What does Lightwave need to bring us up to par with the big guns

tischbein3

Active member
open source it with a license wich allows commercial plugin development
use current support as a software as a service solution
release a commercial closed sourced version as soon as things have been sorted out.

better than let your codebase rot.

but I might be too much in a "i know it better than Newtek" mood today, wich is never a good idea
 

jwiede

Electron wrangler
open source it with a license wich allows commercial plugin development
use current support as a software as a service solution
release a commercial closed sourced version as soon as things have been sorted out.
Actually, if they just did so for the CORE and Chronosculpt sources, that'd probably keep many interested parties busy for a LONG time. ;D

Alas, if that was a likely outcome, it should have happened by now. I'm guessing the due diligence and legal costs of doing so are too great.
 

prometheus

REBORN
I was thinking more of the « tout Blender» part of the equation ....seem to rembember someone accusing you of such, so I just wanted to clarify that it wasn't you I had in mind. 🙂
As far as I am concerned, never been in court for that :D..so who gives a darn about such accusations, someone else than me probably.
Clear intentions however.. are always welcome(y)

Lightwave also needs this right now..

1625702580728.jpeg
 

lardbros

Not so newbie member
LW is miles from "competing" with market-leading pkgs like Max, Maya, C4D, etc. LW can't even compete well against Modo at this point. The notion of "LW competing against product x" is meaningless in any case, that's not how markets work. Either your product earns enough revenue to survive or it doesn't, and all evidence (incl. direct statements) show LW hasn't been "in the black" for quite some time. LW isn't "competing" at ALL.

Similarly, people keep talking about LW carving out a niche, but it's all meaningless if that niche doesn't provide enough revenue to sustain LW development with even a miniscule dev team. If LW were "carving out a successful niche", then there'd be at least some evidence of base growth offsetting base attrition. That LW hasn't, and isn't, exhibiting any such signs pretty much proves that whatever niche(s) LW has, they AREN'T enough for LW to "get by". The subsequent cost-cutting termination of the remaining dedicated LW staff proved LW's lack of health rather brutally. Companies don't make cuts that deep if a product is healthy / "in the black", you get that, right?


That the overwhelming majority of 3D market-leading products are sold by subscription, and that B2B customers overwhelmingly dominate those purchasing said products by subscription, pretty much disproves your assertion. Whatever fraction of B2B customers share your opinion, there's negligible evidence supporting that fraction as significant enough to support products -- LW certainly didn't receive adequate support.
I do agree with the fact that LightWave is miles from competing with apps like 3ds and Maya... but have you used 3dsmax recently?
Although, admittedly, they are adding features, the sheer slowness of the app, and using it on major projects really pi$$es me off. The UI takes a long time to react to any shortcuts. Load up the material editor, 5 second wait. Load up render properties, 5 second wait.

I know a few Lightwave users who are using 3ds max to convert models and scenes for use in LW and Octane (or 3ds and Arnold) and they can't believe how awful it is. (and I agree with them).

I use 3ds max every day, and obviously it's good as some things, and LW is miles behind being able to compete, but LightWave does have some great features and with a lot of effort and some money, could definitely compete again. Problem is, most people will move to Blender from 3ds I'd imagine... and that'd be a wise choice i think.
 

vncnt

Well-known member
Some hot-link to/from Blender wouldn't be a bad idea from my pov.
Best of both worlds: something to rely on, and something to experiment.
 

lwanmtr

Lwanmtr
Some hot-link to/from Blender wouldn't be a bad idea from my pov.
Best of both worlds: something to rely on, and something to experiment.

Id agree, a bridge from LW to Blender would quite desirable. I find that navigating a scene in LW is much more intuitive than blender, but with Renderman now officially available, I cant see doing much rendering in LW moving forward.
 

prometheus

REBORN
Some hot-link to/from Blender wouldn't be a bad idea from my pov.
Best of both worlds: something to rely on, and something to experiment.
While I would indeed welcome that very much, and since I use both tools with a lot of interchange with mdd, fbx, OD copy and paste, and would welcome a simple lws importer for light envelopes etc, and the opposite interchange as well.

I don´t think that is what it needs to bring us up to par with the "Big Guns"
What they need to do is to remove the obstacle Most people find to be obstacles, the perception of what is obstacles isn´t just about current lw users, but should be taken in account to include other new 3D users who are about to look at a software for the first time, or other 3D software users that want to change and for them to decide what to choose.
And to sum that up, we already know what they need to do, and in the end but ironicly also in beginning of it all, it all comes down to what interest Vizrt and newtek has with their investments.

A better interchange with a "GoB" bridge I welcome, but it´s more a thing for making the ife easier for current lightwave users, not so much for blender users or other 3D users to be attracted to it.
 
Last edited:

prometheus

REBORN
People new to 3D don’t know lightwave exists!
That statement is not holding up very well generally.

You could say that Lightwave isn´t the first choice they may encounter though.

a simple search string like this (best 3d software) yields a top link on the first page on google and a 7th place for lightwave within the review on that linked page..

If you care not to look in to it yourself initially, or just go by someone elses recommendation, Lightwave will however rarely show up, but if you are serious, you look around.
 
Last edited:

vncnt

Well-known member
While I would indeed welcome that very much, and since I use both tools with a lot of interchange with mdd, fbx, OD copy and paste, and would welcome a simple lws importer for light envelopes etc, and the opposite interchange as well.

I don´t think that is what it needs to bring us up to par with the "Big Guns"
What they need to do is to remove the obstacle Most people find to be obstacles, the perception of what is obstacles isn´t just about current lw users, but should be taken in account to include other new 3D users who are about to look at a software for the first time, or other 3D software users that want to change and for them to decide what to choose.
And to sum that up, we already know what they need to do, and in the end but ironicly also in beginning of it all, it all comes down to what interest Vizrt and newtek has with their investments.

A better interchange with a "GoB" bridge I welcome, but it´s more a thing for making the ife easier for current lightwave users, not so much for blender users or other 3D users to be attracted to it.
I think a GoB bridge could be a beautiful first step towards cooperation.
  • existing LW users would have a reason to upgrade to LW2020.x or LW202x
  • LW2020.0.3 users would have a reason to stay, and upgrade to LW202x
  • developing LW202x without GPU rendering wouldn´t be a disappointment for some, provided that a GoB bridge (preferably bi-directional) would reasonable translate LW-materials/Genoma/Skelegons/Bones/Lights/animation/etc
  • in LW202x, focus on new features that will attract new + existing users
At least, the LWO and LWS file structure should be published.
Everyone wins.
 
Last edited:

jwiede

Electron wrangler
I think a GoB bridge could be a beautiful first step towards cooperation.
  • existing LW users would have a reason to upgrade to LW2020.x or LW202x
  • LW2020.0.3 users would have a reason to stay, and upgrade to LW202x
  • developing LW202x without GPU rendering wouldn´t be a disappointment for some, provided that a GoB bridge (preferably bi-directional) would reasonable translate LW-materials/Genoma/Skelegons/Bones/Lights/animation/etc
  • in LW202x, focus on new features that will attrack new + existing users
At least, the LWO and LWS file structure should be published.
Everyone wins.
Who's doing all that work? The unseen, apparently-composed-of-dark-matter "VizRT LW Development Team"?

I think folks need to start thinking about what _the community_ should do in order to maximize LW "afterlife". If there's to be any sort of semi-decent "afterlife" experience for existing, active customers, waiting another year or two to even begin planning, gathering, and archiving will likely be too late.
 

vncnt

Well-known member
I was just trying to outline what a potentially profitable relaunch of LW might look like, regardless of who owns it. Without profitable strategy, nobody will be interested to pickup developent of a reliable GoB bridge.
 

prometheus

REBORN
I think a GoB bridge could be a beautiful first step towards cooperation.
  • existing LW users would have a reason to upgrade to LW2020.x or LW202x
  • LW2020.0.3 users would have a reason to stay, and upgrade to LW202x
  • developing LW202x without GPU rendering wouldn´t be a disappointment for some, provided that a GoB bridge (preferably bi-directional) would reasonable translate LW-materials/Genoma/Skelegons/Bones/Lights/animation/etc
  • in LW202x, focus on new features that will attract new + existing users
At least, the LWO and LWS file structure should be published.
Everyone wins.

I don´t think that is where the focus and priority should be, if they start with that..they will still find themself at some point having to adress no modeling tools in Layout, and they will still have the wrong shoes on and walking at the wrong roads.
get priority right means finding within themself an honest interest of developing lightwave and put resources on that, and listen to what customers have said about no modeling tools, but it all starts with them having to be open about what they currently are doing, if not..the above mentioned will never happen due to the lack of customer interest.
Once that is in place, modeling tools to layout, and tap in to GPU power.

So I rather see a focus on what matters most as priority, which would mean a faster recovery than trying to heal the situation with similar things like a GoB bridge, when there is too much of techolocy behind the other app that is too competitive.

I don´t think I would upgrade if the next release would have a GoB bridge button, but nothing new on modeling in layout or GPU Rendering, the opposite would be much more interesting ..but again, not without them restoring customer trust in how they communicate about their development.
 

vncnt

Well-known member
If I remember well, the renderer used to be a very high priority for Newtek.
I guess this was not without reason ($$$).
 

lwanmtr

Lwanmtr
The renderer was always one of the best, IMO, but its fallen behind and is slow when comparing to others out there now. If the next version of LW really got the speed of both the F10 render and VPR, then that would be great. I dont plan on dumping LW myself..I still use it for modeling, scene setup, surface baking and other things that I find alien to do in other programs.
 

prometheus

REBORN
Seems a lot of lw users realize they either have to invest in Octane GPU and uses that mostly, and others may be working hard at work and can afford invest in super pc to
cope with the CPU render Only.

The era of having a good fast render enging for hobby to midlevel users is over, there are other alternatives that make more sense for those, ergo..it is most likely that the top level artists are still there utlizing super pc CPU or third party GPU, and a loss of other users.
 

sami

Active member
Cakewalk was an awesome MIDI sequencer/editor in the 90s. In the 00s, it morphed into Sonar and became quite the DAW. Eventually Gibson bought it and it languished. Something happened and Bandlab bought it and made a previously ~$1000 DAW free. It's even more amazing now and has had a ton of development. Bandlab is fantastic and the new Cakewalk by Bandlab integrates into their band social media site and app platform.

But to think this would happen to LW is dreaming sadly.
 

robertoortiz

Active member
Firat If I was New Tek i would support the HELL out of the new Special Edition of the Star Trek I movie. Mojo is involved and it seems like they will be using a ton of old Foundation Imaging assets. EDIT
JMS seems to be sorting for old Babylon 5 assets and scene, FYI
 
Last edited:

pmwhite

Registered User
I'm asking this because Lightwave has been mostly the only 3D package that I have worked with. I do have Blender on my computer but when I open it up I have that deer in the headlight look. So how can we get back to date?
GPU Support, GPU and CPU Denoisers, dramatically Speed up the Render engine. Cleanup Modeller tools, add snapping,
 

raymondtrace

Founding member
GPU Support, GPU and CPU Denoisers, dramatically Speed up the Render engine. Cleanup Modeller tools, add snapping,
What old version are you still using that makes you think all those features are missing natively or unavailable through 3rd party plugins?
 
Top Bottom