Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics for Softimage 3D Software
Luc-Eric Rousseau
Andy Moorer
Daniel H
Q: Softimage Composite? Is that the former Toxik? And if so, curious about what position that puts Softimage Illusion in?
-Daniel
Cornelius Porzig
(Sorry, couldn't resist...)
-----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] Im Auftrag von Luc-Eric
Rousseau
Gesendet: 09 September 2010 22:49
An: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Betreff: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics for Softimage 3D
Software
Daniel H
Matt Lind
I would imagine deprecated.
The best I can guess is that Illusion is still around but will probably be removed very, very soon. I would be surprised if it was removed in the Advantage pack as the release should really be a service pack to 2011 meaning it should be forward and backward compatible with 2011 and 2011 SP1 (just guessing here). If scenes have active FXtree’s using the Illusion API, they would have issues loading in the advantage pack if Illusion were no longer around (and vice versa). Illusion certainly won’t receive any new features as Avid only allowed components already in XSI to be carried over to Autodesk as part of the acquisition. Avid didn’t sell Illusion or it’s codebase to Autodesk.
The question I have is whether Toxik is integrated at the core level like Illusion was, or is it some patch job outside of the application that’s only integrated in name….and whether Toxik SDK will be opened to Softimage users to further enhance the product’s capability at least as much as Illusion was.
Matt
Andy Nicholas
"ray traced shadows for infinite lights"
That's a relief. I've been painting them by hand up to now. Errrrr....
On 9 Sep 2010, at 23:34, "Cornelius Porzig" <xsi...@connimation.de> wrote:
> Finally - we get the Viewcube for Softimage! A long overdue feature!
>
> (Sorry, couldn't resist...)
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Andy Nicholas
whether Toxik is integrated at the core level like Illusion was
Luc-Eric Rousseau
pulled out of the app.
Composite is a separate app. It's python scriptable and supports
openfx plugins. I would say it's only drawback is that the interface
makes it difficult to get into.
On 9/9/10, Matt Lind <ml...@carbinestudios.com> wrote:
> I would imagine deprecated.
>
> The best I can guess is that Illusion is still around but will probably be
> removed very, very soon. I would be surprised if it was removed in the
> Advantage pack as the release should really be a service pack to 2011
> meaning it should be forward and backward compatible with 2011 and 2011 SP1
> (just guessing here). If scenes have active FXtree's using the Illusion
> API, they would have issues loading in the advantage pack if Illusion were
> no longer around (and vice versa). Illusion certainly won't receive any new
> features as Avid only allowed components already in XSI to be carried over
> to Autodesk as part of the acquisition. Avid didn't sell Illusion or it's
> codebase to Autodesk.
>
> The question I have is whether Toxik is integrated at the core level like
> Illusion was, or is it some patch job outside of the application that's only
> integrated in name....and whether Toxik SDK will be opened to Softimage
Matt Lind
What I meant by source code is the rest of the illusion codebase not yet integrated into XSI/Softimage. Do you own that stuff too?
Matt
Luc-Eric Rousseau
development in 1997, I've finished integrating it when I added the
morpher. Most of the fxtree isn't illusion, I wrote a lot of new
stuff. Toxik is interesting; it has tons of effects, all implemented
in floating point, tile-based rendering, 3d environment, etc. Afaik,
it's still missing a text node, though.
David Barosin
James De Colling
us game artists, being able to chuck an image clip through fxtree and
adjust the levels / color correct it in the scene in realtime is
great. so I certainly hope it doesnt go away...or rather, gets
integrated further. the image clip properties normal adjustments are
fine, but dont really offer the granularity of the fxtree`s color
nodes.
and on that note, more game stuff please. not everyone does ice and
renders all day.
maya's viewport 2.0 and super simple normal map display is very nice.
(script editor progress and photographic exposure for rendermap would
be sweet too. not to mention uv packing, if your fishing for ideas ;))
james,
Jason Brynford-Jones
http://www.the-area.com/blogs/marks/introducing_softimage_2011_5_with_lagoa
Eric Thivierge
--------------------------------------------
Eric Thivierge
Technical Director
http://www.ethivierge.com
Ctedin
Then, there's the cube... Oh well. It's still soft.
Christopher Tedin
Creative Director
Dahlstromdisplay
708-492-4146
Alan Fregtman
easily in the Preferences.
Ctedin
Christopher Tedin
Alan Fregtman
human sound effects. I personally go "squooshhh" whenever I demo any
squishy rigs. :)
On another note, am I the only one who thinks Soft ought to hire
Michael Winslow (police academy sound fx guy) to sit in a corner with
a mic while they demo sim stuff? :p
Gerbrand Nel
I've actually been in a viewing where the animator clicked that thing,
and the client was like : "That's it!!!! I want the camera to do that!!"
So the question would be: Can you bake the view port cube to camera
animation?
Only kidding
It seems like an awesome little toy for a demo artist, And good demmos
sell more seats of the software. So it gets my thumbs up
G
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3123 - Release Date: 09/08/10 19:41:00
>>>
>>>
Gene Crucean
[Gene Crucean] - [VFX & CG Supervisor/Generalist]
** Freelance for hire **
Sam J. Bowling
contract? IT says Advantage pack + Entertainment Creation Suite Premium, in
the autodesk video.
--
Sam J. Bowling
Alan Fregtman
Dan Yargici
Matt Morris
Richard Perry
Michal Doniec
----------
Michal
http://uk.linkedin.com/in/mdoniec
Brent McPherson
You can stop emailing us requests now. We finally caved in and implemented the viewcube *just for you*.
When it came right down to it this proved cheaper than upgrading all our mail servers to handle the extra load caused by your little crusade. *sheesh*
--
Brent
;-)
From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Michal Doniec
Sent: 10 September 2010 12:56
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics for Softimage 3D Software
Congratulations to Thiago Costa. I hope you got rich!:)
Can't wait for this release, mainly because of:
ViewCube functionality!
I almost stopped using Softimage, because lack of ViewCube. Can't live without it.
This is amazing stuff - I have to agree with Dan, I haven't been this excited about a release since 7.0!
This looks like a really strong release! Well done to everyone at Soft HQ!
Lagoa and Polygonizer look to have been perfectly integrated! ....and we get Matchmover too! Yay!
This is bigger news than 2011 itself IMO!
DAN
haha... 20 messages til mention of Hitler. Must be a new Godwin's Law record. =p
> I give it a hard time but I actually find myself using it once in a while. It makes soft familiar to max n Maya users so why not? I like teasing. Overall, looks like an amazing point release.
>
> Christopher Tedin
>
>
> On Sep 9, 2010, at 11:42 PM, Alan Fregtman <alan.f...@gmail.com<mailto:alan.f...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> It's worth noting the ViewCube is *optional* and can be disabled
>> easily in the Preferences.
>>
>>> Groovy! Been waiting for this since I updated my subscription! And polygonizer too? Too cool.
>>>
>>> Then, there's the cube... Oh well. It's still soft.
>>>
>>> Christopher Tedin
>>> Creative Director
>>> Dahlstromdisplay
>>> 708-492-4146
>>>
>>> On Sep 9, 2010, at 10:32 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethiv...@gmail.com<mailto:ethiv...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chinny's sound fx are gold in the Lagoa Liquids vid! Busted out laughing!
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>> Eric Thivierge
>>>> Technical Director
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:11 PM, Jason Brynford-Jones
>>>> <Jason.Bryn...@autodesk.com<mailto:Jason.Bryn...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
>>>>> New feature videos are now up on Mark's blog
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.the-area.com/blogs/marks/introducing_softimage_2011_5_with_lagoa
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com> [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Luc-Eric Rousseau
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, 09 September, 2010 5:49 PM
>>>>> To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:soft...@listproc.autodesk.com>
>>>>> Subject: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics for Softimage 3D Software
>>>>>
>>>>> I found this on the internets
>>>>>
>>>>> http://area.autodesk.com/ibc2010/press#presskit
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
--
----------
Michal
http://uk.linkedin.com/in/mdoniec
Autodesk Limited
Registered Office: 1 Meadow Gate Avenue, Farnborough, Hampshire GU14 6FG
Registered in England and Wales, No. 1839239
Thomas Helzle
longer as unusable buggy as 2011 and SP1) you know what stuck?
Even in this late version, nodes in the rendertree are created all
over the place.
Be it automatic creation of image nodes or pasting nodes from other
trees, they land in outer space.
I think this is one of the most annoying bread and butter
500-times-a-day behaviours in XSI.
And don't tell me to hit CTRL-R please ;-)
Maybe fix it in Autodesk Softimage 2011 Subscription Advantage Pack
Service Pack 1.5 Final 2 New v003 A ?
Cheers ;-)
Thomas
On 10 September 2010 14:23, Brent McPherson
Thiago Costa
thanks Chinny and Marc! :)
-Thiago
Sam J. Bowling
things. What they have now sounds like to different addon packs.
--
Sam J. Bowling
Maurice Patel
The name is extremely prosaic so there should not be any confusion. A subscription advantage pack is, as the name implies, a set of functionality or services provided as an advantage to subscription customers these may or may not be product features depending on the particular pack provided.
Maurice
Stefan Andersson
Stefan Andersson
Creative Director
Mad Crew
Roddargatan 8
116 20 Stockholm
SWEDEN
mail: ste...@madcrew.se
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is intended only for the
above-mentioned recipient(s). Its content is confidential. If you have
received this e-mail by error, please notify us immediately and delete
it without making a copy, nor disclosing its content, nor taking any
action based thereon. Thank you.
Ahmidou Lyazidi
Ahmidou Lyazidi
Director | TD | CG artist
Alan Fregtman
2007... 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and soon 2012.
Maurice Patel
I apologize if this is a bit lengthy but I wanted to give you some insight into the why certain decisions were made at Autodesk and what battles are really worth fighting
The Autodesk naming convention is not necessarily more confusing than the one you propose in the broader context of all Autodesk products. Autodesk has many products and at one point it became extremely confusing for our customers to tell exactly what versions were supposed to work together as each product had its own numbering convention. Was Maya 6.5 supposed to be compatible with 3ds Max 7.3 or not? FBX in flame 6.5 compatible with FBX in Maya 8 or not? and why not with Maya 6.5 etc? it became an impossible mess.
Since Autodesk products now have significant co-dependencies (e.g. AutoCAD interop with Revit, 3ds max interop with Revit and AutoCAD, 3ds max interop with Maya and Softimage etc) it made sense to adopt a more consistent versioning convention across all products. This was an initiative driven by Autodesk as a whole and the various different product groups were asked to comply.
Today, millions of users have no difficulty understanding the Autodesk numbering convention, so I think once you get used to it you'll get the hang of the thing. Flame users did and they had a similar reaction to yours at first. Now I am not saying it's elegant or beautiful, or even that its great branding but it's logical and totally descriptive of how Autodesk manufactures and ships its software.
The way it works is that every year Autodesk simultaneously releases a major public version of its software available to everybody, we typically only do this once a year and it is versioned using the Autodesk fiscal year of shipping (Autodesk fiscal years are how we report our finances to the SEC. For example the Autodesk 2011 fiscal year corresponds to the calendar year of Feb 1 2010 to Jan 31 2011.). the advantage of this is that a user of multiple Autodesk products knows immediately what versions are supposed to be compatible with each other (i.e. all the 2011 versions) and no longer has to remember that it is Autocad 10, with Revit 7, with 3ds max 6.5, with Maya 4.3.1 etc (as was previously the case with individual product numbering and non synchronized release cycles). This is also why we no longer release software at Siggraph but have aligned all our releases to the same April time frame.
The annual release is the only publicly available feature release. It's the only release you can upgrade to. All other product developments fit into either one of two categories:
1. Service Packs: These fix bugs only. They are not allowed to contain new functionality or features (SOX revenue accounting guidelines). These are available at no cost to any customer how owns the software version they are issued for. These are issued as SP1, SP2, SP3 and its pretty clear which set of bug fixes is the latest and also that these are just that, bug-fixes
2. Subscription Advantage Packs: These are new features or services and are exclusive to subscription customers. There is no way that a non subs customer can upgrade to them. Which is why Autodesk calls them subscription advantage packs. Now it is possible that a subscription advantage pack contains new features but it is not necessary and sufficient. This latter caveat is what makes using a numbering convention a bit obsolete because why would you change a version number if there were no new features in a subscription advantage pack (just say some new services). Now most of the time we do issue new features because this is where most M&E customers see the most value - but it is not guaranteed. Note R&D can still continue to use custom product version numbering to track builds (whichever numbering system they want) and that can be published using things like the about box.
It does not make any real sense for us at M&E Marketing to fight a losing battle against this with the entire organization. It would just be a waste of time and money.. I have lived through the nightmares of versioning confusion caused by multiple products each with their own way of doing things (and some had very obscure numbering conventions). It might take a little getting used to but in the end I think you will. Again I do sympathize with your point of view. I am not saying our solution is the most elegant. All I am saying is it is the reality of Autodesk's business and there are some very logical reasons why it is this way and that fighting it would be Quixotic.
maurice
From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Ahmidou Lyazidi
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 11:55 AM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics forSoftimage3D Software
I have seen some other software editors start using this convention, and I don't understand it either...
Ahmidou Lyazidi
Director | TD | CG artist
2010/9/12 Stefan Andersson <ste...@madcrew.se<mailto:ste...@madcrew.se>>
Schoenberger
|> 2007... 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and soon 2012.
Windows 95?
:-)
Holger Sch�nberger
technical director
The day has 24 hours, if that does not suffice, I will take the night
|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
|> [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf
|> Of Alan Fregtman
|> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 12:26 AM
|> To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Sam J. Bowling
--
Sam J. Bowling
Alan Fregtman
I see. Knowing what versions are compatible with what... good reason
for yearly version numbers I guess, as unelegant as they look.
If I may ask, what is the distinction between Service Packs and
Hotfixes? For example why is Maya 2011 Hotfix 3 not called Maya SP3?
Is it the amount or number of bugs fixed?
Regards,
-- Alan
Matt Lind
The part I find most confusing, and others have agreed, is why Autodesk is using the ‘2011’ label for a product that is released and used primarily in 2010. You say the year is derived from the Autodesk fiscal year - February 1, 2010 thru January 31, 2011. Yet according to the calendar 11 of the 12 months in fiscal year 2011 reside in 2010. As convoluted as Microsoft tends to be, even they got this right by using 2010 for their current products.
Knowing which versions are compatible with each other within the Autodesk product sweet isn’t the only thing that’s important if you’re going to go down this path. It’s most helpful to match up the product’s name to the calendar so in the future when users have to consider exhuming old projects or other product matching (custom tools, operating systems, …) it can be done without having to think too hard. Some places write custom tools that link with applications from other vendors (such as Microsoft). Having to remember that Autodesk xxx 2011 has to link up with Microsoft xxx 2010 is the same mess as using different version numbers for products.
Matt
From:
softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Maurice
Patel
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 5:14 PM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics
forSoftimage3D Software
If two emails on this come through, sorry. I tried replying from my mobile at the IBC show but had connection problems so decided to retry back at the hotel.
I apologize if this is a bit lengthy but I wanted to give you some insight into the why certain decisions were made at Autodesk and what battles are really worth fighting
The Autodesk naming convention is not necessarily more confusing than the one you propose in the broader context of all Autodesk products. Autodesk has many products and at one point it became extremely confusing for our customers to tell exactly what versions were supposed to work together as each product had its own numbering convention. Was Maya 6.5 supposed to be compatible with 3ds Max 7.3 or not? FBX in flame 6.5 compatible with FBX in Maya 8 or not? and why not with Maya 6.5 etc? it became an impossible mess.
Since Autodesk products now have significant co-dependencies (e.g. AutoCAD interop with Revit, 3ds max interop with Revit and AutoCAD, 3ds max interop with Maya and Softimage etc) it made sense to adopt a more consistent versioning convention across all products. This was an initiative driven by Autodesk as a whole and the various different product groups were asked to comply.
Today, millions of users have no difficulty understanding the Autodesk numbering convention, so I think once you get used to it you’ll get the hang of the thing. Flame users did and they had a similar reaction to yours at first. Now I am not saying it’s elegant or beautiful, or even that its great branding but it’s logical and totally descriptive of how Autodesk manufactures and ships its software.
The way it works is that every year Autodesk simultaneously releases a major public version of its software available to everybody, we typically only do this once a year and it is versioned using the Autodesk fiscal year of shipping (Autodesk fiscal years are how we report our finances to the SEC. For example the Autodesk 2011 fiscal year corresponds to the calendar year of Feb 1 2010 to Jan 31 2011.). the advantage of this is that a user of multiple Autodesk products knows immediately what versions are supposed to be compatible with each other (i.e. all the 2011 versions) and no longer has to remember that it is Autocad 10, with Revit 7, with 3ds max 6.5, with Maya 4.3.1 etc (as was previously the case with individual product numbering and non synchronized release cycles). This is also why we no longer release software at Siggraph but have aligned all our releases to the same April time frame.
The annual release is the only publicly available feature release. It’s the only release you can upgrade to. All other product developments fit into either one of two categories:
1. Service Packs: These fix bugs only. They are not allowed to contain new functionality or features (SOX revenue accounting guidelines). These are available at no cost to any customer how owns the software version they are issued for. These are issued as SP1, SP2, SP3 and its pretty clear which set of bug fixes is the latest and also that these are just that, bug-fixes
2. Subscription Advantage Packs: These are new features or services and are exclusive to subscription customers. There is no way that a non subs customer can upgrade to them. Which is why Autodesk calls them subscription advantage packs. Now it is possible that a subscription advantage pack contains new features but it is not necessary and sufficient. This latter caveat is what makes using a numbering convention a bit obsolete because why would you change a version number if there were no new features in a subscription advantage pack (just say some new services). Now most of the time we do issue new features because this is where most M&E customers see the most value – but it is not guaranteed. Note R&D can still continue to use custom product version numbering to track builds (whichever numbering system they want) and that can be published using things like the about box.
It does not make any real sense for us at M&E Marketing to fight a losing battle against this with the entire organization. It would just be a waste of time and money.. I have lived through the nightmares of versioning confusion caused by multiple products each with their own way of doing things (and some had very obscure numbering conventions). It might take a little getting used to but in the end I think you will. Again I do sympathize with your point of view. I am not saying our solution is the most elegant. All I am saying is it is the reality of Autodesk’s business and there are some very logical reasons why it is this way and that fighting it would be Quixotic.
maurice
From:
softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Ahmidou
Lyazidi
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 11:55 AM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics
forSoftimage3D Software
I have seen some other software
editors start using this convention, and I don't understand it either...
Ahmidou Lyazidi
Director | TD | CG artist
2010/9/12 Stefan Andersson <ste...@madcrew.se>
You can call it what you want. For all of us it's one of these two
David Rivera
on many 3D demos, and I was wondering where to get the optimized
versions?. I found this page which has the original 3d scans in a gazillion
triangle topology:
http://graphics.stanford.edu/data/3Dscanrep/
Anyone knows?
Thanks.
Bests.
David R.
Stephen Davidson
Luc-Eric Rousseau
> link with applications from other vendors (such as Microsoft).� Having to
> remember that Autodesk xxx 2011 has to link up with Microsoft xxx 2010 is
> the same mess as using different version numbers for products.
give one example of anyone having to line up to a product of Microsoft
where an Autodesk naming scheme would help?
Softimage 2011, 2010, 7.0 all need Visual Studio 2008, not Visual
2010. You have to read the doc.
Ajit Menon
It's pretty cool that there has been so much development for Soft.. and the new features are awesome; and the likelihood for Soft to break out stronger is just getting better...
I don't really care what it's called as long as I can still use it at work over Maya...
Ajit
Ajit Menon | CGI artist
www.ajitmenon.com
"Success is not found in what you have achieved, but rather in WHO you have become." - Larry Bertlemann
Marc-Andre Carbonneau
amen
From:
softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Ajit Menon
Sent: September 13, 2010 1:39 PM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics
forSoftimage3D Software
Ummm isn't this discussion about Autodesk naming conentions getting a bit ridiculous?
Alan Fregtman
Christopher Tedin
David Rivera
there were optimized versions (few polyongs) somewhere on the net.
Are there?
David.
From: Alan Fregtman <alan.f...@gmail.com>
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Sent: Mon, September 13, 2010 12:55:14 PM
Subject: Re: Classic Bunny, Happy Buda, Dragon and Thai Statue for softimage.
Alan Fregtman
I took the lowest resolutions by the way.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 2:13 PM, David Rivera
David Rivera
David.
Alan Fregtman
to reduce it. Bunny's the best.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 3:51 PM, David Rivera
Matt Lind
Simple example since you asked. It would be handy in the case I previously pointed out where, say, in 2014 somebody has to exhume an old project and plugins made in Softimage 20xx. If custom plugins have dependency on other SDKs outside of the Softimage SDK (MS Office for example to record user hours and other accounting related data via an event through Access or Excel), it would be nice to have a more direct relationship rather than having to perform archaeology to match up the versions. It would be easily determined that Softimage 2009 would not be compatible with MS Office 2010 because it didn't exist at that point in time. User would easily know that the plugin would depend on MS Office 2007 and match up the appropriate SDKs to compile plugins. However, since Softimage uses the Autodesk fiscal year for labeling, Softimage 2009 might actually be calling MS Office 2010 because the years are not in sync with the calendar.
Not the end of the world by any means, just pointing out it's confusing and a comment that pops up in water cooler discussions. I personally don't care what it's called other than it should use common sense visible to the end user.
Matt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-
> bou...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Luc-Eric Rousseau
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 10:32 AM
> To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk Announces Licensing of Lagoa Multiphysics
> forSoftimage3D Software
>
Marc Brinkley
Nice stuff. Any pictures of the objects floating around?
_______________________________________________________________________________
Marc Brinkley
Microsoft Game Studios
PROJECT NATAL
marc.brinkley [at] microsoft.com
David Rivera
I wouldn´t mind shrinking Lucy with 3D coat. In the process being shoot
another tuto about retopo tools. :)
David.
From: Marc Brinkley <Marc.B...@microsoft.com>
To: "soft...@listproc.autodesk.com" <soft...@listproc.autodesk.com>
Sent: Mon, September 13, 2010 4:14:31 PM
Subject: RE: Classic Bunny, Happy Buda, Dragon and Thai Statue for softimage.
Raffaele Fragapane
Sorry, they don't make sense, never did past their commercial and marketing impact, and most of the reasons brought up don't either and are a rationalization after the fact (IE: Max was on the calendar year when it adopted this numbering, and users are NOT less confused by this numbering).
Even MS saw how stupid this was and decided on plain "7" for their reboot.
We could argue all the points tit for tat, but do we really care that much? :)
The only thing I'd appreciate is if AD could at least stop escalating this into more and more absurd and impenetrable names. The distinction between SP and EXT was arbitrary (bad) enough as it was.
I'm expecting "motherf***er" to be making it to the release schema sometime soon at this pace, possibly with Sam L. Jackson sponsoring the campaign that year :)
Joe Williamsen
Alan Fregtman
http://s3.darkvertex.com/misc/stanford_dragon_OBJ.rar
http://s3.darkvertex.com/misc/xyzrgb_dragon_OBJ.rar
http://s3.darkvertex.com/misc/xyzrgb_statuette_OBJ.rar
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 5:59 PM, David Rivera
David Rivera
I mean: can you notice the grades of topology in the wings?
If you got a link to her, I would like to download it, please.
Thanks.
David
From: Joe Williamsen <j...@joewilliamsen.com>
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Sent: Mon, September 13, 2010 8:53:59 PM
Sam J. Bowling
--
Sam J. Bowling
David Rivera
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FLgA-D3QQs
That´s a shatter video setup on softimage 2011. And I don´t know what am I doing wrong.
The simulation group simply won´t obey gravity and also won´t stop emmitting particles!
This is so odd and frustrating as I got another file from xsibase that showed how to setup
the shattering scene correctly and with the same point cloud and ice trees!
Even on vimeo, they mention it. So here´s my video, maybe someone would
like to view and correct me...I am doing everything according to those instructions, but still
I can´t get no results! What am I doing wrong?!
Bests.
David.
Orlando Esponda
BTW, I've never used the compound before, but it's just a matter of reading and understand what are you doing.
Orlando.
Alan Fregtman
fall down as they should.
You know XSI only updates 1 viewport at once only during playback,
right? Your bottom right was playing fine (and active) then the one
where it looks still (bottom left) looked static until you stopped
playback which is why it updates when you let it stop. This is normal.
You make a viewport active by clicking inside it by the way.
As for that it won't stop emitting it's because you moved the tree
with the emitter from the Modeling to the Simulation stack, therefore
it's evaluating every frame, adding new particles per frame. (I don't
know why you did this??) It was fine in the Modeling stack like you
had it initially.
If a simulated cloud has a tree in Modeling this tree only evaluates
on the very first frame. If it's not a simulated cloud then the
icetree updates when needed as its inputs or properties change, with
no awareness of previous frames, regardless of what frame you're in.
(You'd know this if you pressed F1 and read a little. The manual
doesn't bite, you know.)
Lastly, as Orlando points out, you should enable "Create Instance
Particles" in Andy's compound. Without instance shapes you're just
simulating tiny little dots. They have no volume and look very boring.
Even then, however, RBDs in ICE are pretty useless for serious
production as they do not calculate "Actual Shape" collisions. You
will see a lot of intersecting geometry and can't really do much about
it. You'll have to wait for Helge or Nassos' Bullet physics
implementations to have correct rigid collisions in ICE.
The collisions you'll get will probably correspond with bounding
spheres or cubes.
Cheers,
-- Alan
Maurice Patel
Raffaele Fragapane
That was fair enough when it came to lining up Maya and then soft with existing company standards. No argument there. Compounding the problem by calling a .5 with a few dozens more letters that make it wildly different from the previous (and next) release's tokenization though is recent and devilish :)
I still do maintain that somebody in marketing or middle management there must have a serious grudge with IT, and has therefore decided to devise these naming conventions and related install paths to piss off sys admins around the world as an elaborate vengeance against the category.
I can think of no other logical explanation ;)
Sent from not an iPhone
Andy Moorer
Joe Williamsen
MeshLab (free), or GeoMagic. It would help a lot if there was just a button in the PPG that was
something like an "Apply" button so you didn't have that huge lag up front.....
Joe Williamsen
http://joewilliamsen.com/Filez/HiResObj/Lucy_Statue_280K.rar
Martin Chatterjee
Wouldn't it be useful to have a "static" reduction function, where you can set your choices in a dialog before it ever touches the model to be reduced?
Alan Fregtman
you unmute it will evaluate.
Joe Williamsen
making any promises ;)
Joe Williamsen
Andy Moorer
Raffaele Fragapane
The lack of a static mode, I agree, can be annoying (especially for us since the rare times we use it it's for 5mills tris lidar meshings), but nothing prevents you from just maximizinng an explorer viewport, tweak away, and then restore viewports to see it chew. If it was static only the games people would freak out, and if it was both, people would probably complain how it'd come up in static mode and they always have to switch it to an op :p
Matt Lind
Probably wouldn’t be too difficult to write a wrapper script to display a UI for specifying parameter values, then apply the poly reduction operator upon pressing OK in the dialog.
Matt
From:
softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Raffaele
Fragapane
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 5:06 PM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Classic Bunny, Happy Buda, Dragon and Thai Statue for
softimage.
Actually the poly reduction tool doesn't necessarily expect huge meshes by default. It's used a lot for game char and props lodding, where the interactivity is great to interactively hit budgets.
David Rivera
-Since 3Ds Max has always excel on this, and they are throwing us the visual cube
for navigation axis in the viewports..I believe somewhere in the future, they may surprise
us with a greeble compound (something really simple...don´t you think?)
:)
David.
From: Matt Lind <ml...@carbinestudios.com>
To: "soft...@listproc.autodesk.com" <soft...@listproc.autodesk.com>
Sent: Tue, September 14, 2010 7:24:33 PM
Subject: RE: Classic Bunny, Happy Buda, Dragon and Thai Statue for softimage.
Steven Caron
Steven Caron
Eric Thivierge
into Softimage? I would think there are tons of better uses for the
developer's efforts than a greeble function.
--------------------------------------------
Eric Thivierge
Technical Director
http://www.ethivierge.com
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:15 PM, David Rivera
<activemoti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ..because I don�t know how much possible is to include a real Greeble
> compound in softimage?
> -Since 3Ds Max has always excel on this, and they are throwing us the visual
> cube
> for navigation axis in the viewports..I believe somewhere in the future,
> they may surprise
> us with a greeble compound (something really simple...don�t you think?)
>
> :)
>
> David.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Matt Lind <ml...@carbinestudios.com>
> To: "soft...@listproc.autodesk.com" <soft...@listproc.autodesk.com>
> Sent: Tue, September 14, 2010 7:24:33 PM
> Subject: RE: Classic Bunny, Happy Buda, Dragon and Thai Statue for
> softimage.
>
> Probably wouldn�t be too difficult to write a wrapper script to display a UI
> didn't mean it!" as their box turns into an�over-sized�doorstop.
>
>
>
> :D
>
>
>
Raffaele Fragapane
Hardly a feature list bullet point worth spending time on in first place, or something you need that frequently for anything but battlestar and starwars fan movies :)
Steven Caron
Raffaele Fragapane
David Rivera
:D
From: Steven Caron <car...@gmail.com>
To: "soft...@listproc.autodesk.com" <soft...@listproc.autodesk.com>
Sent: Tue, September 14, 2010 10:53:56 PM
Subject: Re: Just out of curiosity..are we far from Softimage 2011 .5 ¿?
Fabian Schnuer
functionality, should cater for any and all death stars you were
planning on making :p
Fabian
On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 19:15 -0700, David Rivera wrote:
> ..because I don´t know how much possible is to include a real Greeble
> compound in softimage?
> -Since 3Ds Max has always excel on this, and they are throwing us the
> visual cube
> for navigation axis in the viewports..I believe somewhere in the
> future, they may surprise
> us with a greeble compound (something really simple...don´t you
> think?)
>
> :)
>
> David.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
Adam Seeley
Had the same kind of problems with merge mesh when you really want the default distance to be 0 rather than anything else.
If you're doing a few of these you can use the Scene Defaults set up your default numbers.
i.e.
Get a cube
Run the Poly Reduction Tool
In an Explorer, look at the Application view
Open up Scene Defaults->Operators
And you should see a Polygon Reduction op in there.
You can now set the right numbers in here (e.g. 0 or 100 for poly reduction) and those values will be used when you apply it from now on.
It would be nice to be able to set these for when you restart Soft of course, but it's handy at a push (I guess a quick script could run to set this up at the beginning of a session or pop it in a button)
Adam.
From:
softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com]
On Behalf Of Matt Lind
Sent: 15 September 2010 01:25
To:
soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: Classic Bunny, Happy
Buda, Dragon and Thai Statue for softimage.
Andy Moorer
The part I find most confusing, and others have agreed, is why Autodesk is using the ‘2011’ label for a product that is released and used primarily in 2010.
John Richard Sanchez
John Richard Sanchez
www.johnrichardsanchez.com
Gene Crucean
[Gene Crucean] - [VFX & CG Supervisor/Generalist]
** Freelance for hire **
Joe Williamsen
On 9/15/2010 3:42 PM, John Richard Sanchez wrote:
Actually its just the end of the Mayan calender so that means no more Maya.
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Andy Moorer <andym...@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, nobody would buy 2012 because the world is going to end then, or so I'm told.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Matt Lind <ml...@carbinestudios.com> wrote:
The part I find most confusing, and others have agreed, is why Autodesk is using the �2011� label for a product that is released and used primarily in 2010. �
Matt Lind
That only applies to Maya.
From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Andy Moorer
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 2:27 PM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Daniel H
<Not sent from neutered iPhone - Drooooid>
Sam J. Bowling
--
Sam J. Bowling