|
|
A heartfelt plea to Caligari
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.
A heartfelt plea to Caligari // Roundtable
Post by Burnart // Jan 17, 2008, 1:07pm
|
Burnart
Total Posts: 839
|
Frustration with the bridge?.... I remember that's where we started isn't it. :D
Please Caligari can you make the bridge work better!
(Will that do Splinters?) |
Post by splinters // Jan 17, 2008, 2:30pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Perfect...:D |
Post by adriani // Jan 17, 2008, 3:42pm
|
adriani
Total Posts: 89
|
Hi Splinters!!!!
My name is Flavio Adriani, sometimes I like not much but I come to see the forum...sorry I have bad english :)
I Agree with all that you said,is very true because we are client and WE have clients,and of course We use the TS+vray to WORk not like HOBBY!!!
So ,I have still many troubles and I fix many bugs alone, the truespace is a good Tools but still hard bugs that always we need months to have the fix path. We are january and the problems are the same. the bridge is very trouble. I make big complex scenes in 3D and the model space is very important like max/lightwave etc... is more confortable. The workmodel view
is for not complex scenes.....I work in 3D about 12 years in architecture design. So I am still sad about these bugs,helps etc... but we need to work
hard because today all clients need fast and good things, not just a rendering like some years ago. I think that Caligari need to fix these bugs very fast or
we are going to loose ours clients. As I said we work hard to live not like hobby....thank you so much for your attention |
Post by jamesmc // Jan 17, 2008, 4:06pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
The advantage I noticed about WorkSpace is that it can handle heavy poly scenes much better than Model Side.
Put a 500K poly scene in Modeler and it skips and jumps as you try to move about.
Put the same scene in WorkSpace and it reacts normally. |
Post by splinters // Jan 17, 2008, 10:20pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Workspace is great and, when it matches (or exceeds) the model side for features and tools, will be exceptional. Just that bridge though...:rolleyes: |
Post by Bobbins // Jan 17, 2008, 11:31pm
|
Bobbins
Total Posts: 506
|
I do not think it is unrealistic to expect the ability to change from model side to workspace without error, this is actually what the "code(bridge)" is meant to do, is it not?
Not quite. It is unrealistic to expect the ability to change from Model to Workspace without error - all the time. That is based on the wrong assumption that anything you do on one side can be perfectly translated by the Bridge to the other side every time, without error.
NURBS on Model side - no equivalent in Workspace since it doesn't have Nurbs.
LightWorks textures on model side to WorkSpace, not possible since WorkSpace has no knowledge of the renderer.
DX9 materials in WorkSpace to Model side. Nope, Model side does not use DX9 textures.
Bones system from either side to the other - of course not.
In many cases the Bridge has to do a best effort conversion to a roughly similar equivalent on the other side. In some cases that isn't possible at all. Continually swapping between model and WorkSpace will compound the problem as any errors accumulate, usually to the point at which they fail. It's down to user expectation and understanding of what can and cannot be done. Simply expecting the Bridge to cover for you all the time is a recipe for frustration. |
Post by splinters // Jan 18, 2008, 12:52am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
All excellent points Bobbin, and most of these I know from testing tS7. My needs, of course, are quite modest; I don't expect bones to work or DX materials. But there is a strange workflow here where I can actually render and edit Vray materials in the model side. To the new user, this seems a simple workflow, the bridge is meant to work 'invisibly' and I never switch between model and workspace. However, while I am working happily in model, it is like having two memory hungry programs open at the same time. There are obviously some bugs in the bridge and that is what causes the odd hang/crash/material loss etc.
I have taken to turning off the bridge, loading the scene, editing the scene, saving the scene, loading the scene again to 'retrigger' the textures, then turning the bridge on, saving the scene then rendering it with fingers crossed.
When you are dabbling with a project, that is workable, but when someone is paying for your time, it becomes frustrating to say the least. Add to that the fact that I cannot charge for the time I waste loading/reloading etc. It often means I spend (hypothetically) 12 hours on an image that could have been completed in around half that time. I could only charge for 6 hours therefore the rest I am working for free. Grates a little after a while. |
Post by Bobbins // Jan 18, 2008, 1:10am
|
Bobbins
Total Posts: 506
|
So are you saying that as a professional, you have assesed the tool and found it is unsuitable for your work? If that is that the case then you either carry on frustrated and play a waiting game hoping the tool might eventually work the way you need it to (and it may not), or you assess other tools to find one that does meet your needs.
I know you have a vested and emotional interest in trueSpace but that's not a valid reason to battle it against the needs of your work. For my video editing, I had to dump Adobe Premiere after 8 years of use because it was no longer viable, flirted briefly with Liquid Edition only to find that after learning it that was also unsuitable and have now learnt Sony Vegas and settled on it. Do I miss Premiere? Occasioanally. Do I feel I wasted my time with Liquid? Sure. Am I happy now? Yes. |
Post by splinters // Jan 18, 2008, 1:21am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Again, fair point Bobbins but it is not that simple here. I am a professional, but across various disciplines. For visualisation I use LW and model mostly, for teaching the same( (remember that Vray is an option so I don't presume students will have it). For making tS UI elements for Caligari, again, LW and model....so I am happy and not frustrated.
A client saw my Little Cloud work which is a private project I am doing in my own time. It uses Vray for a change and I love the effect. I would struggle i.e. spend much more time, trying to recreate that look in LW.
So, I find myself using my tried and trusted working methods alongside a renderer that does not want to work so well with model side.
Should I go and buy and learn a new piece of software that uses Vray, I don't think so. I am no tS expert but I have spent the last decade getting as good as I am. To think I could (in my free time) learn a new piece of software to the same standard is I can use tS is quite a stretch; I'm not sure what your full time job is but I am a teacher and that is quite hard work (aside from the pretty long holidays). I am trying to establish and develop my contract work but I can't afford to leave a paying day job just yet.
Rock and hard place I am afraid. |
Post by parva // Jan 18, 2008, 1:39am
|
parva
Total Posts: 822
|
yeah, kicking dead horses. The Bridge was the biggest decision error made.
Working from scratch trueSpace would be much further in progress now but OK decisions are made and we must live with it.
Now the question is what's the priority.
Still have to reject tS from my jobs due to it's problems. Except the D3D stuff where I see much potential in (but which hasn't made much progress in the last month from developer side) I see no real advantage I could benefit from.
@splinters - have you tried to render your project with dribble? It should create a similar look like vray or not?
A bit offtopic inside, sorry :D |
Post by splinters // Jan 18, 2008, 2:01am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Dribble crashes out for me at anything over a standard 1600x1200, especially with GI and HDRI on. Seems a little unstable on my system which has no major problems at all other than in tS, before anyone thinks, Mmmm...dodgy PC.
I think it is probably time to close this thread before it turns into a tS bashing from other user's viewpoints, I have a way of working that does not lend itself to using Vray and workspace is not complete enough to replace it just yet. The bridge, which offers a solution, is not without faults. I guess that is simply the long and short of it.
But I am glad I raised the point. No software or company should be beyond question, no bug or workflow issue should be brushed aside if it stops working. Several prominent names from the forum have stepped up and also added their views on this so I hope Caligari will take it seriously for future development. |
Post by Stem // Jan 18, 2008, 4:04am
|
Stem
Total Posts: 199
|
Not quite. It is unrealistic to expect the ability to change from Model to Workspace without error - all the time. That is based on the wrong assumption that anything you do on one side can be perfectly translated by the Bridge to the other side every time, without error. My assumption is based on the advertisement of TS7.5, with its capabilities. My expectations where that I can use all tools advertised within one project.
NURBS on Model side - no equivalent in Workspace since it doesn't have Nurbs.
LightWorks textures on model side to WorkSpace, not possible since WorkSpace has no knowledge of the renderer.
DX9 materials in WorkSpace to Model side. Nope, Model side does not use DX9 textures.
Bones system from either side to the other - of course not.This then directly admits to you selling 2 packages together as one, that are not fully integrated. Do you not think this should be clearly stated on the website?
In many cases the Bridge has to do a best effort conversion to a roughly similar equivalent on the other side. In some cases that isn't possible at all. Continually swapping between model and WorkSpace will compound the problem as any errors accumulate, usually to the point at which they fail. It's down to user expectation and understanding of what can and cannot be done. Simply expecting the Bridge to cover for you all the time is a recipe for frustration.Well, I do prefer to know what is a bug, or what is a direct limitation within the product.
As I have only just recently purchased TS7.5, then I can certainly decide if I want to use the product (with the limitations explained~ probably others), or return it for a refund.
Regards, |
Post by splinters // Jan 18, 2008, 4:58am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Stem, Bobbins has a very 'straight to the point' approach which I rather like but, to a newcomer, it might seem like how you describe. Remember that I am a long time user very commited to the future of the program. The bridge generally does a good job and is a credit to the developers but my specific problem revolves around Vray which is an optional extra. Therefore, if you are not using Vray you may not have difficulties.
If you turn the bridge off you can use model side just as tS6.6 or you could leave the bridge on and experiment with both sides of the program.
This is very much specific to Vray although I am interested in the future of LW in the workspace. Keep hold of your tS licence Stem, it is a great progra with a bright future. |
Post by Bobbins // Jan 18, 2008, 5:06am
|
Bobbins
Total Posts: 506
|
My assumption is based on the advertisement of TS7.5, with its capabilities. My expectations where that I can use all tools advertised within one project.
Don't go reading anything into the advertising that isn't written there. Sure, all the tools claimed on the website are within tS7.x but unless I've missed something (and I've just been up and down the Caligari website pages about tS7 to check before typing this) it doesn't say that the Bridge allows anything and everything, say like using the WorkSpace bones system on Model side metaball obejcts.
This then directly admits to you selling 2 packages together as one, that are not fully integrated. Do you not think this should be clearly stated on the website?
I'm sorry, I might be a beta tester but I'm still just a user like you. I'm not a Caligari employee, I don't sell anything and what I think should or shouldn't be on their website doesn't matter to them. The website is a sales tool and as such any manufacturer of any product will always play up the good points with clever wording to seduce people without making untrue claims or telling you the downside. You ever seen a car manufacturer state in the sales brochure that you have to check the tyre pressures yourself, check the oil level every week and if a bulb blows, you have to change it at your cost? I didn't think so - it may be true but it's not glamorous and you don't gleefully tell people that it's a benefit of your product in large type do you? That's not what marketing is about. |
Post by Stem // Jan 18, 2008, 5:43am
|
Stem
Total Posts: 199
|
First of all, I am not here to attack, I am here to discuss.
Hi Splinters
Stem, Bobbins has a very 'straight to the point' approach which I rather like but, to a newcomer, it might seem like how you describe. Remember that I am a long time user very committed to the future of the program.I have no problem with anyone being 'straight to the point', and actually respect this. I am the same.
I just think clarity is needed on the capability of the bridge and any limitations imposed.
I did not purchase(update) to versions 5.x / 6.x, but as I now have more time for 3d at home, I am currently using and purchasing 3d software again.
With limitations, I have the option to accept or workaround, so not a real problem. It is only bugs that cause me frustration.
The bridge generally does a good job and is a credit to the developers but my specific problem revolves around Vray which is an optional extra. Therefore, if you are not using Vray you may not have difficulties.I have also purchased Vray.
If you turn the bridge off you can use model side just as tS6.6 or you could leave the bridge on and experiment with both sides of the program.To a certain point I can agree, but, as mentioned, it would certainly be better if the limitations where actually documented (even if just on this user forum), at least then it would be more of a case of finding a workaround, rather than trying to find out if certain bridge crossing was a possible bug or direct limitation.
With respect, such programs need to be fun to use.
Even in my work of producing 3d models of molds/ rapid prototype models/surface data, I still enjoy using the software that I use for this, and yes, I need to have workarounds for some, as there are limitations on the best of any software in this area.
Regards,
Steve |
Post by Stem // Jan 18, 2008, 6:02am
|
Stem
Total Posts: 199
|
Hello Bobbins,
Don't go reading anything into the advertising that isn't written there. Sure, all the tools claimed on the website are within tS7.x but unless I've missed something (and I've just been up and down the Caligari website pages about tS7 to check before typing this) it doesn't say that the Bridge allows anything and everything, say like using the WorkSpace bones system on Model side metaball obejcts.I would be interested to read anything on the website that directly mentions the "Bridge". I have/was mainly interested in what was put forward of the capability.
I'm sorry, I might be a beta tester but I'm still just a user like you. I'm not a Caligari employee,I certainly appologize for that assumption from me, I was looking at the "Team Caligari" with (as now) incorrect thinking.
You ever seen a car manufacturer state in the sales brochure that you have to check the tyre pressures yourself, check the oil level every week and if a bulb blows, you have to change it at your cost? I didn't think so - Your putting this forward, I think is for fun, so I will respond in such a manner.
If after looking at an advert for a car from a manufacturer, then going and making purchase from said manufacturer, I would not actually expect to find the tyres flat, no oil or blown lights. After using the car for a while, then I would expect to make maintenance, but attempting to compare that with machine code, well, as I said, I take it as a bit of fun.
My Regards,
Steve |
Post by Stem // Jan 18, 2008, 8:12am
|
Stem
Total Posts: 199
|
The very first 3d modeler I used had a system of 'rooms' - a modeling room for all the PE tools, a Texture room for the texture tools an animation room for constructing animation clips, skeletons and rigging and finally a scene room to put it all together. If you were in the scene room and needed to tweak a texture or some geometry or an animation you had to leave the scene room, go back to the other appropriate room, make your changes and the return to the scene room to carry on.
It seems to me that this is a jargon thing - we can go from 'room' to 'room' or we can go across the bridge. In fact the software I'm referring too could be seen as having a series of Bridges for moving between the rooms. Ultimately, you can't do texture work in the animation room, nor would you expect too. This is a design feature not a failing - and I believe the same can be said for the tS 7 bridge.I did forget to comment on this directly.
Yes, maybe you started as I did with certain 3d apps as 3d studio (DOS) which did have as you mention. We do see other application now such as Carrra 6, which I do have and use, but I see no restrictions between the available ability between rooms(probably a bad comparison from yourself?)
Regards, |
Post by kena // Jan 18, 2008, 10:26am
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
Hello Bobbins,
I would be interested to read anything on the website that directly mentions the "Bridge". I have/was mainly interested in what was put forward of the capability.
...
My Regards,
Steve
the most significant ones I could find were
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?p=38519&highlight=bridge#post38519
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?p=10195&highlight=bridge#post10195 |
Post by Paul Boland // Jan 18, 2008, 12:07pm
|
Paul Boland
Total Posts: 383
|
Post deleted by Paul due to negative feedback received via email.
Sorry about that. |
Post by parva // Jan 18, 2008, 12:21pm
|
parva
Total Posts: 822
|
Personally the new truespace workstyle (workspace side) isn't so different to the "old" truespace.
You have still an icon driven interface and most of the icons are still the same just with a different look.
In the older truespace versions all panels you opend via rightclick (which is still the case in new ts, not sure if this will be changed or not, keep in mind ts7.x is still in development an many things espacially workflow can change),
cluttered the interface.
In ts7.x you have a nice solution for that -> the stackbar. All panel settings are now well sorted. A wise improvement to the old ts versions.
But yeah much tools are missing. Modeling/modifier tools, an integrated Renderer (Lightworks, Vray whatever but it should be a good solution not a buggy 0815).
What I personally miss is a 4view 3d window and no I don't mean 4 3d window but a 3d window you can change into a 4view window. The advantage is the quick maximizing of the window and the smaller size you need instead of 4 real windows. 3ds, Silo2 and Cinema4d have this. |
Post by jamesmc // Jan 18, 2008, 12:33pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Well, look at this way. Roman could have simply abandoned trueSpace at its early stages and all we have would be what is below.
Which btw, was way ahead of its time in capabilities. :) |
Post by transient // Jan 18, 2008, 1:19pm
|
transient
Total Posts: 977
|
We do see other application now such as Carrra 6, which I do have and use, but I see no restrictions between the available ability between rooms(probably a bad comparison from yourself?)
I'd say so, the rooms philosophy in Carrara is it's major downside (along with it's ponderous renderer). Rooms are great to keep things obvious and organized for newbies, but for me they are a major productivity-killer. It's like driving with the handbrake on at times. Other than this, Carrara is a pretty good program, especially when you don't have to pay for it (I mean the current 3dworld offer).
The bridge in TS is also a pain, but at least it's modal (i.e you can have a modeler window and a workspace window open at the same time). I mostly only use workspace, so it's no big deal for me anyway.
My only real beef with 7.5 so far are the v-ray bugs, memory leaks and slow rendering issues. However, I'll wait until the next patch before I consider it rant-worthy.
I also don't like how the stack goes fubar every time I want to render something or change a material. It would be great if at least the v-ray settings and materials were in separate tabs. At the moment it's like fighting some kind of shapeshifting doppleganger - I really don't like it.
_ |
Post by Stem // Jan 18, 2008, 4:49pm
|
Stem
Total Posts: 199
|
Hello again
First, I must apologize to Splinter if the thread as digressed due to my posts, I was only showing my own concerns on the thread topic/ original post.
But as direct replies to my own posts have been made, please allow me to react/ make comment.
Hello jamesmc
Well, look at this way. Roman could have simply abandoned trueSpace at its early stages and all we have would be what is below.I first started using truespace on version 2 (which I purchased), I then followed (upgraded~ purchased) TS through to version 4, I only stopped further upgrades due to the fact I had no time for such hobby.
Which btw, was way ahead of its time in capabilitiesNo, sorry, incorrect statement. At the time I was using 3D studio, and around that time I was beta testing Rhino1. TS was for me revolution for its front end, but capability, no.(with respect)
Hello transient
Carrara is a pretty good program, especially when you don't have to pay for it (I mean the current 3dworld offer).I suppose it is, but I purchased Carrara 6 pro, as I purchased Bryce6, Hexagon2, Modo, and others.
I have now purchased TS7,5, not to complain, but to use and show support.
I am sorry if my posts show any other reason than being concern, I, as mentioned, only post to give my support on concern, and as long as I have time for 3D at home, I will probably moan`n¬groan about TS, but I will still support the product with purchase of any future update.
Regards, |
Post by kena // Jan 18, 2008, 6:42pm
|
kena
Total Posts: 2321
|
I honestly do not think it is moaning, or groaning, to state a program's limitations. I personally have 3Ds Max Pro. I don't use it very much because it is just too darned complicated to learn with my limited time. That's $3000 US that I have basically wasted.
I started TS with version 3, then 4. I had some money problems (no money because I was paying bills) and skipped version 5. Started back up with version 6 and have upgraded from there. (all my bills are paid off)
TS has some very real limitations. If they are not pointed out by someone, then Roman may make the mistake of thinking that his product is going good the way it is.
When people point out the problems/limitations, then he has a wonderful opportunity to make his product better. I'm sure he appreciates it. I know I would if it were my product.
If the bridge is going down in future releases, then I certainty hope that all the functionality from what is now Model space (version 6) will be implemented in the workspace (version 7 and on).
My current work-flow is to do most of my modeling on the Model side and then if I want to use real-time or V-ray, I switch to Workspace side. I will switch back to Model side to modify a metaball or something. Just now, I got an error switching back and had to delete the metaball I was working on because the bridge failed. Right now, this happens. Hopefully in the future, it won't. Hopefully, in the future, lightworks will be ported to the Workspace. |
Post by jamesmc // Jan 18, 2008, 8:06pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Hello again
First, I must apologize to Splinter if the thread as digressed due to my posts, I was only showing my own concerns on the thread topic/ original post.
But as direct replies to my own posts have been made, please allow me to react/ make comment.
Hello jamesmc
I first started using truespace on version 2 (which I purchased), I then followed (upgraded~ purchased) TS through to version 4, I only stopped further upgrades due to the fact I had no time for such hobby.
No, sorry, incorrect statement. At the time I was using 3D studio, and around that time I was beta testing Rhino1. TS was for me revolution for its front end, but capability, no.(with respect)
Hello transient
I suppose it is, but I purchased Carrara 6 pro, as I purchased Bryce6, Hexagon2, Modo, and others.
I have now purchased TS7,5, not to complain, but to use and show support.
I am sorry if my posts show any other reason than being concern, I, as mentioned, only post to give my support on concern, and as long as I have time for 3D at home, I will probably moan`n¬groan about TS, but I will still support the product with purchase of any future update.
Regards,
More 3D work, less posting about what if, could be, which was and can't do. :D
Let's see some work. |
Post by noko // Jan 18, 2008, 8:50pm
|
noko
Total Posts: 684
|
Hi Splinters,
I wonder if you tried this as a work flow.
Model as you always did in modeler with bridge off
Setup the VRay materials in modeler
Turn bridge on and transfer scene into Workspace
Save scene to Rosetta library
Generate new space to clear both WS and modeler sides
Turn off bridge
Reload your scene for render into WS side and render with VRay.
Shutting down and restarting tS as a precaution but shouldn't be needed
Maybe seems cumbersome but if this workes could be done in less then 30 seconds, ahmmm that is if everything transfers over that is :o. Which maybe worth while if this could save you 6 hours or some time.
When rendering VRay from modeler which requires bridge on you are basically doubling your memory requirements for having same scene on both sides. For larger scenes it is easy to get to 1.5gb memory usage, real ram and page ram which seems the breaking point for tS. This method would free up alot of ram for rendering sakes.
Plus when rendering from WS side VRay you maybe see any bad geometry or bad bridge transfers before you have to render, which would be render time wasted if done on Modeler side which may look alright.
I actually think this thread is rather good and after reading it I really don't feel like it is negative, well more positive then negative. Paul's ability and others who use tS in a professional environment is very encouraging for me and feedback from professionals can only improve tS in the long run if looked at.
I too like the bridge, while I spend most of my time on WS side now it is very nice to know that I can still do what I know works on model side if I have to. |
Post by splinters // Jan 18, 2008, 11:27pm
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Hi Noko, long time no hear. At the moment I can do everything in model with the bridge off then save the scene, re-enable bridge then reload; no need to switch to WS at all. A lot of the time this is sufficient but there is that terrible lag when you delete or undo or step through a hierarchy, unresponsive hot keys (need pressing twice or more) due to the bridge being on. If I then render it has been OK but on many occasions this week I have started up tS with the bridge on Auto and (despite turning auto load off) it stalls as it tries to load the last scene. |
Post by Changa // Jan 19, 2008, 12:58am
|
Changa
Total Posts: 187
|
At the moment I can do everything in model with the bridge off then save the scene, re-enable bridge then reload; no need to switch to WS at all.
Splinters, no need to enable bridge at all to make Vray render from Model. Keep it off all the time. I suppose Ts transfers your current scene to WS for rendering in background. It works for me. |
Post by W!ZARD // Jan 19, 2008, 2:55am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Warning! Long rambling post ahead!!;)I do not think it is unrealistic to expect the ability to change from model side to workspace without error, this is actually what the "code(bridge)" is meant to do, is it not?
But as put forward, this change over can cause problems as mentioned. How can this be the user at fault? or unrealistic expectations?
Fair question Stem - I do not mean to suggest the user is at fault - I don't think fault is relevant on the part of either the user or the code writers.
However I do believe that to expect one language to translate to another with 100% correspondence is definitely unrealistic. A language is a code whether it's a spoken language or a computer code and languages have different grammar and syntax. Translation, heck even communication between two people or systems using the same language, is always approximate at some level and therefore subject to misinterpretation and misunderstanding.
For this reason expecting tS model side, written in one code and grammar to communicate without error with tS Workspace is completely unrealistic IMO. It's all very easy to get hung-up on what a software (or any other complex system) 'should' do but I suggest it's not as useful as focus on what the software 'does' do, at least in a general sense.
Most of the time I have a lot of respect for you point of view but I'll take issue with the quoted point. For a start I was talking about MY experience and I say again - learning the icons, where they were and what they looked like was a nightmare compared to other software I've used. If that was my experience I'm sure its one other people have shared. Frankly its more like learning a new language in order to decode the interface than reading "specialised text entries". There are advantages to it as well but my point was that the volume of icons was going up and up with every release. The workspace still uses lots of icons I'm not against icons - there are however other solutions in interface design and thankfully Caligari is adopting some of them (- as well as using icons!)
G'day Burnart, re "Most of the time I have a lot of respect for you point of view but I'll take issue with the quoted point" Thanks on both points in this sentance! :D .
Please also note that I was not referring to you specifically but as a long-time trueSpace user I have heard the 'too many icons' comments before and , with all due respect to my trans-Tasman friend, I don't believe it's a valid complaint and here's why:
I think you've actually hit the crucial point that so many (myself included) so often miss when you said "Frankly its more like learning a new language in order to decode the interface ....". In fact that is exactly what is going on - Learning to use a new program IS learning a new language! One complex system (a software program) is trying to communicate with another complex system (a human end user) who is also trying to communicate with the software - an interface is what translates and allows communication (which must be imperfect by definition) between the two.
Any computer user must learn the new language, how to use the interface, to tell the software what to tell the computer to tell its output (monitor, speakers, printers, drives and so on) to do.
The second point is that the human mind works on language - we don't just have an aptitude with languages, language is what we do - or more accurately the translation of language. As pattern recognition devices the human brain is unbeatable - that's why we see faces at the window that aren't there and why we can all see animals and things in the clouds - our brains look for patterns to associate with other patterns.
When I say banana how many of us take the associations that word makes and instantly start thinking also about the colour yellow compared to those who think of a blue cube?
Our brains actually work faster using icons, visual patterns that are associated with specific meanings (boolean subtract, render to file etc) than they do with the written word - the word banana and this: :banana: both mean the same thing but which one would be the more effective code for "bendy yellow fruit"?
I believe it's this fact that makes trueSpace to be a truly innovative and advanced tool - and sadly, to my mind anyway, so many folk don't even recognise that.
Model side is simply a reworking of tS6.6...no more icons and no less. One word: Global Environment (HDRI,LDRI). :p (Sorry Paul couldn't resist that one!
I am glad I raised the point. No software or company should be beyond question, no bug or workflow issue should be brushed aside if it stops working. Several prominent names from the forum have stepped up and also added their views on this so I hope Caligari will take it seriously for future development. I think everyone would agree with this point - even Caligari!
Your putting this forward, I think is for fun, so I will respond in such a manner.
If after looking at an advert for a car from a manufacturer, then going and making purchase from said manufacturer, I would not actually expect to find the tyres flat, no oil or blown lights. After using the car for a while, then I would expect to make maintenance, but attempting to compare that with machine code, well, as I said, I take it as a bit of fun.
Equally in fun I think both analogies are inaccurate though Bobbins sentiments about advertising are spot on. We have an SUV 4x4 advertisement on TV here where the car transforms into various metal beasts like giant spiders and centipedes to symbolise, or communicate the idea, that the car is very capable at cross country driving ... well I'll leave it that.;)
but I see no restrictions between the available ability between rooms(probably a bad comparison from yourself?) Badly expressed perhaps but I believe the analogy is totally valid. Are you saying there is restrictions between the available ability of the bridge?
Further, if I can't apply a new texture to my model in the 'animation room', or point edit in the 'texture room' can't that be seen as a limitation of crossing from one room to another - or from one side of the bridge to another?
Someone else said why isn't the new Workspace more like the old Model side? I find myself agreeing with that.
Hi Paul. Isn't that like asking why Swahili isn't more like English? You yourself say that "TrueSpace 7 is in fact two different 3D applications trying to act as one with the bridge linking the two.". What's interesting to me is why is that seen as a problem? I look at the bridge and think it's a great innovation that basically gives me two applications for the price of one. Having the ability to wander around the newest parts of the city that are still under development AND being able to take the bridge to the other side of the river where the old city is - how is this a bad thing?
Equally, it is possible to argue that tS 7 is actually 3 different applications - the new one, the old one, and the bit that connects them.
The streets of the new city are fast and wide, the old city has quaint old cobblestoned alley ways that were great in their day but can't handle the traffic of today. When building a new city you don't put in cobblestoned alleys that can't take the traffic, you put in 4 and 8 lane super-highways knowing that somewhere down the track, sooner or later, they won't be able to handle the traffic either.
At least, that's how I see it. In tS I rarely have the bridge on unless I'm specifically using it - when I'm working in the old part of town I don't need a bridge or the new part of town. When I'm in the new part of town the situation is reversed.
Splinters , not surprisingly, has got the right idea. - use the tools available as best suits your purpose while also politely asking for a tool that better suits your purpose = Norms bigger club.
To quote my favourite Australian movie "The Castle" - "It's what you do with it" |
Post by splinters // Jan 19, 2008, 5:02am
|
splinters
Total Posts: 4148
|
Splinters, no need to enable bridge at all to make Vray render from Model. Keep it off all the time. I suppose Ts transfers your current scene to WS for rendering in background. It works for me.
This was my first solution but when you change materials and other settings they are not always updated. Really grates when you see a 2 hour render finish and something went wrong. But I take your point. |
|
