CORE is dead?


#116

Ya, you did, I meant that Newtek has a way of doing things which don’t exactly square sometimes with the theories of what will happen, regardless of who is in charge of the 3D section it seems.


#117

if i read it correctly i have to agree with what they are doing … from a personal point of view i get to keep the program i am successful with and then they add updates using the tech they developed for CORE without me having to learn a new program, interface , toolset etc…

in the long run could be for the best.

n


#118

And how would the other way (parallel development of both apps as previously advertised) prevent you from keeping/using the program you like (i.e. LW 9.x or 10)? LW 10 wouldn’t suddenly stop to work if they continued to Develop CORE as separate app - right ?


#119

no true, i could still use the LW10 app, but i know that eventually in the long run I would have to switch, if that`s the case i probably wouldn’t spend all my time learning core, i would switch to max or maya, i guess as its proven tech.


#120

But if they integrate CORE into layout or what they plan and redesign UI (whcih they must do if they plan to introduce modeling in layout i.e. integrated app) you will agian need to learn new workflow/stuff in LW so you again need to learn new stuff which bring us back to learning process again - right?

I’ve heard this “proven tech/rtrack record” argument many times and i think it’s not really good “excuse” 'coz if you look it by that way then no new apps would ever been made (LW would then be just one of few available since its among oldest ;)). Why would anyone learn Maya (back then it didn’t have any proven track record - right?) then when we had other apps when they started doing Maya ? OR XSi when we had Softimage 3.8 which was more capable than XSI 1.0 ? Or many other apps (taking maya just as an example but could be said for many other apps made in last 10 years or earlier).

Answer is simple - new app has to do something better i.e. Innnovate (look at Z-brush) and users will COME to it. Simple as that, “patching” LW just to be OK won’t really bring them new users (at least not enough of them to make it shine) either so they have to do somethign radical, better, improved and much faster i.e different (CORE was showing glimpses of that) and that will make us learn new stuff also anyway so why not learn another app right away (with proven track record as some like to say) then instead waiting for that to happen ?


#121

all true,
however as i understand we don’t know what will happen, we don’t know if they plan to integrate modeller into layout ( i hope not), we don’t know if they plan to re design the UI ,

i don’t really see it as patching, more like gradual implementations of improvements…i guess until we have more information we wont know…

the reason i dont want to learn a new app right away is i simply don’t have the time / money to do this and at the moment i dont need to … only in a “no choice” situation would i do this…

cheers


#122

It’s been said/confirmed that they (NT) want unified app to so integration is imminent

the hired pro GUI designer, hmmm i wonder what for that might be then :D?

Agreed we can only wait since they aren’t telling anything now, which is maybe even better considering they were telling too much previously :).

I understand this and respect (I’m also tight with time for last couple of years) but then when you mention you’d buy Maya if you need to learn new app then i supposed money is not an issue then since buying/upgrading maya is lot more than for LW.


#123

My opinion is that with this move, the integration will not be so imminent. they plan a 3 year process, so unless something goes wrong , integration could happen within that timeframe, lets say 2 years maybe to be optimist.

Since in these years they addressed many things in layout and rendering, maybe they’ll start with slowly integrating modelling stuff, introducing history stack/operators and modelling tools within layout environment (so with a different UI than what Core showed.

From this starting point, they could proceed updating the rest, especially CA tools: bones, deformers…but, final integration will be there when every feature we can find in modeler now will be introduced in Layout/lightwave , so for example weight maps and other vertex maps, endomorphs and all what’s related to lw objects.

if all goes well, previously called CORE SDK will allow alot more than simply introducing things into what we now have as Layout, allowing for better tools.

then, new code which previously would be done for CORE and then pass in Lw, will be done in a similar way, but with the difference that the only UI to be designed will be the lw one (actual CORE could serve as a sort of test environment)

the difference of making a new app from scratch with CORE and the current way, is that we’ll be able to learn new things while still having Lw, so it will maybe seem more like huge upgrades rather than a new philosophy to learn.
Also, if i understood well, even if Lw will be integrated, many things into its workflow will stay quite the same, as Rob Powers is way more conservative on what makes of Lw a fast program to work with.

There’s also a marketing difference, in the sense there could be no more confusion. Lw will remain Lightwave, no more CORE as standalone so even possible newcomers will find one 3D app like incidentally happens to be right now with Lw 10.0

This in an optimistic view. speculation. BTW, reality isn’t always what we dream so whatever can happen. :arteest:


#124

to survive in the future lightwave has to make revolutionary changes, because it is not possible to keep the same users_ lightwave needs to attract new users and right now I do not think it has anything to offer. In my opinion lightwave core was hoping to win new users and occupy a good position in the public’s preference, I just can wait… sorry my pessimism, I have 12 years using lightwave but I had the need to use Softimage for 6 years for many reasons and core lightwave’s announcement back at me hope, but after these desicion believe that death is approaching final lightwave.

sorry my english


#125

There is a lot of good in Lightwave as it is, especially a good implementation of node surfacing and rendering. I believe Lightwave will become a tool of choice for many once again. Why do I think this? Newtek know a lot of goodwill has been lost and no more chances. They have talented programmers who want to develop LW into a great all round application. Newtek have no choice but to deliver, or their 3D product will go the way of Electric Image and TrueSpace. I think they will succeed, but I am a optimist, can’t you tell. :slight_smile:


#126

Seeing is believing. NewTek told us before that integration of the two apps is very complicated and will take a long time. And I wonder how they set their priorities. Lots of time was wasted on stuff like FFX, CORE, or shiny new features like the preview render while the things that are fundamentaly wrong with LW are unfixed.


#127

if all newtek show at siggraph 2011 is lightwave 10.1 the i think were in for a long wait until we see any actual evidence that newtek can bring modelling tools into layout…to me ears [from what they say, not seen] they have appeared to have had a ‘eureka moment’ in the last 6 months whereby they now believe that anything is possible including a full internal re write of lightwave and merging to the sets of tools into 1 unified application…

although it could also just be that the pressure to release a new 3d version of lightwave was too pressing compared to the 2 missed Core release dates and no sign of core being anyway near ready so they had to U-turn and throw a couple of things into lightwave 9 and call it 10.
…then they have some breathing space to patch up 10 into a 11 release.


#128

As been evident, both in Volumedic V3 (http://www.volumedic.com/) and Hurleys IBounce (http://www.hurleyworks.com/media/flash/CellPaint2/CellPaint2.html) <— one of many examples of a tool that is highly WIP, mesh creation is allready possible in Layout. These two tools are developed by third party developers accessing the SDK.

I’m not saying that it will be a smooth ride for NT to integrate Layout and Modeler, but I also realized that the building blocks for such a thing is allready there.

:slight_smile:


#129

let me get this straight…

for example cebas came out with a plugin for 3dsmax called matterwaves a decade back that you could assign textures as fracture points/particles and so that makes cebas a possible modelling tools company to rival modo?

the cellpaint2 ‘example’ is not from newtek and is extremely tenuous link to modelling tools at best even if newtek themselves coded it…which they havn’t.

just like Rob has stated…i will only judge newtek on stuff THEY deliver everything else is cheap talk and fairy dust. :thumbsup:

i’m in the ‘show me the money’ camp…i’ll believe it when i see it, not until as i’ve been let down one too many times from newtek now.


#130

Which was my point… if the SDK allows for custom Mesh-creation in Layout allready, it surely indicates that there is codework done from NT to allow for it.

just like Rob has stated…i will only judge newtek on stuff THEY deliver everything else is cheap talk and fairy dust. :thumbsup:

Sure… and I agree. However, it is still interresting from a LW-users standpoint to see what third party developers can do as well.

i’m in the ‘show me the money’ camp…i’ll believe it when i see it, not until as i’ve been let down one too many times from newtek now.

Yep. I hear you… and that is why third party developments, such as IBounce, can be of interrest. :wink:


#131

I think it’s actually possible, but it is indeed a huge work. mesh creation is possible for sure in Layout, what’s more difficult is mesh edit, because it usually used position in space, and displacement for points.

But i think its possible to provide Layout with real mesh edit as well, while i dunno if its possible to have interactivity on those tools.
However this means a complete overhaul of certain parts of Layout, because its made to deal with items and objects.

What Lw actually needs is the possibility to have an internally nodal structure, (Layout is linear) interactive tools for modelling, and also gygapoligon core to deal with massive amounts of polygons and huge scenes.
This is what could actually make a difference with apps like Modo, where everything is integrated, but where you don’t have interactive tools. Interactivity was one of he CORE paradigms, btw.

So, if what was worked for CORE is not lost and finds place within Layout, it wil be possible to have interactivity but with a fast workflow, as opposed to CORE workflow which was too convoluted.

IK has been recently reworked a bit so things for animation are better than before, but would need more to get the same level of apps like Maya or XSI.

right now Layout has VPR and color linear workflow which were CORE technologies, integrated, which is good. Mesh edit though is a deeper component within an app (it has to be connected to everything, hopefully into a nodal structure).

At the end what I think is that changements they plan to do are so huge, that the decision taken from NT for Lw is actually similar to a complete rewrite like CORE was.
The real difference is they don’t start completely from scratch but they have an environment that they have to deeply restructure to make it work into a modern fashion.

This could help them out for workflows, because users want to mantain the Lightwave classic flavour for a fast work and good results, but could also be an obstacle from a programming/development POV.


#132

For me they’ll have to rewrite pretty much most of LW for it to become what Core set out to be (and which seems to be what they are saying is happening, but that’s years ahea).

I was not wanting two fundamentally different ways of rigging for instance, like XSI is set out to have thanks to the old ways and now ICE. I was hoping for one efficient way of doing it and the ability to connect up crazy things nodally without having to store variables as a go-between or whatever.

That’s one of the things that makes me a bit disappointed about Core going the way of the Dodo… I like things clean and I can’t see it happening this way. I don’t want the devs to have to think about old code still working or the odd ik-booster being able to see the new node X for instance.

So I do hope they throw backwards compatibility out the window, I’m worried LW will not have an easy time unless they decide to go full force on actually turning LW into Core. And by that I mean what they said in the first official statement about what Core was all about. Will we see Python in LW for instance? Will LW be a script friendly app finally? It’s just that there’s so much more to Core than a unified app and VPR that I don’t think I’ll have the patience for it.

I do try to though. I think I’m a fan boy at heart although I don’t really use it anymore. :blush:


#133

Stick with what you love. I cannot even consider throwing away LW, core or not core.


#134

i have to agree i feel the same. As long as a i am happy with what i am producing then i wont change.


#135

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.