By arthur argote (Archiea) (66.32.146.30) on Saturday, October 05, 2002 - 12:17 am:

Hey folks,

I've been fortunate with the opportunity to have a dialog with the CEO of Idruna regarding a mac version of their HDRI editing package Photogenics HDR

http://www.idruna.com/photogenicshdr.html

He's been kind enough to offer a frank assessment of the mac market for such a product. In the end, the question posed to the mac community is whether you would pay $999 for a package like Photogenic HDR. This question is offered to everyone from Hobbyist to indie artist to the owner of a small studio. Additionally, would a version with a non-standard interface (as Lightwave or Combustion have), having what I guess would be a more windows looking interface, be such a problem.

He mentioned that the port to Linex was more difficult than predicted, but there was a demand for it from studios. So you can imagine a mac port being equally difficult, but without the high profile demand...

Let see if we can change that.

He's allowed me to post his email here with the interest to offer feedback from the mac community. So please, real responses folks. No flaming, no anti PC vendetta or overt mac praising,. If you use macintoshes in your home or studio and desire the use of HDRI paint software, here's a direct line to such a request. So do so responsibly..

Paul Nolan.
paul@idruna.com

You may want to explain to Paul what you do and how such a package would benefit you... etc. Be honest, though, they are a small company and deserve an honest answer.


For the mac users on the fence, let me elaborate on the usefulness of this software...

I'm sure alot of folks here share the frustration of seeing most of photoshop's functionality being ghosted when you scan a picture in 16 bit. Truth is, photoshop's main market is the print world, where 8 bit is the norm. Lightwave is unique in that it offers compatability with 32bit images (meaning 32 bits PER channel), but there hasn't been means to edit such data on the mac, or even the PC until recently.

Although the intent for this had been the film world, working in 32 bits, assuming you have a recent mac, offers more flexibilty in image manipulation.

newteks page here expalins it far better than I...
http://www.lightwave3d.com/tutorials/fullprecision/index.html

Considering that Combustion and shake exist on the mac platform and have the ability to work with LW's extended range output, the tail end of this pipeline is addressed. Its the input part where the mac platfrom is deficent.

Any other questions regarding this workflow, even as to why to you should even give a flying mouse turd, please post!!

thanks for taking the time.

By riki (Suture) (203.173.129.170) on Sunday, October 06, 2002 - 06:01 pm:

I would definately want to buy a copy. I don't mind so much what it looks like. I would prefer a macstyle interface. Though I'm a freelance designer and it's a bit out of my price range. It might be a few years off but I would imagine that it's only a matter of time before someone delivers a Mac solution for 32 image manipulation.

By policarpo (Policarpo) (168.215.166.253) on Monday, October 07, 2002 - 12:06 pm:

why not buy Wirtual PC and use HDRShop in the meantime. it's free. you can also use Lightwaves built in FP image viewer to set new exposures to your renders.

just a thought. but really...you could buy a PC for less than the cost of the $999 price tag they are asking and run HDRShop too.

By policarpo (Policarpo) (168.215.166.253) on Monday, October 07, 2002 - 12:08 pm:

why not buy Virtual PC and use HDRShop in the meantime. it's free. you can also use Lightwaves built in FP image viewer to set new exposures to your renders.

just a thought. but really...you could buy a killer-fast PC for less than the cost of the $999 price tag they are asking and run HDRShop natively too.

You might think about email paul Debevec and ask him how development of HDRShop on OSX is going as well.



note: Digital Domain uses HDRShop...and i'm sure the pricing for commercial usage isn't as high as the $999 price tag you noted above.

By kenneth woodruff (Kenneth) (64.129.197.193) on Monday, October 07, 2002 - 04:41 pm:

one reason is that it states specifically in the hdrshop license that you can use it for non-commercial purposes for free. for commercial purposes, you need to contact them about purchasing, which means that it's going to be considerably more than $999...

as for photogenics, i think it's fantastic that someone has chosen to fill this gaping hole, but it's still pretty high-end stuff. most people who own lightwave have no idea what's going on with the hdr stuff underneath (indeed i have been in touch with big studios that didn't even "know" that you could save >8 bit/channel images from lw). if it intends to compete with photoshop and such as a painting tool, with only a nod towards its fp pipeline, it should be priced accordingly.

i think it has to be priced high because it's in a niche, and the price will prohibit it from being widely adopted, which will keep it in its niche. there should be a "lite" version...

By Hervé Steff (Hervé) (212.76.255.97) on Tuesday, October 08, 2002 - 01:20 am:

Hello Kenneth, being a HDRshop user myself, I was curious to know how do you know that the price for commercial use is way more than $999 ? Did you ask them.... I was wondering how they could even see you see it..... dunno, I dont want to be pirate or anything like that , but frankly, i mean big Co. have a hard time tracking down software pirates putting a lot of money on table, so how a university dpt. (or is it private now... ) could track down all commercials products on earth and see if hey used somewhere, somehow their app., did Photogenics have write their own code or is it coming in part from M. Debevec (sounds very french from Bretagne region...) who sold it to them....

BTW, in my opinion, HDRShop does a better job at re-exposing my multi-exposures self made pictures, than re-exposing the renders I am doing in LW (recorded with the HDR format...of course), is there a reason t that.... or am I dreaming...

Ok, now what about the ready made HDRI's that we can download at the Pr. Debevec's site... are we free to use them withtin LW for commercial usage....

If so , it is bizarre and makes LW going to have uniformed lighting possibilities (I can see the Kitchen HDR, the commercial Center HDR in so many renders.....) so NT should provide a small HDR app plugin.... i know you can re-expose within LW, but it is as good (at least I think) as HDRShop....

well that's it.... see you

Hervé

.... and I would buy a lite version also of photogenics..... but not for $999.... that's almost the price of LW, and LW can do a million more stuff than Photogenics....

Share your POV

By Hervé Steff (Hervé) (212.76.255.97) on Tuesday, October 08, 2002 - 01:24 am:

BTW Arthur, I would buy a Mac prior a PC LITE version of Photogenics (no$999), but if Mac is not avilable, I 'll buy a PC version , so ..... whatever would come LITE..... (in price)

Hervé

By kenneth woodruff (Kenneth) (64.129.197.193) on Tuesday, October 08, 2002 - 11:50 pm:

it's a bit like being in one of those stores where there are no price tags... usually that means you'd be surprised by the price.

i think they set the price based on usage, frequency, number of units, etc., but since there's no "base" listed, i'd be surprised if it were anything affordable by mere mortals.

By Hervé Steff (Hervé) (212.76.255.97) on Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 12:59 am:

Too bad for Pr Debevec.....

By Michael Robert Martin (Mrmartin100) (24.49.49.197) on Wednesday, October 09, 2002 - 09:45 pm:

Today I attended a lecture given by Paul Debevec at the University of Virginia. When asked if there would be a Mac port of HDR shop, he said it wasn't necessary. He volunteered that Newtek was including a version of something similar in the next iteration of Lightwave.

So I don't know if I'd rush out and pay more money for a third party program.

By kenneth woodruff (Kenneth) (64.129.197.193) on Thursday, October 10, 2002 - 02:17 am:

spin is such a strange beast.

of course, if you need something now, you're out of luck...

By riki (Suture) (203.173.155.249) on Thursday, October 10, 2002 - 02:50 am:

sounds good though