CompuServe Thread

Charles, Imagine is not the only program I use in my production work, it is simply the principal program I use for animation and rendering. I use Animation Master, some of LW's object processing features, and image processors as well. The fact that I augment much of my work in Imagine with other tools probably has a lot to with why I've been content to stay with it as my renderer. (And I don't mean this as sarcasm.) Since I come from the Amiga, which has always been a multi-tasking system, I am used to a very modular approach, and prefer to chose the best tool for each of the different jobs in my production work. I think the idea of having one program do everything probably developed in pre-Windows days, when, on the PC, you had to completely shut down another program before you could use any other. But I don't think I would want Impulse to try to put all the other stuff in Imagine that I currently do with other programs. I'd prefer that they focus just on making Imagine's rendering, animation, and perhaps also modeling features better. However, from a marketing standpoint they'd probably be unwise to heed this advice, because it seems many users are still looking for a panacea in one program. (I don't mean to suggest that you are one of them though.) I haven't spent enough time with either LW or 3DS to offer a truly objective comparison, but in the final analysis I don't think it makes much difference what program you use (as GreG and others have already said). Most 3D packages seem to be heading down roughly the same paths of development, with just slight deviations in emphasis, like game development, or broadcast effects, character animation, etc. I don't think anyone could really make an objective judgement about which program is *better* than the others. Each one has its own strengths, and your choice ought to be based on what you want to emphasize in your work. Some of the work I've seen done with Imagine looks just as good as some SGI stuff. But this doesn't really matter to me, because the point is that I can get Imagine to do what *I* want it to do, with a little assistance from a few other programs. There have, however, been times when my enthusiasm for Imagine has ebbed. My frustration with the program probably reached its peak just before 3.0 came out, because, at that time, I felt Imagine's animation features had gone too long without any major improvement. The biggest problem for me was the lack of smoothing on the keyframes, and brush tacking. Imagine 2.0's simple linear interpolation on movement just wasn't cutting it anymore. The animation looked jerky and unsatisfying, and unsuitable for nice character animation. But once 3.0 came out with the spline interpolation on keyframes, brush tacking, and Bones (which actually worked(!), albeit difficult to set up) to boot, my wavering faded away. It might seem odd to have put so much stock in such seemingly insignificant features. But there was just *no* practical way around the clunkiness of the animation in 2.0, without the spline interpolation. I experimented with combinations of paths following paths, and other such nonsense to try to smooth out the motion and morphing, but all of my efforts were futile. Although, at the time I was also captivated by things I saw in other programs like lens flares, glows, and such, in retrospect, it was the spline interpolation that was the deciding factor. Looking back on it now, it seems strange that my whole opinion of the program could have hinged so completely on simply these minute features. But that seems to have been the case. Although Imagine's spline interpolation probably isn't as versatile as some other programs, it has proven more than adequate for my needs, so far. And, for me, the addition of this and brush-tacking levelled Imagine with LW and 3DS in terms of its *basic* functionality. Since then, it has simply been a matter of refinement. <Forgive me for digressing a moment to direct a suggestion to Impulse>. I know many folks would put the soft shadows at the top of their list of improvements, but as far as I'm concerned the repairs on the tacked altitude maps is most important, because it is fundamental to getting my animated objects to look right. And there are no work-arounds (like light arrays for soft shadows) to replace it in the meantime. There are to be sure, other improvements needed in Imagine's fundamental structure, but it has just about reached the point where I can do everything I want with the program. Although Impulse may be planning a big paradigmatic shift after 4.0, I think, with just some slight fine-tuning to the current program, I could could be content with Imagine's capabilities for quite some time. I've only recently begun to feel comfortable enough with Imagine to the point where I feel I can control its output to get almost *exactly* what I want. For users who are concerned about losing a learning cycle, I would say the knowledge you gain by learning any 3D program will be valuable. Most of the skills and concepts will translate to other programs. After my experiences with Imagine, other programs like 3DS and LW were remarkably easy to pick up. Since Imagine is one of the more difficult to use, it makes an excellent `trainer'. One of the things that I think gives Imagine its solid feel is something that I initially regarded as a drawback in the program, its emphasis on triangular polygon modeling. Years ago when I first bought Imagine everyone was saying that polygonal modelers were archaic, and that splines or multilateral polys were soon going to take over the world. But look at the results of the Topaz (spline) vs 3DS (polys) battle. Ideally of course I think a user should have access to all methods of modeling, which is why I've adopted AM as a new tool. But when it gets right down to discreetly massaging geometry, Imagine is still king of the desktop. Today I think you could make a better case that splines will probably be the wave of the future, because they are scalable, and eventually may work better as 3D clip art. But I still have skepticism about this, because I see inherent limitations in splines. And until the MAC-ESCHER 3D clip revolution happens, I'm pretty sure I'll want the solidity that comes from Imagine's comprehensive geometry editing features. All those point, edge, and face mode commands, give me the feeling that if anything is wrong with my model, I can simply *muscle* it into shape. Humanoid was a good example of this. The models were by no means easy to to build, but at the time I created them there was no other program available with the same discreet controls for detailed manipulation of points that Imagine had. And for the most part, I think this is still true today. Triangular polygon modeling is the lowest common denominator in 3D geometry, and although you may be able to render and create some types of objects with splines and multilateral polys more easily, there will almost always be times when you'll want to come back to tri-polys. Another thing that I think makes Imagine feel powerful is that it doesn't lock you into any one course of action to achieve the result you need. Yes, the program is a bit of a hodgepodge right now, but you know the saying, `there's at least two ways to do almost anything in Imagine.' And the fact that I've found work-arounds to solve most of the `problems' in software over the years bears this out. I even figured out a nasty work-around in 2.0 to simulate bones. That's how I created all the hand poses for Humanoid. This is just one of many testaments to Imagine's versatility. The final thing (I'll mention for now) that has me stoked about using Imagine is the P90. I can see now that Imagine was made for a machine like this. All the little things that gnawed at me on slower machines, just zip by virtually unnoticed on the P90. And that just adds to the feeling of elation that I now get from using it. So there you have it. I hope this is helpful, and welcome your (or anyone else's) reactions, or differing views. – Tim