Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 76

Thread: What is LightWave when you really think about it?

  1. #46
    Well talk to Oliver yourself, not my place to say what he's thinking or doing, I only said what I had seen him say in response to whether he had converted to Houdini from LW. His response was pretty much. Take it for what you will. Believe it, don't believe it doesn't matter.
    As I already mentioned, I'm sure he will continue to support the tools he's made, he is very skilled with Python so I imagine its not hard for him to tweak the code when issues arrive. I just can't imagine he's spending a lot of time these days making new tools for LW, unless its to transfer information from Houdini to LW.

  2. #47
    Super Member Chris S. (Fez)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,935
    Thanks Steve.

  3. #48
    Founding member raymondtrace's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    ...not my place to say what he's thinking or doing...
    Then why are you?

    People and software come and go. Let them do it on their own. You don't need to keep score.
    LW7.5D, 2015, 2018, 2019 running portably on a USB drive on an Amiga 2500 running Wine.

  4. #49

    well, i guess the point is to say that less and less people are using LightWave, a thing already covered to a great extent in another thread.

    [cough!] https://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?159804
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  5. #50
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    Of course LW are two apps. But we were talking about modeling were we not?
    In the context of what you believe LW lacks, it is facetious to omit Layout simply because it doesn't have the word "model" in it.

    When you say that Modeler can't do procedurals, or everything is destructive in Modeler, you are making a true statement (although I would argue that straight modeling stack modifiers in other programs are simply "undo" with a selectable list)... but only insomuch as it pertains to Modeler, the part of Lightwave that wasn't designed to animate or procedurally generate anything, or make non-destructive modifications to a mesh.

    That doesn't make Modeler simple. It is equally as complex and proficient at what is was designed to do as any other 3d application.

    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    There is nothing procedural about modeler. Everything it does and everything third parties do are completely destructive in modeler and 99% of everything modeler does is not able to be animated in Layout. I dont' see how LightWave also shipping with Layout changes that argument.
    I'm not sure what you mean by "99% of everything modeler does is not able to be animated in Layout". Modeler is for creating mesh models; Layout is for animating those meshes. The two do not have the same tasks.

    If you believe that simply because the creation of a mesh and its animation occurs in the same interface, that also means they are programmatically the same operation, you are mistaken.

    The only difference between Lightwave and other 3d applications (not including actual tools LW doesn't have) is those things occur in physically separate programs.

    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    I haven't used Mayas or Max's UV tools but I've seen enough tutorials in them to know that the UV tools might not be the brightest thing out there, but they're still a far cry away from LW's UV set which lacks a lot of functionality(and pretty sure Maya uses Unfold 3D at least for packing directly in app which is great).
    They are honestly pretty much the same as LW. I've used them and I can tell you, no one is starting the UV revolution over at Autodesk. That's not to say they are bad; they're just not in the same category as the third-party solutions.

    And the fact that Maya uses the Unfold 3d algorithm just reinforces my argument about third-party solutions.

    Also, I know they don't include it now, but Lightwave 9 shipped with Unfold 3d as well. I still have it on my system.

    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    And yes, of course third party tools like Rizom or 3DCoat are good for UVs because they can specialize(substance painter has no UV tools), but then the whole point is to rely on third parties when it becomes necessary. Modo has great UV tools and for the most part, it does most of what I need but Rizom fills in where it doesn't. But sometimes you just need a simple unwrap, relax and pack sending everything to rizom to have to relax and pack things would get annoying quick.
    Probably 35% of the UV work I do is in LW, straight up. ABF Unwrap lays things out pretty quickly; and if I need finer control, I can part out the UV in planar. That takes a bit longer, but is still very workable.

    I turn to 3d Coat when it absolutely positively has to be spot on; in my work, that's normally when I am compositing my 3d with video and the object is the subject. That's about 40% of the time.

    The other 30% of the time I am using straight PBR materials, with or without procedural textures, no UV required.

    So the amount of UV work I do natively in LW isn't honestly that much less than the amount I do in 3d Coat.

    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    And this isn't about finding an uber app that does everything. That's not the point. Of course people use different apps. The whole point of this thread was to suggest that LW is a base for third party tools. I simply suggested that every app is that (which is exactly what you're suggesting here so that we are in agreement). However you objected to me defining Modeler as simple so not sure what any of this last part has anything to do with that. Modeler pushes points, polygons and edges. Period.
    My problem with your definition of Modeler as "simple" is that in your list of complaints illustrating how simple Modeler is, nearly every point is something that Modeler wasn't actually designed to do; it is something Layout was designed to do.

    That has nothing to do with its level of simplicity in relation to other 3d applications, or even its level of simplicity in general. It only pertains to the lack of direct integration of Modeler and Layout.

  6. #51
    Sigh. I'm not omitting Layout, I'm just saying they are completely separated. Not just that they're in 'different' UI's as you suggest, just that the tools in modeler exist to do one function, whatever that task is, and once you drop that tool, that function is gone forever. And suggesting that stacks in other applications are simply undos in a list, just tells me you're not seeing the complexity for what it is and don't understand the implications of procedural modeling. Those lists can be reordered to completely change the behavior of a set of modeling tasks. And they also can work in a multi-layered fashion so that a new mesh operation not only doesn't undo a previous operation, but can also have an additive effect to gain the benefits of both(or more) tools, and being able to edit that behavior anywhere along the way. Just using Blender for instance, I can have a bevel modifier, a solidify modifier(thicken essentially) and a procedural Boolean all operating on the same mesh at once. I can at any point adjust the shape of my Boolean cutter, change the thickness of the mesh shell and change the width, shape or round level of my bevel (or even the edges it affects either all or by angle or edge weighting) and all of those operations are working together and not destroying any previous modifier or work beneath it. This is why modeler is simple for one example.
    And Again, this has nothing to do with simply being in the same interface. This is the fact that modeler was designed to work on points, polys and edges. And that's it. That is all it does and it is the only app out there with that limit on modeling. There is no procedural modeling in Layout so not even sure why you keep bringing Layout up.
    Unfold is integrated with Maya, it simply didn't ship with Maya as a promotional offer.
    You keep saying that Modeler isn't simple, yet in the same breath you say that Modeler wasn't designed to do what every other app now does which is have a non-destructive workflow in modeling practices. Why is that not simple? The programmers of LW never had to worry about working with animation envelopes, or stack based workflows. At its heart, all modeler had to do was move vertices around in a multitude of ways. One destructive operation at a time. You don't think that's simpler?

  7. #52
    'the write stuff' SBowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The stars at night are big and bright
    Posts
    19,348
    Do we really have to do this? Really? Is anyone's view changed by it? Is it any more 'informative' or 'constructive' than the previous 50 or so nearly identical threads propagated by nearly the same people? Show of hands, how many are just dying to hear it again.
    --
    Regards, Steve
    Forum Moderator
    ("You've got to ask yourself one question ... 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, spammer?")

  8. #53

    well, at least this thread started on a positive note.

    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  9. #54
    Yeah okay Modeler has some (a lot ) issues and layout has a slow renderer, but it makes me a living and the renders look amazing.
    Tim Parsons
    Technical Designer
    Sauder Woodworking Co.

    http://www.sauder.com

  10. #55
    A.K.A "The Silver Fox" Gungho3D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Oztralia
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Parsons View Post
    Yeah okay Modeler has some (a lot ) issues and layout has a slow renderer, but it makes me a living and the renders look amazing.
    +1 Yep, it has been the mainstay of income for many years for me

  11. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Parsons View Post
    Yeah okay Modeler has some (a lot ) issues and layout has a slow renderer, but it makes me a living and the renders look amazing.
    That's all that matters Tim. If it works for you, awesome.

  12. #57
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by hrgiger View Post
    Sigh. I'm not omitting Layout, I'm just saying they are completely separated. Not just that they're in 'different' UI's as you suggest, just that the tools in modeler exist to do one function, whatever that task is, and once you drop that tool, that function is gone forever. And suggesting that stacks in other applications are simply undos in a list, just tells me you're not seeing the complexity for what it is and don't understand the implications of procedural modeling. Those lists can be reordered to completely change the behavior of a set of modeling tasks. And they also can work in a multi-layered fashion so that a new mesh operation not only doesn't undo a previous operation, but can also have an additive effect to gain the benefits of both(or more) tools, and being able to edit that behavior anywhere along the way. Just using Blender for instance, I can have a bevel modifier, a solidify modifier(thicken essentially) and a procedural Boolean all operating on the same mesh at once. I can at any point adjust the shape of my Boolean cutter, change the thickness of the mesh shell and change the width, shape or round level of my bevel (or even the edges it affects either all or by angle or edge weighting) and all of those operations are working together and not destroying any previous modifier or work beneath it. This is why modeler is simple for one example.
    And Again, this has nothing to do with simply being in the same interface. This is the fact that modeler was designed to work on points, polys and edges. And that's it. That is all it does and it is the only app out there with that limit on modeling. There is no procedural modeling in Layout so not even sure why you keep bringing Layout up.
    Unfold is integrated with Maya, it simply didn't ship with Maya as a promotional offer.
    You keep saying that Modeler isn't simple, yet in the same breath you say that Modeler wasn't designed to do what every other app now does which is have a non-destructive workflow in modeling practices. Why is that not simple? The programmers of LW never had to worry about working with animation envelopes, or stack based workflows. At its heart, all modeler had to do was move vertices around in a multitude of ways. One destructive operation at a time. You don't think that's simpler?
    In the end, maybe it really just boils down to different approaches to modeling.

    I use 3ds Max sparingly nowadays, but even when it was my primary software, I rarely made direct changes to the modifier stack.

    Possibly because most of what I model is based on real-world objects and people; once I used a tool, I either liked it or didn't like it. If I didn't, I would CTRL+Z and do it again. If I needed to go further back, autosave had a file waiting and ready to load.

    The majority of my time in Max was spent pushing points. I think that's the majority of what most of us do.

    Just to confirm that I wasn't having an aneurysm or a memory lapse, I asked the other four 3d artists on my team who have gone back to Max how often they actually used the modifier stack (as opposed to simply undoing / redoing).

    They just shook their heads no; the consensus was, they rarely used the modifier stack as opposed to just undo and do it again.

    When I was moved to Lightwave due to employer budget constraints, I honestly thought I was downgrading.

    I can say today that it wasn't a downgrade; and even though now I have 3ds Max back, I didn't rush back to it like a long-lost friend. In fact, when I go back to it for anything, it feels clunky and slow. And the modifier stack wasn't even on my radar of things that I thought I missed about it.

    But I definitely can't agree that not having a modifier stack makes Modeler simple. Boiling down the range of tools in Modeler to simple because of the lack of this one feature is, in my opinion, more than a little exaggeration.

    I started on Ray Dream Designer. If you want to see simple, that software epitomized it.

    I mention Layout because currently, that's where the object modifier stack is. It actually has most of the object modifiers I care about, especially when I am animating. Even then, I rarely use them except for displacements, which I use often.

    So there it is. Maybe on that subject, it really just boils down to the user.

    Quote Originally Posted by SBowie View Post
    Do we really have to do this? Really? Is anyone's view changed by it? Is it any more 'informative' or 'constructive' than the previous 50 or so nearly identical threads propagated by nearly the same people? Show of hands, how many are just dying to hear it again.
    Sorry Steve and more importantly, sorry OP for being part of the derailment.

    On the original subject; I think LW is definitely a platform for the expanded capabilities that third-party developers provide, and it's a solid one.

    I think that its continued relevance in that area is completely dependent on VizRT and the LW3DG; how much do they want to pursue? What can be done in-house?

    How much are they willing to invest (in time and money) in expanding their capabilities through cooperation and licensing with third party application developers to make the experience of using those applications more seamless?

    The base is solid. Where it will go from here has a lot of dependencies.

  13. #58
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Oxford, UK
    Posts
    761
    I am totally not a coder, but I suspect learning Python might help. I do have Ryan's course in the queue somewhere.....and I do love his still at 0:44.

  14. #59

    I use 3ds Max sparingly nowadays, but even when it was my primary software, I rarely made direct changes to the modifier stack.

    Possibly because most of what I model is based on real-world objects and people; once I used a tool, I either liked it or didn't like it. If I didn't, I would CTRL+Z and do it again. If I needed to go further back, autosave had a file waiting and ready to load.

    The majority of my time in Max was spent pushing points. I think that's the majority of what most of us do.

    Just to confirm that I wasn't having an aneurysm or a memory lapse, I asked the other four 3d artists on my team who have gone back to Max how often they actually used the modifier stack (as opposed to simply undoing / redoing).
    same here,

    for a few operations it is gold to have, but quite far away from all. that said, it is a Must for some tasks, and should be added to LW.
    Last edited by erikals; 05-29-2019 at 11:33 AM.
    LW vidz   DPont donate   LightWiki   RHiggit   IKBooster   My vidz

  15. #60
    RPSchmidt, if all you got out of everything I said boils down to me saying Modeler is simple just because it doesn't have a modifier stack, then I don't know what else to do to explain it. A modifier stack is only one part of it. And you may have used Max as your primary app at one point, but you sure weren't making the most of it if you only saw the modifier stack as a 'undo list'. You were essentially using it like someone would use modeler now. Relying on saved versions or limited undos. Because those are your only two options in Modeler. Yet you have so many other possibilities outside of Modeler. The modifier stack in Layout has zero, nada, nothing to do with modeling or anything modeler does so I don't know why you're even mentioning it.

    Modeler is simple because it only pushes around points, polys and edges. That is IT. You cannot get any simpler than that. It doesn't know what an object is, it doesn't know what a animation channel is and every single tool in modeler has no idea that another tool in modeler exists because everything is linear. One step after another. There is no cross talk of operations, no combining of operations to achieve more complex results, there is only perform step A on vertices, perform step B on vertices, perform step C on vertices, then maybe repeat.
    Every other app allows you do combine steps A, B, C, add step D which then takes into account what steps A, B, and C did and makes a cumulative effect, then you can change step B to be last so that it achieves an entirely different result as an operation in a list. Other apps allow you to use instancing in a modeling fashion.
    You're taking the term simple to be an insult, when its really just the very nature/definition of what Modeler is. This is why people always like to say it's 'fast' which is really just another way of saying, I don't have to worry about all this other stuff like objects, stacks, channels, references, etc.... Of course, its all the 'other stuff' that really takes modeling to an entirely different level.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 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
  •