CompuServe Thread

#Wavefront vs. 3DS

23 messages in this thread
#70640From: ROBERT RITGERDec 9, 1993 8:49 PM
To all who have helped me out so far: THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!! The forum messages, mail messages, phone calls and faxes are evidence that this forum is chock full of outstanding humans. I'm confident that I can put on a show that will prove 3DS's capabilities to my firm. I cross my fingers in anticipation of the pending decision. I've said this before, my firm is run by some of the finest minds of the 19th Century.<g> If the firm chooses to bring in an outsider to run Wavefront I'll be posting a note here looking for a new job. Thanks Gary, Jack – Yost Group Thanks to John Ellis Thanks to Greg Pyros Thanks to Rachel Rosenthal Thanks to Roger Cusson Thanks to Martin Foster's lager Thanks to Martha @Synergis Thanks to all @ Autodesk You can bet I'll keep you posted on the outcome. Bob Ritger
#70677From: James M. MurphyDec 9, 1993 11:59 PM
>> Thanks Gary, Jack – Yost Group Thanks to John Ellis Thanks to Greg Pyros Thanks to Rachel Rosenthal Thanks to Roger Cusson Thanks to Martin Foster's lager Thanks to Martha @Synergis Thanks to all @ Autodesk<< Sniff…Sniff.. Well…I tried. <g> Murph'
#71092From: ROBERT RITGERDec 12, 1993 11:12 PM
Murph' Omission from the thank you list is what you get for being the first to help out!<g> Update for all: I put together a small show and managed to give it to about 25% of our main office staff (about 50 people) I had images created by Wavefront and 3DS and simply tested everybody on which images they thought were created by the "high end" system or the "low end". Literally to a man/woman no one could make a distinction! 70% guessed that the 3DS images had to have been created on the high end system. A few people I tested were members of the executive committee and I could see the light bulb come on when they realised that it was impossible to make a distinction. Momentum is starting to shift but I've learned not to get too optimistic. A gig of thanks Murph' Bob
#71132From: Dec 13, 1993 6:03 AM
Bob: That's great news! Just goes to show that we aren't just making it up, it is true! Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] 13-Dec-93 at 3:48a PST
#71216From: James M. MurphyDec 13, 1993 2:33 PM
Bob! >>> A few people I tested were members of the executive committee and I could see "the light bulb come on when" _they realised_ <<< Isn't this inconsistant with the "Peter Principle" that is to say that the term _they realized_ is generally at odds with the description "executive commitee" also that the term "the light bulb came on" would almost never apply to anyone in the Architectural Disipline..as it is applied to "self-realized" Men. <g> Murph'
#71825From: Bill StampDec 16, 1993 9:07 AM
We've been looking at Wavefront and I'm interested to hear that you can't tell the difference between Wavefront and 3D Studio animations. Could you share a couple more details? In particular, was there a dramatic difference between the two platforms as far as production time? I would imagine Wavefront would claim to be able to do things simply that would be very complex in 3D Studio. Do you find that to be true? Also, I wonder if your particular task was or was not a good fit for the power of Wavefront? As an example, you wouldn't buy a silver chalice to drive a nail, but it would be great for pouring libations. Sorry to be so poetic, but hopefully it makes the right analogy for the question I'm trying to ask. Perhaps Wavefront would be incredible for engine pistons but so-so for architectural walkthroughs (?) — Jerry Waxler
#71951From: John TissavaryDec 16, 1993 8:07 PM
Wavefront and the hardware required to run it is very expensive, as I'm sure you are aware. For just a fraction of the cost of a decent SGI, like the Crimson VGXT or Indigo2 you can get a network of pentiums up and running that will give a single SGI a good run for its money on an animation rendering session. While Wavefront has certain advantages over 3D Studio as far as features offered, it is hardly a fair comparison, since the cost is so totally out of proportion. Not only that, but Wavefront's key new feature, kinemation, is still not being shipped (vaporware for non-beta sites). And the Wavefront modeler is not all that easy to use. Many people find non-organic stuff a lot easier to do in 3D Studio, but for organic forms a spline based modeler like Wavefront has is definitely an advantage. And 3D Studio's new renderer is really excellent. I cannot tell the difference in many situations between stuff rendered on Wavefront and 3D Studio. The main difference is when you start using Wavefront's features that make the renderings look way less computer generated. But as far as 3D Studio goes, it's just a matter of folks writing the right IPAS routines. I was just at a large firm that uses Wavefront and SGI's exclusively for their animations, and they're having a bad year, financially, while many 3DS based firms are raking in the bucks. Perhaps the performance/price ratio brings the two closer together when it comes to a buisness/financial situation. Of course there are companies using high-end expensive equipment that do very well, but I think 3D Studio is definitely taking a bite out of the previously "high-end" market. John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#72312From: spencer lindsayDec 18, 1993 1:38 AM
I'll Second that one John, We're currently testing Wavefront/TDI, Alias, and SoftImage software for our SGI boxes and I haven't seen ONE of those software platforms (Running on an Indigo Extreme) beat my DX266 running 3DS3 in a render test. The spline modelling IS cool and I wish that 3DS had refraction mapping, but for rendering speed for the money and bang for the buck, 3D Studio is my tool of choice. El Mundo Loco, Spencer Lindsay Atari Games
#72314From: Paul LindDec 18, 1993 2:49 AM
You're actually saying that you have 3DS rendering faster on a DX2-66 than you do on a R4400-150? I have to tell you that after extensive testing all of the platforms you mentioned render alot faster on comparable settings than 3DS. It's the platform as much as anything else. Now considering the $35,000 price tag, obviously you could compare a number of Pentiums against an Indigo2, but the sheer math calculation speed of the SGI allows it to kick the crap out of all current Intel based chips. Most of the software that you mentioned generally renders well over twice as fast on a R4000 based Indigo2 with comparable ram. I'm really interested in your test data, polygon count, rendering parameters, and speed comparisons. Paul
#72578From: spencer lindsayDec 20, 1993 12:10 AM
Paul, Lemme compile it and get back to you after the holidays. Cheers! Spencer Lindsay Atari Games
#71997From: ROBERT RITGERDec 16, 1993 10:41 PM
Jerry, Glad to meet you at the first meeting of the Philadelphia 3DS Users Group the other night. Martha Lubow at your office knows a lot of the battle I've been embroiled in lately. >>>We've been looking at Wavefront and I'm interested to hear that you can't tell the difference between Wavefront and 3D Studio animations.<<< It's not that_I_couldn't tell the difference it's the people I showed a demo to couldn't tell the difference. I showed them architectural still images not animations for their comments and the difference was not apparent to anyone I showed the demo to. There are a few things that would make wavefront faster for the setup of an animation. Since the software runs on processors that currently outpace the PC platform the previewing, test rendering and similar functions seem faster. This processor speed difference seems to be closing quickly. For specifically architectural animations I can't come up with too many significant differences that would make production time savings dramatic for Wavefront. For animation rendering speed 3D Studio with network rendering has the potential to be faster for me than Wavefront because I have many PC processors at my disposal already. As far as whether or not Wavefront is a good fit for my particular task. It does all that I need to do and way too much more. It costs a %^&^%$# fortune and therefore is not what I have found to be a good value for what I need to do. With network rendering, excellent output, great documentation and this awesome forum, I believe that 3D Studio is the best solution for my firm. For a more detailed comparison Greg Pyros may be able to help you out. He has both packages and could speak about many other types of animation not specifically architectural. I hope Greg doesn't mind me pointing you his way but he really has been able to do a first hand evaluation of the two programs. What do you have in mind that you might entertain shelling out the big bucks for Wavefront? Bob
#72017From: John TissavaryDec 16, 1993 11:43 PM
I don't think Greg has Wavefront. Paul Lind at Anim8 does, however, and I've used both packages, although my Wavefront experience is pretty minimal. I think Wavefront is a bad deal unless you're doing a lot of complex organic modelling, data entry simulations, or (someday soon) character animation that would require inverse kinematics and motion tracking input. For that stuff it's pretty excellent, though I think Alias and SoftImage may be a little better in the modelling and animation department. John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#72030From: Paul LindDec 17, 1993 12:49 AM
John, I was really trying to keep my head down on the Wavefront use, I'm a 3DS fan first!<g> Alias is a great modeler, SoftImage is quickly losing ground. Wavefront's kinemation has a ton of stuff that blows away SoftImage. After comparing them for a couple of months and trying both of them, Wavefront was a clear cut winner. SoftImage seems to be spending all of their time on non-linear editing for the SGI platform instead of improving their animation software. Plus SoftImage support really sucks. But dollar for dollar 3DS is still king in my book, and any further discussion regarding animation packages on this forum will have to be strictly 3DS or keep me out of it.<G> In watching the thread, I'd have to say that the gentleman who originally inquired about this has only one clear cut choice and that is 3D Studio. The Yost Group has the most phenomenal package around, and every day I ask myself why they don't charge $30,000 for it, so I could keep out the competition. For architectural use especially, 3DS is "THE" ticket for the animation environment! Paul
#72037From: John TissavaryDec 17, 1993 1:56 AM
I wasn't aware that Wavefront had caught up to SoftImage so well. I'd heard different from other sources, but that was a while ago, and I don't think kinemation was available. I thought it was still not being shipped, but I guess I was wrong (or did you have a beta release?). While I would kill for some of the advanced features of Alias and Wavefront it's just becoming a ridiculously expensive propostion considering the new alternative: 3D Studio/IPAS. John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#72051From: MARTIN G FOSTERDec 17, 1993 4:17 AM
John, I'd kill for a decent modeler, with the power of Alias….
#72190From: John TissavaryDec 17, 1993 4:24 PM
Now that the renderer kicks butt… => => => R4 wishlist!!!!!!!… #-) John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#72316From: MARTIN G FOSTERDec 18, 1993 2:56 AM
John, I added NURBS for nerds to my wishlist file already. Simultaneous polygon and nurbs models, a la Alias/Wavefront/Softimage.
#72066From: Paul LindDec 17, 1993 8:50 AM
John, We really shouldn't discuss other packages,IMHO, on this forum. The only thing that SI ever had that others didn't was solid inverse kinematics, but the SI IK has always been in sore need of reworking. The IK interafce is lunky and vastly limited. Close to 20 features of IK that are pretty standard even in small PC and AMIGA based packages are non-existent in SI. Additionally, the only thing that SI "really" claims as fame is Jurassic and the guys at ILM used it for a very limited part. Alias was the modeler, Renderman was the renderer, Some Parrallax stuff was used as well as 150-200 custom routines. Soooooo don't believe the hype!<g> Dennis and his crew can afford to use whatever someone decides to give them 100 copies of<g>. We talked to around 75 current SI users and close to 70 said that Wave's new IK kicks the SH*t out of SI. Additionally we were looking at 5 seats approximately $300,000, and SI would barely talk to us unless we were interested in there non-linear editing software. MAybe this is the reason that they have the smallest clientel of the Big 4 or 5 SGI packages.<g> Sooooooo………. 3D Studio is one hell of a program isn't it? Anyone looking at visualization or animation should certainly give a good hard look at 3DS regardless of their budget! The SIG'93 demo reel is nothing short of spectacular and the worldwide expansion of the 3DS market is a true testament to the phenomenal power that this package exhibits! Paul "Die Hard 3DS Fan!"
#72189From: John TissavaryDec 17, 1993 4:24 PM
No doubt. The more I'm exposed to the big SGI packages the more I like what I spent my $3K on!!!! John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#72032From: Dec 17, 1993 1:18 AM
Bob: Actually, we had Wavefront running on our Sun workstations, and tried 3D GIG, also, but after experimenting for a while, found 3D Studio to be by far the best bang for the buck, and also with R3 have the animation and rendering capability of the expensive systems. But it's nice to know that we had tried the other options, and are back here because of choice, not lack of firsthand experience! Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] 16-Dec-93 at 10:51p PST
#72245From: ROBERT RITGERDec 17, 1993 8:25 PM
Greg and all who responded, I have found your responses vital to giving me the resolve to push for what I think is the best way to spend our money in a field where a bad choice on software and hardware could seriously damage the firm in many ways. I think that discussing other software is a good thing to do because it keeps Autodesk responding to its customers, it keeps the forum hangers informed and gives this forum an air of objectivity even though the forum is sponsored by a software company. I am completely satisfied with the response to my original querry and I hope that I didn't alienate anybody for bringing up the question. Bob
#72298From: Dec 18, 1993 1:14 AM
Bob: I don't see any problem, and there was no alienation with anybody here, especially since you obviously came to the 'right' decision! Let us know what the firm decides to do. Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] gpyros@pyros.com 17-Dec-93 at 10:45p PST
#70692From: Yost GroupDec 10, 1993 12:52 AM
Good luck, Bob. As you can see, you've got plenty of support here. – G