The future of new modeling tools

[lauramelissa]

modeling tools of today are more sophisticated and more related to the artist without much technicality, wings 3d tools are really great and functional but lack ease of use, this is not to minimize the application but to make the app better and beautiful at the ayes, the problem is there are functions that require many clicks steps to execute, possible be posting ideas and tools that can enhance wings 3D and make it popular.

- wings 3d need a foundation for donations for user to help developer integrate new feature or make part of the app better.
- participate in the Google Summer of Code this can attract new developers.
- what make Sculptris so popular at the level to compete with zbrush
the ease of use and the apperance of the software, people like cool and functional application...
- here are some new tools behaviour that can be implemented in wings 3d:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...AUSVwoUBiM
3D sketchin in the space:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...bzQ_yXEEbE
here you can find the experimental tool and tutorial:
http://www.gunayorbay.com/tutorial/
direct link to App: http://www.gunayorbay.com/tutorial/Subdi...deling.zip
F2 fast face generator: http://vimeo.com/57686760#at=0
in this thread you can find the benefit of the addon: http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?277242
Modo pen tools: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N1l4lUkUFg
this is a fast way of generating new faces :
http://www.holgerbiebrach.com/movies/retopo_demo_01.mov
BubbelEd: this is an example of functional and nice UI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...mXvjOYRsiU
Those are reference for ideas on how to make wings 3d tools more artist friendly i really like wing 3d it has everything to be a more powerful modeler

[ggaliens]

Artist tool ... or analyst tool ?

Wings3D for me is not studio level application ... for me ... it is a pinch hitter application. Deep in many areas ... without superficial polish. I would not want it any other way.

If you have used this tool enough ... you very quickly come to understand that NOBODY knows what it is really capable of ... because of the way workflows are constructed. There are too many permutations. Too many possibilities. The tool set is incredibly extensible ... and despite the fact that core development is in a long release cycle, folks are still getting on an experimenting with new tools for later inclusion of plugin releases.

Many skilled modellers use it in that capacity ... as just another tool in their arsenal, but is usually recognized as a very strong tool for cleanup and hard to make msh adjustments.

[oort]

lauramelissa,
Thanks for your input...

I looked at the videos. The problem with all but one of those tools is that they are creating models with faces and Wings3D requires modeling with a closed mesh.

BubbelEd features is the only one that would have any chance at all of being added. It looked neat...not sure what one would gain by adding those features. I couldn't find the website for BubbelEd to get more info on what can be made with it.

If I remember right it used to be possible to donate to Wings3D but that didn't happen much. I think YafaRay has a foundation but that has not increased the activity on its development...

Being part of GSOC would be good but I think the developers have to be involved with it and they don't have much time to do what needs to be done with coding Wings3D.

Wings3D is very popular due to its ease of use so I am surprised you do not find it easy to use... Sculptris can handle many more polys than Wings3D can so Wings will never be able to do what Sculptris can. That being said you can do some neat stuff with Wings3D > Tools > Sculpt.

oort

[micheus]

Differently of those softwares, Wings3d is coded in Erlang. The amount of people coding in this software language is very small compared to any C compliant language. I don't believe that would be easy to "attract new developers".

Currently, how many people are coding for Wings3d? I can think only about two people: dgud and optigon.
Oort, ggaliens and I, we are just sporadic contributors.
Each one producing at their own time; what think to be useful, interesting or was asked for someone.
I don't believe we can say that Wings3d has a developer team.

I think that is because of all these things that Wings3d is growing slowly.

That's my thinking (my words)

[boredom]

Those tools look nice, but they're hardly central to "the future of modeling." There have always been many different workflows to achieve the same result, and those videos, while cool, don't make a strong case for any specific addition to Wings3D. It's all pretty vague (e.g. Sculptris is "easy to use" and you can draw polygons in Modo. Neat! But what does it have to do with Wings3D?).

I disagree with the implications of this quote in particular: "modeling tools of today are more sophisticated and more related to the artist without much technicality." Wings3D already has a great balance of technicality and artistry. That's arguably its main selling point, and why people still use it today despite the slow development. I don't think I'd continue to use it if it lost the technical merits and became an "eyeball precision" kind of program like Sculptris. Being artist-friendly is one thing, but downplaying the technical aspect would be a huge mistake.

Differently of those softwares, Wings3d is coded in Erlang. The amount of people coding in this software language is very small compared to any C compliant language. I don't believe that would be easy to "attract new developers".

Currently, how many people are coding for Wings3d? I can think only about two people: dgud and optigon.
Oort, ggaliens and I, we are just sporadic contributors.
Each one producing at their own time; what think to be useful, interesting or was asked for someone.
I don't believe we can say that Wings3d has a developer team.

I think that is because of all these things that Wings3d is growing slowly.

That's my thinking (my words)

Indeed. I'm a programmer myself and don't know how to code in Erlang. Going into functional programming has a steep learning curve (I'm well versed in some of the theory behind it, but have yet to ever apply it). I've actually toyed with the idea of picking it up, but that has yet to materialize. I suspect this is the case for most programmers who are used to imperative programming languages.

Maybe slightly off-topic: I feel like going with Erlang is both a blessing and a curse for Wings3d. It's probably very neat and productive working with it, but the lack of manpower is seriously hurting the "open source" aspect of this program.

Hypothetically, if I had the time, I'd love to rewrite it in C# and just follow a functional paradigm (enforce referential transparency, don't maintain state unless required and multithread stateless things etc...).

[Fonte Boa]

(to lauramelissa)

I like so much the Wings description in http://sourceforge.net/projects/wings/:
Wings 3D is an advanced subdivision modeler that is both powerful and easy to use.

Some points imo:
( a ) Wings is very beautiful and attractive to my eyes: a clean and customizable ui, focused in modelling. Some of the examples above are "sexy" but not so powerful and precise as Wings.
( b ) The idea of sketch 3d models seems good until the moment you need precision and control over the results. Personally i've already tried 3ptools lite and soon i've abandoned it: the video is cool, but i couldnt found its place in production.
( c ) About Sculptris (by the way, it could compete with zbrush essentially because it was free) and other digital sculpt app: Wings is a box modelling software. Anyway, probably you know this, the digital sculpt app products are sooooooooooo heavy that the only way to deal with them in animation tasks is to generate a displacement map that will be applied on a basic and light mesh (this one will be animated). So you will have to start sculpt on a base/light mesh or you will have to build one at the end (or retopology your model).The cinema4d take you shown above is about this, but that hand wasnt modelled with those tools.
( d ) i LOVE all the Wings "functions that require many clicks steps to execute". They are extremely precise and powerful. Once you try, you'll fall in love too.
( e ) Wings isnt a Nurbs modeller either a poly-by-poly one neither a spline one. It is for box modelling.
( f ) When you say Wings needs "more artist friendly" tools, the only thing i realize is: do you know some box modeller that is "more artist friendly"? I have the impression you are talking about sculpting softwares and about re-topology tools. I really dont know about box modelling softwares that are "more artist friendly".

[Geta-Ve]

Just a side note, Sculptris in no way is competing with ZBrush. Considering that Pixologic now owns the program, and that ZBrush can do infinitely more than Sculptris.

Most consider it to be the demo version of ZBrush.

[Wegg]

Just a side note, Sculptris in no way is competing with ZBrush. Considering that Pixologic now owns the program, and that ZBrush can do infinitely more than Sculptris.

Most consider it to be the demo version of ZBrush.

I find sculptris to be a 10000 X more intuitive that Zbrush. The whole 2.5d thing infuriates me.

Hmm. . . better weigh in on the topic.

I don't think there is any danger in sprucing up the ole wings GUI. I tend to like it the way it is but wouldn't mind if it was a little "sexier". I guess if I wanted it bad enough I'd mock something up and propose it but . . . priorities.

I tend to get frustrated at there being so much power in the brush/sculpting side of zbrush and yet wings chokes when you even get close to that many polygons. If wings could have the same . . . subdivision history that Zbrush has. . . that would be awesome. You should be able to model your character, subdivide it a few times. . . paint in a displacement map. . . go back to your root level of subdivision. . . make changes. . . go back up to the top. . . paint away. . . and when you are happy with the results save out the base mesh and then a displacement map. That doesn't seem like an impossible request. If it could be a "mode" you go into where you don't have any other modeling tools other than brushes that push in and pull out. Support some industry standards like PTEX. . .


My $0.02

[oort]

ggaliens played around with increasing the number of polys that Wings3D could support but I think it only worked on Linux??? I never tried it. There are technical reasons why Wings3D can only support low poly count models. This was discussed in the old forum. If I find time I may add a link to the discussion...

oort

[Wegg]

I guess I'm not as interested in the actual winged edge polygon count. . . I'm more interested in a mode that freezes the geometry and lets me paint the displacement map. No more need for winged edge limitations in that mode. No?