MrsBebel

#21

Hi, Brian an Ian

>> As for Northernlights, which plugin are you talking about? Im not aware of anything that NL offers that can do anything like Bebel or Invigorator/Lathe.<<

But CableCraft looks like lofting…

>> Except maybe path plotter… so I guess that could handle lofting functions. I appreciate you wanting to be concerned for other plugin vendors and what other people have purchased, but we’re in a competitive market. You shouldn’t hesitate to create something better than what’s out there. You’re already competing with Northernlights by offering FlexPath. Its in direct competition with Contortionist. <<

Such competition easily can be not productive for both developers. And need to think twice (or more) before start it.

>>The invigorator way… <<

It sounds like (please correct us if we wrong): “You, guys, must learn from great Invigorator how to extrude. It would be better if you put your efforts in reanimating/improving of this awesome product instead of creating something yours (it’s named as “combining the powers”, but we see you just want to have “old good Invigorator” and nothing more). And it would be same successfull as 10 years ago”

Sorry, but in our opinion the Invigorator way is just obsolete. Why EPS is only one possible base of extrusion? Why the base cannot be animated? Why it’s only a plane shape, not any surface or even every facet? How about interactive profille edit, advanced caps etc.?

We’ve nothing against opinion like: “combo EPS + extrude is very (most) usable”, but EPS import should be solved in host.

>> it would just be even cooler (and worth more £€$) if it could deal with EPS files imported into Animator.<<

We understand you, Ian. Yes, host’s import is hmm… not always perfect, and in any case it would be helpful if a plug has a button sorta “Load EPS…”, right :slight_smile: ? But please understand us also: a plug-in should solve its main task instead of duplicating host’s functions like load models/textures.

So, sorry, gentlemen, but no EPS support.

#22

I agree:

EPS import in EIAS would be a good thing.
The new version of Maya has a AI vCS import feature AND if the original file is edited it is updated in Maya. Obviously there is a need for such features. (Wasn’t there an INV for Maya at one time?)
I like Mrs. Bebel and yes it would be cool if it could do this and other Invigorator type features. IMHO the foundation is there.
One thing I liked about Invigorator was you could turn on and off different parts of the EPS file and apply different FX all in the same plug.

#23

Igor, I am curious.

What would it take to get this project going?

Mike Fitz
www.3dartz.com

#24

Hi, Mike

Please explain what project you talk about?

#25

Hey Igors, I was trying to figure in my mind(non programming mind!) what would it take
for programmers to begin work on a plugin like we are talking about here.

The reason why I asked is because perhaps, we could (community wise) “hire” you guys to assemble this/upgrade/further develop MrsBebel.

Thanks for any info

Mike

#26

Well, “this/upgrade/further develop MrsBebel” is not enough clear formula. Revolver? It’s simple but unneeded. EPS file? For 1 plug? Looks not serious. It’s better to hire Blair who knows much more about import/export - at least you would have EPS for all plugs

But we like your train of thought :slight_smile:

#27

Igors,

First off let me just say to everyone: This is a friendly debate. The Igors are raising good points. I, of course, will stick with my position because from my experience, my requests are well justified.

On with the debate.

Igors: “But CableCraft looks like lofting”

Agreed. I completely overlooked Cablecraft. Sorry Blair. But CC is not a lofter, but rather an animation capable extruder. I know CC will support multiple entities within the control group, but I’m not sure if it will create geometry between two separate outline entities of different shape. (IE a circle to a square). Twisting and scaling of the outline cross section is supported, which is great. Secondly, Cablecraft doesn’t have its own outline/spline loading capabilities. You must use imported entities within EIAS. I’m ok with this because of Blair’s control group method is well thought out for the way his plugins operate. But ultimately, CC serves a specific animation requirement. Its not really a plugin used for modeling purposes.

Igors: “Such competition easily can be not productive for both developers. And need to think twice (or more) before start it.”

I agree. I don’t want a war breaking out. EI’s market is too small for fighting between vendors. However, competition isn’t a bad thing. Its the foundation for producing a superior product and it allows the users to decide which product meets their needs for both methodology and practicality. Users ultimately want some kind of modeling subsystem with EIAS. Any vendor that supplies this, I believe, will be well received.

Igors: "You, guys, must learn from great Invigorator how to extrude. It would be better if you put your efforts in reanimating/improving of this awesome product instead of creating something yours (it’s named as “combining the powers”, but we see you just want to have “old good Invigorator” and nothing more.)

You’re taking this too personally. I’m all for creating new and unique plugins. Bebel is awesome. I own it. You know I support you guys because I’ve purchased nearly 3/4 of your entire product inventory. I plan to own everything by Konkeptoine eventually. The loss of Invigorator in OSX/PC left a very specific void within EIAS. One that, in my opinion, was crucial to people in the broadcast design community. It was fast, easy, and efficient. Its not about reliving the “glory days of invigorator”, but rather, seeing a potential plugin emerge that could have both the powers of Invig, Lathe, and Bebel in one product. You need to take off the developer/programmer hat for a minute and listen to what the users are asking for. We want some form of integrated modeling tools. Until EITG gives us that, we’re relying on 3rd party guys to provide it.

Igors: Sorry, but in our opinion the Invigorator way is just obsolete. Why EPS is only one possible base of extrusion? Why the base cannot be animated? Why it’s only a plane shape, not any surface or even every facet? How about interactive profille edit, advanced caps etc.

Mike had an excellent suggestion in a previous post. It would be awesome if your plugin would allow us to draw the cross section within Animator and then extrude it or revolve it or whatever. I love the idea of interactive profile editing within Animator, but is that possible within the current plugin API? If it is… by all mean… do it. I only suggest EPS as a solution because drawing bezier splines in a 2d package is so simple and its understood by any level of user. Its good for newbies.

Igors: We understand you, Ian. Yes, host’s import is hmm… not always perfect, and in any case it would be helpful if a plug has a button sorta “Load EPS…”, right ? But please understand us also: a plug-in should solve its main task instead of duplicating host’s functions like load models/textures

“Host’s import is not always perfect”…hmmm. True. But EIAS doesn’t even have EPS import. Neither does Transporter. Modeler had it, but modeler is dead. Not good for people purchasing new seats of EIAS. Why is EPS import valuable? Easy. Tools like Illustrator have tons of 2d spline creation tools, alignment tools, kerning tools, etc etc etc that dwarf anything EIAS offers. Hopefully, IF (heavy on the IF) integrated modeling tools in EIAS appear within the next year, these issues will be resolved.

Igors: “So, sorry, gentlemen, but no EPS support.”

I think you’re missing a huge opportunity here.

#28

Hi, Brian

Let us not answer “step by step” but concentrate on key places only. We hope it will be more productive and interesting.

>> You’re taking this too personally. <<

Absolute not (even maybe with our English it looks so :wink: ).

>>You need to take off the developer/programmer hat for a minute and listen to what the users are asking for.<<

We propose a “reverse” way. Please imagine (for a minute) you are an engineer, we think here this word is more suitable than “developer” (too abstract) and “programmer” (assumes a concrete implementation). Let’s talk as engineers who plan an “extrusion, revolving and lofting” system overview, counting business aspects.

Ok, imagine (only imagine) that “Load EPS…” button is added to Mrs. Please sorry our immodesty but what David and we would have from it? A big additional piece of work - absolute yes, but $ - looks like absolute no. “They charge money for a single button added!!!” - for users it’s not intersted how much developers’ blood this button can drink. What happens if we cannot implement EPS import? (yes, engineer should count this variant always, not to rely on “someone has already done this”). Or if this work cannot be finished in short time? Maybe we’ll improve, improve and improve our great EPS import (following by users’ formula “we need”). And, maybe, half year later it will be Ok, but… no any new model tools are ready/started yet. What if new EPS “sub-formats” coming and we must back to this work again and again.

So, why we need such stone on our necks? How about to forget about EPS and find other ways that are easier and faster for both: users and developers?

>>but rather, seeing a potential plugin emerge that could have both the powers of Invig, Lathe, and Bebel in one product.<<

Let’s omit numerous tech. details but just say: in our opinion it’s not realistic to collect “all in one plugin”, need 2 and more plug-ins. Clear-clear: "so, I should pay $150 for Mrs, $150 for… etc.:curious: " Of course, no, it’s not a way to go. How about “more integrated” approach, for example: you are Mrs user, so, say, Mr. Revolver is accessible for you and its price is very and very tolerant/loyal?

Ok, let’s talk more about Mr.Revolver. We see: interface as for Mrs, same graph but used for revolving. Minimal set of options (revolver is simpler itself), like: count of revolve steps, revolve axis, UV options. No EPS please.

Interested? Ideas? Suggestions?

#29

Hey Igors,

I’m glad to hear that I haven’t upset you in any way with my ideas. I’m certainly not trying to attack your position and I fully respect the work you guys do. Without developers, we artists would have nothing to work with.

So… we can agree to work together on meeting the need at hand. This is a good step. Let’s start over then and ask the primary questions necessary to meet both parties requirements.

Artist’s Position: We would like a set of tools that can provide Animator with a method in which we can generate geometry from within the package itself. It should be able to:

  1. Extrude
  2. Bevel
  3. Revolve
  4. Loft between open and close curve entities.
  5. Be capable of loading and saving settings for each capability.
  6. Be capable of modifying the existing cross section.
  7. Potentially be capable of generating the curve or cross section with animator itself.
  8. Preferably be a single plugin tool rather than multiple tools.
  9. Be capable of generating meshes at any level of resolution.
  10. Integrate some level of animation capability.

Engineer’s Position:

  1. Be cost effective and capable of generating income for your business.
  2. Does not interfer or cause unnecessary competition between 3rd party vendors.
  3. Is not dependant on outside formats like EPS which may become obsolete in the model generation department.
  4. Can be programmed in a reasonable amount of time.
  5. Potential committment for such a product from the user base.

Am I missing anything?

#30

Hey Igors!

Thanks for the positive response!!! :slight_smile:

Could Mrs. Revolve marry Mr. Extruding? Mrs. Revolve would be a great start though…

I suppose the really simple modelling tools would be great, and if they make enough £££ to make it worth while adding more… That would be great too.

So long as you could use Mrs. Bebel on Mrs. Revolve (oh dear, that doesn’t sound right…)
Ian

(I still don’t want to give up on loft though…)

#31

Hi, Ian

In our lang Revolver is “he”, so - mister. But let’s concentrate on what he does, how to name is a kind of pleasant problems :slight_smile:

#32

Hi, Brian

First of all for us it seems fully clear: need to finish this thread and start a new one. It corresponds to switching from general discussion to concrete. So, we propose to start “Mr.Revolver” thread.

About your lists: generally we absolute agree. Of course, it’s possible to discuss more some things, for example, is it the same: extruding and beveling , but imho such details are not very important. Only one difference is enough principal:

>> 8. Preferably be a single plugin tool rather than multiple tools. <<

Sorry, but we are fully sure: there is no way to collect all in a single plugin. We see only a series of plugins (in one style).

Ok, back to Mr.Revolver. It’s maximally simple (can be programmed in a reasonable amount of time) and minimally conflicted. Yes, we wrote it’s “too simple” and we still think it’s “not enough featured”. But maybe we can apply our brains together to make it a popular tool?

So:

  • it looks like Mrs but graph is revolved (internal, the plugin builds cross-section itself)

  • external cross-sections… How about this: for each child group the plug-in finds/scans particle lines that are used as a “revolve contour” (we are not familiar with terms). If child group(s) has polygon geometry, the plugin scans opened edges and uses them as a contour.

That’s a modest but absolute realistic start. Your move(s), gentlemen ?

#33

Ok Guys…

I’ll start a new thread. However, Mr. Revolver? Hmmm… gonna have to work on that one.

Brian

#34

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.