Who needs displace I want Auto topology

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08 August 2005   #16
Originally Posted by cyartist: Funny I was watching CNN and they a major marketing executive was speaking about navigating your Business in todays market. And he said one of the things that alot of young companies make the mistake of is not playing to their strengths. So I guess he is wrong too.


And you believed him- a MARKETING executive. And you get your information from CNN? I guess now I know the extent of your knowledge about FINANCE .

Originally Posted by cyartist: And it very clear why the dot com bubble crash. One word. HYPE.
I read numerous articles and books on the dot com area and since I work for some of them I know first hand. In every bubble 1928, 1973 ,1987, 1998 there is always a element of hype and speculation that pushes it over the edge. The 1998-2000 bubble was filled with more hype than any of the previous ones.


That is a gross oversimplification. You may have been with a dotCOM when the bubble burst but I was working for one of the biggest global financial institutions who was handling a lot of these dotCOMS. From an institutional investor perspective, I had a front-row seat to how these companies imploded . Here is part of an internal document written by some of our top financial analysts:

1. Their business plan, although being inspiring or revolutionaly, were never really profitable.

2. Unchecked spending of investor's money in an effort of gain as much market share as soon as possible.

3. A lot of inexperienced teams who were focused on the growth of their company and not on long-term success.

4. The company may have survived the bubble but because a lot of so many others failed, investor capital was pulled.


Originally Posted by cyartist: Maybe you should be embarrassed because your arguments keep getting weaker and you keep speculating on the depth of my knowledge on the subject.


Heh. Now you're just being defensive and silly. You haven't even provided a valid rebuttal regarding the original topic! But it's still funny, though!

Originally Posted by cyartist: That being said I just stated my opinion on what I thought of Silo's development decisions. The people on these forums get so mean. Can I state my opinion without a full frontal assault. This is my last post on this topic. BEST TO ALL OF YOU!


If you want to state your opinion, why don't you do it in NC's Silo forums? I'll bet it'll be more effective there. And MAYBE if you didn't come off as a jack@$$ know-it-all, people would have been a lot friendlier. Just a thought you may want to consider.

Ciao, baby!
__________________
"He swung the bat. . . ."
<Cmdr. Amarao, FLCL>

Last edited by AmbiDextrose : 08 August 2005 at 05:32 AM.
 
Old 08 August 2005   #17
Why did this thread turn into a economics lesson?? Can you guys keep it focused....

I personally do not hink that what the topo brush does is the same as patch modeling. I is getting its curve info from another object, not simply user input. I think a simplier topo brush would be great, if you could define with 4 curves an entire head for instance. I also vote for this!
 
Old 08 August 2005   #18
Back. focused. Well that is what I was intially pointing to. You draw outlines(flowlines) then topology brush fills in the rest. This would be better than drawing and connecting every single line. Once this is accomplish then I would have moved on to more features. Again just my opinion.
__________________
deus es
 
Old 08 August 2005   #19
"It's strange really because i have never been able to get good results until i tried it with the latest beta 1.42"

This is my experience as well, NC either made it work easier and better or it's my imagination but I could never get it to work well before but now it works great with the latest update.
 
Old 08 August 2005   #20
Yeah it is definetly almost there. Hopefully Silo 2 will have a smart topology function to help draw patches. I have confidence NC will get it down with next two updates.
__________________
deus es
 
Old 08 August 2005   #21
I don't understand why so many people have had issues with the topology brush. For me it worked on the first try when it came out, and has worked every time I've used it. Granted it's not perfect, but the cleanup is usually minimal, and most of the time all I have to do is flip the normals.

I guess whenever I get a chance I can do some tutorials on how I use the topology brush. I've found it to be a great addition to regular polygon tools, and I use it quite often.
__________________
Online Portfolio
 
Old 08 August 2005   #22
chadtheartist,

I, for one, would really appreciate a Topo Brush tut. Pretty please...


PS
Awesome avatar!
 
Old 08 August 2005   #23
Yeah the problem i had Chad was that the Topo Brush was very very slow on my laptop and very hard to get goodlines even though it has a 9700 on board, Now though the speed increases and accuracy increases of the line allow me to get clean meshs
 
Old 08 August 2005   #24
Just thought I'd drop in to say: no reason we can't work on both!
 
Old 08 August 2005   #25
Originally Posted by cyartist: I think the Silo Developers should have made topology more automatic. Just draw basic outlines and hit a button to patch the model. They made a bad decision wasting time with displacement. Zbrush has them beat by miles. Business 101 stay with your strengths.


adjusting proportions by using the wacom tablet is something that should be in every single modeller.

adding levels of hierarchy,to models, etc isnt something that can merely be added to an application once its reached maturity. theres a very good reason why theres displacement tools and all this other technology going into silo. and the reason is, theres a core re-write happening here. when you re-write the core, you have to make sure that you add as much possibilities to it as you can. you then write the tools which will expose the cores posibilities.

smart coding.
 
Old 08 August 2005   #26
I understand your point, but writing a smart topology function seems to me would be more linear in the coding process. It just like an extension of it's base functionality.
__________________
deus es
 
Old 08 August 2005   #27
Originally Posted by Thomas Mahler:

Yeah, I second that. I never felt that I needed to paint straight lines in ZBrush, for example. I want my modeler to feel like digital clay and be able to output animation-ready topology. Get the workflow in place, make sure the displacement stuff is useable and can easily be retopologized. There's some other stuff that still drives me nuts, the instance mirror still screws up at times and merges verts in the middle of the mesh (which will be undoable!), the soft selections in Silo are very, very far from being perfect (the colored verts are masking the area I'm going to tweak, makes it hard to see the effect, also, changing radius and falloff is a pain with 4 (!) different hotkeys for just this one operation), we still have no object management (which is badly needed) and there's still the annoying selection bug in multi-component mode in 1.42. Ugh.

Displacements are nice, but there's still fundamental stuff that either isn't there or is just hard to use while modeling. Especially Magnets should be completely reworked now. ZBrush like "on the fly" tweaking with easily adjustable radius/falloff settings while tweaking would be a godsend. Magnets that support Connectivity would be great, etc. etc.

I really hope you guys are reworking some of the annoying stuff before pushing yourself to 2.0. Displacement painting is cool and all, but I'd prefer having all the traditional modeling stuff in place first.


Another similar point of view.
__________________
deus es
 
Old 08 August 2005   #28
Originally Posted by cyartist: I understand your point, but writing a smart topology function seems to me would be more linear in the coding process. It just like an extension of it's base functionality.


but whats the point in expanding/re-inventing on the topo brush in version 1.4 when you'll have a new base codeset to rely on in 2.0, which is already underway?
 
Old 08 August 2005   #29
Only NC knows their coding environment;and if it is a total rewrite which kill any ideas of linear coding or expanding pre coded functions. If you know about their coding process or environment I defer to you on that.
__________________
deus es
 
Old 08 August 2005   #30
Originally Posted by _Feed_: Just thought I'd drop in to say: no reason we can't work on both!


There ya go all worries over
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.