#Novice making donut
20 messages in this thread
Anyone: I am a novice with the TOASTER and have been playing with Modeler.
I have been trying to make a donut. I started with the idea of making two
concentric disks and then removing the center disk ("hole") to make the
donut. I thought then I could extrude the result to make a letter "O".
I need help in removing the "hole". Thanks– –\/ |<–
Van,
If you have the 2.0 upgrade check out the tutorials page 121, make the
mug handle fatter,don't use taper then use mirror on the final object. That
should get you close enough. Then experiment…
– Used to work in "REAL" TV!
This trick works in Modeler 3d, which is an 'ancestor' of Lightwave's
modeler. Take a circle. Lathe it around an axis through where the donut's
hole would be. Instant donut. 🙂
Van… I know you got your donut made but here's a tip: If you make a flat
circle by using the sphere or disk primitive you end up with two polygons –
one facing each way. In order to lathe this around a center point, you
must only have one polygon – lathing a double sided polygon only lathes the
points. Use Modeler's polygon info command to deselect one polygon, then
cut the other. You can now select the one remaining and lathe that…
–John `Tips' Gross
I would recomend trying a different modeling program. Lightwave modeler
doesnt seem to be very user friendly to me (IMHO).especially for new users.
Vertex is a fine shareware modeler, its a lot like Caligari and seems like
what LW should be. I finally found a modeler that lets me be very
productive without a couple year learning curve. It comes with many
primitive objects including donuts.
Later
– via Whap!
LightWave Modeler DOES come FREE with the toaster though, and $200-$600 is
a bit much to spend just for a donut (even if it does have little sugary
sprinkles ontop :^).
I have to admit I have never seen Vertex, so you may be correct there, but
if it you've got a Toaster this versatile, it should be able to make Donuts
too. (It is sort of a doughy product :^)
Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom
I bought lightwave and thought the Toaster was some kinda weird dongle.
–Paul
I've been using my toaster now for nearly a year and a half and I too
bought it for its 3D rendering capabilities mostly. Lightwave is a
fantastic product, especially 2.0 .The rendering part of the s/w is by far
the best on the amiga (IMHO) but I just dont like the modeler.
To me the best part of a s/w is how intuitive it is. You shouldnt have to
be constantly refering to a manual, or be on the programmers level to be a
able to get the best results. Theres always many ways of going about any
task, some are just easier than others.
I honestly dont see how anyone can use Imagine ( I know Im asking for it)
or turbo silver. I tried many times over the years to get in that mind set
but never could. I always liked sculpt and caligari.
To each his ( or her ) own… Try the Vertex demo Though, complete vers. is
only 35.00 and is worth many times that.
– via Whap!
John,
You are right, Imagine is a joke. The only time I ever went to the
Lightwave manual was to animate the "Under Water" surface going across a
pool bottom. It's not fair what the Imagine users have to go thru to get
something simple. It is exaclty like comparing WorkBench 1.2 on a 500,
with WB 2.04 on a '040.
I had to send Toaster back for a mod, so I bought Imagine to finish a
project. It took 3 1/2 hours to get the same result as Lightwave did in 8
minutes! Again, no referencing the lightwave manual and going bonkers with
the Imagine docs.
–Paul
John,
different strokes for different folks, I guess. I personally have the
same mindset as most programmers, and some interfaces or functions often
feel natural to me because I see how and why the programmers would have
made them that way. It's some kind of programmer's intuition, although I'll
be the first one to admit it's a rare trait.
Blaq!
I understand your position, as I too am an old programmer.
The major problem with packages that have this kind of interface is that
while they are GREAT for the programmers/tinkerers out there, this kind of
interface will drive the majority of the market for the product crazy.
It used to be that the people who used computers were mainly techno-weenies
like you and I.
These days, a majority of the users are interested in using the computer as
a tool (and ADDITION) for their current profession/hobby.
The standardization of interface among Mac programs is second to none, and
is a beautiful example of the kind of standardization that ALL platforms
should adopt. I am not saying that the Amiga should look like a Mac
Graphical User Interface.
I am just saying that GOOD programs will cater to the end user (the person
who is paying for the dev. of these product), rather than just doing whats
easiest for the programmer.
The end result of putting out software that is non-standard is frustrated
users, and a re-affirmation of the widespread (but fallacious) belief that
the Amiga is just a toy.
Having used Mac, Windows, and Amiga GUI's, I cannot understate the
importance of STANDARDIZATION of interface. It makes life MUCH easier for
the end-user, and results ingreater productivity, and greater satisfaction
in the platform of choice.
I am saying this only out of concern for the Amiga platform, and its
continued existence. There are too many people out there who would like to
see the Amiga die. If we continue to see these non-standard GUI's no one is
going to choose the Amiga, just becqause it is such a poain to learn the
the dozens of interfaces used by different Amiga software.
Keep On Toastin', and 'Imagine' the possibilities,
Erik Flom
Yes, standardization of GUI's does make life a little easier, but who are
we to say that one particular GUI is the ONLY GUI that everyone should use?
I've seen it happen many times when standardization is adopted at the
expense of innovation. Sure, there are some parts of the interface that can
be accepted as standard, but lets leave the door open for something better.
John – K7KB (via Whap!)
I have no problem with innovation, but let me give you some examples:
Why can't file requesters sort their items the same way – some put
directories first, some don't. Some allow double-clicking, some don't. Some
automatically sort their entries, some don't. With the Mac and Win
iterface, this is standard. When a program does vary from the standard, it
augments the standard requester, it doesn't replace it with its own
'better' standard. (True, we can blame Commodore for this, but it seems
that programmers SHOULD use the ASL library regardless of wheteher or not
they 'like' the interface) The Toaster is a perfect example of this
discontinuity of interface guidelines.
Another example is Imagine v1.1. Here is a great program, but what do they
do? They can't even put the 'Load' and 'Save' options in the first menu
item! They change hotkey functions depending on what part of the program
you are using! They autoamtically accept data and move to the next field on
some requesters, but DO NOT on others. There is no rhyme or reason to their
interface, and makes a great program very hard to use for the person trying
to make money with the software.
I am not speaking of myself, but of the PETENTIAL Amiga users out there who
might try the machine, only to forsake it because of the fact that they
have learn a new interface for every different piece of software they use.
Again, I would not discourage the advancement of the standard interface
(Steven Stuntz's replacement for tha ASL File Requester is a PERFECT
example of improving upon a standard. It is called MFR [Magic File
Requester] and is available for download from CIS.). I would just like to
see every developer try to consider the predicament of the novice user who
is familiar with the Amiga, but not thier application.
Anyway, this is going to happen all over again inthe next few yaers as we
move towards systems whihc can accept input from a variety of sources
including: keyboards, mice, 3D-mice, natural speech recognition systems,
pen and handwriting recognition, and even optical image recognition.
True, we have alot to look forward to.
Erik,
Sounds like a message I would write….. right on! People may not like
the Mac or Windows menus and requesters, but at least they are consistant!
BTW can anyone out there make a menu column that lists the current open
applications and allows you to select one and you would be taken right to
it? Also have this menu column appear in the menus of any 2.0 compliant
application?
-Steve Sponagle
I HAVE seen a pop-up menu utility that lists all current tasks and allows
you to switch immediately to that application.
I got it from one of the other Amiga SIGs around here – sorry, can't
remember the name of the file. I have a Toaster in my A3000, and I noticed
an increase in undocumented crashes after installing it, thus I haven't
used it since.
My problems might not even have been related to this util, so it could be
worth checking out.
It gives you a pop-up window – like the task switcher in windows. It
doesn't support the menu, unlike the Mac.
Keep On Toastin'
Erik Flom
Better watch out . . . I made a disparaging comment about the Whap! demo,
and my rear end is still raw from the verbal chewing out it got.
I agree completely with your comments re: Imagine and its lack of intuitive
interface.
I mean, the least they could do is document all 'power-key' and keep them
performing the same actions in all the different editors.
But NOOOOOOOOooooooo, they could even keep the 'Load' and 'Save' in
left-most menu – which is pretty much a standard for Graphical User
Interfaces on MOST platforms.
After working with it for a few weeks, I can see it has many powerful
features, but I would never have found half of them if I hadn't gotten 'The
Imagine Companion' by Dave Duberman.
And here is parfect example of the problem I have with these low-end
packages:
The Imagine manuals did not have indexes on them (making it very hard to
use the reference manual, unless you knew what to look for), so Dave
included a PD compilation of indexes that someone had compiled. This was
great! It made the manuals much easier to use. BUT, did Dave include an
index in his book? NOOOOOO.
Imagina and the companion book are very useful, it is just unfortunate that
they look like packages designed a few years ago before anyone realized how
important the user interface really IS.
Pardon me while I duck behind this FLAME-retardant shield . . . . .
Keep On Toastin'
Erik Flom
Erik,
Have you read UNDERSTANDING IMAGINE 2.0 by Steve Worley? That's the book
to get — it's everything the other ones aren't, and more — and it has a
COMPLETE index.
Pete
Doesn't the LW modelor have a Toroid Primitive? if so USE IT,it'll give ya
an almost perfect Doughnut looking shape MIDGARD GRAPHICS, CREATORS OF
QUALITY ANIMATION.