Lightwave vs Imagine
13 messages in this thread
I'm a current (experienced) user of Imagine 3.2 for the PC. There seems to be a
good deal of energy about the release of Lightwave 4.0 for the PC and I would
very much like to move to a 32bit windows program for my rendering.
My question is:
Is there anyone out there with experience working with both Imagine and
Lightwave who could give me a (hopefully) unbiased opinion as to the merits of
each? Ie, Which modeler is better? Which renders faster? What do I lose in
moving to Lightwave from Imagine? etc.
Thanks in advance.
Trevor.
Hey Trevor,
Hopes this helps, but I've used Imagine 3.0 on the Amiga & Lightwave 3.5 on
the Amiga. Imagine always had a modular approach to Modeling. There is alot
of control over geometry in the detail editor. As opposed to layers in LW,
Imagine uses seperate axis for each obj. Your start off w/ an Axis in Imagine,
enter points & Lines, Extrude or lathe them (Simplistic example here, there are
other more complicated functions). Another way is to start in the Freeform
Modeler. I personally prefer Lightwave's metaform, but Imagine's Freeform
kinda splits the object into cross sections that you work on one at a time.
Tedious but alot of control.
Animation in lightwave is more intuitive but Imagine has a timeline feature
that offer alot of control. Hope this helps a bit
Arthur Argote
Digital FX Artist, Tape House Editorial/Digital, NY
Lightwave has a timeline graph that allows you to control keys singlely or
in groups. Check out the motion graph in layout, or the scene panel.
Steve
Image Dynamics, Inc.
Chicago
Yeah I know, but in LW you kinda slip & slide keyframes. Imagine you
discreetly enter in the begin & end frames. The scene panel in LW should be
developed more so that you can slide Keyframes Back & forth.
Arthur Argote
Digital FX Artist, Tape House Editorial/Digital, NY
I'm not exactly sure what you mean. I'm able to adjust keyframes using the
mouse and the motion graph for the selected item (camera, object, light,
etc.) in Lightwave. You can chose to move, add, and delete keys using
buttons above the graph. Very handy, I think.
Oh, I think I understand now….being able to do that in the scene panel.
I agree, it would be cool to be able to grab keys in the scene panel graph
and move them there, as well.
Image Dynamics, Inc.
Chicago
Arthur & others,
I've used Imagine for a couple years now and just couldn't continue working in
Dos, so I ordered Lightwave 4.0 for NT last Friday. If Imagine's modeler is
better at some tasks, then I'll use it, otherwise I would prefer to work in a
multitasking environment that Lightwave NT could provide. (Cheaper option than
buying a PC just for rendering). Give me a couple weeks and I'll have my own
opinion on the merits of each.
Thanks for your input.
Trevor,
Imagine 3.x using run386.exe *will* run under OS/2, Windows 3.1 or NT…I'd
assume it'll work under Windows95 too.
Good luck w/NewTek!
Wayne
The Modeler of Imagine is leaps and bounds ahead of Lightwaves tho I have
not use LW since version 3.1 so that may have changed. I know LW now has a
metaformer which is supposed to be AMAZING so……
Midgard Graphics
Internet address: midgard@met.com
Peter,
I've got a friend with LW and METAFORM…
Imagine has been working on a smooth fracture; Supposed to be on 3.3. Alfonso
Hermida is also working on one that I'll bet will be really something too!
Wayne
Thanx for the info
Midgard Graphics
Internet address: midgard@met.com
>The Modeler of Imagine is leaps and bounds ahead of Lightwaves tho I have >not
use LW since version 3.1 so that may have changed. I know LW now has a
>metaformer which is supposed to be AMAZING so……
This used to be true but I can't say that it is still true today. While
LW/Modeler is diferent in that to make a grouped object you must create in
Modeler and assemble in Layout it does have lots of tools that Imagine doesn't
have. Not only the basic features (which all work) but also includes the ARexx
scripts that just about anyone can write for Modeler.
Imagine has some advantages over LW as well like a more capable Bones feature
but my biggest problem with Imagine is that the rendering quality wasn't there
when compared to LW. The last version of Imagine I have is 3.0 and it still has
bugs from years ago. While I am sure that these problems will be fixed some day
I am not willing to wait around.
>>
my biggest problem with Imagine is that the rendering quality wasn't there when
compared to LW.
<<
Anthony,
Of course, this is a subjective thing, but this is what I've noticed about
rendering quailty between the two. Lightwave gets a user up and running rather
quickly, by having a lot of defaults set as what I affectionately call "dumb
dumb buttons"…that is various presets. Without much tweaking you get a
render that basically looks great. The only draw back is that most images tend
to look similar between artists because the ". With Imagine, the user has to
set and create the look they want. It takes someone longer to get the look
they want, but they can tailer it to what they like. I've seen Imagine output
that looks "cartooney" as well as dead-on phorealistic, to anywhere in between.
In most part, the look is dependant on the user and lets them define their own
style rather than be locked in to someone else's. Just my opinion and take on
things, I could be wrong. <g>
>>
The last version of Imagine I have is 3.0 and it still has bugs from years
ago. While I am sure that these problems will be fixed some day I am not
willing to wait around.
<<
What exactly are you referring to? Specifics would help here in getting them
fixed, if they haven't been already. Many bugs were squashed in 3.2, some well
known by users, others very obscure.
-GreG
Some Day 🙂 Hows it going Tony? Long time no type
Midgard Graphics
Internet address: midgard@met.com