder to come by, period. They may find jobs but may have to be less picky about the type of work or the location. But we are all realizing we need to know something besides LW for income security. Some of the more nomadic types have even moved out of country to find work, but those with a family and a mortgage are a little more concerned about a shift in opportunities, given the economy and a number of animation/FX houses going out of biz.



As you noted elsewhere, most jobs in the field are filled through word-of-mouth, and from my experience that's certainly the case with most LightWave jobs. I keep in contact with a lot of LightWave users in the VFX field and they keep very busy. A lot are steady at particular houses, but those that move around and work project to project have pretty much zero down time between. A number of houses have added LightWave divisions this past year, and in general if there were in fact more people developing LightWave skills, the industry would like to have them. I hear this both from houses in Vancouver and in California.

In the most recent industry study across all 3D segments for which I've heard results (about 3 years back, I think), of the commercial packages Max had the most seats overall (based largely on strength in games, which dwarfs all other segments), and LightWave was second overall, and well ahead of Maya. Maya does have a solid lead in the film segment but the numbers for second and third in that segment were in fact very respectable.

For more than a decade and a half artists using LightWave 3D have been bringing home Emmy awards, because LightWave gets a lot of use in television effects and animation. At most times it's been the dominant package in terms of seats in that industry, and when it hasn't been at the top it has been a very close number 2. And there is a lot of work to be had there, and growing.

Skills in more than one package would be a good choice, given the common presence of multiple packages, each used for their strengths, in modern production pipelines. However, there is plenty of demand for good LightWave artists, and no one should be reluctant to learn it on the grounds of employability. It's not the case, and never has been. To the contrary, there is good reason to make it one of the packages you are skilled in.

As long as no one is pretending the LW job market is anywhere near equal to Maya's. I imagine that the ratio of jobs posted online compared to jobs floating around by word-of-mouth are about the same per specified app requirement. So I see the job post totals I listed as a fair indicator of the market majority.

The newly coded Core is going to be a complete, competitive, and stable production tool... when exactly? How about Modo...? While you're waiting, I see no reason to put off adding another tool set to your utility belt that is already well established and with a substantial job market.

jasonwestmas
07-06-2009, 08:47 PM
"I see no reason to put off adding another tool set to your utility belt that is already well established and with a substantial job market."

I agree with this of course,

There is no reason to be mono-app centric, that's the way it goes. This is just reality if we want to keep our opportunities up. There is no real reason to be protective of lightwave either unless someone is just plain lying about it. LW speaks for itself amongst those who know what it is

sadkkf
07-08-2009, 02:18 PM
Interesting thread.

I've been using LW since 5.0 and love it as much as I hate it. Interface is great. Usability is great. Rendering is great...toolset is wimpy, 3rd party support ... well, it sucks.

I love LW for non-organic renders like arch-vis (LW CAD rules!) and robots, cars, etc, but for anything organic it really falls flat. I need realistic grass, fire, cloth, some fluids...but out of the box it takes way too long to finesse any usable results and even then they're not quite photorealistic.

I recently bought Max and XSI (XSI just before the devil's acquisition) and yeah, the interfaces are intimidating and stupidly organized, but, man, they work! Hair and fur with a few clicks. And who can argue the 3rd party support for Max? I still haven't found anything close to fumeFX. Someone said he wussed out by using it, but I can't find better results. Too bad Dynamite is still so shaky; that had promise. I'd get into Maya, but who the f can afford that?

Depending on your situation, it may not matter the tools you use. I'm self-employed and no one cares how I create what I do as long as it looks how they want. If you're looking for a job for someone else, yeah, I can see LW being ignored. All we can do is hope CORE re-invigorates the market for LW.

Intuition
07-08-2009, 06:36 PM
Yeah, I wissed out and used fumeFX.

The context of saying "wussed out" means that I wasn't man enough to hunker down and make hypervoxels try and do the same thing I could get from fume FX. I actually did use dynamite a few years back but by the time I got it looking good the sim took 3 days and the renders were 4-5 hours a frame w motion blur.

FumeFX did the same thing in like a 5 minute sim and 12 min per frame render at full HD. Looked great and was much more detailed then the dynamite fluid sim.

So, yeah, I wussed out since I wanted to go home at a decent hour. ;)

SplineGod
07-08-2009, 06:40 PM
And Ill bet you HATED that paycheck too... ;)

Intuition
07-08-2009, 07:35 PM
I've found that getting a big fat paycheck for multiple days ending at 3am will only work until another guy comes along and does it in one day ending at 3pm and it looks much better.

Then you have to go find another place to get paychecks from. I'll take the latter everytime.

toby
07-08-2009, 07:59 PM
In the June issue of Computer Graphics World, LW was used in Angels & Demons by CIS for one part they didn't use Maya for. I've seen that it was used in IronMan, Speed Racer
No lw in speed racer, not even modeling or pre-viz. One media test still was done in lw well before the movie.
Iron Man used t well beyond previz of course, and in Star Trek it was used for the robot cop's mask in the beginning. That was in cinefx I hear -

Dodgy
07-09-2009, 01:27 AM
Interesting thread.
I recently bought Max and XSI ...
... I'd get into Maya, but who the f can afford that?


You could if you gave max and xsi a miss.....

Max $3495
XSI $2995

Maya unlimited $4995 Complete $1995

3495+2995> 4995 >> 1995 >> 995.00 (LW 9 price)

3dWannabe
07-09-2009, 07:18 AM
No lw in speed racer, not even modeling or pre-viz. One media test still was done in lw well before the movie.
Iron Man used t well beyond previz of course, and in Star Trek it was used for the robot cop's mask in the beginning. That was in cinefx I hear -

Yeah, I guess I misread this article in cgw.com, the fragments by themselves say something different than the entire story.

http://www.cgw.com/Publications/CGW/2009/Volume-32-Issue-2-Feb-2009-/Fit-Crew.aspx

In the all-CG “Defense Mechanism,” a semi-realistic Honda Fit (left) faces a gas-guzzler (middle), which, like the cityscape and the puffed-up Fit (right), is super-stylized. The artists built the models in LightWave, while surface shaders developed for Speed Racer gave the vehicles their shine.
---
As a matter of fact, the project was mostly done in LightWave, from modeling, to lighting, to rendering. “Richard Morton is strongest in lighting hard-surface objects in LightWave, and built a team around him with those capabilities,” notes Parker. A number of the developments for Speed Racer were indeed used for this project, ..

Intuition
07-09-2009, 08:44 AM
As a matter of fact, the project was mostly done in LightWave, from modeling, to lighting, to rendering. “Richard Morton is strongest in lighting hard-surface objects in LightWave, and built a team around him with those capabilities,” notes Parker. A number of the developments for Speed Racer were indeed used for this project, ..

Hmm, I am like 20 feet from Richard Morton on a daily basis and he was telling all about the shaders in Mental Ray that were developed for Speed Racer's cars last Dec. Also, Mike Lusby told me all about the custome DD render optimizations that were done in maya to help Mental Ray speed up the render times.

I know a few cars were modeled in XSI because of the articles on XSI base but I am sure that a few cars were modeled in LW's modeler. But the Honda Fit may have been done mostly in LW.

3dWannabe
07-09-2009, 08:57 AM
KC - I'm sorry - I was just giving you the quotes from that article, when read out of context indicated that LW was used for Speed Racer.

I misread them, and was showing you what I misread.

I wasn't questioning whether you were right, I was just showing my source (which did mention LW being used for OTHER projects, so I thought I'd include the mag url as the topic of this post is about jumping).

Intuition
07-09-2009, 09:04 AM
And I am not even saying that you are wrong but rather, I've been told otherwise is all. :)

;) Its all good. :D

sadkkf
07-09-2009, 10:12 AM
I'm not really sure it can be "wussing out" to use a different plugin. I've had way too many long- and allnighters to consider using a specific tool wussing out.

Yeah, I love LW and want to use it wherever I can, but in the end, I just need to get the job done quickly and with the best results; if that means using the devil's software, okay. I simply can't justify spending hours or days trying to get the look from hypervoxels when fumeFX has a button for it.

This just goes back to the idea of weak 3rd party support for LW. No pun intended, but the core of LW is solid. It's just lacking in some areas like fire, fur and cloth and there doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in developing plugs to fill these gaps. Whatever happened to Dynamic Realities? Those were decent, but seemed to fall off the planet.

If I ever get the time, I'd love to develop a decent fire shader for LW and have some good ideas about how it could work. I just need to learn C++ to get it done. :)

Andyjaggy
07-09-2009, 12:00 PM
Forcing yourself to do everything in one package when you know there is a much easier and better solution elsewhere is just dumb.

Especially if you have access to those other tools. People get way to emotionally attached to software around here.