So, what do you think of modo?

[Matariki]

I am just a beginner in 3D and can't compare to many other modelers. However, I have tried recently to get into 3D modeling using LW and I had a hard time to get started. With modo I have not experienced these problems it is much more intuitive and the modeling examples and training videos have made quite a difference. I would regard modo as a very good modeler for the 3D beginner.
Cheers

[Larsen]

I just LOVE modo.

first of all, the interface is really rapid to learn and is very user-friendly, all the important thing, as selection, transform and make tools are very rapid and easy to use (as a maya user i didn't felt like a fish out of water ...).

Well it's a modeler tool, some will say that using a "all-in one" program is totally the same but NO, modo is only a modeler but it's an intelligent modeler.
However, there's some bugs but the time will repair all those little stuffs... (btw, a nvidia driver is urgently needed :sad:, but everybody know that...).

I modeled 2 heads in a very short period (some hours) and i'm very happy of the result,
Personaly, i think that the sub-d rapid preview and the user interface helps a lot to make progress and being always motivated to make something new :).

Once again : I just LOVE it !

Cipher

[wolver1ne]

Wings3d roxor boxor!!1 xD

Seriously tho. I really don't understand why people rushed into purchasing modo at such a high price when it doesn't offer anything extraordinary compared to any other 3d package. In fact, I believe that you are better off getting XSI4 Foundation which offers more for much less money.

All in all, the price of modo is absolutely ridiculous.

That's what I think.

[kursad_pileksuz]

well you wont understand until you use it i guess



Wings3d roxor boxor!!1 xD

Seriously tho. I really don't understand why people rushed into purchasing modo at such a high price when it doesn't offer anything extraordinary compared to any other 3d package. In fact, I believe that you are better off getting XSI4 Foundation which offers more for much less money.

All in all, the price of modo is absolutely ridiculous.

That's what I think.

[onlooker]

It's a tough call right now as a Maya user, and I also have not used it that much. Customization of the tools for the somewhat maya like interface (if you can call it that) is going to be the first thing that gets attention from me.
Being that Modo, and Zbrush2 were released almost simultaneously I have had little time to get to know modo yet. What parts I was most interested in I have looked up in the manual, and it's all there. And what I wasn't sure about I asked in here. For what it's worth I think Modo will be exactly what I dream it will be once I go through it, and get it fully customized how I would like it.
The reason I started ZB2 first is mostly because the wait for it was really long over due, and secondly. I had the full manual for ZB2 first, and started it the day before the modo box arrived here.

I think the modo app it self is a grand start to a really exciting modeler. If it goes completely to the lightwave model I'll loose it. But if they evolve the Maya interface, and workflow, and do the same with lightwave workflow I think both camps (and then some) will be extremely pleased with it. We'll see.

:)

[wangjun]

yeah,i love modo!

[dpartridge]

workflow, leaves lw8's modeller in the dust. also very simiply yet incredibly powerful. sub-d's are a lot faster than lw's subpatch. can't wait to see what else luxology come out with. :thumbsup:

[wolver1ne]

well you wont understand until you use it i guess

And I have to spend 800 bucks just to see and understand it?

[Para]

What I think:
modo has so much potential to be the de facto modeling program that there's just no way it will fade away. It's not the best of the best yet, but next update will show us whether or not Luxology will use it's possibility to literally make history.

BTW, 800-900 dollars isn't that much for a professional software. Sure, there's other software that's really cheap but if you know anything about running a business you soon realize that even 3000 dollars for a compositing program is cheap - both from your own company's view and the other company's view which is making the software.

[eRP]

I think it's the best modeler there is and it's a version 1.0.

But I also agree with wolve1ne. It's to expensive.

with less, you can get XSI Foundation. There must be a rethinking regarding the price or they have to put some extra cherry on top of Modo.

[yog]

Seriously tho. I really don't understand why people rushed into purchasing modo at such a high price when it doesn't offer anything extraordinary compared to any other 3d package. In fact, I believe that you are better off getting XSI4 Foundation which offers more for much less money.

All in all, the price of modo is absolutely ridiculous.
Modo vrs XSI are two different beasts in my opinion. Without doubt XSI is an excellent hard surface modeller (my current project is being modelled in XSI, and I'd be pulling my hair out and sobbing in the corner if I had to do it in LW), but possibly due to experience I find I can modeller organic models far faster in LW, and even faster again in Modo.
There is a lot in both programs that I really wish were in the other. Luckily as they both have good Obj support, transfering elements between the two isn't a problem.

As for the price, it's all relative. A year ago (before Silo and XSI-Foundation hit), most people wouldn't have batted an eyelid at a modeller this good for $600. Heck, a lot of commercial plug-ins with far less functionallity cost this much or more. You could say that Vray ($800) only renders, or that Syflex ($2000) only does cloth deformation, and that most programs already come with a renderer and cloth deformation.

I own XSI-Essentials, LW and MAX, and personally I think the purchase of Modo was a good move :thumbsup:

[gustojunk]

Hey Yog,

could you please elaborate a bit about XSI an being an excellent hard surface modeller. Are you implying that (based on your, experience, taste and opinion) XSI does a better job than Modo for hard (mechanical) surfacing?

Since you are faniliar with both packages, I would really appreciate if you could tell me which one is better for that and why.

Thanks!

Gustavo

[yog]

Hey Yog,

could you please elaborate a bit about XSI an being an excellent hard surface modeller. Are you implying that (based on your, experience, taste and opinion) XSI does a better job than Modo for hard (mechanical) surfacing?

GustavoYes, I would say that XSI is better for precise mechanical modelling, but as normal this is very much a matter of personal preference.

A few reasons are :

Instances
When you have an aray of components that you are trying to fit precisely to an area, in XSI you can aray the components, then tweek their dimentions/features with the benifit that each component will update in real time.

Grouping
Mechanical objects tend to have many individual pieces and although you are able to group by layer or part in Modo, XSI's grouping facility is far more effective, and the tree view makes it a lot easier to examine a hirachical chain at a glance.

Rotation values.
Modo doesn't retain rotational information (in basic rotate it doesn't even display the value during transforming). Whilst this isn't neccessary for organic modelling, or even hard surface modelling if you are roughing out a new design. If however you are recreating an existing design to a high level of precision, then it becomes very important.

Construction planes.
Modo's Element action centre is very good, but XSI's Reference mode (does the same thing) feels more robust, and doesn't give me the worry I may switch off the element mode accidentaly.

Local mode.
Again, Modo's Element action centre is very good, but IMHO not as robust as XSI's local mode.

If a person is just starting up and wanted to buy a base package, I don't think they could go far wrong than buy a copy of XSI-Foundation and a copy of Modo. The range this gives is staggering, and the two together is cheeper than either Maya, Max or LW. If they were doing a lot of organic work I would suggest a copy of Zbrush as well, and the three would still be cheeper than most of the others :thumbsup:

[Gwot]

BTW, 800-900 dollars isn't that much for a professional software.
In today's market, yes it is. I shelled out for it mostly out of curiosity rather than any hope that it would be the 'uber' modeler. I wanted to see what an evolution of LW would be like and that's exactly what I got (modeler is not worth 900 bucks on its own either by any stretch). I'm not disappointed, but I'm not super excited with it yet. For a 1.0 release it got off to a good start, but I'm not dropping my other tools just yet.

A lot of the tools could use some more versatility, visual feedback and general refinement. There's definitely been effort put into utilizing modifier keys and extra mouse buttons, but it needs more. There's no reason why any application can't just get by with a few really loaded core tools like extrude, bevel, cut and the transform/selection tools with variations on each stacked within mouse/key binds, all relevant to each core tool. XSI feels like it's sort of stumbling in this direction somewhat, which is good. Its Add Edge tool rocks over the Edge Slice tool in modo, especially since it works on any type of geometry, including polygon surfaces. Notice how visual feedback is very apparent with this tool as well.

http://www.gwot.net/pub/XSI_add_edge.gif

Symmetry has been improved a bit since LW, but it's still flaky and that makes it useless for serious modeling use.

I think I still prefer LW's SuperShift tool over Modo's SmoothShift. It's more versatile and predictable, and generally smoother to interact with. The widget's in modo's Smoothshift don't even work intuitively as an alternative. I'd expect the blue arrow to be used for dragging the extrusion along that vector (without scaling) and the red handle for scaling of the selection but they don't quite work that way. A rotation handle would be a nice addition to that widget too, to save the need to drop the tool, rotate the selection to change direction, then reactivate the tool again to continue extruding. You could stay within the tool for as long as you needed then. For redundancy, an extra modifier/mouse button combo could be reserved for rotation for those who don't use widgets or manipulators.

Even things like selecting itself could use some extra mousebound features. Things like double click are cool for loops and selecting connected... what about using the mousewheel for grow/shrink selection for example?

There's tons of things you can do to improve tools by adding more functionality to them. It's easier to remember a couple of consistent mouse button, and keybind variations for a single tool (CTRL, SHIFT, ALT) than many extra keybinds or hunt through menus/tabs for limited one tool, one button solutions. LW suffers horribly from redundant feature bloat, cluttered menus and keybinds because nobody has taken the time to refine any of its tools over time and better utilize the mouse as an input device. Modo will go the same way if Luxology continues with the "patch it on" mentality that now plagues LW development. I'm not saying this will happen, but it's a possibility if stuff like this isn't taken care of early on.

I wish Lux had abandoned the need to bash the spacebar to toggle selection mode sensitivity as is common in LW. Cycling through that stuff is a real waste of a good key bind not to mention time consuming. Individual keybinds (1234) are a much better solution and that's all I use in Modo - or any other app. Spacebar could be much better used as a tool/selection toggle (even better than using separate sticky keys for each active tool to toggle selection mode). If I'm doing some smoothshifting on some polygons I could just hit space, pickup or drop some more polygons, then hit space again to reactivate the last tool used (smoothshift in this case). It beats having to hold down a different key every time to "toggle" selection mode on and off, depending on the tool you are using, if you want to stay working with that tool.

The app definitely looks cooler than LW... though ultimately that means little to me. XSI looks like ass, but it works great, so I could care less.

Please get some decent, innovative UV tools in there as well. For the amount of money I spent on Modo, I DO expect that much. XSI comes through well in that dept AND it's much cheaper. The real shame here though, lies in the fact that even blender has wicked UV tools in the latest version. Integrated LSCM and UV vertex pinning makes UV tasks a snap. Speaking of snap... where is it for UV editing?

There's some nice basics in Modo for UV stuff, like being able to edit UV edges, polygons, etc using the standard tools like drag, but there needs to be more. The relax tool should be interactive and provide feedback as you drag the iterations slider. Having to wait till you hit "OK" makes it kinda useless.

http://www.ibiblio.org/bvidtute/mytut/uvtut.avi

Skip forward a bit to the point where he defines the seams and starts unwrapping if you just want to see the LSCM goods.

Overall, I enjoy using Modo, but there's lots of "little things" I'd like to see fixed in future updates. Please don't mistake this post as whining either. I'm merely looking out for my investment in this software and hoping to see it improve to be something even better than it is already. It won't get better either unless we point out its flaws. I think part of improving it will require shedding some more of its LW heritage for it to really shine though.

[MattClary]

I think it's the best modeler there is and it's a version 1.0.
Or 8.0, depending on your view. ;)

[c-g]

In today's market, yes it is. I shelled out for it mostly out of curiosity rather than any hope that it would be the 'uber' modeler. I wanted to see what an evolution of LW would be like and that's exactly what I got (modeler is not worth 900 bucks on its own either by any stretch). So then when you do ANY work for a client you charge $1.50 for your time and work? I'm sure your work is worth no where near $800 for what you do?

You also point out that you prefer a LW function that NewTek purchased from a 3rd party, hell, I prefer Sasquatch to nothing in Modo for rendering hair. Maybe there is a plugin in Max or Maya that is better than Modo's "Close File"

Sorry to jump on you for this, it isn't really directed at Gwot, but I am tired of hearing people bitch and whine about how Modo is too expensive by people that no doubt actually charge for their work. Let's see some models that aren't WIP and are really finished, delivered work so Luxology can rip it apart and say that they are glad that their product isn't attached to it.

[Gwot]

Looks like we'll just have to disagree then. It's not as if I refused to buy the software because of the price - I did buy it so it couldn't have been TOO expensive.
I'm still entitled to judge its worth compared to other software I've used and how useful it will be to me in my work.

Just because you make money with something doesn't justify charging too much for it. The market has changed since there were only a few priveleged geeks working on expensive machines and software that were worth far more than any one of us makes in a year, and open source 3d software was a pipedream. Feel free to pay all you want for your tools. When there are better, cheaper alternatives compared to what I paid for I will step up and ask for improvements. To not cater to the user is suicide for any developer these days. Your outdated attitude is just as annoying to me as my "whining" is to you. But don't worry, I'm not offended by your stance or your post. This is a common argument around here these days. :)

As for purchasing plugins and such, well that's probably an argument best left alone since nobody is clean when it comes to that, least of all Luxology. The fact remains that SuperShift is NOW a LW tool, whether Newtek developed it or not. I know where it comes from, I was using it long before 8 shipped with it included. I was merely using SuperShift as an example of how Modo could still use some refinement because imo, it is one of the best and fastest organic extrusion tools I've used in any software.

[tjnyc]

c-g,

Wuh? What is with the hostility? You make it sound like Gwot insulted your girlfriend or mother. If you disagree, then share your opinion without personally attacking another member.

I have been seeing more hostility in this forum, what is up with that? I know there are many users who avoid a certain forum in CGTALK due to the hostility, I hate to see the Modo forum turn it that.

Peace man, hostility isn't going to do anyone any good, it is just going to hurt a great new forum before it really gets going.


Cheers,

[Chaz]

I think I still prefer LW's SuperShift tool over Modo's SmoothShift. It's more versatile and predictable, and generally smoother to interact with.
I think between the new Bevel option 'Group Polys' and Smooth Shift in modo, we get the same, if not better, results in modo.

A lot of professional animators using Maya and XSI enjoy Modeler's workflow; it's fast and powerful. I think what Lux has done is smart, they've take that workflow to the next level. It might seem a little expensive if you're a hobbyist or student, but c-g is right: if you've ever done freelance work in 3D, it's not really a lot of money.

[Gwot]

Hey I hope my last post didn't come off as a flame either c-g. I totally see where you are coming from for the most part... I just have a strong stance on the whole "value" issue as well. Ultimately it's just not worth arguing about, as it steals time from actually using Modo to model with. =]

[Gwot]

Chaz: Yeah bevel is closer to using SuperShift... this is part of what my comment about falling victim to the old LW tool methodologies was about. Too much overlap in tools. There's really no need for all those tools when a little more thought can be put into refining one tool and giving it multiple features that are all relevant to that tool, as opposed to having several that do the same thing, but maybe one or two things slightly different. This is also where the Tool Properties, and extra key/mouse input would be useful. I'd sooner see less tools in my tool palettes, knowing that they can handle whatever I need them for than having to shuffle through tabs or menus for extra buttons, or even memorizing extra key binds. The less you fight with the UI the more work you get done.

Example: The polygon tool palette has 4 different tools - Inset, Shift, SmoothShift, and Bevel... all of which have overlapping functionality that could easily be absorbed into one tool or two if you really want to keep bevels and extrudes separate. =] And these don't work on edges or verts, so I need to have extra bevel and extrude tools for verts and edges. Ok now I'm treading in someone else's water... I believe Ambient Whisper has already brought this topic up in another post anyway so I'm not going to regurgitate it all here. Let's just say that I happen to agree with him then. =D

[kursad_pileksuz]

i personally do not see any hostility from anyone, i take telling personal outrage as a form of self expression. i agree on certain comments from gwot, like needing some refinements in modo.
but what i see most of the time is that, the very basic idea of modo fades away in details of how particular tools should be.You can judge modo based on how symmetry has a bug or you can judge modo based on how you can add falloffs to many tools, or idea of tool pipeline or customizing modo or macros etc. it is so relative really. At this point i personally belive in talking about structural princibles rather than why luxology should give up spacebar, even thou it may sound like a structural matter. i personally LOVE changing component mode with SPACE bar, because i like to have different selection sets in different component modes, so rather than assigning 3 different buttons i use 1 button for fliipping through. but that is me and my needs, but if you want you can assign those functions to another key set and use your space bar for something else. but you made a good comment on space bar, it could have been used for ability to add new selections, i would prefer that with another key but not a bad idea at all.

slice tool, that one needs improvement i personally complained about adding new features to it and some other testers did too. and i belive they did not have enough time to add to v.1. hopefully we will see it improved and get faster.

uv, it is a monster. uv technology has not changed in last 5-10 years at all , and noone could come up with better and faster and versatile ways of doing mapping.
Modo needs better and more uv stuff. but as you know it is v1 and they just tried to stick in enough for starters i belive. from point of developement it makes sense, so actual users can shape the software during newer versions.But that does not justifiy not having more robust uv toolsets.

and patch it forget it is not a good way, as in lightwave case it clogged developement. and we never had edges and real working uv stuff even in v7. But it is yet one fo the fastest and best modellign software out there.

[c-g]

c-g,

Wuh? What is with the hostility? You make it sound like Gwot insulted your girlfriend or mother. If you disagree, then share your opinion without personally attacking another member.

That is why I said it wasn't directed at Gwot AND put that part in BOLD. I did address something he said because there seems to be a lot of people comparing Modo to LW with a buttload of plugins. (again not just Gwot). As a matter of fact Gwot seemed to have taken the post as it was intended.

The reason why I posted it is because there is a lot of people on here "attacking" the work of others, namely Luxology. Luxology didn't find Modo under a rock or at the end of a rainbow, they busted their ass programing it. To have someone say that it isn't worth the price just stinks of hypocrisy when they turn around and charge high dollar for their art they sell to others. That was where my rant came from.

[MunCHeR]

Hey I have seen a lot of whingeing lately about price, and quite frankly I'm astounded...was anyone around 5 years ago? Maya unlimited would have cost me $30,000, lucky I didnt have the money then or I would have rammed the manual somewhere dark and steamy:thumbsup:
Since softimage came out with fundamentals for $495 everyone seems to think everything else is too expensive, is anyone drugged out enough to think they're making any money doing this? So there are less funds in the coughers for product enhancements and even if they get a few hobbyists and some studios signed up.I'm not knocking XSI either I think its a great package and as soon as they come out with a real linux port I'll buy myself a copy, but XSI fundamentals isnt maya complete(and no I'm not trying to start a flame war either) I think complaining over a couple of hundered dollars is pathetic, and as someone put it probably from someone who's never earned a cent doing computer graphics.I probably should have waited for a demo because I sure cant afford it, but from the demo videos I saw some pretty cool tools that are gonna save me a lot of hours im maya I think in the future, once I learn how to use it and once I get electricity hooked up to the refrigerator box I'm gonna be living in in a coupe of weeks.

Anyway just my 2 cents, hoping to see some 15+ cg'ers in the forum

MunCH

[Griffon]

As far as similar tools, some people want fewer tools with more options and some want more tools with fewer options....

Someone commented on having different bevels for polys, edges, and vertices. That's just something in the default UI. Simply mapping the command "bevel" to a key or button will give you a single bevel that will work on any element type. This workflow carries through to other tools as well.

[c-g]

There is the best example for the price argument.

Check the About box in Modo. FIVE of the Software and engineering people that are listed, post here in this forum. How many of the Alias or Discreet programmers are here posting and helping people out?

[wolver1ne]

Alias and Discreet don't need publicity as much as Lux does. So it's quite obvious why they would post, to get people's attention. Understandable why, and definitely not a bad thing to do, but I personally don't see them being that much around here once modo will grow up, as community will take it on its own.

[MunCHeR]

pyoDuncan Brimsmead posts quite often in the maya forum but thats the only guy I know of.

but I personally don't see them being that much around here once modo will grow up, as community will take it on its own. This forum is linked to in the help menu of modo, so I guess the guys will be hanging around to be a nuisance and teae us with new product features ( a little joke fella's :D)

Cheers

MunCH

[c-g]

Alias and Discreet don't need publicity as much as Lux does. So it's quite obvious why they would post, to get people's attention. Understandable why, and definitely not a bad thing to do, but I personally don't see them being that much around here once modo will grow up, as community will take it on its own.
That must be why they have those stupid commercials Alias made with the "scientist"

[Dion Burgoyne]

I honestly don't know how much "attention" we've gotten, because we post here... I honestly think that everyone at Luxology recognizes that there is way too much company between the people that use the other tools and the people making the other tools. I don't know of any better way to find out what people really need in a piece of software than to listen to what they say they are doing with it, where they may be stumbling, misunderstanding etc...

At least to my job, these forums and the ones like them are gold...

[Nando]

So it's almost been a month since modo was released, and I'm curious to find out what people think of it. Is it the best thing since sliced bread?
I have to say that it realy isnt revolutionary, but more of evolutionary from the other product they once developed.

The Pro's are that it does enhance the workflow of Modeling for the folks familiar with the LW Product.
Interface is clean, smooth an intutive.
Mesh editing Tools work with all object modes, vertex, edge, poly so you can slice & connect as needed.
The President of Lux is also a user, helpfull on the forums, and not a corparate shmuck that doesnt use the product they make, like other manufactures of other well known 3D products.

Some folks who are used to modeling the old way, will not benefit from the newer aplication. they will most likely stay stuck in their box if they dont think out of it.

Users, who arent familiar with LW might have a harder time getting used to the new workflow.... which isnt a bad thing. ( there is more than one way to make a box)

Still a bit buggy on my end with mirroring, sometimes it just goes *poof*, so autosave is enabled all the time now.

I have to say that at 1.0 its pretty good for me, except for the small goes *poof* quirks and the intial stage of knowing where what was and where to get at it.
I purchased MODO, becuase..... I was moving on from another product, which I sold to purchase MODO. so I sorta evened out <-----thats for folks who complain they dont have the dough ( Yard sale TIME) ;)

Having not modeled for about MMmmm.....almost 7 years, I feel like a new kid with his first bike. Modo realy make me look forward to modeling again its given me a new life as far as 3D Modeling apps GO.

Yes XSI was less expensive, but I flipped a coin and MODO won.
Also, the developers first product was my intruduction to 3D , when I was a wee LAD on my skateboard.. I was ollie-ing to a rail slide near a puter store.. that had a chrome sphere on a checkerboard patterened plane. I fell off in amazment ran into the store and asked what the fudge is that (pointing)
sales guy ( Nerd) thats a toaster!!
Me, No!! DUDE that (Pointing again)
Sales geek, yes dude a Toaster!!
Me, scratches head.... mumbles fudgen toaster is for bread man.
Another geek in store explains
Ya toaster is the computer box with program that you can do 3D in and Video.
me, Ahhhhhh!! How much
Sales Geek 3grand about.
Me, member im skateboard kid, Uggggg little Ceasars dont pay me that much.
So years later after savings i got 5.5 and thats another reason for my purchase.

One thing though that I dont want is MODO to turn into an aplication of old dated tools that folks want implemented , becuase they are to scared to move foward.
I also dont want it to become a half assed aplication full of work arounds to do X mesh edit workflow.( I hate work arounds, and poorly implemented tools)

At a 1.0 release its good, but like most apps it will truly shine at the .5 update, and I think thats why there is no Demo yet.
Folks like me are the early testers, and Lux will most likely inprove the product based on what we have all said on this forum..

the future is pretty simple... folks want to be able to have it 2 ways either implement Mirai/Wings3D/ best tools with more intutive worflow.
or
a more enhanced LW/MODO worflow.
I want both, and MORE!!....becuase I sez sooooo :twisted:

And the LUX Folks are the only ones who can do it AT the Moment!!

Yes its long and prolly, went on rambling, i had to type quick to see the prez debate.

;)

[matty429]

Wings3d roxor boxor!!1 xD

Seriously tho. I really don't understand why people rushed into purchasing modo at such a high price when it doesn't offer anything extraordinary compared to any other 3d package. In fact, I believe that you are better off getting XSI4 Foundation which offers more for much less money.

All in all, the price of modo is absolutely ridiculous.

That's what I think.
2nd that...Waaayy to expensive....a comparable app Silo is $109 U.S.

[Nando]

2nd that...Waaayy to expensive....a comparable app Silo is $109 U.S.

So it's almost been a month since modo was released, and I'm curious to find out what people think of it. Is it the best thing since sliced bread? Realy now, you would think that ppl would stick to the topic
the Original thread is about folks who have it and have used it since its release
comments about price comparison have nothing to do with the original thread. I suggest folks start their own thread instead of Hijacking it...

[matty429]

Realy now, you would think that ppl would stick to the topic
the Original thread is about folks who have it and have used it since its release
comments about price comparison have nothing to do with the original thread. I suggest folks start their own thread instead of Hijacking it...
Cry about it will you...Price has more to do with it than you think.

Hes Curious what people think about it , and thats what I think about it...PLus If Luxology is reading this , then they can hear that it's overpriced as well..

[kursad_pileksuz]

do not get me wrong, but you guys are spinning the same cycle again. Silo is a great great program, noone questions it. But comparing modo too silo is not a fair game for either. i am telling this as someone who is using modo for a year nearly.
how about this, silo is too expensive when wings3d is free ? it is not a fair question or attitude at all

silo offers alot for the price, but that does not make other programs expensive.




2nd that...Waaayy to expensive....a comparable app Silo is $109 U.S.

[Nando]

Cry about it will you...Price has more to do with it than you think.

Hes Curious what people think about it , and thats what I think about it...PLus If Luxology is reading this , then they can hear that it's overpriced as well..

If your so concerned about price? sounds to me that ur Modo envy? ;)
well let me tell you something my Modo is bigger than urs ;)
here let me walk you over like a little baby over here to a thread just for you
dont forget to hold my hand ;)

http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?p=1639098#post1639098

unfortunetly at the moment this is the only forum available for MODO, but i dont want it to get full of degenerates like it did in the LW one.
This is the only forum/option i got for MODO stuff,so DAM straight Im gona Cry over it...
:cry:

[Xtrude]

The reason why I posted it is because there is a lot of people on here "attacking" the work of others, namely Luxology. Luxology didn't find Modo under a rock or at the end of a rainbow, they busted their ass programing it. To have someone say that it isn't worth the price just stinks of hypocrisy when they turn around and charge high dollar for their art they sell to others. That was where my rant came from.


Apples and oranges... art invokes emotion, apps invoke commands, or something like that ;)


I think the next block of cg money I will be spending will be on better hardware for the apps I already have... ;) :D

[onlooker]

matty429, realistically there is no comparing silo to this. Compare silo to wings if you want a comparable application. Wings is better.

[yog]

Price is relative.

You can sell a program cheeply if :
a) There are only one/two people working on it.
b) You are part of a large established company that has a much more expensive "full featured" program (or two) that you can use to offset the charge.

Unfortunately for them Luxology doesn't fall into either catagory. At one point their website listed about 15/20 software engineers working for them. What's a normal yearly sallery for a software engineer, $15/$20k pa ?, then times that by two for the time Modo has been in production without other sources of income. And with no established base to work from Luxology has had to invest heavilly in advertising and select promotional events.
I don't know what all that came to financially (sounds quite scary for a gamble, even before you add in support staff, equipment budget and rent), but all that would need to be recouped in initial sales, and as Brad has already said that sales have exceeded expectations it can be assumed that the necessary recoupping was calculated on a lower turnover.

Is it too expensive ? Considdering what was spent on it to get it this far, I don't think so.

Is it value for money ? For me it is. Already most of my rendering was being done in Vray and Mental Ray, and I had already partially moved over to XSI for my modelling needs. Since getting Modo I haven't been into LW at all. Also because LW's export functions were quite bad I had to use Deep Exploration to get my models into MAX, but with Modo's good export function, and a quick script to handle sizing and rotational transformations, I don't need Deep Exploration either.

[MasonDoran]

At least to my job, these forums and the ones like them are gold... QA Manager says it all.....



but for the guys griping about the price...

if money is an issue...then stick with silo and wings cuz they are really solid modellers that will get the job done. They have a much simpler and easier UI. Wings is so simple i couldnt call it an interface....no pallets...no popups....just hotkeys are right mousbutton was about it. So if you have a big package like max or maya....and just need a couple of extra tools for doing a creature head or need to keep a budget, this choic makes sense

but then...if you really do need something more robust where you need a 101 blendshapes or a tank with 5000 parts and you plan on spending day in and day out modelling some big stuff then MODO (once things like layers are improved) will perform better.


Nobody has actually taken into account the reason for the price differance of Silo and Modo.

Silo is priced for hobbyists and people with a budget....the package is not as deep as a result and will never have the economic power to do anything revolutionary like Alias does . Silo gets a lot of respect from me...and Wings even more so....cuz they prove they can create excellent modellers for the price they are at.

Modo is more interested in the sophisticated needs of production artists...the guys spending all day getting their hands dirty with pixels and vertices...these people have higher expectations(you can tell by their complaints in the forums--like me) and really test the software to its limits. To satisfy these guys..you need to spend a lot of money making a production pipeline worthy software....

Modo has the foundation for that....now let us see how they improve.


just like to add that the bigger the app gets, the longer it takes to improve all of its features. Maya didnt gets its bevel fixed till 6.0 because they were busy updating all the other features...and fixing bugs introduced with new features....

so I hope Modo REALLY focuses on modelling and not get distracted to much with dynamics or animation...

[MunCHeR]

well said 2bytes, I couldnt agree more, and its a nice change not having to wade through menu's and sub menu's to find stuff, even when you have hotkeys and marking menus setup you still have to wade through a lot of "stuff" sometimes to get what you want, with modo (and silo, wings etc), everything in there is for modelling.
My havorite line from city slickers: "Just one thing":thumbsup:

MunCH

[StephanD]

I agree with what Yog says.

Also,the price is very cheap,just finished my first contract(yay!) and can afford it even after paying my bills...I just can't commit all that money into something I only 'know about'

[mbaldwin]

I like it a lot. I want to make it my main modeler--I'd do it in a second if it had:

-a bridge tool
-jigsaw/cut tool

here's hoping something pops up soon.

[gustojunk]

Yes, I would say that XSI is better for precise mechanical modelling, but as normal this is very much a matter of personal preference.

A few reasons are :

Instances
When you have an aray of components that you are trying to fit precisely to an area, in XSI you can aray the components, then tweek their dimentions/features with the benifit that each component will update in real time.

Grouping
Mechanical objects tend to have many individual pieces and although you are able to group by layer or part in Modo, XSI's grouping facility is far more effective, and the tree view makes it a lot easier to examine a hirachical chain at a glance.

Rotation values.
Modo doesn't retain rotational information (in basic rotate it doesn't even display the value during transforming). Whilst this isn't neccessary for organic modelling, or even hard surface modelling if you are roughing out a new design. If however you are recreating an existing design to a high level of precision, then it becomes very important.

Construction planes.
Modo's Element action centre is very good, but XSI's Reference mode (does the same thing) feels more robust, and doesn't give me the worry I may switch off the element mode accidentaly.

Local mode.
Again, Modo's Element action centre is very good, but IMHO not as robust as XSI's local mode.
Hi Yog,

Thanks so much for the detailed anwser.


Now... Hi Lux team,

I'm VERY surprise to find out that MODO does not have many basic features like instances, grouping, transformation history information, etc. Along with some other big missing features other people posted in other topics in the past, I can't help to wonder: WHY?

I know creating a new software from the ground up must be a huge task, but I would think if a company wants to make a big splash they would be better off hitting the ground running with a product where everything has been thought out and implemented. Even if it's a V1.0 where there is always room for improvement, but there's gotta be a starting point where the basic stuff HAS been taken care of, right?

Is this situation happening because Luxology:

a. Thinks the product is just fine as it is, and the stuff people are asking is not right for MODO

b. 'Forgot' to include those features?

c. Had to rush to market and compromise with what they had ready for certain shipping date?

d. Wanted to use the V1.0 as an alpha version for feedback or what to implement and see what people didn't miss and what people could not live without?

e. None, of the above, the real reason is.....[please explain]

If a product like Modo has been created over a period of several years, by many programmers and industry experts, I cannot make sense of why so many needed things are not there. The reason I inquire about this is because I'm very interested in Modo if it can become the software I expected to be when I saw the demos at Siggraph 1.5 years ago, and not a watered down me too product. Also before investing my money (and my time and opportunity cost of adapting to Modo, which will cost me way more that the sticker price of the software) I want to know who am I dealing why and see if I can give you a vote of confidence.

I know you don't want to tip off the competition with what your long term strategy is, but there gotta be something you can tell your customer base before they loose faith in a yet undelivered promised.

Something like honestly answering my a,b,c,d or e question and telling me what IS going to be implemented in the next version and if that next version is scheduled to be out in 3 months or in 2 years would really help me plan my game and make me better understand if you guys are the people I want to trust to provide me with your work to create my work.

[Dion Burgoyne]

Realistically, there would never be a 2.0 of a product that had everything everyone wants. I believe, and has been stated by many others, that modo's tools and workflow make the modeler faster, and more efficient. Any number of statements can be made about a specific tool that someone wants more of, different or enhanced, and whenever we see these we take note. I have no problem saying that modo is the strongest modeling software out there

With all due respect to Silo, Wings, or whatever application that you would like to champion, they all have their strengths and weaknesses and for whatever reason they are sold at the price they are. modo is priced where modo needs to be priced, its a reflection on how far the product will grow and what is required to get there. As modo saves time in modeling, and gives better results, and is so much more open to outside influence. The end result is that you make more, faster, and with far less hassle than anywhere else.

As for the question of a multi-app system, we believe there are significant advantages to integrated technologies, as well as individual work environments. Essentially, this is a decision that should be made by the user. The technology should be integrated and the user should have the choice to use it that way, or to work in a focused function specific environment.

Whew, with all that said I really enjoy the spirited discussions on this forum :) it's obvious that people have put a lot of thought and time into the discussion!

[Thalaxis]

Realistically, there would never be a 2.0 of a product that had everything everyone wants.
I don't think that's true at all, because researchers will come up with new ideas, and as technology and people evolve, they want new things.

Besides, how can people want things that they haven't yet heard of, and that the researchers haven't yet thought of? :D

[Sbowling]

Cry about it will you...Price has more to do with it than you think.

Hes Curious what people think about it , and thats what I think about it...PLus If Luxology is reading this , then they can hear that it's overpriced as well..
With the constant statements about sales being much higher than expected, I don't think Luxology is under the impression that Modo is over priced. I'm also under the impression that I got a great deal at the price I paid and would have paid more for it. No, it does not have all the features of other programs, but (specifically in the case of LightWave) it reall doesn't need all that clutter. Instead of a seperate tool for each function, a lot of the tools can perform multiple functions. The interface is very configurable, and not only can you configure you buttons and shortcuts, but you can configure what they do and make them work how you want them to.

[Sbowling]

I'm VERY surprise to find out that MODO does not have many basic features like instances, grouping, transformation history information, etc. Along with some other big missing features other people posted in other topics in the past, I can't help to wonder: WHY?


My opinion is that they are not needed. Modo is a MODELING tool, not a layout tool. I've been using LightWave for years, and I can't think of ever wishing I had any of those tools. I thnk the biggest problem is that people are trying to use Modo like they used the programs they are replacing. Why? You already have a program that does all that. Now, there are a few things that are missing (like a bridge tool), but I don't really miss it. In fact, I rarely used it in lightWave, because It doesn't always put the polygons in the way I want, and I then end up spending more time fixing things than if I had done it manually in the first place.

[annaleah]

Perhaps some one could write a script with the actions of selecting the vertices of selected 'bridge polys'.Making a 'bridge' is easy by selecting vertices and useing 'make' but maybe there is a way to 'action' this process.

[Xtrude]

I thnk the biggest problem is that people are trying to use Modo like they used the programs they are replacing. Why? You already have a program that does all that. .
Well, I kinda think that many/most were sort of figuring that for the hype, and the price, that Modo would have all the modeling tools found standard in many packages today, plus a few...

and while there are a few cool tools from what I have managed to read about, I kinda figure that these do not fully substitute for the tools yet missing...

and the object was not to use what we already had, but rather to use this new set which would have it all... hehe, not quite yet I suppose ;)

[thesuit]

Im a LW/Maya/XSI user and I have a feeling that only LW users are defending many of things that other app users find as flaw. I thought the point was to give studios a standalone modeller which is a good idea (as zbrush has proven) becuase I dont want to pay for a full maya modelling station just to see the non-modelling tools go to waste. But I feel that some major things have been pinpointed to LW users and not actually to the majority of modellers out there. Besides the bugs that are common to new apps. So I think that price altho a bit over the bar its not so bad compared to what you would have to pay for other apps (xsi foundations is a different case tho). I liked that it could export in .ma and not only in obj.

The main point is that, I find some tools that are missing from the big apps and the only people denfending Modo in this way are the people who have never even had this tools in their apps before so they dont really give much of an input rather than: what u need that for?
NEVERTHELESS as this is a new app making its way thro i find it more important that Lux try to fix and debug the app as it is first before expanding. Layers instead of object based is a HUGE MINUS for me. There is a thread on this where they suggest giving the ability to click on an object and automatically select that layer. Anyone wanna give it a go with script?

This is not yet the best modeller out there. But it has a lot of new things in workflow and speed that I like. I think my studio is not switchin to modo yet but I'll keep my personal copy up to date just to keep an eye on it.

[Xtrude]

Well put :)

[gustojunk]

My opinion is that they are not needed. Modo is a MODELING tool, not a layout tool. I've been using LightWave for years, and I can't think of ever wishing I had any of those tools. I thnk the biggest problem is that people are trying to use Modo like they used the programs they are replacing. Why? You already have a program that does all that. Now, there are a few things that are missing (like a bridge tool), but I don't really miss it. In fact, I rarely used it in lightWave, because It doesn't always put the polygons in the way I want, and I then end up spending more time fixing things than if I had done it manually in the first place.Different users have different expectations of their software. Even if we all are here talking about a "modeling only" package I cannot use it productively if I cannot instance certain details so I can see how all the instances are looking in my model. Also If my model is made out of various part I want to manage those parts (via grouping for example), and the list of cases of why the features that I'm asking for are important goes on and on. On the other hand there are tools that I find useless, however I have no problem with them being there if they work for somebody else's workflow.

The idea of having 'low' expectations of Modo because is a modeler only makes no sense. If I could work with a barebone modeler I would stick to wings or Silo. But I need more, and I was expecting Modo would be it. Also I only consider Modo a viable solution taking into account that once the rendering and animation packages are ready they will be seamlessly integrated. If they are not integrated (ala lightwave), well I think Modo will just be a step forward for Lightwavers like Thesuit just said.

[Griffon]

What kind of grouping are you looking for? Currently you can group, part, or hierarchy in the mesh tree.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.