Lightwave kicks over Maya, any comments [Archive] - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking

Anhar Miah

11-21-2006, 07:15 AM

OK, eureka, I understand that you like you 3d application. In that respect thats not a bad thing, in fact thats a good thing. Being confident in an application means that your work will probably be better.

Now, if however you start to think that your application is better than another application, thats when things start to go bannana shaped, its whats starts numerous (endless) threads and flame wars along the lines of

"My App X is better than your app Z"

In the end no one actually gets anything out of it other than the usual ego bashing and "e-dick" comparisons :)

Anyway to cut a long story short:

[1] Its good to be confident about your 3d app, its good to comment that you enjoy using that applications

[2] Its Bad, to suggest that your package is better than another, because the reality is, most applications offer similar functions / and or are just another tool with a different approach. Astists make art not the tools, though using the right one(s) can help alot.

Anhar

P.S I'm not having a dig at your, its just your Thread Title is some what highly suggestive!
Peace out, also please post some of your work, I would enjoy looking at them :)

kai

11-21-2006, 11:53 AM

How about we just argue about "my work and end product is better than yours".

The tools are just that: tools.

There are about a million ways to do the same thing in 3D apps, it just boils down to personal preference on most of it.

...but that said, I started with Lightwave then kicked it for Maya, which i've now kicked for C4D.

retaf99

11-21-2006, 01:44 PM

I agree with Kai. I have found that for non-organic modeling I prefer to use 3DS Max and for organics I like to use Maya. I have also had to use XSI. Tools are tools. It's all how you use them. Being able to move from program to program opens a lot more job possibilities.

Sad Max

11-21-2006, 02:32 PM

Started working with Lightwave back when it was just an extension of the Video Toaster...now working with LW V9, having failed to develop much interest in 3DS Max (tried it out years and years ago and was overwhelmingly unimpressed) and have only grudgingly learned to use Maya, which I think is fantastic software that is also fantastically over-ballyhooed...

It's for-sure and true that tools are just tools, and it's always the operator who makes the difference, between packages of roughly equivalent utility.

I think the one place where you *can* make comparisons, is on price/performance. Strictly and solely in my opinion, using both, I think that Lightwave blows Maya away in terms of what-you-can-do-with-it versus what-you-pay-for-it.

And, I'm with retaf99 - Lightwave is what I bring up for any kind of mechanical, architectural or technical-type 3D work, while Maya has an edge in utility for organics.

Heard great and wonderful things about Cinema4D for a long time, now, but have not yet tried it out.

Jason Ramsey

11-21-2006, 02:58 PM

"e-dick"

:laugh:

Matt Grunau

11-21-2006, 04:33 PM

...but that said, I started with Lightwave then kicked it for Maya, which i've now kicked for C4D.

I've read the C4D switch more times than I can count. What does it bring to the table that you like most kai? I'm still a lightwaver, and release 9 was supposed to bring about some much needed changes we users have been complaining about for the last 2 main revisions. Basically, now it is only 3-4 years behind the rest.

Still love it though, easiest modler out there (and I'm not counting Modo, since it is basically lightwave modler, but built properly).

Greggl

11-21-2006, 07:05 PM

They all suck.

eureka

11-22-2006, 04:31 AM

Hey guys

I was trying to make conversation..so pls dont take it to heart, As was quoted " for price and performance".
Your right wre else can u get a 3D package thats so easy to use.
Why isnt there more support for Lightwave ie: Shake.
I was hoping to see more happen in LW9 also.

Anhar Miah

11-22-2006, 08:02 AM

They all suck.

you know there is a lot of truth in that, compared to paint and canvas and sculptoring 3d apps are kinda primative approximation. One day though that might change...

mcgeedigital

11-22-2006, 08:15 AM

Sad Max

11-22-2006, 08:56 AM

you know there is a lot of truth in that, compared to paint and canvas and sculptoring 3d apps are kinda primative approximation. One day though that might change...

I dunno; apps like Maya et all seem to me very sophisticated approximations...

Love your sig :grin:

kai

11-22-2006, 09:09 AM

I've read the C4D switch more times than I can count. What does it bring to the table that you like most kai?

First and foremost is its integration with After Effects. You can render out your files as multipass and it will spit out an AE file with all your camera and light info intact, so this saves a ton of time and opens up lots of new opportunities for workflow and design.

C4D is based on the main application, then "modules" you can either buy if you want, or not. I use the studio bundle, so it has all the tools, and they're great. The advanced renderer is great, and produces gorgeous images. Mograph module is awesome if you do this kind of work. Also, as a package in general, C4D is the easiest to use and learn of any i've used before. It just makes sense. That said, under the hood it still has all the horsepower to pull off just about anything you can imagine, and do it well.

You should download the demo and give it a whirl if you have some time. http://www.maxon.net

milksac

11-22-2006, 09:19 AM

I've read the C4D switch more times than I can count. What does it bring to the table that you like most kai? Well, I haven't made the switch. Heck I haven't even jumped in the pool yet - 3D is a big beast to wrestle with. That said I have spent some time on both LW and C4D and I found C4D to be much more intuitive.

As others have said it's just a tool and the choice of tool depends on the work being performed. For mograph work it appears that C4D is a good choice, especially with the mograph module within C4D. For doing character animation LW or Maya may be a better choice.

Matt Grunau

11-22-2006, 11:15 PM

First and foremost is its integration with After Effects. You can render out your files as multipass and it will spit out an AE file with all your camera and light info intact, so this saves a ton of time and opens up lots of new opportunities for workflow and design.

C4D is based on the main application, then "modules" you can either buy if you want, or not. I use the studio bundle, so it has all the tools, and they're great. The advanced renderer is great, and produces gorgeous images. Mograph module is awesome if you do this kind of work. Also, as a package in general, C4D is the easiest to use and learn of any i've used before. It just makes sense. That said, under the hood it still has all the horsepower to pull off just about anything you can imagine, and do it well.

You should download the demo and give it a whirl if you have some time. http://www.maxon.net

I may have to do that. I use lightwave primarily for visual effects based work for video, incorporated via AE. The lightening of the workfow you describe is enough to make me drool on the keyboard.

Though I do still love setting up my scene in Lightwave. :beer:

zeke

11-29-2006, 06:23 PM

First and foremost is its integration with After Effects. You can render out your files as multipass and it will spit out an AE file with all your camera and light info intact, so this saves a ton of time and opens up lots of new opportunities for workflow and design.

C4D is based on the main application, then "modules" you can either buy if you want, or not. I use the studio bundle, so it has all the tools, and they're great. The advanced renderer is great, and produces gorgeous images. Mograph module is awesome if you do this kind of work. Also, as a package in general, C4D is the easiest to use and learn of any i've used before. It just makes sense. That said, under the hood it still has all the horsepower to pull off just about anything you can imagine, and do it well.

You should download the demo and give it a whirl if you have some time. http://www.maxon.net

Kai, I didn't know that. I'll have to check it out. That alone is a way cool feature.
The only other tight integration I've heard about is Maya and Nuke.

I currently use Hash A:M and Blender 2.43. Very impressed with price/performance ratio of Blender, as in free open source and getting better and better with each release.

Kholi

11-29-2006, 09:06 PM

Would anyone agree that Maya looks better on a resume? Just asking because I have to make a decision tonight.

Realistically, I think that it does look better than Cinema 4D or Lightwave. I might be wrong, though.

I have to choose between Cinema4D and Maya 8 Complete tonight! ARG!

Sad Max

11-29-2006, 09:08 PM

Kind of a difficult snap decision. Have you had *any* opportunity to test-drive and compare?

Kholi

11-29-2006, 09:33 PM

Yeah. I've been in Maya Learning Edition for a week and can navigate the basics. Camera, animation, and some manipulation.

I've used Cinema 4D demo and it's kind of weird to me. Like, it's supposed to be intuitive, right? Why is there no "IMPORT" selection under FILE like in Maya? Import is always under file in like every program I use.

I'm leaning toward Maya, but Cinema4D is 1/2 the price and seems like people are getting great results with it.

I have no prior 3D experience, either. Maya is more intuitive to me... just that price-tag.

Greggl

11-29-2006, 11:17 PM

If you are learning 3D to support your film projects, pick whichever one is most
accessable, affordable and comfortable to you.

If you are targeting a career in vfx or games, its maya for vfx... max for
games. There are plenty of exceptions to the rule, but if you don't know
the above, you're seriously limiting your potential employers.

Kholi

11-29-2006, 11:37 PM

Thanks Greggl. You have PM as well.

I'm not targeting a Career in VFX or Games, but I would be using one or the other for visual effects in my own projects and probably some work projects.

I have NO idea how to rig characters or make particles work. And while I would love to sit on the level of the artists that did Final Fantasy: Advent Children, I dont' think I'll be there at all.

Anyway, PM for you! And thanks.

Sad Max

11-29-2006, 11:50 PM

I think that a *little* love for Lightwave is in order...some recent Lightwave-reliant projects include:

The Last Samurai, Threat Matrix, Children of Dune, Firefly, Taken, Smallville, Star Trek: Enterprise, Star Trek 10: Nemesis, Matrix Reloaded, Collateral Damage, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, Agent Cody Banks, Daredevil, Spy Kids II, We Were Soldiers, Panic Room, Hart's War, Driven, A.I., Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius, Final Fantasy, Blackhawk Down, The Time Machine and Star Trek: The Motion Picture - Director's Edition DVD. Recent game titles include Doom III, Unreal Tournament, Serious Sam for XBox, Age of Mythology, Civilization III, Dead to Rights, Baldur's Gate II, EverQuest and Escape From Monkey Island. And there's also Star Trek: Voyager/ DS9 and some NextGen, Titanic, seaQuest DSV, Mantis, Battlestar Galactica and Starship Troopers: Roughnecks. Plus the 'flexible' American Express ads, and *lots* of commercials.

It's worth evaluating, is all I'm saying; I think it's a little pricier than C4D (?) but at about $800 it's way less expensive than Maya, and in my experience close-on in terms of functionality (disclaimer: not a character animator, here).

Lightwave has what appears to be a comprehensive set of character tools, and what I can vouch for as a very effective and versatile particle system. Systems, really, considering the tools available.

Kholi

11-30-2006, 12:12 AM

I will check out Lightwave as well, but as a secondary app for particles and other Visual effects.

zeke

11-30-2006, 09:55 AM

For those using LightWave 9, overall how do you like it for photorealistic rendering? Do you need a seperate renderer to get best quality?

Kholi

11-30-2006, 09:00 PM

Gotta say that I am in love with Cinema 4D. I can't wait to rip into this program and gain this new skill!

kai

11-30-2006, 10:02 PM

Glad to hear it! Be sure to share some of your work once you get into it.

Kholi

11-30-2006, 10:38 PM

I definitely will!

Sad Max

11-30-2006, 11:31 PM

For those using LightWave 9, overall how do you like it for photorealistic rendering? Do you need a seperate renderer to get best quality?

Lightwave's renderer is equal or superior to most anything else available, IME...with the possible exception of Lightscape. I've seen renders out of Lightscape that are just unbelieveable (which is to say, totally believable).

zeke

12-01-2006, 01:29 PM

Lightwave's renderer is equal or superior to most anything else available, IME...with the possible exception of Lightscape. I've seen renders out of Lightscape that are just unbelieveable (which is to say, totally believable).

I checked out C4D, easy to learn, but I wasn't impressed with their photo realistic options,
based on their online examples. Maybe someone can post some links.

Kholi

12-01-2006, 01:55 PM

C4D is great! I'd like to see how well it performs in conjunction with Zbrush for photo-realistic faces and such.

I'm thinking that it's not a bad idea to have a few programs in the workflow to take advantage of strengths. Then again, I'm new to this so I'm just speculating!

onetrackmind

12-03-2006, 06:32 PM

On a similar note, I have decided to try and learn some 3d in 07, most likely Maya, any suggestions on books that are strictly for the beginner? , may also take classes as well.

Thanks

gt

Kholi

12-03-2006, 09:13 PM

I'm learning Cinema 4D and Softimage right now, might mix some Lightwave in. Try those two or three programs as well!

onetrackmind

12-03-2006, 10:28 PM

one is proving to be tricky enough for me at the moment, so all 3 would be a time be a nightmare im sure :)

gt

Sad Max

12-04-2006, 09:19 AM

I was able to learn Lightwave, working with it at home to start with, well enough to move into a Lightwave shop and go from there.

I got a copy of Maya, but found that I needed classroom time to get on the learning curve.

YMMV.

onetrackmind

12-05-2006, 12:22 AM

hi

as an alternative to classes can anyone recommend a series of training dvd/cd's or online course (flash) material ?

Best

GT

Sad Max

12-05-2006, 09:03 AM

There are a lot of phone-book-sized-with-tutorial-CD-manuals out there; you can find a bunch for most of the popular packages, at Barnes & Noble/Fry's/etc...or have a look-see on amazon.com.

Andrew Brinkhaus

12-26-2006, 07:26 PM

I invite you all to check out Blender. Its an open source modeling program that i'm sure you've all heard tossed around. Best part of all: Free.

Sad Max

12-26-2006, 07:38 PM

will check it out...although I usually think of 'functional' as edging out 'free...'

Bruce Morgan

12-26-2006, 08:23 PM

In addition to thee index of easy verses hard ,I spoke with a 2dStudioMax rep after a Santa Monica conference .
It was hinted that auto desk may dump Maya and just support 3dstudioMax.

Sad Max

12-27-2006, 09:34 AM

Well, given then number of high-end big-budget projects being done with 3DS, versus the number being done using Maya, I can see why.

oneinfiniteloop

12-27-2006, 09:47 AM

Wel, given then number of high-end big-buidget projects being done with 3DS, versus the number being done using Maya, I can see why.

I hope this is sarcasm...

It was a sad day when Autodesk bought Maya, but I'm switching to C4D anyway...I'll miss Mental Ray though...

Sad Max

12-27-2006, 09:59 AM

yes, that was sarcasm...

oneinfiniteloop

12-27-2006, 12:49 PM

Just making sure...

zeke

01-02-2007, 10:53 AM

Now that C4D is getting VRAY support, should make it something worth looking at.
Might make up for losing Mental Ray.

At least I'm interested now that they will be offering that as a 3rd party option.
The new character animation tools look awesome, but they didn't say if they were animatable in the tutorial.

Joe C.

eureka

02-10-2007, 06:17 AM

Anyone using V9.2 Beta Lightwave?

zeke

02-12-2007, 01:15 PM

After doing my own research and checking out stuff, I'm going to start using LightWave v9. 9.2 seems a pretty good upgrade when it comes out.
Anyone recommend good newbe tutorials and books?

Sproketz

02-12-2007, 04:37 PM

I use LW9 for occasional 3D needs. Alot of discontent lately among posters on Newtek's LW forum. If I was going to switch it would probably be Maya. More job opportunities.
I have C4D 8.5 Studio but it's so rediculously expensive to upgrade that I might as well spend a little more and get into Maya.

kai

02-12-2007, 11:33 PM

I have C4D 8.5 Studio but it's so rediculously expensive to upgrade that I might as well spend a little more and get into Maya.

The basic upgrade is only about 700, but you're right, a studio upgrade is over 3k. That's pretty steep. C4D is well worth it though imho.

eureka

02-13-2007, 05:30 AM

After doing my own research and checking out stuff, I'm going to start using LightWave v9. 9.2 seems a pretty good upgrade when it comes out.
Anyone recommend good newbe tutorials and books?

Hey
Dan Ablan Inside Lightwave 8.5 , 9.0 isnt out yet, the book to learn with.
Lots of great tutorials, and if you know how to composite the best tool.
Regards
Eureka

Raptor365

02-16-2007, 12:37 PM

I've just been playing around with C4d the past day and am seeing pretty fast results. Seems quite intuitive to me. Used 3dsmax till now ( 1/2 yr) . Tried Maya for several hours with no printable results. May look at lightwave when I get a chance.
Here's a link I found from a c4d artist. He's good with light. (real good)
http://www.3dluvr.com/carles/images.htm

Draven32

07-28-2007, 05:52 AM

If you are targeting a career in vfx or games, its maya for vfx... max for
games. There are plenty of exceptions to the rule, but if you don't know
the above, you're seriously limiting your potential employers.

Primary exception: television visual effects.

Maya's deep pipeline and programmability are great when you have a $12 million VFX budget, and six months to get it done.

Not so good when you have four weeks to turn out an episode, or need to build a five million polygon spacecraft.

Greggl

07-29-2007, 11:21 AM

Thats not an exception.. thats exactly what I'm talking about :)

You're limiting yourself to a selection of houses that only really do television
vfx.. most of which have now gone out of business.

Capt Quirk

07-29-2007, 02:28 PM

My first introduction to Maya, was in 3D design and animation class, and we watched the animated short Bingo the Clowno (http://dabble.com/node/2371588) . I was blown away by the sheer coolness of it. That, and the fact that it totally creeped out my instructor. But we never learned Maya, just Metacreation's Infinty 3D... a program that was already dead. So much for a good education.

Sad Max

07-30-2007, 09:26 AM

Lightwave still has a strong presence in film, as well as tv work. While max has had some penetration into tv, it's still primarily a game tool.

On 'Avatar' a great deal of work was being done in Rhino (followed by Maya, followed by AutoCad, followed by Lightwave and FormZ; max was nowhere to be seen, of course) - Rhino and Sketchup are the 3D tools I'm making an effort to learn, now. Well, Rhino requires some effort; Sketchup is practically self-explanatory.

Anim8

07-30-2007, 07:00 PM

I had to drop my $.02 in here....:Drogar-Thinking(DBG
I use Max, Maya, Autocad, Zbrush, Mudbox and an array of other 3D apps every week in the studio. If you have the talent, you will get the same result+/- in LW, Max, XSI, Maya or whatever 3D app your using.

There is no holy grail of 3D software. They all have advantages and disadvantages.

LW uses a brute force approach to modeling, which is good sometimes, and horrible others. LW was once the king of TV effects. It has a really clean renderer that processes lighting well. I like LW, but I dont know what the future holds for it.

Maya is great for the foundation of a custom UI. The big FX houses make their own tools this way. Turning out a project in Maya is slower than LW or Max. The default interface feels thrown together at best. The polygon modeling tools are poor compared to other apps. I think Maya has held on because of its foothold from the SGI days. Things are changing......

Max is the middle ground of 3D apps. I work with other studios and companies and Max is by far the most common/widely used app of the bunch. It has out of the box tools for TV, Film, DV and games.
The Max workflow is quick and straight forward (similar to LW).
It's my app of preference right now.... especially after the Maya buy-out.....but we will see what happens with that whole story.

The general opinion on C4D is that it is just a toy. I haven't been a part of any projects that use it.

Sketchup is becoming huge in the architectural field. Easy to learn and exports fairly clean models.

It's just software. If you want to have an edge, learn them all.

Sad Max

07-30-2007, 07:47 PM

I agree with most of the above.

Sketchup is also increasingly popular in production art departments, for its utility in rapidly laying out sets, dressing, props, etc and turning out both working drawings and nice, illustrative-looking renders (the illustrators around me are getting nervous...). If Sketchup was better at file interchange, it would be a much more useful tool; as it is going back and forth between LW and Sketchup or AutoCad and Sketchup or Rhino and Sketchup, is a minor nightmare. Since I'm joining the Technology Committee in a month or two, I'm gonna lean on those guys but hard, to make it more multiple-platform-friendly.

The observation that the same results +/- obtain, with adequate user skill level, across these platforms is mostly accurate. Especially since you can mix and match renderers to your heart's content (and your wallet's capacity) regardless of where you do your modeling.

but my heart belongs to Lightwave

oneinfiniteloop

07-30-2007, 07:59 PM

The general opinion on C4D is that it is just a toy. I haven't been a part of any projects that use it.

This amuses me...I love how hardcore 3d artists in general like to pan software that doesn't measure up to purist needs (I'm not referring to you, Anim8, just making a general statement in response to your post, I understand you've never used it)

Anyhow, in my opinion, it's about the results and tools are just a way to get there. I cut my teeth on Maya, messed with Lightwave a little, and I'm now on C4D, which is my tool of choice for many reasons. I'd love to dive into XSI, but no Mac version keeps me away.

Capt Quirk

07-31-2007, 06:00 AM

And I just built a retro PC so that I can play with Infinity again :)

Sad Max

07-31-2007, 08:40 AM

This amuses me...I love how hardcore 3d artists in general like to pan software that doesn't measure up to purist needs (I'm not referring to you, Anim8, just making a general statement in response to your post, I understand you've never used it)

If by "purist needs" you mean, the needs of people who are expected to deliver the requested product on the imposed schedule, then it seems to me that "purist needs" are worth taking seriously. That is, if you happen to be a person who is expected to deliver product according to a schedule, anyway.

Whatever "purist" means, anyway. The professionals I know have all mastered at least two, usually more 3D packages, not to mention the ancillary software that you also have to know, in order to be productive. Hard to be a "purist" while using multiple competing applications...

I cut my teeth on Maya, messed with Lightwave a little, and I'm now on C4D

Yeah, and there's the proof of it.

I first saw a friend using C4D in what must have been one of its earliest iterations, several years ago, and I was very impressed with what he was doing with it. But it's true that - for whatever reason - it has not yet come to be widely recognized as a useful tool in the houses around here.

oneinfiniteloop

07-31-2007, 09:29 AM

My "purist" definition doesn't really apply to the production world...I was thinking more along the lines of people who pan one software because it doesn't have some feature that their current software has. It's like the people who say Macs are better just because, that whole thing.

Anyhow, I definately understand the production aspect and that certain packages lend themselves better to that. Like I said, I started on Maya and I know where it's strengths are compared to C4D. I mean, C4D just started using a joint based rigging system whereas Maya has had that for a while. I'm no 3D expert by any means, I just use it to make what I need in the fastest, most creative manner.

Each has there on niche anyways, like it or not, C4D has been heavily adopted by the motion graphics crowd and it also enjoys the success of Bodypaint. I agree with your statement regarding multiple apps, depending on how Maya shapes up with Autodesk, I might dive back in that some day and I would LOVE for XSI to come on to the Mac platform, I've been itching to learn that. Same as Houdini, but that mostly out of curiousity.

oh, and I definately meant no offense to anyone in the production world, I use this stuff to make a living and I know what it's like.

Sad Max

07-31-2007, 09:40 AM

My "purist" definition doesn't really apply to the production world...I was thinking more along the lines of people who pan one software because it doesn't have some feature that their current software has. It's like the people who say Macs are better just because, that whole thing.

Usually because they bought one, I think.

I guess you're describing hobbyists. I didn't catch that, at first.

I'm no 3D expert by any means, I just use it to make what I need in the fastest, most creative manner.

Well, isn't that what experts try to do?

like it or not, C4D has been heavily adopted by the motion graphics crowd and it also enjoys the success of Bodypaint.

I don't have a dog in the fight, so I like it just the same, either way. I haven't done much motion graphics work in a while; the last tool I used heavily for that purpose was Director, on TNG and DS9 - obviously, that was a while ago.

oneinfiniteloop

07-31-2007, 10:05 AM

Well, isn't that what experts try to do?

True...I think I lost my point a while ago, confused myself blabbing. And yes, I was thinking about the hobbyists.

And now for the cliche...to each their own...and I'm done. :)

Raptor365

08-01-2007, 05:15 PM

Sad Max... care to post some of you're Maya work? Or your company? Thanks.
Oddly enough no one around here using Maya is posting their works.
Not judging, just asking.

Yeah Maya is the pro film production tool. If you want to work for in that field I agree. If you need to produce very quick low end video product, weeks, then Maya falls apart. Here's where the other products fill the niche. Maya is so overly complicated and basically asinine from a programmers standpoint, much like photoshop, that the defacto standard has a snowball effect.
"well that's what they use so I have to learn that to get a job."
So that part's true.

I looked at C4D's company history. I am not a follower. Either are they.
Maya looks good on a resume and if your serious about a job in that field it's a must. But if you plan to actually produce anything resembling an end product using a home computer then forget Maya. Most of us, like me, do video, aka TV. I've seen TV movies where the graphics are abhorrent. These are mostly kids movies where they can get away with it. Also documentaries, almost DAILY, where I say, WHAT? That is CRAP. So , there is a big market out there.

And I'll say something else. If you guys want to come in here and offer crits thats cool. Why don't you come in and offer some advice as well, aka on other people efforts. (Not the regulars of course)

Raptor365

08-01-2007, 08:02 PM

oneinfiniteloop

08-02-2007, 07:17 AM

Also, the only commercialy viably product that I have seen come out of this forum of late has been from "oneinfiniteloop " and "I" Loved it. C4D baby.

You Maya guys wanna step up? Can you post a single photo? A demo?

Thank you kind sir!

I have another one, a production company film ident, I plan on posting when I'm done. I might go into workflow a bit since it's more of a vfx shot using HVX200 footage, camera tracking/match moving, 3d and compositing/grading at 2K...if anyone is interested.

Greggl

08-02-2007, 12:42 PM

Heres some recent maya based work:

http://adsoftheworld.com/media/tv/miller_lite_break_from_the_crowd

oneinfiniteloop

08-02-2007, 02:25 PM

Looks good Greg, what did you do on this spot?

Are you still doing any matchmoving?

Greggl

08-02-2007, 03:00 PM

Shot blocking, cameras, on-set previz, some mo-cap supervision and helped
design the gantry pendulum for the live action component of the giant.

Its been a while since I've done any tracking... been mostly supervision, previz
and some compositing for the last year.

Also worked on this toyota spot recently... layout, camera and shot blocking:
http://shilo.tv/

surf

08-03-2007, 03:44 AM

If you think Lightwave is better than Maya, then use Lightwave.
I prefer Maya, because it is powerfull & I do not need thousands of plug-ins.

kai

08-03-2007, 08:12 AM

As a full time user (when I do 3D) of C4D, I can sing its praises in the design/mograph realm. That said, I also use it for architectual work (its very popular in this area), and even vfx work. The studio bundle which includes advanced render module (and others) offers a very strong tool and can net some amazing results. Of course other packages have their strengths (maya kicks it in character animation for example), but for what it is, C4D is definitely a player in the game and can't simply be dismissed. Early on in its product life, it was an entry-level piece. That's changed dramatically in the past few years (shoot a full seat of it is as much as maya now).

I have a ton of C4D examples I can post up if anyone wants to see what it can do.

oneinfiniteloop

08-03-2007, 08:26 AM

Of course other packages have their strengths (maya kicks it in character animation for example)

Regarding character animation, I think they've taken a step in the right direction with R10 and the new MOCCA overhaul in conjunction with the new timeline. Definately not on level with Maya, but most users of C4D aren't character animators, but it's nice to have the flexibility.

kai

08-03-2007, 12:18 PM

Agreed, R10 is a huge upgrade.

triplej96

08-03-2007, 12:54 PM

Raptor365

08-03-2007, 08:17 PM

Heres some recent maya based work:

http://adsoftheworld.com/media/tv/miller_lite_break_from_the_crowd

Thanks Greggl. That's impressive. What kind of time frame was this seq done in? How many cpu's and what rendering engine was used? How many people worked on it? The reason I'm asking is what is the kind of project scope does it take to do this, time, software and people wise? Obviously this is a pro end product. And what is a clip like this worth to a buyer?

Greggl

08-03-2007, 08:52 PM

There is a ton of agency overhead, financially... and the the director of 300 helmed it, so there is a substantial price tag involved.

http://www.animationmagazine.net/article/7118

Anhar Miah

08-04-2007, 06:02 AM

That just amazing!

I'm wondering if something similar might be feasiable (for us amateurs) by using PFflow to scatter 2d planes of alpha mapped sprites (people shot aganist greenscreen) and distrbuted onto the surface normal of a biped mesh?

surf

08-04-2007, 10:40 AM

Heres some recent maya based work:

http://adsoftheworld.com/media/tv/miller_lite_break_from_the_crowd

and there is the LOTR, or something newer, like Transformers, or the latest Harry P., however, I have not heard of any films "made by" Lightwave or C4D

Raptor365

08-04-2007, 01:58 PM

Thanks again Greggl. That's a great insight into the process.
After reading that, my intitial estimate on what that would sell for went
up substantially. :)

I guess that's my point. It's not something I could do without a big budget and team. And to go out and buy Maya thinking that I could otherwise would be a mistake. For me anyways.

Being a noob I need to know what areas I can make a buck in, where
I'm wasting my time and what these apps can really do.
And everytime I hear that a certain program was used to do a movie I cringe because that does not mean anything. Unless something like the article provided by Greggl accompanies it.
Or at least an explanation of what role the program played.
Some are used just to model for example.

So for me, film is out.
Video on the other hand is still wide open. So are stills for magazines
and books and can be handled by a single person like myself.
And like I said before, the other programs are more than capable of
handling that.

Capt Quirk

08-04-2007, 02:13 PM

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow started out with a couple young guys, a camera, and lots of 3D/Green Screen.

TowerFan

08-07-2007, 09:27 AM

however, I have not heard of any films "made by" Lightwave or C4D

Check out this BTS for "300".

http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/profiles/300/index.php

Capt Quirk

08-07-2007, 12:14 PM

In one of my earlier posts, I gave a link to a 5-10 minute short done in Maya. If you have never seen Bingo the Clowno, I recommend it.

Raptor365

08-07-2007, 05:02 PM

Check out this BTS for "300".

http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/profiles/300/index.php

I wouldn't have guessed that was LW. Just goes to show you I guess.

TowerFan

08-07-2007, 10:31 PM

Me, a LW guy, and I haven't even seen it yet! Maybe I'll hit the rentals this weekend...

I usually don't comment in these "this vs. that" package threads. I've only used Bryce and LightWave so I can only comment on those. All I know is you use the tools you need to use get the job done; within the deadline, budget, and quality. (You'd never know my day job is in the public sector, would ya?)

Another recent movie that was mostly LW is "Sin City".

TowerFan

08-07-2007, 10:45 PM

Being a noob I need to know what areas I can make a buck in, where
I'm wasting my time and what these apps can really do.
And everytime I hear that a certain program was used to do a movie I cringe because that does not mean anything. Unless something like the article provided by Greggl accompanies it.
Or at least an explanation of what role the program played.
Some are used just to model for example.

I agree with Raptor totally here. In no way was my previous post trying to contradict what he's saying. I just wanted to show that LW has some real power under the hood. Especially for $799 USD!

EDIT: I just looked up HD Instance, the plugin the dude mentioned for doing crowds? $149.00 USD.

Greggl

08-09-2007, 01:26 PM

M

Another recent movie that was mostly LW is "Sin City".

hehe... 'mostly lw' :)

TowerFan

08-09-2007, 09:39 PM

hehe... 'mostly lw' :)

Yeah? So what's your point? Do you have a point?

Never used Photoshop to create a texture? You haven't used After Effects or similar to composite several elements together? 'Spose you've never needed Avid or FCP to put your shots together in one show? Well I guess your movies don't have sound then since 3D apps do it all?

Gimme a break. Just thought I'd part your hair for ya. I read the artice you linked to about the Miller Man commercial. Great spot, but let's see... Maya, Massive, live action, motion capture, proprietary code, Flame, and those are just what they mention.

Kinda funny how they used mo-cap to animate the Miller Man as well. Seein' as how character animation is one thing Maya is supposed to be famous for. Hmmm... Oh well.

And now, to quote oneinfiniteloop... to each his own... and I'm done.:beer:

Greggl

08-10-2007, 01:43 AM

Err... you kinda made the same point I did.. only with more words :)

'Mostly' is way misleading... tons of applications get used on projects. But lets
also be honest here, we're talking about an app with a RAPIDLY shrinking
market share and dwindling user base. Apps come and go, I've buried more
than my fair share... Softimage (Creative Environment through 3.9), Vertigo,
Gig3d, Wavefront's Advanced Visualizer, Alias PowerAnimator...got my start
with Explore, right before TDI bought em. Spent a lot of years
using Lightwave and was on the SGI beta for it.

Its a great app for the money and a decet tool for a project studio... still,
its a bad career move to spend too much energy there unless you really
want to limit your options.

surf

08-10-2007, 08:50 AM

well, at fxguide.com you can read articles about making vfx in the biggest productions right now, and about tools and techniques. I usually find maya as a tool, but lw is not common there...

Sad Max

08-10-2007, 09:10 AM

One of our illustrators here just picked up a copy of Modo, which might (might) be described as Lightwave Done Right - it's produced by the some of the same people who created Lightwave for NewTek, then got fed up with NewTek and went out to develop it themselves.

Chris is very impressed with it (he's primarily a Rhino driver) and at some point when there's time I gotta sit down and have a look, myself...

Arguments over which app is better, in a production process, is kind of like draftsmen arguing over which tool in their kit is the best - Triangles! Triangles rule! No, you heathen, Drafting Machines rule! What? No! Protractors are where it's at! etc etc etc