Subject: Hexagon Feedback 2005-07-03 - By Michael J. H. Brooks
Back
Hello Michael:
I find Hexagon much easier to use than AMAPI (I could never stand AMAPI,
not even when it was included with C4 Pro). It still has some "AMAPI
like" things, such as the need to "finish" a modeling step using the
enter key. However, the "AMAPI like" things are designed in such a way
that they are much more intuitive and don't get in your way the way
AMAPI did. So, overall, it's got the power of AMAPI with a usability
that is closer to Carrara. I've found it similar in many ways to using
Silo, Truespace, Carrara, plus it's easier than I remember Cinema4D
being. However, your mileage may vary because "ease or use" is partly
dependent on the way you think and your past experiences, and each
program has its own flavor, strengths and weaknesses.
Hexagon has more "vertex" modeling abilities than Carrara but I think
it's missing some of the stuff that AMAPI and Carrara can do. For
example, I haven't found ways to do the following in Hexagon:
- crease/smooth edges
- fill/empty polygon (for use with polyline)
- tessellate an entire object while retaining the outline of the object
(like Carrara)
- automatic generation of "box" UV coordinates
- generation of "tiled" UV coordinates
- saving UV coordinates to an OBJ file
- operations don't always use the "selected" fragments but ignore the
selection and work on the object instead
These things are critical for me since I'm creating OBJ models that will
be used with a none raytracing OpenGL visualization engine. OpenGL (and
DirectX) visualization engines (especially those that use reflection,
transparency and bump maps) don't have much tolerance for models with
poor tessellation or UV coordinates. So, these weaknesses forced me to
use Carrara, Silo and other programs to do tessellation and UV
coordinates for my models. Use more than one program to do what Hexagon
should have been able to do on it's own is very frustrating... almost
enough to make me want to get a refund for Hexagon.
I've also had Hexagon freeze (maybe it was doing something but it wasn't
showing a busy icon or progress bar like Carrara does) or stop working
in a predictable fashion on several occasions. However, I've not been
able to reproduce those problems in preparation for a bug report.
Anyway, I think your satisfaction with Hexagon will depend heavily on
what you need to use it for. If you are using it for the same things I
do then you might not like it until a few changes/enhancements are
made. However, if you are using it to create models that will be used
in a raytracing program, like Carrara or Cinema4D (and UV coordinates
aren't your highest priority), then I think it does better than many
"polygon" oriented modeling tool out there. Not bad at all for a
version 1.0 !
If you can get a hold of a demo... try it out for a while before you
make a decision.
Good Luck
Michael Brooks.
Michael Samuels wrote:
>to all those who use Hexagon
>
>I am curious as to getting feedback as to how easy it use and learn .
>
>I have been mostly used Carrara Studio and i know Hexagon is more styled
around the Amapi modelling product.
>
>i am very impressed the images and models in the Eovia Hexogan Promotional
Gallery.
>
>Hexagon looks like a great program to use in conjunction with Carrara Studio
Pro 4.
>
>
>
>
>=======================================================================
>
>
>Michael Samuels " The only limit is your imagination "
>
>Email : msamuels@(protected)
>Website : http://msamuels.bravepages.com
>
>
>=======================================================================
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>Welcome Yahoo Members!
>
>http://www.eovia.com
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Welcome Yahoo Members!
http://www.eovia.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Carrara/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Carrara-unsubscribe@(protected)
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|
|
