Has anyone tried Modo?

#14

As I said before, Modo’s native file format is .LWO. The caveat is that Luxology has added various optional extensions to the LWO file format that includes support for things like edge weighting, n-gons and various other features.

So if you import a modo-created LWO into Lightwave then save the object again from within Lightwave it may get saved without these extra extensions.

Because of this I still model in Modo with just 4 point polygons, for rendering in Lightwave. For people who want to model using n-gons there are work-arounds to make the mesh compatible with Lightwave (ie you model in n-gons, then split them into 4-point polys before rendering in Lightwave).

#15

I am a Lightwave user and have owned Modo since early late September. I still use Lightwave Modeler along with Modo. I think they work well together. There are some tools in Modo I like better and some in Modeler I like better.

#16

I purchased Modo the other day and I’m quite happy with it, but I do need to get used to it’s method. I think I will switch it so that it behaves more like Modeler.

I am relaxed and no tension here. I just asked a simple question.

I noticed that at this moment that there doesn’t seem to be any user-based support for the application. By that I mean plug-ins. I’ve looked around, but nadda. Mind you I can’t find anything on the net, even though I design for it. Go figure. I really wish that there was a plug-in to convert trigons to quads, but I guess that will come eventually.

I think I’ll play around with it until I have some real time to get into the app.

Thanks everyone for your replies, and by no means do I want this post to end. Keep it coming 'cause I’d like to read about more experiences.

#17

I noticed that at this moment that there doesn’t seem to be any user-based support for the application. By that I mean plug-ins. I’ve looked around, but nadda.

www.vertexmonkey.com

:wink:

#18

Thank you.

Do you know anyone who scripts for Modo? I’m looking for a conversion tool that turns Trigons into quads. Merge_Trigons for Lightwave is just too slow and not very effective.

#19

Well, you obviously have not used Modo then. After using modo for a while I dread having to do anything in LW’s modeler. Modo is much better, you don’t have all the constant popups, you can change almost anyhthing with realtime previews, the interface is very streamlined and does not get in the way as modeler sometimes does. Modeling with edges and Ngons makes things much easier and faster even if you have to divide them up later. Edges… well this is the main reason I don’t use modeler anymore. I can’t really describe how much of a diference edges make in modeling. Everything in modo feels like it’s part of the program, you can bevel anything (ponts, edges, faces) with a single hotkey. I think the biggest problem with discussing modo in a lightwave group is that there are a few peopl who seem to take it as a personal insult because the Lux guys quit working for newtek for whatever reason they did. Personaly I thing it’s foolish to avoid a great program for such petty reasons.

#20

All of what’s been said could’ve been gotten from a Modo list.

Marketeering at it’s best.

#21

There are some scripts, macros and such at vertexmonkey.com Also, remember that Modo has only been release for a few moths and the SDK has not yet been relesed. Once the SDK is available I’m sure that there will be a lot of plugins being developed. I know there are several people who have expressed interest in developing third party plugins.

#22

Personally i’m not insulted at all. I know the best of the NT staff have gone to Lux, and i’m happy they are on to something great and revolutionary, doing the things NT should allow them to do many many years ago.
What i’m saying is that i’d rather get my hands dirty with Modo, when it comes as a complete package having everything under the same roof and way of thinking. Untill then, LW’s modeler does everything i need, and i mean everything. And anyway, when you work on the point and polygon level of detail, and when the details are about that point and polygon, whatever tools you use to build the general shape, don’t make much of a difference.
One thing i can say to conclude, Modo can make you a bit faster as a modeler, but it doesn’t make you a better modeler. :wink:

#23

Dennik,

I disagree actually. (DISCLAIMER: I’m the president of Luxology! :slight_smile: ) I’ve been modeling for over 12 years now most of those years in LW Mod. Since I started working with modo I am MUCH better at modeling. Why? Several reasons, but I will hit on the main one. Edges. It seems silly but having edges and true edge tools is just WAY more intuitive for me. As a result I am a better modeler. My meshes have better flow, I can get out of “problem” areas in a model quickly and I can just “noodle” more easily. It’s a little difficult to explain properly but anyone who has spent a few weeks in modo will most likely agree. There is sort of a “pop point” where all the sudden you just GET modo. At that stage you become faster AND better.

I have always been quick to say “its all about the artist, not the tool” but when the tool gets out of your way, you can be a better artist.

That is all. :slight_smile:

BP

#24

Sounds like what I’ve been told (and experienced with) about modeler.

I wonder if that’s how it will be described for modeler when true edges are introduced…

I would dare say, the moderators would best serve us all by moving this thread to a more appropriate location.

This list has a decided focus: LightWave. I have nothing against anyone else’s app but I do believe they have their own space to talk ad nauseum about their product.

I’ve recently started ‘getting’ LightWave after using it on and off since it’s inception. It is a MUCH more comprehensive program than it ever has been. I’ve tried Modo and couldn’t see the point of an $800.00 modeler. Oh, sorry, modeller. Too many other programs have similar, same or better ways of working – this still feels like modeler with different constraints.

Yeah, if I gave myself $800.00 and more time with it, I might grow to like it, as I have LightWave. However, I believe that if 8.2 comes near what Modo now offers, it makes even less sense as an alternative.

#25

Brad,

Just the guy I want to ask this question to…

is there anyway to UNTRIANGULATE a mesh with Modo? I have this unbearable model that I don’t know what to do with that’s been created in Pro/Engineer and converted to a LWO. I own Modo, but still too unfamilar with it to know it’s true functionality.

Great stuff BTW. It’s what Modeler and LW should be like (interface and usability, let alone OpenGL performance). I still like LW I just need a couple of extra tools to make my job easier.

#26

there is no doubt that modo has a certain slickness to it that modeler lacks - i mean i have always felt in lightwave you have alot of tools where 1 would do noteably the bevel tool ( though i ahve my complaints against modo’s bevel tool too i’m used to the mosue drags working the opposite way and iwish that when i went to do the next bevel it didn’t jump to the same bevel as i had last time - i very rearely do two consective bevels of exactly the same amount ) lightwave has sooooooo many bevel tools or does is you want to bave a complete set

bevel
edge bevel
magic bevel
rounder
and if you have any sence bevel++

other thigns like the display some of my meshs drag lw to a complete halt where i forced to never have all the layers visable at any 1 time unless i dont plan on move the viewports load them into modo and the fly around no problem

otehr thigns liek teh local action center ohhhhhh how i have longed for this in modeler ( though i now long for the good old mouse action center in modo )

as to it making me a better modeler - hmmm well not noticed yet though i still not complete got into modo yet as brad said there is a “pop point” and haven’t reached it yet perhaps once i do and transfer all my modeling from lw to modo ( though annoyingly i have some expensive plugins for lw that modo certainly doesn’t have yet - now if only it could use lightwave plugins lol that would be sweet ) it will happen and my moddels will get better - can but hope certainly

#27

One has to wonder why people keep posting in a thread that clearly annoys them.

Go figure.

I don’t expect LW 8.2 to be more than a lot of bug fixes. Bottom line is the app needs a serious overhaul, and frankly Modo has that overhaul NOW. Not at some magical “later”.

As for the cost, I could question the 495.00 upgrade cost of LW8, just to get plugins I aready owned integrated into LW, where they will never see another upgrade.

The 595.00 for Modo is money well spent.

#28

I agree 100%. I didn’t think that edges were going to make such a big difference, but they have completely changed the way I work. Let’s not forget the work planes. I’ve been working on a house model and being able to change the work plane to match the slope of the roof makes things so much easier. Also, all the tools are completely integrated, so when I need to bevel an edge or a point, or a polygon I don’t have to use a different tool. It’s all the same shortcut key. Also, the elementmove tool is like a combination of the move tool and the free transorm tool (I forget the actual name) in lightwave where you can just click and drag a point and if you need to move it in a different view you can just grab the handle in a different view and drag it a different way. There’s no need to hold CTRL to constrain movements along the main axis like in lightwave (which would often constrain movement in a direction I didn’t want to go), just grab the handle and drag. Also, deselecting things is so much easier in modo. Just click in an empty area in a view. No more having to click in an empty area of the menu bars. Edges are just plain awesom. I saved a mesh I had frozen and then accidentally saved over the original subD model by selecting edge loops and removing them. This was as easy as double clicking on an edge and then hitting backspace. So, while Modo may not seem to have as many features as LightWave modeler does after a little use you will realize it doesn’t need them. Bandsaw, point bevel, rounder, etc. all feel like hacks after seeing the way these things work in modo.

BTW, the whole “It’s a poor artist that blames his tools” thing in the Lightwave 7.0 or 7.5 manual was when I started seriously looking at other programs. I couldn’t believe that there was an actual excuse printed the manual.

P.S. For everyone complaining about this being posted in the LW group, all of my replies have been made in the Modo group, so I don’t know how they are getting there.

#29

“Automatic” works like the mouse action center. Wherever you click becomes the center for the current action.

#30

Actually, that is very true, to a certain degree. The artist finds solutions to problems. And there are always problems to be solved. I think where NT was coming from was that there was a consistent “dumping” on them because software-X has this and software-Y has that. And that this was slower than that and so on. I would get pissed too. But I don’t think the term artist is the right word. Artists use what they have to create the work that they make. A Complainer blames his tools. People who talk and not walk blames their tools.

my 2 cents.

#31

Sorry but I have to disagree with that last reply.

Saying an artist finds a way to make things work is a cop out. Why spend all your time figuring out workarounds when you could spend that time creating??? How much creative time do you LOSE when you have to figure out how to work around a problem?

Why should you have to?

Whoopie dooo. I didn’t get into this to spend all my time working around issues. I got into it to create. If A program gets in the way of creating, then they have a problem. Addressing user issues with poorly worded excuses doesn’t cut it.

Show me another industry where making an excuse for the lack of proper tools is acceptable.

#32

I don’t know exactly why that was put in the manual, but it came across as an excuse. It’s like saying, sure we don’t have all the features of program X, but if you can’t figure out a way around it, it’s because you’re a lousy artist. While I can usually figure out a way around most problems it was becoming a constant thing in LightWave and that is very disruptive to the whole crativity/workflow thing.

As for newtek getting tired of hearing how this program does this better or that program does something else better, the best way to combat that kind of criticisim is to make the features people complain about BETTER, not blame it on the users.

#33

I also think this whole saying is a bit out dated. Back when art was being made with hammers and chisels or paints and pencils, this was fairly true, but with computers there is a whole new layer, which include bugs, features not working as they should, of features that don’t exist. Sure you could do character animation without bones, but why should you have to? I could build any model imaginable with only the ability to create polygons and move/merge vertices to join them together, but why would you want to, especially if some other package has all the cool tools that ake things easier and faster. Hell, my first experience with 2d computer art was nothing more than entering coodinates by hand into a comodore computer to draw an image and my first experience in 3d was with PovRay on a 286 where everything had to be entered in a text editor before I previewed it. Could I create art with those methods? Yes. Would I ever want to go back to them? Hell no. Why? Because there is something better.

Ok, enough ranting.