Very Computer

Hi David...
I wouldnt be against any function... But I would be very strongly against
any kind of graphic symbolisation of a function besides the little tirangle
in the viewport and such things. Icons are the evil of the modern day
graphic interface. It takes way longer to learn what the meaning of all
those icons are in 3ds than it takes toi understand their function.
Therefore learning the actual Interface is harder than kelarning how the
program works. Basic interface rules. They're not icons used in every days
life like traffic signs or toilets, they are highly specific functions and
they make rediculous icons... I'm not against any function, just against
icons in such a complicated prorgam. Most new buttons in photoshop are
completely ambiguous as wel...

Quote:

> > Am I actually hearing someone request ICONS to be used in LW?
> > Oh my god... where is the world comming to. When LW will substitute
function
> > names with icons, I will sell my copy of LW. As an interface designer, I
> > have utmost respect for LW's interface, and to put in an icon would kill
it.
> > Instantly.

> I'm no longer pushing for a "Windows" interface. I was just explaining
> why I thought it would be helpful to people that only use Lightwave
> occasionally. Back when I was pushing for a standard interface, LW
> wasn't worth the effort on anything but Windows anyway. As a user of
> Windows applications all of the time, I have developed expectations of
> context sensitive right mouse button function, undos and redos, open/
> save, etc. Moving from application to application is far easier if the
> interface is the same. That's all.

> I realize that the LW power users only occasionally use other
applications,
> and find them awkward because of the icons, and menu locations,
> that are foreign to them. We now have some Mac users (although I can't
> understand why :-)

> BTW, if Lightwave did add an undo icon (with a decent number of undo
levels),
> what would you buy to replace it after ditching LW?  Would you be against
a
> history function as used in Photoshop too? Just curious.

> David

Try it with lets say a model with 500.000 polygons +. Modeler will be busy
with it for 10 minutes, and then still it *s it up. I treid it together
with Tess on a set of trees and honestly, forget it, its not doable. And
still, this is not instuitive at all. You dont agree that a simple tile
input box in layout is not more intuitive and easier to tweak than this
solution?

Quote:> --
> ctrl+u to unweld the polys if necessary, invoke Transform
> UVs command and punch in the numbers -- 200% for 2
> repetitions, 300% for 3 etc. Really takes no longer and is
> functionally the same [i.e. equally simple/confusing] to
> opening surfaces panel and entering 'tile factor' in there,
> imo.

> >And a Juliette that works!
> --
> Works fine for me...

Not on complex models. It just makes the slicing geometry and then does
nothing.

Quote:> Hi,

> > Yes, and a PROPER hdri expose plugin... I dont get it, that black point
/
> > white point never works. I dont understand why you cant have one that
just
> > works with stepping like camera's and HDRshop.

> Uhm... disagree, LW controls are more flexible tan HDR shop's. You can
> control min-max input points much *kinda* levels in Photoshop. HDR offers
> *kinda* a Gamma regualtion tool.

> > Umm, I mean beveling multiple faces as if it were one. Smooth scale
sucks.

> Ok, agree here. Bevel ++ with session storage would be the top.

> > And a Juliette that works!

> It works, but its very old concept cutting tool, and it does not work on
> selection but on entire layers. Again, it activates layers very far on
> Layer's list, and it does not erase cuttter geometry.

Yeah but it often fails with me, it jsut doesnt cut.. it always makes the
slicing geom. but just doesnt cut.

Quote:

> > > If Newtek does it properly there's hardly any more clutter than we
have
> > now. In
> > > the
> > > ideal situation you would not loose  Modeler or Layout, but gain
modeling
> > tools
> > > in
> > > Layout and animation tools in Modeler.

> > Indeed, but I would also need more RAM.

> I keep reading that in this thread, but I just did a little test and guess
what.
> When I load
> Modeler, Layout with the Hub active, with one object loaded in both Layout
and
> Modeler they all together eat 99640 K.
> Now when I load the same object in Maya 4.0 , it uses "only" 85376 K.

> So after all, Maya uses less memory then Lightwave. So much for that
argument
> :-0

I did the same calculation earlier as well... Why dont you try just starting
up modeler? It will definately eat less memory than maya does, and the issue
was when I'm rendering I want to model too, so with an integrated app, I'd
have to start up the program twice and have twice the mem usage of the
entire app. Wit LW I would just have the mnemory load of modeler added.

Hi,
thankfully we have lots of people providing useful tools for free... i'm
getting used to UME_c_slice from pictrix, it works like a charm. Basically
you make a spline and put it in BG. This spline defines the range to slice.
You can set the number of slices, btw. Again, if you have a 3+ points
spline, you can subdivide FG geometry using also TCB controls to modulate
the density of the cuts; so you can have non uniform cutting  (more dense
where spline's curvature get higher). A must have cutting tool.

Paolo Zambrini

Quote:> Yeah but it often fails with me, it jsut doesnt cut.. it always makes the
> slicing geom. but just doesnt cut.

Nope; it would be enough if Newtek give us rendering thread as separate
process.
So all you have to do is go into Task manager, set rendering priority to
LOW, and keep on modeling.....
Another reason to make rendering a plugin class or to extract it from LW's
core (other reason is having access to all those monster rendering engines
popping around these days...)

Paolo Zambrini

Quote:> I did the same calculation earlier as well... Why dont you try just
starting
> up modeler? It will definately eat less memory than maya does, and the
issue
> was when I'm rendering I want to model too, so with an integrated app, I'd
> have to start up the program twice and have twice the mem usage of the
> entire app. Wit LW I would just have the mnemory load of modeler added.

On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 09:03:26 +0100, "Exception"

Quote:>> >> > -Being able to tile UV images. How hard can it be?!

>> >> [ transform UV command ]

>Try it with lets say a model with 500.000 polygons +. Modeler will be busy
>with it for 10 minutes, and then still it *s it up.

--
Ouch. What about doing it in smaller chunks, say 5ok polys
at a time, does it still fail? Since the polys are unwelded
they don't have to be transformed all at once.

Quote:>And
>still, this is not instuitive at all. You dont agree that a simple tile
>input box in layout is not more intuitive and easier to tweak than this
>solution?

--
Am just saying it's effectively the same -- in both cases
you open a panel and enter number of repetitions.

Having a choice, i'd rather Layout to allow UV map
transformations with the usual Scale/Position/Rotation and
reference objects, just like it can be done for other map
projections. It'd offer more flexibility than the 'simple
input box' and --being consistent with rest of the Layout
interface-- would be more intuitive as well, IMO.

Quote:>> >And a Juliette that works!
>> --
>> Works fine for me...

>Not on complex models. It just makes the slicing geometry and then does
>nothing.

--
Didn't happen to me; but since the slicing geometry is
already prepared, invoking the final step manually doesn't
sound like horrible amount of work...

Tolaris

As I said, I have given up on that crusade, and you are right 3ds does
take the use of icons to the Max :-) Couldn't help myself.

I'm not arguing in favor of icons, but there are immerging standards like
the curved arrows for undo and redo, and the disk for save, etc.. If
you already know what some of the icons means, then you only have
to learn the ones you don't understand. I can pretty much use any Adobe
product, because they all use the same icons.

I do understand about the lack of a need for icons in Lightwave.
Would you be against working on the right mouse, context sensitive,
menus? I know the Mac folks are saying "what right mouse button,
we don't need that. one button is enough to learn :-)

David

Quote:> I do understand about the lack of a need for icons in Lightwave.
> Would you be against working on the right mouse, context sensitive,
> menus? I know the Mac folks are saying "what right mouse button,
> we don't need that. one button is enough to learn :-)

> David

How to terrify a Mac user..

.. put them in a store full of Ami Mouse 300 Dual scrolls (5 buttons 2
wheels) poor sods will line their shorts with shit lol!

Hehehehehe
Hi Chris,

My iMac actually has a Microsoft scroll wheel 5 button optical mouse because
Apple doesn't
know what a proper mouse is. The original having only one button sits on a
shelf collecting
dust but it is optical.
But now that I have dual 19" monitors on my P4 2.53 Ghz machine my Mac
actually sits
in a corner collecting dust. hehheheheh
I use it occasionlly but most of the time I'm pounding on the P4.

Cheers,
JS

hehehe, I remember when you were really happy about getting your Mac, and
you were defending it and all sorts.. now you say its gathering dust, poor
thing, guess the apple went rotten huh *groans* :)

Hehehehehe

Well the P4 2.5 Ghz with a GeForce 4 Ti 4200 and dual 19" monitors
make the iMac seem like a toy. But it is kind of a nice toy though.
Its got a Pioneer 104 DVD burner (Superdrive) and it comes with
a lot of useful software iDVD, iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto. The only
problem is I don't have a digital video or still camera to take advantage
of alot of that software. If it wasn't for my mounting stack of bills I
would buy a camera and be able to do some video/DVDs on the mac
as the software for that stuff really does work well on the Mac.
But the P4 is my main LW machine because it rips through HV previews
and rendering in general.

Cheers,
JS

You could always network the two (if they're not already) and put your LW
animations on DVD.  :)

--
- Jeff Kilgroe
- Applied Visual Technologies | DarkScience
- www.appliedvisual.com
- Have a multiprocessor Windows system? Download xCPU, it's free!

Hi Jeff,

Yeah I did that once already and it worked well.
Now I just need more animations to fill up another DVD.

Cheers,
JS

Quote:> > Hehehehehe

> > Well the P4 2.5 Ghz with a GeForce 4 Ti 4200 and dual 19" monitors
> > make the iMac seem like a toy. But it is kind of a nice toy though.
> > Its got a Pioneer 104 DVD burner (Superdrive) and it comes with
> > a lot of useful software iDVD, iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto. The only
> > problem is I don't have a digital video or still camera to take
advantage
> > of alot of that software. If it wasn't for my mounting stack of bills I
> > would buy a camera and be able to do some video/DVDs on the mac
> > as the software for that stuff really does work well on the Mac.
> > But the P4 is my main LW machine because it rips through HV previews
> > and rendering in general.

> You could always network the two (if they're not already) and put your LW
> animations on DVD.  :)

> --
> - Jeff Kilgroe
> - Applied Visual Technologies | DarkScience
> - www.appliedvisual.com
> - Have a multiprocessor Windows system? Download xCPU, it's free!