|
|
trueSpace7.5 First Impressions
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
trueSpace7.5 First Impressions // Roundtable
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 12, 2007, 12:30pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
V1.5 of comments. Resolved issues will be removed.
Pros:
Interface:
The new interface is faster than previous tS7.x releases. The darker color scheme is much easier on the eyes, though there are some issues with it (See Cons).
Animation:
The new animation tools are far better than those in previous versions. Integration with the Physics system is a great addition to the new IK toolset, as is the long-overdue BVH animation import, meaning I no longer have to deal with computing physics in NaturalMotion and go through hoops to get the animations into trueSpace.
Rendering:
While slower than it really has any right to be compared to VRay1.0, VRay 1.5 is awesome. The new DOF tools are nice (more about DOF in Cons), and the new soft shadows help bring simulating reality closer to our grasp.
Hair:
Overall, the new Hair tools are nice, and even without a manual (since for some reason my download is coming through corrupted, this is a good thing, and hopefully tech support will figure out what the issue is after my multiple download attempts and emails) the grooming and length tools are very easy to use. There are some serious shortcomings, however, that I'll address in Cons.
Cons:
Interface:
The interface, especially in Workspace, is buggy. I've already had to reinstall tS7.5 half a dozen times as the icons in Workspace view keep disappearing and reverting to their 1D text mode, even when they're set to 2D.
While the darker color scheme is easier to work in, it lacks polish. There are also some interface inconsistencies (especially the Render panels) with certain windows/panels not quite fitting in with the overall look established by a majority of the program.
I'd also like an option in Workspace, as we have in the Model view, to change lights to wireframe. They stand out more, making them easy to find in a complex scene, and with Caligari's focus on usability, this seems a no-brainer.
Having object layers native to Workspace would also be useful, further reducing the need to jump between Workspace and Model views, as would a standalone scene list in Workspace view for easy drilldown to sub-objects.
If an object such as a simple sphere must be converted to an editable mesh when you want to do point selection, extrusions, etc, why are there still options for editing the latitude/longitude divisions still available in both the object panel and the Link Editor? Again, the interface needs polish.
Animation:
As with lights, I'd really like to be able to switch the bones to wireframe as opposed to shaded. Being able to attach helper objects to specific bones is great, but for something like a wrist, being able to attach TWO, or more detailed (eg. the first screenshot, which allows constrained movement along one axis or another in an easier way) one for each axis of rotation, would make the animation workflow much easier. Check out this screenshot of another 3D program to see how they handle their helper objects for an example:
http://www.saecorporatetraining.com/images/maya_animation_sae_corporate_training.jpg
An easy way to set up custom helper objects would also be extremely useful. For example, a character holding a gun could be animated with a stand-in for the gun until the model is completed, at which point objects could be swapped out.
http://images.ea.com/eagames/official/battlefield/battlefield2/us/communityupdates/maya_soldier.jpg
The same goes for setting up constraints: there's really no reason for them to be shaded and not wireframe (or at least have a wireframe option), except to say "we can shade EVERYTHING." There's a few screenshots of tS7.5 that show wireframe bones, so...why not give us that option, since we know it's possible and some of us may find the program easier to work with?
Being able to assign animation ranges to sliders would be a great addition to the new animation toolset. For example: Set the rotation for each finger opened and closed, and then have sliders to position the fingers, rather than trying to do so with the selection tools. This would be especially useful for animations where you have characters grasping objects, each other, or just have to make tiny little tweaks to stop character polygons from intersecting objects. Maybe if percentages could be set on animation clips, or better yet animation clips had sliders attached to them?
Muscle Bulges, as in the older animation system, would be nice, especially if they were easy to set up. Check out this URL for an example of a workflow that seems very tS-like in another 3D animation program:
http://www.projectmessiah.com/x4/vids/Flex.wmv
Rendering:
While the new DOF in VRay allows for easily-attainable realism, having an additional camera tool with a focus point would allow for easily animatable DOF. The camera could allow the user to set the near/far focus planes based on location of the camera focus object. This method works in many other 3D programs, and while a user could have the camera linked to a null object, being able to set the near/far focus based on this object, and allowing the DOF to be animatable, would allow more complex camera cinematography.
Hair:
Why does making hair longer make it stick out farther from an object? What if I'm trying to create, for example, a human with thing, stringy hair that clings more to their head? Wet hair? Is there a way to GROUP hairs, for more complex styles, a la Sasquatch? Clumpy hair, for example. Using an image to set hair length would also be useful. Being able to use a thicker hair shape - spline-based planes, for example - would allow users to combine the best of both worlds: the styling ability of the current hair, with the time-tested method of using textured planes, resulting in faster renders than possible with the current version of the new hair system.
http://www.worley.com/E/Products/sasquatch/p7hg_img_1/fullsize/hairtests.jpg
Material Editor:
Weren't we supposed to get a new one? It's possible to do some material in the Link Editor now, but the base Material Editor is really limiting compared to those in Lightwave, Cinema4D, 3DSMAX, etc. No transfer modes (eg. Screen, Multiply, Overlay)? Still no procedural masks between layers? The features are there in tS7.5 elsewhere, as we can animate color shaders procedurally...why not alpha masks? Still no layered shaders in VRay1.5? Again, maybe it's a lack-of-manual issue, but...
This:
http://www.3dm3.com/tutorials/shaders/index2_clip_image004.jpg
http://www.profilesmagazine.com/p34/images/clark_lw-material-editor.gif
Compared to this:
http://caligari.com/products/trueSpace/ts75/Brochure/images/Surface4_s.jpg
http://caligari.com/products/trueSpace/ts75/Brochure/images/Surface1_s.jpg
And there's no doubt trueSpace is a bit behind - at least until they get the material editor working completely through the Link Editor, and it's as easy to use as Maya or Blender's similar node-based systems.
Hotkeys:
Model view hotkeys don't seem to work in the Workspace view. Some consistency here would be nice, eg. if F8 is Render Scene in Model view, why not in Workspace as well? Not to mention, why are there so many duplicate items to set hotkeps for, eg. two copies of Move to Next Keyframe for two different icons that trigger the same action, and not being able to use the same hotkey assigned to both?
Conclusion:
Overall a worthy upgrade, mostly because of the new animation tools. However, the new hair tools and the material editor need to be upgraded to match the quality Caligari is trying to achieve, as evidenced by the new animation tools, and the interface needs more consistency and polish.
I hope it doesn't seem like I'm being overly-critical of tS7.5, because the improvements over 7.0 & 7.11 are vast. I see the potential of this new platform Caligari is building on and, with a little tweaking, it could be amazing as opposed to just an improvement over the previous version. It may help if Caligari had a few more animators with more experience in other high-end 3D applications that could point out some of the shortcomings of the new animation system for use in a production environment where time literally equals money. From company comments it seems that their goal is to attack this market and steal some of the Lightwave/Cinema4D glory, and that is exactly what I'd like to see happen! Otherwise, why would I keep coming back to trueSpace after over 12 years of using the program?
Did You Know:
trueSpace was used to create the virtual environments for the first-ever commercial video ringtone? They featured Donald Trump, as mentioned in Billboard Magazine and featured on daily morning talk shows. trueSpace is used for more, and larger things, than most know about, and I'd love to be able to use it bigger, and even better, things!
Here's a clip of the background from one the ringtones (sorry, can't post the actual ringtone for legal reasons), showing the straight render from trueSpace, followed by the post-process version with color correction and 2D volume effects, developed in After Effects. The original high-res DV footage included Donald Trump against a greenscreen, which was keyed out and composited in AE. Additional 2D camera movement was also added in AE, to give the clip a more realistic feel, as if it were shot from a helicopter. This was followed by 2D motion blur, again created in AE, which often provides a superior result to the non vector-based motion blur trueSpace currently uses (not to mention it renders far faster than rendering the same frame 20 times to get decent motion blur).
http://digital-soapbox.com/red/cityscape.html |
Post by noko // May 12, 2007, 1:06pm
|
noko
Total Posts: 684
|
Good run down, some of these you might want to check.
The panels can be reposition or taken away from their docking spot, go to panel title bar and press and hold the ctrl key and drag panel to where you want, even to second monitor. I am pretty sure tS7.5 is modeless. Also you can stick panels inside of other frames.
Agree with lights, would be nice if they could be put into wireframe, even going inside of light object using the Link Editor and working with render attributes doesn't change the rendering of them.
You can switch bones to wire frame, do this on skeleton object panel in stack view or Link editor. You have four options
Solid default
Solid diamond
Wire diamond
Wire thin
You can also turn skeleton view off during Dynamic posing using Character Posing panel found in stack view under tab called Panels. Remember the panels that open in the Panel view of stack view is context sensitive, so Dynamic pose tool needs to be ative to get to the Character Posing panel. Also skeleton panel, same way, skeleton has to be selected.
Locks are pretty much shaded as far as I can tell. Sliders would be great, maybe doable in tS7.5 with Link Editor as it is. Have to see if possible there.
See if I can come up with more things for you to check out. |
Post by splinters // May 12, 2007, 1:16pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
The lack of icons (just text) has so far only been attributed to Vista 64 bit, I have not heard of this on other platforms. Well, not since the Nvidia driver problem was sorted many months ago.
Hair can be textured just like any other object...:D
When you get the manual, check out Heidi's excellent hair tutorial or play with my head in the 'free stuff' thread. |
Post by mrbones // May 12, 2007, 1:23pm
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
Good comment.:cool:
P.S. correct me if Im wrong but I think hair is animatable and also collides.
Perhaps it would help if Caligari had a few more animators with more experience in other high-end 3D applications that could point out some of the shortcomings of the new animation system for use in a production environment (where time literally equals money)?
http://digital-soapbox.com/red/cityscape.html |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 12, 2007, 1:28pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
noko:
Yeah, I was hoping it was still possible to change away the shaded bones. Definitely a spot where the manual would come in handy :).
Ah, so it's just an additonal key to detach panels. That alleviates a LOT of my issues with the interface!
Splinters:
I'm running Windows XP Pro 32bit until there are better drives for my workstation hardware, so the problem isn't there. I'm also on ATI video hardware, so nVidia issues shouldn't be the problem, either.
Hair CAN be textured? Hmm. Wonder why it's not working for me, I'll take another look.
Thanks guys! |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 12, 2007, 1:29pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
Good comment.:cool:
P.S. correct me if Im wrong but I think hair is animatable and also collides.
I've tried setting keyframes for hair parameters and while I can see the keyframes, it's still not animating. There is a collision option, but without the manual to read exactly what that option does it looks to me like it's just not colliding with the object it's on. |
Post by RichLevy // May 12, 2007, 2:06pm
|
RichLevy
Total Posts: 1140
|
As far as the animation system goes, it's only at version 1.0. There are a lot of plans for it...
We have a pretty diverse group on the beta team, animators do tend to be in short supply though... Know anybody interested? Send off an email to Caligari with a request to be on the beta team.
Rich |
Post by mrbones // May 12, 2007, 2:56pm
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
You might have to enable hair attributes via the keying panel.
It also seems that if you apply a physprop to the hair it will collide with the shoulders when the head turns, as an example.
check your PM for an example of animating hair via keyframing.
HTH
I've tried setting keyframes for hair parameters and while I can see the keyframes, it's still not animating. There is a collision option, but without the manual to read exactly what that option does it looks to me like it's just not colliding with the object it's on. |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 12, 2007, 3:33pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
Great animation test! I guess I really DO need that manual :). |
Post by mrbones // May 12, 2007, 3:35pm
|
mrbones
Total Posts: 1280
|
Would your conclusion or pros been different if there was no physics interaction with keyframed objects or BVH import for that matter?
[COLOR="Red"]V1.3 of comments. Resolved issues will be removed.
Pros:
Animation:
The new animation tools are far better than those in previous versions. Integration with the Physics system is a great addition to the new IK toolset, as is the long-overdue BVH animation import, meaning I no longer have to deal with computing physics in NaturalMotion and go through hoops to get the animations into trueSpace. |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 12, 2007, 4:03pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
Would your conclusion or pros been different if there was no physics interaction with keyframed objects or BVH import for that matter?
Oh, absolutely. With the current state of animation software even at the game engine level, that kind of interaction is a must to stay competitive, in addition to giving animators the kind of modern tools they need to be efficient as well as artistic. |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 12, 2007, 11:18pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
In case it was overlooked, here's a screen cap of the new material editor:
5940
But as I mentioned in another thread, I agree with you that the real-time shader nodes (ramps, inverse, blend, alpha, etc.) need to be able to be linked to the V-Ray shader inputs. If we could do that, then we wouldn't need layered materials to be natively supported by VRay, because we could layer the materials in the node system before the bitmap data is even passed to the render engine.
The question is would making LE bricks with better visual feedback for shaders, or a whole new UI based Shader/Material node editor, be a better approach?
-Jack. |
Post by xmanflash // May 13, 2007, 1:20am
|
xmanflash
Total Posts: 335
|
It may help if Caligari had a few more animators with more experience in other high-end 3D applications that could point out some of the shortcomings of the new animation system for use in a production environment where time literally equals money.
I agree - and suggested this a long time back.. (which got a little heated as I remember!)
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?t=703
..however I am quite happy with the 7.5 release so far, it is much more polished than 7 and I hope that now its been released, the fine tuning will steam ahead.. |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 13, 2007, 1:25am
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
I also agree. I think even if Caligari had to *pay* a few of the top professional industry guys to be consultants it would help with the overall quality and usability of the product.
-Jack. |
Post by stretch // May 13, 2007, 4:17am
|
stretch
Total Posts: 1
|
In the little time I have spent on this new version I am pretty happy with TS7.5 so far with one exception. The controls for the f-curves in animation. I don't see any tangent controls like they had before for the curves. You could adjust the tension, Bias and continuity for the curves. This is useful to "ease in" and "ease out" of a key (especially a "hold"). This is important for natural organic motion. Maybe I am not finding what I am looking for when it is really there. I do see that there are the 4 interpolation methods that are available. But is there further control for the curves. If not, I think it needs it.
Any help would be appreciated if I’m just overlooking something.
Thanks. |
Post by Délé // May 13, 2007, 4:28am
|
Délé
Total Posts: 1374
|
Yeah, tangent handles didn't make it into 7.5 unfortunately. I agree, they are important and hopefully will make it into 7.6. |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 13, 2007, 5:41am
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
In the little time I have spent on this new version I am pretty happy with TS7.5 so far with one exception. The controls for the f-curves in animation. I don't see any tangent controls like they had before for the curves. You could adjust the tension, Bias and continuity for the curves. This is useful to "ease in" and "ease out" of a key (especially a "hold"). This is important for natural organic motion. Maybe I am not finding what I am looking for when it is really there. I do see that there are the 4 interpolation methods that are available. But is there further control for the curves. If not, I think it needs it.
Any help would be appreciated if I’m just overlooking something.
Thanks.
I didn't even notice this yet, haven't played w/ the new animation tools in enough detail. A useful addition to what was previously available would be the ability to "break" the handles, so the curves before and after a point have an additional layer of control:
http://www.pixels.net/products/htm/images/fcurves_r1_c2.jpg |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 13, 2007, 5:48am
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
But as I mentioned in another thread, I agree with you that the real-time shader nodes (ramps, inverse, blend, alpha, etc.) need to be able to be linked to the V-Ray shader inputs. If we could do that, then we wouldn't need layered materials to be natively supported by VRay, because we could layer the materials in the node system before the bitmap data is even passed to the render engine.
For quality reasons pre-comping textures before they hit the rendering stage wouldn't work. If one texture is 1024x1024, and the texture on another layer is 512x512, why up-sample the smaller texture (or downsampling the higher resolution texture), we're either a) wasting texture memory, or b) lowering quality by precomping the bitmaps.
Also, found the "Material Editor" you're speaking of...would be nice if we could pull off the Material Editor to float it, and take the other panels from the side bar out as well (the color, bump, etc. material panels) and attach them back together...as it stands, I can pull them off and float individual panels, but not attach them to each other so they move as one panel, reducing interface clutter and the need to resposition each panel individually. And how about being able to just click on the shader in the color panel (eg. the "plain" color shader) to get a list of shaders, reducing interface clutter more, as we won't have to have a shader list viewable at all times when editing each material?
And, if we've torn the panels off to float, why are the existing panels closed, and then reopened again in the sidebar, when you switch between objects or even keep the SAME object selected, and click on it with the "Inspect Material" tool?
http://update.multiverse.net/wiki/images/8/8e/Material_editor_open.jpg
We've got some of the necessary features for more complex shading, but the workflow needs to be improved. With a few tweaks, production speed could be greatly enhanced...
The question is would making LE bricks with better visual feedback for shaders, or a whole new UI based Shader/Material node editor, be a better approach?
-Jack.
An additonal, separate window w/ a node editor would definitely be preferable - that way, we wouldn't have to dig down into an object to make materials, adding an additional, and unnecessary, step to the shading process when in the Workspace view.
Also, I wouldn't mind seeing a REAL scene graph, with a list of objects, their sub-objects, and the materials attached to each object, basically expanding upon previous versions' KFE/Scene Editor to include materials as well:
http://static.highend3d.com/downloadsimages/4382/UI_Editor2.JPG
http://www.toolfarm.com/images/xfrog4_hierarchy.jpg |
Post by roman // May 13, 2007, 10:29am
|
roman
Total Posts: 320
|
Yeah, tangent handles didn't make it into 7.5 unfortunately. I agree, they are important and hopefully will make it into 7.6.We had to pull the handles out at the last minute, they "almost" made it to TS7.5:( They will be back soon. |
Post by roman // May 13, 2007, 10:32am
|
roman
Total Posts: 320
|
Also, I wouldn't mind seeing a REAL scene graph, with a list of objects, their sub-objects, and the materials attached to each object, basically expanding upon previous versions' KFE/Scene Editor to include materials as well:We have a good design for it. It will come. |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 14, 2007, 4:49am
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
We had to pull the handles out at the last minute, they "almost" made it to TS7.5:( They will be back soon.
Darn. Welll, hopefully we'll be seeing them in a new point release soon! :) |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 14, 2007, 4:50am
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
We have a good design for it. It will come.
Awesome, I can't wait to see it. |
Post by GraySho // May 14, 2007, 11:59am
|
GraySho
Total Posts: 695
|
Agree that lights and camera's need to be wireframe (as option) and can be hidden easily as mentioned in a different thread. |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 14, 2007, 1:23pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
Where I am with polishing the overall interface on my own; if I'm going to criticize it, it's only fair that I show how I think it could be improved :).
http://www.digital-soapbox.com/dev/1.jpg
Nowhere near finished, but hopefully it gets the idea across of what I mean by polish, consistency, etc. |
Post by thistlewait // May 15, 2007, 10:26am
|
thistlewait
Total Posts: 2
|
Hi.
I don't post often, but I wanted to share a feeling. I'm not a professional 3D artist, I'm just a hobbyist. But, I like to have good tools to doodle with. Thus I use or have used such tools as RayDream, Infini-D, Cinema4D, Poser, Carrara, Wings3D, Maya, 3DS Max, and have had my hands on LightWave a time or two. At this time, I spend most of my time with Modo 203, Poser, and Carrara, but I still like to keep TrueSpace in my bag of tricks. I've been using TrueSpace (off and on) since TS4. I've always liked the TS interface, but mostly, I keep TS around because I like playing with the physics engine. By the time of TS6.6, I was very close converting most of my projects to TS projects because I really like the way TS organized the library system for projects, materials, etc.. I eagerly anticipated the release of TS7.
That's where the story turns south. I've been used to node-based editing systems for a while. No big deal, right? I'd been doing the node-based thing for two or three years with other packages. No problem, right? Wrong. After a few hours of playing with TS7, and trying to find the appropriate sections/tutorials in the manual, I still could not figure out how to simply disconnect from one node and reconnect to another. In short, the Link Editor completely baffled me.
No big deal. This is just a hobby. I'll keep kickin' at it and I'll get it eventually. But, then I start getting offers from Caligari to purchase video courses that promise to teach me how to use the Link Editor and something doesn't sit right with me. I find that I am of the opinion that I paid for a piece of software. When I buy such software, and it advertises certain features, I expect that the manual or other supporting documentation should be able to teach me how to do what they claim their software can do, without additional cost. This has not been the case with me, TrueSpace, and the Link Editor.
So, TS7 goes on the back burner, I reload TS6.6 (so I can still play with physics from time to time), and then I dig into Carrara, Modo, and Poser. And that has been the status-quo for about a year.
Then, I get a new announcement from Caligari, they're releasing TS7.5! Cool! Curiosity tickled, I download TS7.5 and start playing around. It's been a while, and it takes a bit to get back into the swing of the new UI. But it's not long before I'm able to do a few things. And there are some way-cool things in the new version. But then comes the real test. Can I at least figure out how to drop a behavior, activity, material, hell...**anything**...into the Link Editor and at least get a line to connect (or even disconnect) from one node to another. NOPE! Grrrrrrrr!
And no, I'm still not going to pay extra money to be educated in a feature/function of the software that is so basic, so intrinsic to the operation of the software and Caligari's claims of function and utility, that such information should be prominently available in the user/reference manual without additional cost to the user.
Roman, I like you, I like your software, and I would like to be able to say that TrueSpace is a valued part of my toolset. But as things stand, for lack of appropriate documentation TS7 (for me) has been relegated to the status of "interesting but perplexing curiosity".
Regards,
Thistlewait |
Post by trueBlue // May 15, 2007, 11:38am
|
trueBlue
Total Posts: 1761
|
@ thistlewait:
As far as Linking from one node to the other it is really simple. One way is to Click and Drag the wire from one and to the other. Another way is to Click and drag on the Text box, which will highlight to show that it is selected, and then drag it to the other Text box, which will highlight to show that it is selected, and drop it or let go of the mouse. Granted there is some learning there to know where you can and can not link to. I would suggest since you like Physics, that you visit the Activities Chapter. There are three written examples and scenes that are included with tS7 for you to explore.
The Link Editor can be very simple as a container for your scene which shows all of your objects, lights, and cameras as such. The Link Editor can also be very complex where the Developers have exposed the working areas that help make tS7 UI work. They have exposed most of the Tools, Toolbars, and Widgets to name a few. Here is where could for instance change the Background Widget to perform an action that you would prefer. For instance you could change the Middle Mouse Button - Double Click = Look at Selected object to say Reset View. I know that this is not much help and is just an example. The way that I am learning is by way of examples and that is why there are several examples in the Libray. If you need another example to help understand a certain part, just ask there are very many willing and more experienced users here that I am sure would be glad to help you out. Again this is how I am learning as well, I am very grateful from the help I have received from other users here in this forum. |
Post by Délé // May 15, 2007, 12:23pm
|
Délé
Total Posts: 1374
|
The trueSpace7 manual was a monster of a manual. I think they did about as good as can be expected with it. It could use an update for 7.5 now though (which I think is in progress). The community forums are a very useful resource where the manual leaves off though. People around here are usually willing to lend a hand and answer questions.
As for the LE, it can appear a bit daunting at first, but it's actually pretty easy for the most part once you get the hang of it. Once you learn how to use it you won't regret it. It can be VERY powerful. I have various scripts floating about the "Interactive Artwork" and "Garage" threads. I would be happy to help you learn how to use them an link things up if you want to start playing around in the LE. :) |
Post by Burnart // May 15, 2007, 1:28pm
|
Burnart
Total Posts: 839
|
I can't swear to it in the v7 manual but the 7.5 manual does describe how to connect nodes (read that section just last night) ........ how to actually use them in creating a useful function is a whole other issue. |
Post by DigitalSoapbox // May 15, 2007, 1:36pm
|
DigitalSoapbox
Total Posts: 71
|
I can't swear to it in the v7 manual but the 7.5 manual does describe how to connect nodes (read that section just last night) ........ how to actually use them in creating a useful function is a whole other issue.
Exactly. When newtek introduced a similar feature to Lightwave (I think version 7) called "Expressions," which is basically a subset of the tools available in Link Editor, they released videos - for FREE - showing exactly how to use it.
Maybe the real problem isn't the Link Editor itself, but that because it can do so many things, it's made more confusing. Maybe if the Link Editor could be broken down into additional windows, each with their own set of functions, it would be easier to learn, rather than forcing the user to deal with so much at once? |
Post by Asem // May 15, 2007, 1:40pm
|
Asem
Total Posts: 255
|
Can someone test changing the camera zoom to a alt+mdrag. I know I connected it right but the syncing in ts still seems to be off. I wanted to change this because I don't like using the wheel scroll.
Scripting/Node based wise it took me some time also to figure out a lot of the LE stuff as I wasn't going to pay money to find out how to use it. I love it and am working on a script for the hair system (hopefully it works) and the lack of documentation is a problem but I think those who like to script or mess around with the LE need to get to together and create or own documentation (based on what was found out). If were stuck we can get answers from the Caligari dev. I think its worth a try that way they don't really have to spend a large amount of time on it and people will eventually benefit from it.
just a thought. |
|
