Its done first week 2004-01-30 - By Dave Angelini
Back
Chris,
Could you please provide a link to your winning entries in the Lightwave
galleries....I would very much like to see what a really great Lightwave
artist can do.
Thanks,
Dave Angelini
-- -- Original Message -- --
From: "Chris Kufahl" <chris-k@(protected)>
To: <truespace@(protected)>
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 4:30 AM
Subject: Re: [TSML] Its done first week
> 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
> >>
> >>
|
|
