Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Al Carna » Wed, 19 Nov 1997 04:00:00



Hi,

I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine. The review was
not very flatering. Among the problems they sight are :

1. Poor user interface.
2. Non consistancy between Modeler and Layout.
3. Too confining.
4. IK tool does not allow you to constrain location or translation.
5. No scene wide way to manage links and parent - child relationships.

(This was for LW 5.0)

Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

I currently use TS 3.1, how does LW compare to this. I'd hate to be
moving backwards.

Is V5.5 worth the extra cash?

Any other views, comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by J. Eric Char » Wed, 19 Nov 1997 04:00:00



> Hi,

> I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
> found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine. The review was
> not very flatering. Among the problems they sight are :

> 1. Poor user interface.
> 2. Non consistancy between Modeler and Layout.
> 3. Too confining.
> 4. IK tool does not allow you to constrain location or translation.
> 5. No scene wide way to manage links and parent - child relationships.

> (This was for LW 5.0)

> Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
> gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

        Assuming that production houses know what the hell they are doing, if
you are interested in doing production animation you need to simply ask
yourself "What do the pros use?"

        While this is not a guarentee (after all, maybe Digital Domain WOULD
throw away Lightwave if they were impressed w/TS, and we don't KNOW that
they've checked) it is usually a pretty good indicator of what people
find useful and productive.

> I currently use TS 3.1, how does LW compare to this. I'd hate to be
> moving backwards.


--
***********************************************************************

**   "It's a sad thing that a family can be torn apart by something  **
**               as simple as a pack of wild dogs."                  **
**   Shooting, Gaffing, and Animation for the End of the Millenium   **
*************************** Seattle ***********************************

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Ernie Wrigh » Wed, 19 Nov 1997 04:00:00



> I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
> found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine.

It's exactly the kind of review I would have expected from them.  Some
of the criticism of LW was fair, but they gave it undue weight, while
giving virtually no weight to the quality of the output versus the cost
of the program.  And a lot of LW users, had they been asked, would have
quickly pointed out to them that they were doing everything the hard way.

They made no effort to learn the important role LW plays in the special
effects industry--and *why* LW is used there--preferring to dismiss this
with a few parochial and ignorant remarks, and they appear not to have
sought any consensus among professional users.  This was a pointy-haired
boss type of review.

Quote:> Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
> gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

Keep in mind that LW and TS were judged in different categories, and the
marks were relative.  LW's "good" was relative to MAX and SI, while TS's
"excellent" was relative to the cheap stuff it was lumped in with.

- Ernie                              http://www.access.digex.net/~erniew

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Michael Rui » Wed, 19 Nov 1997 04:00:00


Uh.....Dude! I think you went back a little too far in you research...
uh.......it is almost 1998 ya know. DUH!!!!

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by m.. » Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:00:00




Quote:>Hi,

>I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
>found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine. The review was
>not very flatering. Among the problems they sight are :

>1. Poor user interface.
>2. Non consistancy between Modeler and Layout.
>3. Too confining.
>4. IK tool does not allow you to constrain location or translation.
>5. No scene wide way to manage links and parent - child relationships.

Opinions are like...well you know...g  I read the same review and had
to laugh because they gave a product I really dislike using rave
reviews.  

Simple fact is, it's the biggest bang for the buck out there.  Yeah
Alias is smoother with a much better interface, so is Softimage but if
you have a spare $12,000 or $30,000 sitting around for animation
software you wouldn't really need anyones opinion...g

It may not do everything as well as all other packages combined but it
gets the job done!

Best
RW

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Barry O'Nei » Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:00:00


The note wrapped around the rock said


but she was paying me a hundred bucks a day to find out about the
comp.graphics.apps.lightwave connection.  It was Wed, 19 Nov 1997
01:17:40 GMT, and it was raining again...



> >Hi,

> >I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
> >found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine. The review was
> >not very flatering. Among the problems they sight are :

> >1. Poor user interface.
> >2. Non consistancy between Modeler and Layout.
> >3. Too confining.
> >4. IK tool does not allow you to constrain location or translation.
> >5. No scene wide way to manage links and parent - child relationships.

> >(This was for LW 5.0)

> >Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
> >gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

> >I currently use TS 3.1, how does LW compare to this. I'd hate to be
> >moving backwards.

> >Is V5.5 worth the extra cash?

> >Any other views, comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

> You would be moving Light Years forward by going to LW 5.x!  TS is
> fine for fooling around, but if you are serious about
> animation/modeling, go get LW.  It is well worth the extra $$$$

Not entirely true, Hogi.  TS3's IK and physics  dump all over LW, IMHO.  
That said, Lightwave is a superior product, without a doubt.

To answer Al's question, LW is worth the extra cash provided that:

a.  You don't mind the steep learning curve.
b.  You find TS3 is holding you back in some areas.
c.  You like hearing people say "Wow" when they see your latest work.  :)

If anything Al, LW is harder work than TS3, so if you do make the switch
don't expect everything to get easier all of a sudden - it doesn't.  What
you will find is that LW will reward your hard work, patience and
frustration - but ultimately it's only a tool that depends on the
craftsman to make it work.

regards,

Barry
--
Today isn't going to be as good as you'll think it was in the future.
(Remove "nothanks." from my address if you promise not to spam me)

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by HOGI » Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:00:00




>Hi,

>I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
>found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine. The review was
>not very flatering. Among the problems they sight are :

>1. Poor user interface.
>2. Non consistancy between Modeler and Layout.
>3. Too confining.
>4. IK tool does not allow you to constrain location or translation.
>5. No scene wide way to manage links and parent - child relationships.

>(This was for LW 5.0)

>Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
>gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

>I currently use TS 3.1, how does LW compare to this. I'd hate to be
>moving backwards.

>Is V5.5 worth the extra cash?

>Any other views, comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

>Thanks,


You would be moving Light Years forward by going to LW 5.x!  TS is
fine for fooling around, but if you are serious about
animation/modeling, go get LW.  It is well worth the extra $$$$

HOGI!

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by E.K.Holbroo » Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:00:00


Truespace's rendering engine and abilities is ...uh.. well there's no
comparision to Lightwave really. yes, I sort of like TS's interface
(sometimes), but when things start to get hairy and the polygons start to
rack up, forget, Lightwave wins no contest. But getting back to TS's
rendering engine, it's so full of bugs and glitches (fog and transparency
problems, shadow errors, slow and horrible looking shadowmapping, limited
world space, the list goes on and on). As a modeler, it's (TS) ok at best..
it has some tools Lightwave doesn't have (metaballs are very cool compared
to LW's), but overall it's pretty amateurish in comparision. I think the
guys who made that review, and I laughed like hell when I read it, didn't
take much more than a cursory glance at any of the programs and instead went
to (what some think is) God's gift to 3D: 3DS Max. Personally I think max is
way overrated in many ways, though it does have stuff I can only dream about
in LW (and vice versa).

--
Portfolio at::
http://www.digital-knight.com

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by MarcMyl » Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:00:00



Quote:*i) writes:
>(This was for LW 5.0)

>Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
>gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

>I currently use TS 3.1, how does LW compare to this. I'd hate to be
>moving backwards.

I'm sure you'll get a lot of responses to this, but one indication of the
quality of a program is the number of professionals that are using it.
LightWave is currently one of the * 3D tools in television and is
rapidly moving into feature films.  I don't know of any animation or
effects houses in these areas that use TrueSpace.

-M.

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Q » Thu, 20 Nov 1997 04:00:00


Buy LW 5.5 you'll be doing yourself a favor, it's simply awesome for
production work.

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Little88 » Fri, 21 Nov 1997 04:00:00


I do not subscribe to PC Magazine because I found it to be more for the
PackardBell novice type users. This type of review on LW just reinforces my
decision.
Calise

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Glenn Saunder » Sat, 22 Nov 1997 04:00:00



: I currently use TS 3.1, how does LW compare to this. I'd hate to be
: moving backwards.

No comparison, overall.  Truespace is terrible compared to Lightwave in
modeling.  TS has decent IK and nice texturing features, as well as a
pretty good scene editor window, but other than that, it's pretty
confining.

Lightwave is starting to get a bit overpriced, but it's still a decent
value.  It is, however, too reliant on plugins, some included with 5.5
(Morph Gizmo), some not (Lock and Key) to do decent character animation.  
It could use an overhaul to integrate a lot of these plugins into the
core of the package.  It can get confusing.

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Glenn Saunder » Sat, 22 Nov 1997 04:00:00



: Not entirely true, Hogi.  TS3's IK and physics  dump all over LW, IMHO.  
: That said, Lightwave is a superior product, without a doubt.

While that is true, IK has some serious parenting limitations in how it
handles discrete objects/metaballs.  I tried doing character animation
with metaballs and failed because of this.  The only character animation I
could see TS doing well would be robots.

: a.  You don't mind the steep learning curve.

LW is easy to learn, but hard to master.

: If anything Al, LW is harder work than TS3, so if you do make the switch
: don't expect everything to get easier all of a sudden - it doesn't.  What

LW's modeler pisses all over TS.  TS barely has a modeler at all.
Modeling in TS is like wearing a straight-jacket.  LW gives you awesome
control, an intuitive user interface, and plenty of time-cutting special
tools.  I could go on for hours about the flaws of TS' approach to
modeling.

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Barry O'Nei » Sun, 23 Nov 1997 04:00:00



The dame had said Glenn Saunders was a cheap hood and

paying me a hundred bucks a day to find out about the
comp.graphics.apps.lightwave connection.  It was 21 Nov 1997 00:25:01 -
0700, and it was raining again...


> : Not entirely true, Hogi.  TS3's IK and physics  dump all over LW, IMHO.  
> : That said, Lightwave is a superior product, without a doubt.

> While that is true, IK has some serious parenting limitations in how it
> handles discrete objects/metaballs.  I tried doing character animation
> with metaballs and failed because of this.  The only character animation I
> could see TS doing well would be robots.

Animating metaballs and their variants with IK is possible in TS3, but
the results are disappointing - the objects deform themselves in
proximity to each other even at minimum SOI settings.

Quote:> : a.  You don't mind the steep learning curve.

> LW is easy to learn, but hard to master.

Switching from TS to LW involves a period of "unlearning" during the
transition.  :)

Quote:

> : If anything Al, LW is harder work than TS3, so if you do make the switch
> : don't expect everything to get easier all of a sudden - it doesn't.  What

> LW's modeler pisses all over TS.  TS barely has a modeler at all.
> Modeling in TS is like wearing a straight-jacket.  LW gives you awesome
> control, an intuitive user interface, and plenty of time-cutting special
> tools.  I could go on for hours about the flaws of TS' approach to
> modeling.

You're defending a position I'm not attacking, Glenn.  TS3 is a fine
program within the bounds of its limitations - once you reach those
bounds, it's time to get serious.  That means taking up with LW.

Al's original question was whether it was worth upgrading to LW.  As I
don't know why he was considering the move, I thought it worth raising a
couple of issues.

regards,

Barry
--
Today isn't going to be as good as you'll think it was in the future.
(Remove "nothanks." from my address if you promise not to spam me)

 
 
 

Lightwave - Bad review in PC Magazine

Post by Jean-Eric Hénaul » Tue, 25 Nov 1997 04:00:00



> Hi,

> I have been considering the purchase of Lightwave but in my research
> found a review in the Nov 5, 1996 issue of PC Magazine. The review was

> not very flatering. Among the problems they sight are :

> 1. Poor user interface.
> 2. Non consistancy between Modeler and Layout.
> 3. Too confining.
> 4. IK tool does not allow you to constrain location or translation.
> 5. No scene wide way to manage links and parent - child relationships.

> (This was for LW 5.0)

> Although, they gave LW 'Good' marks for most of its features, they
> gave TrueSpace 2.0 'Excellent' marks in many of the same categories.

PC Magazine's basic readership is made-up of people with rather simple
computer needs. This magazine isn't really designed with the people of
Digital Muse or Foundation Imaging in mind, but rather the average Joe
who's main requirement is a computer that can run the latest version of
MS-Word & Quake.

In the same category, I believe SoftImage didn't get a much better
review than LightWave as a matter of fact. And yet, SoftImage &
LightWave combined are probably used in 75-90% of all the effects seen
on TV & on the big screen. Don't try to remake Titanic with Truespace...
:-)

BTW, speaking of Titanic, visit NewTekniques brand new web-site. We have
the latest info regarding LightWave, and will soon have a sneak-peek
into the December/January issue that will cover the people that worked
on Titanic and the technology they used.

http://www.newtekexpo.com

Take care !!!

Jean-Eric Hnault
Webmaster
NewTekniques Unoficial Web-Site

http://www.newtekexpo.com

 
 
 

1. PC Magazine Reviews

I thought this might be intersting to some.

"PC Magazine Reviews 6 Leading Graphics Programs"
Adobe Photoshop 5.5, CorelDraw 9 Graphics Suite, Jasc Paint Shop Pro 6.02,
Macromedia Fireworks 3, Satori WebFX 2000, and Ulead PhotoImpact 5. See how
they stack up at:
     http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/stories/reviews/0,6755,2578666,00.html

2. what is the bin LW group

3. PC Magazine Review

4. Rhino Beta build 23-Jun-97 available

5. PC Magazine review of OpenGL cards for Windows 95 / NT in June 25 edition

6. How to make a shadow around an image?

7. PC MAGAZINE Reviews Ulead DVD WORKSHOP

8. conference in Atlanta

9. Review of PI5 in PC Magazine

10. PC Magazine review of OpenGL cards for Windows 95 / NT in June 25 edition

11. New Reviews at PC-Review

12. New Reviews on PC-Review

13. New Reviews at PC-Review