Its done first week 2004-01-30 - By Chris Kufahl
Back
Yeah, but there's something to be said of the fact that I tried tS 5 and
tS6 demos and still blindly went with LW, and haven't regretted my
choice. I have also yet to see conclusive proof that I was wrong in my
choice in turning to LW instead of upgrading tS. Look at the monthly tS
galleries as opposed to some LW galleries. Either Roman is picking some
really bad images (which I believe to be the case), or well, no, he's
picking really bad images, but I still don't think a great tS artist could
hold a candle to a great LW artist. Yes, it's the artist, not the tools,
but take two equally skilled artists and the one with the better tools will
always prevail.
-chris
At 09:04 PM 1/29/2004, you wrote:
>Comparing TS4 to Lightwave 7.5 is a wee bit off, methinks ;) Try 6.6,
>instead, and you'll find things are a whole lot different.
>
>-Joel
>
>
>Chris Kufahl wrote:
>>Well, I can only compare LW 7.5 and tS 4.3, so my comparison isn't exactly
>>going to be right on. And obviously, this is mostly opinion and personal
>>preference.
>>
>>Interface:
>>I guess tS's interface is more intuitive in the beginning, and probably
>>better for a beginner. However, once you learn LW's interface, workflow
>>becomes pretty smooth. It's also logically laid out in my mind. (Though
>>sometimes in the beginning I wonder why something would be in one spot or
>>another) I do actually prefer the text based "icons" in LW as opposed to
>>the image based icons in tS. The 4 view layout in LW is nice, and while I
>>don't have it in tS 4.3, I know the newer versions have it. The layers in
>>LW's modeller are great, but I can't compare them to tS 5 and 6's layers as
>>I don't have either.
>>
>>I'm still somewhat mixed on the modeler/layout workflow of LW. While it is
>>nice for keeping things neat and tidy, I sometimes miss tS's way of having
>>it all in one.
>>
>>Modelling:
>>LW takes the cake, easily. I find it much easier to create and design the
>>shapes in LW than in tS. In a few weeks I was creating things in LW that
>>took me months to learn to do in tS. Maybe that's because tS taught me how
>>to model in general, but I'm pretty sure if I set out to model something
>>complex with subdivision surfaces (THC in tS), I could do it a lot quicker
>>with LW.
>>
>>Surfacing:
>>Easily LW. The fact that you can change matierials scene wide is a big
>>plus. Plus you have a lot more options for surfacing. You get much more
>>control over everything (such as incidence angles, etc). While different,
>>the surfacing in LW is just as easy as tS, though it may take some
>>practice.
>>
>>Lighting:
>>I haven't gotten too in depth with LW's lighting, but I would venture that
>>tS and LW are pretty similiar in this respect. I do like the option in LW
>>of being to exclude individual objects from individual light's
>>effects. (IE: Box 1 is affected by lights 1 and 2, but box 2 is only
>>affected by light 1)
>>
>>Animating:
>>I've done very little animation in tS and none in LW so I can't comment.
>>
>>Rendering:
>>Again, easily LW. I don't know what it is, but the renders I've done in LW
>>just look much better already than some of the renders I've done in tS.
>>
>>Stability:
>>LW has crashed no more than 3 times on me. tS crashed on an hourly basis
>>for me (whereas nothing else crashed at all really)
>>
>>Other notes:
>>There are an extreme ammount of free tutorials for LW out there. A lot of
>>them are extremely thorough, detailed, and well written. A lot of them I
>>would imagine are as good, if not better than some of the proteam matierial
>>(and yes, they're free). There's also quite a bit more LW related resource
>>sites out there. The LW community, while seemingly bigger, is still very
>>helpful, but the tS community is a bit more tight knit and everyone sort of
>>knows everyone.
>>
>>
>>Compare: http://ck.ethereal.net/skyline18.jpg - That's after years of
>>using tS. http://ck.ethereal.net/supra018.jpg - After just a few weeks of
>>using LW. (Ignore the shadows though, I just used a quick light
>>setup). Again, this could be that tS taught me quite a bit of the basics
>>that carried over to LW. Those two aren't exactly the best benchmarks, but
>>are meant to just give a sort of rough estimate. It would probably help if
>>I had two better full scenes that were more comparable, but I don't as of
>>yet. Of course, someone could make a car in tS that looks 100x better than
>>my LW car.
>>
>>
>>Conclusion: tS is a great starter app, and could be used to make some great
>>work. However, I believe LW to be well worth the extra money. A pretty
>>pointless post, but I thought I'd share my opinion :P .
>>
>>-chris
>>
>>
>>At 01:41 PM 1/29/2004, you wrote:
>>
>>>At 05:28 PM 28-01-2004, Bobby Ray wrote:
>>>
>>>>I said it at the beginning that I meant no offense and I still say it
>>>>now No Offense. Let not take a statement so serious. The Facts are the
>>>>Facts Maya Softimage is HighEnd tS is not this is only argued when
>>>>someone disagree with that. tS probably can do movie and TV's that not
>>>>what being said HiEnd Renderers produce HiEnd Work.
>>>
>>>
>>>It's not offensive, it's just an old, I guess argument isn't the right
>>>word, it's just that some of the back-and-forths on this topic in the
>>>past
>>>have gone on an on, and with extreme rancor, beating the proverbial dead
>>>horse until it's just annunrecognizable smush. So I admit that i, for
>>>one,
>>>tend tor eact badly when it loos like that poor dead horse might be
>>>resurrected again.
>>>
>>>I personally do think, though, that it'd be interesting and useful to see
>>>some solid comparisons between other programs and tS. If nothing
>>>else, it
>>>would establish some known paramaters/limitations for people to evaluate
>>>and work with. I do also think that, if Caligari could manage a
>>>subdivision structure, i.e. with something like trueModeler (or whatever
>>>one would call the older, student-priced versions), trueSpace (current
>>>trueSpace, with continuing development) and a "super-duper" version
>>>geared
>>>towards the film and other intensive-use industries (trueVision,
>>>truePower,
>>>whatever), they'd be in a unique position.
>>>
>>>As I see it, what people fear, with all the talk of going high-end, is
>>>the
>>>possibility of affordable trueSpace versions disappearing in favor of
>>>$30,000 program-plus-plugins setups.
>>>
>>>- Kris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>- Kris M. Krieger
>>> http://www.pterochromics.com
>>
>>
|
|
