awesome!
btw, merged with mine? what do you mean?
*written with my thumbs
On May 9, 2013, at 5:21 AM, Ahmidou Lyazidi <ahmidou....@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Steven, it's still very wip, I'll release the sources as soon as
I'll have cleaned the code
I also want to merge it with yours.
By the way, it's updated :)
http://www.si-community.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1735&p=12643#p12643
Cheers
A.
-----------------------------------------------
Ahmidou Lyazidi
Director | TD | CG artist
http://vimeo.com/ahmidou/videos
2013/5/9 Steven Caron <car...@gmail.com>
@ahmidou
if you don't have plans to market/sell it, maybe share the code?
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Ahmidou Lyazidi
<ahmidou....@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Sebastien,
There is a 64bit version in the archive, and you can smooth/relax by
choosing the option in the RMB menu.
By the way I have an updated version at home with the undo working,
I'll post it tonight
-----------------------------------------------
Ahmidou Lyazidi
Director | TD | CG artist
http://vimeo.com/ahmidou/videos
2013/5/9 Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com>
I'm not a coder unfortunately, :- ( but yes I'd definitely buy a
finished version with relax and symmetry, I have stated as much on
previous threads. (i don't know much about development costs)
On 9 May 2013 02:09, Steven Caron <car...@gmail.com> wrote:
no, the first post shows he updated it.
ya, no relax... maybe ask him for the source code so you can make
the changes? or offer to pay him?
s
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com
> wrote:
Yes i have seen this before, however it is only for 32 bit ? i still
think it is impressive, but it doesn't have the most important tool
the relax tool, the one tool that would complete mudbox... so they
horde it as a maya exclusive...
On 9 May 2013 01:07, Steven Caron <car...@gmail.com> wrote:
for the time being...
LivePaint - Ahmidou
http://www.si-community.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=1735
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com
> wrote:
yes building ice in maya does sound excessively enterprising, which
is why i asked if it would be doable as supposed to viable. i'm much
more interested in a simple artisan tool counterpart for softimage
there would be a nice place for it, right on the shelf beneath the
weight painting tooles :P
On 8 May 2013 23:58, Alan Fregtman <alan.fregt...@gmail.com> wrote:
Code in html? They don't do the browser plugin anymore.
You're right about the other things as far as I know though. Write a
tool in Fabric and it's usable from Maya and Softimage. Their hair
system example is essentially an example of that. Their viewport
integration seems to be cross-platform.
They have painting samples already, and a brush API, so it's not so
far fetched to make an artisan tools clone if you were so inclined,
and can code.
An ICE clone? That's harder. :p
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com
> wrote:
Apologies for resurrecting this topic, only i was chatting to our
character fx supervisor about Fabric, and it got me thinking, would
it be possible to create something like ice in fabric engine, but
for maya? i mean possible, not viable, i don't want to see ice in
maya, i was just wondering what are the limits, it sounds like an
sdk away from home, could one make deformers operators, could you
make a version of artisan sculpt tools for softimage with deformers
linked to brushes ? would it all have to happen in a second
interface, or is there a way of integrating it seamlessly with what
is already there in maya and softimages UI, also i was told that you
can code in html and the KL core does the heavy lifting is this
right ? sorry again if any of this in inacurate
On 20 April 2013 21:02, Paul Doyle <technove...@gmail.com> wrote:
Don't get me wrong - Yeti is great software, and the guys at
Peregrine are very smart. I was just responding to the comments
about Fabric :)
On 20 April 2013 13:33, Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com
> wrote:
Hello Paul, i have in fact seen the demo for the hair module, and in
general the fabric engine looks amazing, up until now i was under
the impression it was going to be some external application that
would instance things back into softimage or maya, i was not aware
that you intended to integrate it into both applications, i'm
curious and very eager to see what this might look like :)
the thing i like with yeti after having seen it in action is the
interaction model is really solid, you have a node based editor to
build your simulation tree where your setting live like ice, but you
can also come in and comb and tweek the guides manually, its also
really cleaver about instancing. more to the point its very
specifically built for "artists" to create production quality hair.
On 20 April 2013 18:15, Paul Doyle <technove...@gmail.com> wrote:
Just to clarify - the Creation modules are designed to be much more
'out of the box' than the Creation Platform itself (which, as you
rightly say, is a tool for building tools). Right now we're focused
on modules for locomotion/crowds (Horde), scene assembly (Stage) and
vegetation (Flora).
Tufty (the hair module) is on hold at the moment but we'll pick it
up again later this year (sooner if someone wants us to build them a
hair system). When it's made available it will provide out of the
box functionality, and run standalone as well as inside Maya and
Softimage (which I think is a pretty good attempt at " its nice to
have a production ready out of the box solution identical and
compatible everywhere in the world"). The preview video that we
released last year already showed a viable workflow - we just want
to do a lot more with it before we release anything.
On 20 April 2013 11:54, Sebastien Sterling <sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com
> wrote:
i would have thought the more third party willing to develop on
softimage platform the better, yes the fabric engine looks really
promising, but its still not a "solution" its a tool designed to
create other tools, as powerful a tool it is to a TD or coder, in
this instance its like replacing ice with something even more
sophisticated and specialised,
To give you another example, i don't know if any of you have seen
the Psyop ruffle feather engine, that is ice based and amazing, but
i can't create somthing like that, we can't all go away for a year
or 2 and become TD's in order to build our own little feather
systems in ice, sometimes its nice to have a production ready out of
the box solution identical and compatible everywhere in the world.
On 20 April 2013 12:48, Nick Angus <n...@altvfx.com> wrote:
Have you had a look at fabric engines vimeo page? They have started
a fur package probably more as a tech demo at this stage, but they
may be planning to complete it as a full package.
It would of course be maya/soft compatible, and you know its good if
Helge Mathee had anything to do with it!
N
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Sebastien Sterling
Sent: 19/04/2013 7:26 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Yeti for Softimage
Hello List.
I just wanted to perform a quick survey of what solutions people are
using for hair/fur/feathers in softimage these days.
recently a new tool has become available on the market, its a
production ready all in one hair/feather solution. it's called Yeti
http://peregrinelabs.com/yeti/
The hair module in softimage doesn't seem to have aged well, and i
know what a lot of you are thinking, ice already gives us a
multitude of ways to develop hair solutions... However, there
doesn't seem to be any universal go to hair solution for softimage.
this can be a problem for numerous reasons. and as good as ice is,
it's short comings can't be ignored (ex: styling tools?)
I wrote an email to Peregrine asking if there where any plans for a
port to XSI, they responded as follows:
Hi Sebastien,
Thank you for the great feedback - we have investigated Yeti
integration for rendering preview which may be available in a later
version but at this time we're not planning an XSI version of the
editing tools. Adding in support for a whole new 3D application is
a large task and we haven't had enough demand for an XSI version at
this stage. If at some point that changes and it looks like a
studio may commit to a large number of licenses we could afford to
do this.
So yes, i guess I'm asking who would like Yeti to come to softimage,
and if Not, why?
good day :)
