View Poll Results: How important do you think it is for Lightwave to be unified?

Voters
130. You may not vote on this poll
  • Lightwave needs to be unified, and should be a huge priority moving forward.

    38 29.23%
  • It would be nice to have Lightwave unified but not a deal breaker for me.

    55 42.31%
  • Lightwave is fine the way it is with Modeler and Layout.

    37 28.46%
Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 120

Thread: Poll: Lightwave unified or not?

  1. #91
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    376
    I just want to say, I think the poles are misleading. Very few are actually against unification. A lot are however, for fixing other issues, or adding other features first. For instance, if you told me LW could be unified in 3 years, I'd say that's great. Then if you told me it would be at that point that you could begin to work on all the features we've been living without, like good native UV tools, smoothing groups, animation layers, etc, so it will be more like 5 years before we get to actually use those features, I would say that is a little less great. On the other hand if you said, we can implement a bunch of the commonly requested features that we need everyday, right now, and then be unified in 6 years, I might say that would work for me as well. In fact it might be better for me, because I personally spend more time doing UVs than motion graphics or simulations. (I do those things too by the way, and do want unification)

    In any case, I think that is where people are coming from. Wanting the everyday tools that would make their lives easier now, over the long term benefits of unification. Other companies seem to have teams working on both future and current needs simultaneously. NT tries to run a lean operation for better or worse.

    So while the "give me tools now" crowd might seem short sighted, having those tools to actually use every day for the next 5 years vs waiting years for unification then getting those tools, does make some sense. Hopefully they are closer to getting modeling in layout with the work that has been done. Ultimately without Layout geo manipulation LW is stuck in a lot of ways. But since it has been stuck without lots of other tools too, that they might be able to do something about. Progress is perhaps more important than which progress they make. Long term they have to make that breakthrough. Short term they just have to keep making it better, and keep it alive.

  2. #92
    unification all the way... everything else is waste of development time on such small team like LW3DG is. its duplicating code work.. not to tell we need modeling tools with animable parameters.
    Last edited by mav3rick; 12-18-2017 at 03:31 PM.
    new web page up www.null.hr

  3. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by mav3rick View Post
    unification all the way EOD... everything else is waste of development time on such small team like LW3DG is. its duplicating code work.. not to tell we need modeling tools with animable parameters.
    Duplucating modeler tools in layout would be LITERALLY duplicating code work. Your argument that complete unification is the most important use of resources for a small team is the same argument that some of us have of against a unification-Uber-alles approach. Resources are limited so give us what we need or we will be forced to find other options. We WANT unification and all the advantages we know it offers, but we NEED modern industry standard PBR materials and rendering, just to give an example. If lw 2018 had shipped with a first generation modeling/uv toolset in layout With a cleaner architecture but fewer tools than we have now together with an untouched old renderer how hot do you think it would be? My guess would be “not very”.

    Also somehow there is this idea going around that just because lightwave is two apps everything needs to be done twice. I seriously doubt that is true. I am sure parts of SOME things needed to be done twice, but I seriously doubt it is as big a development cost as some people make it out to be.
    Last edited by hypersuperduper; 12-18-2017 at 03:46 PM.

  4. #94

    it was mentioned somewhere that new Modeler tools were going to be made in such a way so that they could more easily be transferred over to Layout.
    (can't find that quote)

    if that still goes... no idea.

    Duplicating modeler tools in layout would be LITERALLY duplicating code work.
    Absolutely. In the Beginning.

    look 15 years ahead, LightWave is still a split app, with the all the limitations and duplicate codework that brings.
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  5. #95
    My biggest concern with unifying Lightwave is that it needs to be done right and must carefully planned. If not done carefully it is something that could go terribly wrong. Someone definitely has to have a a grand vision to accomplish this great technical feat that has illuded Lightwave so far.
    Threadripper 2990WX, X399 MSI MEG Creation, 64GB 2400Mhz RAM, GTX 1070 Ti 8GB

    https://www.dynamicrenderings.com/

  6. #96
    Super Member samurai_x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    lalaland
    Posts
    1,231
    Quote Originally Posted by 50one View Post
    And here we F going again....
    Unification even if needed won't happen.

    Need to mark this thread to check again in 2025.
    This does feel like deja vu.
    Happened after lw 10 was release
    Happened somewhere between lw 11 to 2015.

    Anyway people can dream even if it won't come true. Pipe dream especially if majority of lw users left and some developers themselves don't see it as priority.

    See another poll in 2021.

  7. #97
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    1,848
    two independent polls and both point to unification as a longer term goal.

  8. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    568
    Yes, but in which direction? Node based modeling like Houdini, destructive, nurbs, polygons, parametric like catia?
    English is not my native language so please be patient.

    Salvador Ureņa
    http://urenasalvador.wixsite.com/portfolio

  9. #99
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    1,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Asticles View Post
    Yes, but in which direction? Node based modeling like Houdini, destructive, nurbs, polygons, parametric like catia?
    well we have nodes. i’m sure they can be hooked up to drive inputs.
    non destructive parametric would be good.

    modos system, where you have non destructive and old skool immediate seems like a nice blend, for speed and flexibility.
    Last edited by gar26lw; 12-19-2017 at 04:39 AM.

  10. #100
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    568
    If I had to try one, I would go to something like Blender's Animation Nodes.

    Sverchok is too difficult for me. :P

    Edit: This would add a whole universe of possibilities for making motion graphics in Lightwave.
    Last edited by Asticles; 12-19-2017 at 04:16 AM.
    English is not my native language so please be patient.

    Salvador Ureņa
    http://urenasalvador.wixsite.com/portfolio

  11. #101
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by Asticles View Post
    Yes, but in which direction? Node based modeling like Houdini, destructive, nurbs, polygons, parametric like catia?
    nodes, nodes and more nodes.

  12. #102
    RETROGRADER prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    sweden stockholm
    Posts
    15,118
    Someone here in the post wrote something about not understanding why we would be afraid of unification and you could just as easy set up various vieports or themes to be modeler or layout kind of thing, I donīt think itīs that easy...what I could agree on would be to simply open two instances of a unified lightwave exefiles, where you can have one of them set to modeling environment and the other as layout environment, in such way it would be more close to keep it "seperated" but new unified anyway..and with an option to work with certain models in one instance and analyze a scene in the other instance, though it would still require a way of sending a model back and forth between the two instances...I you need to do that.

    I simply donīt think itīs as easy two try and work out a theme in one single app that allows for similar environment, what we see today is options to change to modeler interface or a layout interface in blender and in modo for example..but no proper way as I see it to seperate the items within the application, meaning a model that isnīt in the scene, and a scene that isnīt affecting the model window, and a switch to choose when you want them to work together.

    Itīs a bit hard to explain unfortunately.

  13. #103
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    4,146
    Quote Originally Posted by gar26lw View Post
    i am guessing there can be a flag set in the startup shortcut that would have the app only have modelling stuff and another set that only has layout stuff?
    For years, I have been suggesting the idea of a unified application with "workspaces", preset views that switch your toolset between modeling and layout. You can have a unified program without having to have a cluttered workspace.

    No reason to radically change your workflow. A unified system would negate having to deal with the Hub, which has been known to flake out from time to time.

  14. #104
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    a place
    Posts
    1,848
    Quote Originally Posted by prometheus View Post
    I simply donīt think itīs as easy two try and work out a theme in one single app that allows for similar environment, what we see today is options to change to modeler interface or a layout interface in blender and in modo for example..but no proper way as I see it to seperate the items within the application, meaning a model that isnīt in the scene, and a scene that isnīt affecting the model window, and a switch to choose when you want them to work together.

    Itīs a bit hard to explain unfortunately.
    you mean like lightwave?

    unreal might be an example, with its blueprints and model editor.

  15. #105
    Axes grinder- Dongle #99
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    14,732
    I'd like a list of exactly what tasks are enhanced by having a "unified" app.

    Certainly it would be good to be able to easily and usefully manipulate points/edges/polys/{sets of each} in Layout, mostly from a deformation aspect.
    They only call it 'class warfare' when we fight back.
    Praise to Buddha! #resist
    Chard's Credo-"Documentation is PART of the Interface"
    Film the cops. Always FILM THE COPS. Use this app.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •