PDA

View Full Version : Luxology and Allegorithmic will be partner..


LW3D
07-30-2005, 11:00 AM
Allegorithmic will be the partner of the upcoming and anticipated Luxology's special event for SIGGRAPH :

Luxology's President Brad Peebler will present the new version of modo, Luxology's fantastic 3D package, and a brand new software tool created in collaboration by Allegorithmic and Luxology ...

Beamtracer
07-30-2005, 01:07 PM
http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/5043/allegorithmic2oq.gif (http://www.allegorithmic.com/v2/news.htm)

Here's the links...

Allegorithmic website main page:
http://www.allegorithmic.com/

Allegorithmic page explaining their technology:
http://www.allegorithmic.com/v2/techno.htm

It'll be really interesting to see what Luxology + Allegorithmic reveal during their Siggraph demonstration on August 2.

colkai
07-31-2005, 11:30 AM
Ahh, makes sense.
Sound like they've effectively partnered with a company to produce the texture side of things for their package instead of having to develop it from scratch. Wonder if these guys had any input on the development of the render stuff as well?
Think I may have their MapZone stuff tucked away some place on my HD.

Should be interesting to see how this pans out, Luxology appear keen to align themselves with anyone who may be able to raise their profile. Wonder if an Alias / Kaydara thing may happen in the future?

JDex
07-31-2005, 11:31 AM
Interesting combo... can't wait to see what Lux has up it's sleeve.

colkai
07-31-2005, 11:44 AM
Aye,
Wonder if they'll be looking to hook up with the guy who write Kray - that seems an interseting renderer. Mind you - lots of "new" ideas on the market these days so lots of choices for possible routes.
Amazing to think that only 5 years or so ago, this sort of choice and power was totally "pie-in-the-sky". Interesting times for sure, especially with Siggraph just around the corner, who knows what we'll end up with then?

harlan_hill
07-31-2005, 08:40 PM
I'd highly doubt we'd see an arrangement with the KRay folks, simply because Lux already has some amazingly talented coders on their team who specialize in rendering tech. Lux is also set to release their own render engine - which is blazingly fast and incredible quality (the demos they've shown were pushing times on par with FPrime with cleaner results).

One of the reasons to keep a close eye on Lux is their staff. Some of the smartest minds in the industry (that I know of at least) are Lux coders.

Hazdaz
07-31-2005, 10:12 PM
Looks pretty interesting.

Now is Modo a "full" 3D package? Like I know it is a modeller (that is essetially all their site mentions), but I don't recall if it has animation or texturing or rendering ablities. Is that what they are trying to do now - expand it into a full-line package?

Beamtracer
07-31-2005, 10:14 PM
the demos they've shown were pushing times on par with FPrime with cleaner results
But I seem to remember Luxology said that Worley Labs were one of their "partners". Makes you wonder what will be revealed on Tuesday.

JDex
07-31-2005, 10:15 PM
I believe that has been the intent from the beginning... a truely modular, platform independent, complete CG and VFX system.

colkai
07-31-2005, 10:20 PM
But I seem to remember Luxology said that Worley Labs were one of their "partners".
Yeah, but Steve Worley pretty much made it clear that he didn't have a workng relationship with Lux, contrary to their published claims, of course, that may have since changed.

c-g
07-31-2005, 10:27 PM
But I seem to remember Luxology said that Worley Labs were one of their "partners". Makes you wonder what will be revealed on Tuesday.

In this industry, especially around trade show times, "partner" could mean anything from co-coding to stopped-in-to-use-the-restroom. Pick a company and see how many partners they list.

Beamtracer
08-01-2005, 12:14 AM
So, what do we make of this Luxology-Allegorithmic collaboration? Below are some cloth textures from the Allegorithmic website:

http://www.allegorithmic.com/v2/images/news/serviette.gif

FunBucket
08-01-2005, 01:25 AM
I would seriously hope it's something more then procedural textures. What I wish SOMEONE would do is eliminate uvmapping. Create a new type of uvmap/projection that doesn't have to be flattened out. Just paint directly on the mesh. Has something like this ever been attempted or looked into? I really hope Luxology has considered this.

--

Jay

Beamtracer
08-01-2005, 02:07 AM
I would seriously hope it's something more then procedural textures. What I wish SOMEONE would do is eliminate uvmapping. Create a new type of uvmap/projection that doesn't have to be flattened out. Just paint directly on the mesh. Has something like this ever been attempted or looked into? I really hope Luxology has considered this.
Paint on an object? Do you mean something like BodyPaint or DeepPaint?

Also, do you think what Luxology + Allegorithmic are creating is just like any ordinary procedural texture? I'm trying to work out if there is something special about this.

BillB
08-01-2005, 02:21 AM
I would seriously hope it's something more then procedural textures. What I wish SOMEONE would do is eliminate uvmapping. Create a new type of uvmap/projection that doesn't have to be flattened out. Just paint directly on the mesh. Has something like this ever been attempted or looked into? I really hope Luxology has considered this.Jay How would that be possible though? You have to describe the surface in a way that the software knows which bit of the surface you're talking about to place a brushstroke or procedural there, so short of somehow placing your strokes in 3D space(!), it's gotta convert it to 2D coordinates of some sort. Best you can hope for is clever UV tools.

Mike RB
08-01-2005, 02:23 AM
http://www.allegorithmic.com/v2/images/technology/mont_anim.gif

" ...with the FX-Map beneath the surface, you can simply grab some of the rocks and move them where you want, or make one of the mountains higher with few clicks!"

Being able to edit procedural shared is very cool, if this ability was embedded into the guts of whatever shading tree Lux will have then I think well be in for a treat.

Mike

Hazdaz
08-01-2005, 02:40 AM
http://www.allegorithmic.com/v2/images/technology/mont_anim.gif

" ...with the FX-Map beneath the surface, you can simply grab some of the rocks and move them where you want, or make one of the mountains higher with few clicks!"

Being able to edit procedural shared is very cool, if this ability was embedded into the guts of whatever shading tree Lux will have then I think well be in for a treat.

Mike

Sure, it definitly is cool, but truely usefull?.... well, not so much. I mean I can think of a few times when something like that would be very helpful, but that would not be a "must-have" feature.... and not a big enough new technology to warrant all this attention.

FunBucket
08-01-2005, 08:50 AM
How would that be possible though? You have to describe the surface in a way that the software knows which bit of the surface you're talking about to place a brushstroke or procedural there, so short of somehow placing your strokes in 3D space(!), it's gotta convert it to 2D coordinates of some sort. Best you can hope for is clever UV tools.

No clue how it would be possible! I just want it! lol.

Why need a map at all? I don't understand why you couldn't just paint directly on a mesh (like with Bodypaint), and the computer would just remember what's painted on each polygon. Why does it need a map to explain what's on each polygon? No need to flatten it all out. You'd end up with NO stretching, and NO seams. Like I said, I have no idea how this would possible, but I don't see why it would be IMpossible.

But hmm. I'm not sure what's up with Luxology. Should be interesting.

--

Jay

DanSilverman
08-01-2005, 12:04 PM
One area where you certainly need UV maps are for real-time 3D games. While such mapping techniques as UV-tiles and the like are interresting, they are not quite what you want for game models yet. And why is that, you ask? Good question ;) .

Today's video cards, while much better than previous generations of cards, are limited by the size of the textures they can display in real time and by their memory. The larger the texture the more video memory consumed. If, in a real-time 3D game, you want to have a lot of models on display (i.e. many enemies, etc) then you need to pay careful attention to the size of the "skin" (the model's texture) that is used. At the same time you want the skin of the model to be as detailed as possible.

In order to squeeze as much detail into a texture as possible areas of the UV map may share the exact same space on the UV map. For example, someone may overlap the right side of the face mirrored directly on top of the left side of the face, the right hand and arm may be mirrored directly over the left, etc. This effectively allows for almost double the resolution without increasing the file size of the skin.

UV-tiles and other "non" UV mapping methods do not really "natively" allow for this sort of thing. Each polygonal face is considered seperately and, as a result, each will take up space on the UV map created by the application. This can effectively reduce detail overall for the model as less "space" is available by these methods.

There are ways around this. The artist could delete all the areas of the model that they want to have duplicated on the UV map and then paint the remaining areas and then create the UV-tiles (or whatever "non" UV mapping method) and then, when all that is completed, copy, paste and mirror the missing parts and then attach them to the model. This should preserve and overlap the UV coordinates for the copied/mirrored parts, but this is a bit more work (IMO) than to do things in the traditional manner.

Real-time games, depending on the engine being used and the file formats accepted by the engine, may require a seperate 2D file for the skin. If you do not create UV mapping coordinates for the skin then the app will not know how to translate this into a 2D image. And, as mentioned above, even if the app could do this, how is it to know what areas deserve more detail (i.e. have a larger portion of the UV map assigned to them than other parts) and what does not? How can it determine if the left side of the head is identicle to the right?

For now, unless some really cool and creative method is created, UV mapping is incredibly important.

ThomasMahler
08-01-2005, 12:34 PM
Well, I hope that Luxology implements some clever unwrapping features like in Wings, allthough I would still want to be able to manipulate my UVs, as Dan suggested. I haven't done a lot of UV stuff in the last few months but I think that a mix between Automatic Wrapping and a "typical" UV Editor like in Max, Maya, etc. could be the optimum. Because I really don't want to care with UV Stretching and stuff like that anymore - The computer should handle this for me.

Also, I really don't like the approach of painting the texture on a flat map in Photoshop, Painter or whatever. It just pulls you away from the model you created and you have to recheck your model everytime to see if everythings okay, etc. etc. BodyPaint/DeepPaint/ZBrush and so on feature much, much better, artistical ways to deal with texturing. I love ZBrush, since I'm able to do everything at once. I can sculpt, texture and test-render in one package, within the same interface, use the same hotkeys, etc. - It really feels so much better than everything else I used before for texturing, even though there are tons of stuff missing compared to deepPaint or bodyPaint.

lightblitter22
08-01-2005, 01:07 PM
I would seriously hope it's something more then procedural textures. What I wish SOMEONE would do is eliminate uvmapping. Create a new type of uvmap/projection that doesn't have to be flattened out. Just paint directly on the mesh. Has something like this ever been attempted or looked into? I really hope Luxology has considered this.

Check out the Bodypaint 2 demo. It does pretty much what you ask for. A wizard sets up your UVs, then you paint right on the model without distortion or unwrapping. Even lets you paint in a fully rendered view with its raybrush tech.

CGTalk Moderation
08-01-2005, 01:08 PM
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.