The future of new modeling tools

[micheus]

What makes it take more space ? Inserting a line break the the help strings, or pulling it's border with the mouse ?

as is in the release notes (I linked above):

- Improvements to Information line management made it auto-sizable when the message is longest than window width.

plus the insertion of new line ("\n").
The information line can be divided in three areas (columns) in the code, so you can observe this in some operations with mult-lines.

Also, if you check the current release notes, you will noticed that it was already available for 1.5.1.

[TulipVorlax]

Oh ok.

I've played with the Sculptris software and if i'm able to do something like this
http://img.synaptique.ca/Capture_2013_12_%23000648.jpg
in a few minutes, i can't wait to see what my friend will be doing now using this in conjunction with Wings and he's others tools.
Too bad Sculptris is exporting triangulated mesh or maybe i just need to play more with the parameters of the untriangulate command.
As for importing into Sculptris, faces must have at max four edges and vertices at max 24 edges. Duh! Lol.

[Justanother1]

Hey Tulip, the key is to start with a Quad-model, leave the Detail slider at 0 (No-triangles) use the subdivide button if needed (will keep quads) and just use the sculpting tool in Sculptris .... Did some Vids on this last year ... http://www.zbrushcentral.com/showthread....post919585

[TulipVorlax]

Thanks for the tips.


I've tried to show the OpenCL thing to a friend and it's doesn't work with version 1.5.2 x64 on my computer but it work with version 1.5.1 (32bit).
Weird.

[Justanother1]

OpenCL doesn't work on mine at all ....

[micheus]

Guys, you should be tunned in the bugs report session. There is a thread about OpenCL there - check this post.
Try not to change the subject of this thread.

[donkey32]

Hey y'all..
Since I stopped doing graphics for a living (some years ago), I ALSO stopped contributing to wings (some of you may remember me).. But I still ocassionally lurk the forums and I OF COURSE download and test drive new versions, just for fun.

This subject has kept on coming up, from time to time since the beginning, when Bjorng first made wings3d public..
The shape that the requests come in is almost always the same too; "wouldn't it be great if wings copied these functions from this software over here?". Most often, the requestor can't code in ANY language, and/or hasn't a clue about coding in Erlang in particular. More often than that, the requestor doesn't know WHAT Winged Edge geometry is and why it's differnet than other methods.. Last but certainly not least, more often than not the requestor doesn't attempt to understand the workflow philosophy built into the program and attempts to argue for a completely different method, never understanding that some choices were designed in from the very beginning.

This last one, has always been my personal pet peve since the early days. Everytime someone even mentions widgets, my head want's to explode.. Think carefully people!! Wings is NOT built around widgets, WAS NOT from the beginning and in fact works in REVERSE ORDER of operation. Once you "get" wings, it very quickly becomes the fastest workflow of any program you might own. The reasons for this are: Winged Edge geometry and NO WIDGETS!!

If I got back into the 3D biz and picked up wings again for real, my feature requests would revolve around taking things OUT!! Removing possible redundant features, removing or making smaller GUI elements, things like that. I would push for breaking the UV tools off of the base package and making it a stand alone, though it would use Erlang's power to run concurrently, across networks(s) WITH the base package. I would advocate for a lighter set of tools, with as little screen clutter as possible for each, all with the ability to run concurrently with the others either on the same desk or across desks and down the hall, or halfway 'round the world. "Just the model and the mouse" is what wings has been, what it should remain, and I'd advocate for that model on steroids.
More polygons would be nice, freeform re-organization of all graphs would be nice but bottom line for me would be fewer, streamlined tools that run smoking fast and stay out of the way when they're not in use.

[puzzledpaul]

My thoughts to a 'T', d32 ... I've always failed to understand why anyone wants to see it changed into yet another widget based prog.
It's not as if they don't have a range of 'bewidgeted' apps to choose from either, is it?

Good to have you around again - even if only for a brief flyby to say 'Hi'

pp

[nemyax]

Wings ... works in REVERSE ORDER of operation.

Tweak mode, which is a very long-standing feature, does not. And tweaking is immensely helpful and productive.

[donkey32]

@puzzledpaul: cheers, mate!! it's good to see you're still 'round here. Funny that some things don't really change.

@nemyax: True about tweak mode, but only just barely. You still have the "make the selection, then act" paradigm. I was sceptical about tweak mode when it first hit wings, but quickly warmed up to it. The fact that it deviated slightly from the typical Wings Way was my main reservation.
There are a LOT of tools out there that don't really seem to have a consistent "feel", often a new tool is thrown in the mix, just to toss in a new tool, regardless of how it fits with the rest. One of the nice things about Wings over the years has been the fact that it is a VERY self-consistent tool. It doesn't do everything and some things it doesn't do well or even at all.. The things that it DOES do, it does so cleanly, so quickly and with very little effort.