By Eike Hein (Sho) (217.231.25.60) on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 05:08 pm:

Hi,

like many of you, I'm interested in a Linux version of LightWave. Since they already ported (or are porting) the renderer and its plug-in interface, what's left is the GUI. Now, I'm not exactly a programmer, but it is my understanding that Layout and Modeler don't use the native Windows/MacOS widget kits, but a seperate toolkit.

Was this GUI toolkit developed by NewTek, or was it bought? If it was bought by NewTek, maybe the original developer is already offering or working on a Unix/X11 version? Does anyone know more about this matter? I'm curious about the probability of a LightWave 3D 8.0 for Linux/XFree86. Thanks in advance.

By Digital Freak (Trilogy) (203.33.171.147) on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 06:15 pm:

This thread has been done to death....

LW uses LWPanels services, which are part of the SDK and made by Newtek.

I would not expect LW8.0 to have a linux flavour,
maybe if or when we get to LW9.0

There simply are not enough people, using Linux in a commercially viable environment, to warrant a full linux flavoured version (IMO)

By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Sunday, January 12, 2003 - 08:28 pm:

Kudos. That's what it brings. Those 3D apps working on Linux get major film work, like Maya/XSI. Those that aren't on Linux (like 3Dmax) don't, though Max's popularity comes mainly from gamers. People buy a 3D app like Maya, not because it's better, but 'cause they think it's better due to its Hollywood credits.

If Newtek wants big Hollywood gigs they must go Linux. The kudos then spurs sales in the other platforms.

By Eike Hein (Sho) (217.231.62.245) on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 06:05 am:

Every major studio uses Linux nowadays. Many smaller studios, LightWave studios, would like to use Linux, because it's cheaper, more stable and easier to administrate than Microsoft Windows.

Linux is a viable choice - its importance to the industry increases every day. I'm pretty sure NewTek has Linux plans, it's only a question of when it's going to happen. That's why I asked a very specific question about LightWave. Thanks a lot for answering it.

By Digital Freak (Trilogy) (203.33.171.133) on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 06:49 pm:

No worries, Sho....
That is why they are making the Linux Renderer..

The sales for Linux based XSI & Maya are the lowest of any platform.
Like i say, it will be viable, but it's not yet..

It works for hundreds of PC's rendering, but not as a workstation. (yet)

Maya gets used in Film / Games / Television
because it's well supported, well made, and has tons of excellent features.

Maya was designed as a Character Tool!
And what kind of work is getting made in those areas these days......??? Chracter Animation.
Hollywood FX teams, need a program, they can program... (MAYA & MEL)

It is the character tools, and MEL that have made Maya a success, nothing to do with Linux.

It is also these two things, that have turned
Hollywood away from LW.

Broadcast logo's are no longer the bread & butter of animators, CA is....

3D studio is still the most widely used and supported 3D software in existance.
It does not even have a Mac version.

What good is a linux version of LW, if everybody is going to use a Linux version of Maya & XSI anyway?

The core feature-set needs to be improved!

It is mainly LW's limited SDK that stops the bigger companies like ILM from using it more.

Whatever is Crap on MS is still crap on Linux..

By Chuck Baker (Cbaker) (66.69.70.123) on Monday, January 13, 2003 - 09:43 pm:

The Emmy winners in VFX for the last three years running have been done in LW, and LW productions have picked up a number of other Emmys and awards over the years since the first one for B5's pilot in 1994.

Digital Domain gave LW quite a workout on Nemesis, and plenty of other major studios and FX houses are continuing and expanding their use of LW. We continue to have the leading marketshare in films, telvision, and print, and our share in games and new media is good and growing.

By Digital Freak (Trilogy) (203.31.48.113) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:29 am:

I understand that LW is used in the Movie Industry. (But not as much as it once was)
I think every major studio, does use LW, but they are using it less than before.

But when it comes to Character animation Maya is king. (And with Yoda, Gollum, Final Fantasy, Harry Potter(s) etc, etc) Character Animation has become, what broadcast logo and design once was.

Broadcast graphics, are another area where LW shines. But CA is shining brighter now, and will continue to do so, until the next revolution.
LW rocks, but it's not going to rock any harder just because it's been ported to Linux.

Maya has worked hard to copy LW, and they have deeper pockets to spend on advertising, and are able to buy their way into Hollywood.

But the Character tools, MEL, Renderman pipeline) Have made it the number one 3D software for film, in the last two years. Kickbacks and advertising, are the others

It's not because Maya has a Linux version.
LW needs to address some of the things that are being ignored.

If even Joe Alter, can't get a few bug fixes after 4 years in waiting, why the hell would
ILM or Weta throw a bunch of programmers at it?

Plugins can't talk to each other in LW, Incomplete and odd buffer systems, etc, etc....

These are the things that have stifled LW's growth in this area. Not a lack of Linux support. Thats my point. (i knew i had one)

I don't use or never have used Maya.
But i do see why others are using it.

I personally have spent way too much time and effort being devoted to LW, and now i refuse to go and use inferior products, when LW is quite capable of improving on the areas it needs to.
And reclaiming it's spot at the top of the 3D pile.

Who cares which software was used in which movie?
Not me but just about everybody else on the planet. That is why Formula 1, sells cars.

At the end of the day, i'd like to see what we have improved, rather than what others have and are not using, added.

Rant Mode: OFF

By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 05:08 am:

I don't think Alias/W has deep pockets. Not with their cost slashing and move to Canada.

By Chuck Baker (Cbaker) (207.235.86.2) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 10:00 am:

Trilogy, your points regarding what you'd like to see in LW are certainly well taken. However, the notion that LW is being used less in movies than it was is not founded in fact. While Maya and other applications have certainly seen heavy use for character animation for quite some time, modeling has often been done in other software and rendering has been done in other software still. The actual trend for NewTek's LightWave is upward, because LightWave 3D is seeing increasing use bracketing other applications in the pipeline, often as both the modeler and the renderer.

Observing this fact is not to say that we plan to be content with the state of our character tools or other elements of the program - we've invested a lot in improving the character and animation tools over the last several years and there are more improvements in development. We'd like to insure that if you can only have one 3D application the obvious choice is LightWave 3D, but we also recognize that professional users are often going to have multiple applications in their pipelines to take advantage of what each does best, and that we want LW to be an application of choice for those production pipelines as well.

By Rakesh Malik (Thalaxis) (208.20.220.69) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:35 pm:

I think that qualifies as "not resting on one's laurels"

I'm glad to hear it.

Now, if only the NewTekPro guys had NewTek's professionalism...

By Digital Freak (Trilogy) (203.33.171.26) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 05:04 pm:

Thanks as usual Chuck.
Your words are always welcome, and accepted.
And especially to one of my boring rants.

I wish you well in your new position,
and i'm sure you hard work and loyalty to Newtek
will not go unrewarded. For you, or the rest of us.

I can also say i agree that LW will (if not already) reclaim some of what was once lost.
as their does seem to be, a slight mutiny against Maya. The hype has died down, and people realise that the grass isn't really greener, it's just a differen't type of grass.

Thanks for the well rounded response.

By Eike Hein (Sho) (217.231.49.180) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 05:43 pm:

I wholeheartedly second that. Thanks, Chuck. Knowing that one of the team follows what's on our minds gives me a warm feeling . You're showing presence and giving input, that's reassuring and certainly something you don't get with most other software development companys.

One of the reasons I enjoy using LightWave is its great and generally resonable community, and I'm glad NewTek is a part of it.

By Dustin D'Amour (Wizcraker) (68.99.218.128) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 03:43 am:

I think Lightwave 3D has done pretty well in the market. It has features that other packages can't compare with and the dev team are always on top of the ball. Granted it might be lacking in som CA areas but I'm sure Newtek is working on this. I've seen major changes since 5.0 [when I first bought it] that keep Newtek in the Lead for implementing technology that the more expensive stuff does not have. Newtek implements all this and still finds a way to keep the price under $1600. The closest full package comes in at $1400 more. [Maya Complete does not count do to the fact that it does not include Cloth, Fur or the Advanced modeling tools. And Houdini light or what ever they call it does not count either because it does not include the full particle, modeling, animation tools].

As for deep pockets you got to also remember that Max is owned by Autodesk [big company], and a/w is owned by SGI [another big company, granted they had trouble in the consumer market but they are one of the leaders in Enterprise]. Newtek is the only company that is still privetly owned and is not trading on the board.

Oh and don't worry about a/w, I only have 97,908,860 shares left to buy in SGI before I do a hostile take over. Then the fun begins with a break up, first to go will be openGL sold to Microsoft , then a/w will get a major change.

By Jim Williams (Hiraghm) (65.70.121.97) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 12:01 pm:

Ack! Drive a stake through its heart! Kill OpenGL? That would only leave us with DX.

Now I realise.... you work for Microsoft

By Dustin D'Amour (Wizcraker) (68.99.218.128) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 12:19 am:

Jim,

In order to be successful with hostile take overs you have to learn from the Best. That is why I would sale openGL to Microsoft, they would be able to take the technology and expand on it with the funding of a $348 Billion company. They probably would merge it into DX. DirectX 9.0 is far more powerful than openGL currently [as well as the upcoming 2.0 release]. In the end Microsft would help openGL become something more than just a dead struggling graphics language. Plus after this deal I would secure my position with a powerful allie.

and to continue:

for A/W I would get rid of Maya Complete, take Maya unlimited change name to just Maya [no need to complicate things with extra words]. The next thing would be to strip the renderer out [as we all know it sucks] as well as their poor excuse for polygon modeling. Bring it back to its roots as strictly a character modeling package. Force them to put native support for Lightwave 3D [models and scenes] import/export. Next would to drop the price to $900, and then make it the Tool to have for Character animation because it would be the ultimate plug-in for Lightwave 8.0.

Last but not least would to get rid of the icon based gui, add LW Panels to make it look like the familar GUI we all love. Then negotiate a deal with Newtek to merge Maya and Lightwave to become Lightwave 3D version 9.0 .

And as you can see in a few easy step I would have eliminated the competition for Newtek made their customer base 100 times fold and as for me, well I would be scoping out my next victim,...err company.

By Jim Williams (Hiraghm) (65.70.121.97) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 05:47 pm:

Microsoft is the best at making money, not at making software.

DX is far more extensive than OpenGL, since it deals with more than just 3d graphics (including fixing some of the shortfalls of stock Windows.)

I won't concede yet, however that it's more powerful.

Certainly isn't as easy to use. And absolutely sucks on Mac and Linux.

By Beam Tracer (Beamtracer) (203.109.241.109) on Thursday, January 16, 2003 - 06:12 pm:

I'd like to hand Microsoft control of everything I do. They can be my gatekeeper, and decide what technology is best for me. They will help me choose where I want to go today.