#R5 Wishlist
24 messages in this thread
Jonas:
Here are 10 ideas for R5. Another batch will follow shortly.
1. Gotta have 3DS able to run on the Alpha AXP under Windows NT. At the very
least a rendering engine for this platform.
2. Eliminate the need for Liquid Speed by optimizing the base package to run
as fast as it possibly can.
3. Combine the Shaper/Lofter/Editor into one modelling environment. I wanna be
able to see my modelling as it happens and where it happens. No more flipping
back and forth.
4. Support the import of 2d .DXF files as a 3D mesh. An example would be a
building facade. I'd like to be able to import the whole facade like one big
flat billboard and apply materials to the planar faces. I don't want to have
to model or loft anything first. Perhaps there is a way to do this already and
I would love to hear about it.
5. Include a sunpath calculator like the one in AutoVision or better yet
GregP's version.
6. Better snap control while modelling. The environment that I use now offers
a list of possible snap codes all available if you hit a point and hold your
mouse. A menu appears so that I can select endpoint, midpoint, centroid, point
on a line, center of an arc, point normal to a line, point tangent to a curve
and a couple of others. What I would like to do is simply move one thing to a
point exactly adjacent to another without having to know any dimensions. I'd
like to be able to move a window to the midpoint of a wall without jumping
through any hoops.
7. Include a mapping randomizer to flip and rotate maps thus eliminating the
'perfect wood grain' or 'perfect marble pattern' look. I'd even take it as far
as including a process that could alter a map via parameters similar to ones
available for SXP materials. This process could alter one original map to have
a user defined # of alternates and then apply a tiling pattern using these
alternates in random fashion.
8. Ability to see at least a gray scale view of texture map during placement.
9. Put a number inside each of the little color squares for selecting objects
by color and/or number. Currently if you pick two object colors that are
similar and therefore next to each other on the chart its a pain to figure out
which is which.
10. Encourage dealers to bundle similar IPAS routines with 3DS to offer
customers the "Architectural PAK" which might have some Yost, Pyros,
Digimation, Schreiber, etc. routines (don't forget Mark Meier's lighting
utilities) which architects find useful. Bundle this all up for a discounted
price of course. Similar bundles should be encouraged for the character
animators, forensic animators, etc. Then I could feel like I bought one package
from one place and I've got one guy to call if I got trouble.
11. Gotta have 3DS able to run on the Alpha AXP under Windows NT.
OK, so I lied about there only being 10 items. One is real important to me.
Bob
got 'em
Jonas,
since when has a new wishlist period started? I thought it ended back on April
1st ….
Hi Martin,
<< wishlist over..? >>
It is over.. however, as a courtesy, I'll keep grabing them anyways. Most of
the recent wishes are repeats but we've gotten at least one new one..:-).. With
200 new members joining ASOFT daily over the last 3 months, many were not here
in April.
jonas[adesk]
Jonas,
>> It is over.. however, as a courtesy, I'll keep grabing them anyways.<<
thanks for the clarification. I was worried that I might have to resubmit
wishes I sent in for the April deadline. Now I won't bother 🙂
April 1, Martin was the deadline for r4 wishes. I would take it that the
starting date for r5 wishes would be April 2 or after such time as we learned
that some of the r4 wishes were not included in r4.
>>3. Combine the Shaper/Lofter/Editor into one modelling environment.
One of the things I like about 3DS over Topas is that the shaper, lofter, and
editor are separate. Helps keep things in order for me when I work. Seems
you'd like working in the Topas environment. Maybe you should try Topas rather
than try to get 3DS to emulate it. I feel having it separate is an advantage,
so I cast one vote to counter yours <G>
I like the rest of your suggestions, especially #2 about LS. It really frosts
me that Vibrant has such a monopoly over Yost and forces him to produce a slow
poke cripled product just so Vibrant can bring it back up to speed by selling
an accessory. Note that this is just my opinion and perspective of the LS
issue. It is a non-technical perspective.
Don:
With the current ability of splitting the screen into plan view/side
view/camerea view ,etc I believe that the combining of the Shaper/Lofter/Editor
would be more efficient for how I like to operate. I use a solid modeller now
that provides this environment but its editing tools suck. The part I enjoy is
when someone looks over my shoulder to figure out what I'm working on. Lines
everywhere, it looks like a mess I suppose.
The LS idea was posed by another forumite but it was one of those things that
bothered me when I first got 3DS. It is a strange thing to describe but I
think there is an analogy in the DOS memory manager market. Quarterdeck saw a
soft spot in DOS and filled it with a worthy product. Microsoft didn't put
fliers in their software boxes to offer an additional third party memory
manager did they? With the migration to Windows95 and NT 3.5 all DOS memory
managers will start to die. Quarterdeck will have to find another soft spot.
I think LS should be assimilated into 3DS and let Vibrant find another soft
spot in 3DS.
Bob
>> The part I enjoy is when someone looks over my shoulder to figure out what
I'm working on. Lines everywhere, it looks like a mess I suppose. <<
I get a kick out of this too. Its the only time I really feel like I hold a
special knowledge — a real ego boost when someone looks at my screens and
says, "wow, that looks really complicated!" (if they only knew!) 😉
— James — MAP —
Don, you're totally wrong about Vibrant "forcing me" to produce a slow poke
product… We made 3DS as fast as we knew how to make it, given our
understanding of display technology at the time. They came in and found some
ways ON THEIR OWN to make it go faster. If we knew how to do what they did, we
would've done it, believe me.
– G
Yes I know, Gary. We've had this discussion before. I'm not saying Vibrant
"forced" you to do anything technical. When I said Vibrant forced you to
produce a slow poke 3DS I meant your total package of your part of the package
+ the inline driver. I'm saying that they we're in a unique position to
develop a product for 3DS and for some reason rather than produce a top notch
product (the vibrant driver) for you they produced a mediocre product for 3DS +
a means to accellerate the video output with LS which is sold separately
thereby having a top notch product in the combination of the two.. IN MY
OPINION, it appears that Vibrant was in a unique position to do this. I don't
see it as a technical reason. I see it as a marketing reason. And, IN MY
OPINION, it is a bad marketing decision. The idea of a dual dongle is just
ludicrous to get 3DS to perform at 100% but thats another issue.
Since the LS product requires the Vibrant video driver to reach top performance
it would seem that Vibrant's development of LS has something to do with using
it in combination with the inline driver. It also seems peculiar that when
using LS in combination with other independent drivers such as Panacea that LS
actually cripples 3DS performance. If LS has nothing to do with the driver in
operation then why this discrepancy in speed data?
In this case, Gary, I stand by my opinion that a wiser marketing decision would
have been for Autodesk to offer LS as a non product within the 3DS package.
Autodesk should have done everything possible to arrange this with Vibrant
prior to releas of 3DSr3. Believe me when I opened my r3 box and saw the ad
for LS after hearing about the wonderful inline driver to solve all those
driver problems from r1 and 2 I was immediately disappointed.
Again, I repeat, I don't blaim you for producing a less than top speed product
as in "slow poke" because it appeared this had only to do with the vibrant end
of things. But, if I had hired a sub to develop something for my client and
the sub gave me a 50% product for them and then went to my clients and offered
to sell them the remaining 50 % at the time my client received his cripled
version, do you think my client would buy the story that something wasn't
ethical? I don't blaim you and I don't blaim the technical guys at Vibrant as
the LS product and the Vibrant drivers are first rate. I just think its bad
marketing and makes you look bad. If you are indeed responsible for the
marketing decisions, then I stand corrected and shame on you. You should have
insisted that LS be a part of the package. I know I'm not making any friends
here but I think 3DS is a top gun product and I want it to continue to be that
way. I depend on it for my livelihood and want to support you and Autodesk in
any way that makes it more successful even if I have to sound off once in
awhile.
Regardless of how it looks, it certainly didn't happen the way you think. The
Vibrant folks were kind enough to give us the in-line driver technology to
replace/suplement the archaic ADI method that 3DSr1 and r2 users had to put up
with. About 3 months away from shipping (WAY beyond the date for freezing the
code in the final QA process), they had an idea that we helped explore with
them re how to accellerate the process. Even though we couldn't add it to the
code at that point, they went ahead with doing an accellerator because I begged
them to at least make the technology available to our customers who needed the
extra speed. They were reluctant to do it, since they didn't think that the
financial returns were worth the effort. But my insistent pleading with them
eventually wore them out.
– G
I know this is against AD policy to comment but I'm going to ask the big
question anyway: Since you did go to bat for us and convivced Vibrant to
release the technology for all our benefits why didn't you get ADESK to just
acquire the technology along with the Vibrant inline driver as part of the
package? I think this is what others don't understand and I know it is the
root of my questioning.
When you say that Vibrant "gave" you the inline driver. Do you mean as an
altruistic act? If so, then I _humbly_ stand corrected. I was always under
the impression that Vibrant was contracted to do this for 3DS as a part of your
team so to speak.
Ultimately, all of us want 3DS to perform at 100% full speed out of the box.
LS has been proven to be an asset, a money maker, and worthy investment. It
should be part of the package as it involves the basics of all 3DS operations.
I give you my word that the Vibrant gift of the inline drivers to my group was
an extremely altruistic act. I can't give you the particulars, but you are
correct in that if you knew them, you'd be quite humbled.
Regarding the issue of why Autodesk didn't go out and buy the Liquid Speed
technology, the same can be said of any new technology a 3rd party ISV develops
for 3DS. LS is just an add-on that increases performance one way, like
Optimize is an add-on that increases performance another way. No difference.
Why should Vibrant be penalized for doing it their way?
– G
>>I give you my word that the Vibrant gift of the inline drivers to my group
was an extremely altruistic act.<<
Then I am truly humbled and apologize to any and all who took offense to what I
previously said.
>> LS is just an add-on that increases performance one way, like Optimize is
an add-on that increases performance another way. No difference. Why should
Vibrant be penalized for doing it their way?<<
Good example but I still disagree. Optimize is a way of reducing the mesh size
for speedier rendering. One could actually do this by hand too. Therefore it
is just a tool for easier mesh modification. LS on the otherhand could have
been licensed by 3DS-ADESK for part of the package and I doubt if this would
have penalized Vibrant. If any thing it would have made their life much easier
as they would not have to be in a position of marketing, they would have their
product in all the hands of every 3DSr3 owner and they would have avoided this
discussion too. <G> You did say they wern't really interested in marketing LS
anyway so it would still seem to me that Vibrant, Yost, Adesk and ALL us users
would have benefited from the inclusion of LS. As you are aware, my studies of
last winter clearly showed that unless you were using ADI drivers, or a
currently obsolete video card, LS was a very smart purchase for anyone using
3DS on a time schedule deadline and typically models with more than 30,000
faces in the editor.
When did I say that Vibrant wasn't interested in marketing LS? They're in the
business if building and marketing software accellerators, and LS fits into
their business model as well as anything else they do.
I don't buy your argument in your last message. I still believe that my
analogy between Optimize and LS holds.
– G
Robert,
Re: Item #4, importing 2D .dxf as 3d meshes.
You can currently do this right now. The trick is that you must create 2D
closed Polylines in AutoCAD and send them out in the .dxf file.
3D Studio will automatically "cap" any closed area that comes from AutoCAD,
i.e. closed Plines, circles, etc.
Another trick we've used when you have some type of feature "cut into" a larger
surface is to elevate the "cut" feature above a single polygo representing the
larger surface. For example, brick highlights, in the middle of a stucco wall;
elevate the polygon that represents the brick pattern, ever so slightly above a
single polygon that represents the entire stucco wall……kinda like hanging a
picture on a wall. It avoids having to cut "holes" in a large surface in
AutoCAD.
Hope this helps,
-Jeff
Jeff:
AutoCAD, eh? I was afraid of that. Suppose the 2D .dxf file were created in
some other package. Could the file be brought into AutoCAD and converted to
closed Plines? What makes a Pline different from a regular line? I'm gonna
have to assume that the CADD software I use (GDS) creates .dxf files which do
not maintain whatever properties make up an AutoCAD Pline. My .dxf files
import o.k. but I don't get the automatic caps you've mentioned. Thanks for
your note, you've given me a couple of ideas.
Bob
Oh, I was assuming you used AutoCAD….. Yes, if you import the .dxf files
into AutoCAD (or AutoCAD LT) you could join them into polylines.
Polylines are essentially a "line string". That is, a group of individual line
segments that are handled as one line object with multiple vertices. Kind of
like a SHAPE in the 2D SHAPER.
There are many other cad packages that will "define" a polyline within the
dxf file format. Do you have some sort of "polygon" object in GDS? That might
help out. Do circles come into 3DS with caps from GDS .dxf exports?
Also, in your 3ds.set file, there is an option to have automatic "closed area"
capping turned off. Make sure this option is turned ON (it usually is by
default).
Good luck,
-Jeff
Jeff:
To convert lines into polylines in ACAD sounds like a manual process, yes?
GDS creates closed loops but they seem to show up in 3DS as broken at one
vertice. I'll re-verify this. I'll also check my 3ds.set file but I don't
think that I messed with the default value for automatic capping.
Thanks again.
Bob
>> Jeff:
To convert lines into polylines in ACAD sounds like a manual process, yes?
GDS creates closed loops but they seem to show up in 3DS as broken at one
vertice. I'll re-verify this. I'll also check my 3ds.set file but I don't
think that I messed with the default value for automatic capping.
Thanks again.
Bob <<
GDS may be creating polylines but not doing an official "close" on them. You
should probably just import the DXF into the shaper and weld the vertices.
Assign the shape and then go to the editor for at Create/Object/Get_shaper.
This will give you the same result as a direct DXF import except it wil let you
fix little problems like open polylines.
Terry Gilbert
Forcade & Associates
Terry:
/_____________From your message_____________\\
GDS may be creating polylines but not doing an official "close" on them. You
should probably just import the DXF into the shaper and weld the vertices.
_______________________________________________
This is what I've been doing, pretty tedious. I've got a few things to try yet
so I'll give this another few shots.
Bob
/* To convert lines into polylines in ACAD sounds like a manual process, yes?
*/
Don't mean to be rude or anything, just thought I'd add that there are plenty
of routines to automate this in the forum… out of the box, yes it would be a
manual process, but there are LISP routines to do this in several ways. -dave
PMFJI,
Amen to the NT port… We just installed the windows NT server 3.5 to a dual
Pentium P5-90 (Giga-Byte GA-586ID PCI-EISA- this little dude will handle up to
.768 gig of RAM (DROOL) 🙂 ) and WOW! a former four hour crunching routine on
an "old" (9 mos.) 486/dx2-66 took less than 6 min.
I know that there are a lot of other factors involved, but our clients were
amazed and we were pleased. The clients even let on they would allow a little
margin for this kind of increase (to all you system VARS out there: wouldn't
that be a nice change).
I do not know whether the 3dsx algorithims will benefit this much but it
certainly can't hurt. I have heard the same co. has an upcomming 4 processor
board!! (drool)
JD