I... LOVE Canadians :(
On 12 April 2013 00:46, Raffaele Fragapane <raffsxsil...@googlemail.com>wrote: > Holy Shit Gmail! > Sorry, this was supposed to be a reply to Eric in another thread, how it > literally jumped me to this thread upon hitting send I have not the > faintest clue about :) > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Raffaele Fragapane < > raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Don't you have some Canadian jobs to steal? >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Sebastien Sterling < >> sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Why not petition SDK improvement ? >>> >>> on a side note, has anyone seen the updates to mudbox ?! the new >>> topology tools look pretty sassy ! >>> >>> >>> On 10 April 2013 18:21, Eric Cosky <e...@cosky.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Just to add to the discussion, when I made EssGeo (a geometry plugin, >>>> http://www.boundingboxgames.com/tools/essgeo) I had to disable a >>>> couple of features due to problems with cluster management. Namely, a >>>> random cluster op and a greeble op. I think they could have been pretty >>>> useful tools.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> I made an imgur gallery that showed the features I had to abandon, >>>> check it out here: http://imgur.com/a/5T7v0**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> It’s been a while since I wrote all this, but if memory serves I >>>> couldn’t find what I needed for cluster management in the C++ API, so I had >>>> to resort to this sort of thing which basically builds a VB command to make >>>> changes to clusters:**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> >>>> CString prefix = cluster.GetFullName() + L", " + pname + L".poly[";**** >>>> >>>> >>>> if(ecount > 0)**** >>>> >>>> >>>> {**** >>>> >>>> >>>> CString arg = prefix + L"0-" + CString(CValue(pcount-1)) + L"]";**** >>>> >>>> >>>> args[0] = arg;**** >>>> >>>> >>>> status = Application().ExecuteCommand(L"RemoveFromCluster", args, val); >>>> **** >>>> >>>> >>>> DEBUG_ASSERT_OK(status);**** >>>> >>>> >>>> }**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> This of course is pretty slow compared to a proper native API, but it >>>> generally solved that part of the problem and in practice wasn’t a >>>> performance problem since clusters didn’t change all the time.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> Unfortunately I had to yank these features because I could never get >>>> them stable. Changing anything that changed cluster data had the potential >>>> to crash Softimage. I usually assume when something doesn’t work that it’s >>>> my fault, because there always seems to be a tendency for things to >>>> actually turn out to be my fault the moment I point the finger somewhere >>>> else, but in this case I wound up convinced the cluster management >>>> internals of Softimage was buggy and there was nothing I could do about it. >>>> I’d love to be wrong so I could fix my plugin but this thread suggests >>>> otherwise.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> If someone on the Softimage dev team would like the source code to this >>>> plugin along with an already-built version with these features enabled in >>>> order to fix the crash and see a specific example of what cluster API >>>> changes would be useful, I’d be happy to provide it.**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> -Eric Cosky**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: >>>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sebastien >>>> Sterling >>>> >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 09, 2013 5:40 PM >>>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >>>> *Subject:* Re: Softimage 2014**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> If these things are to hard to accomplish for third party people, then >>>> what realistic chance is there that they will ever be implemented ? is what >>>> i want to know, Autodesk don't exactly have a good track record of treating >>>> there customers as a valid source of input... is there some secret ballot >>>> where this stuff gets decided ?**** >>>> >>>> Also, is the problem that the SDK is just too archaic ? does it need a >>>> complete rewrite ? or are aspects of the code unavailable or illegal to be >>>> changed to/by scripters ? if so does Autodesk have the ability to make the >>>> code available ?**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> On 9 April 2013 09:27, Eugen Sares <softim...@keyvis.at> wrote:**** >>>> >>>> Oil on my fire. >>>> That cluster SDK restriction really really sucks. It is the reason why >>>> there never were any good topology/modelling addons from 3rd parties, which >>>> leads to stagantion if there aren't any new "factory" modelling tools >>>> brought also. >>>> In 3ds max or Maya, all kinds of plugins are available, completely >>>> natural. Not so in Softimage. >>>> The few ICE modelling tools like Cap are nice, but slow. Native code is >>>> nice and fast. >>>> >>>> Luc-Eric mentioned once, ICE was meant to be the "new SDK", that's why >>>> this cluster update mechanism has been implemented for ICE already. >>>> Imho that's an excuse. ICE complements the SDK, it is NOT a replacement! >>>> Cluster updates should be supported by the SDK as well, even if it is >>>> complicated, and thus somewhat of a challenge for a 3rd party dev. >>>> Try us! Provide a good code example alongside, and we'll do fine. >>>> >>>> Be wise and do it. Please. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 09.04.2013 09:08, schrieb Piotrek Marczak:**** >>>> >>>> Just give us proper SDK and let community do the rest. **** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> "**** >>>> >>>> Softimage currently does not fully support custom topology operators. >>>> The problem is that any cluster or cluster property will not properly >>>> update when a topology operator adds or removes points that belong to the >>>> cluster. In the worst case Softimage may crash. Hence custom topology >>>> operators should only be used in the more limited scenario of objects that >>>> do not have any clusters. Once the geometry is ready it would be possible >>>> to freeze the object to remove the custom topology operators (but leave the >>>> result of their evaluation), then to add the clusters and other operators. >>>> **** >>>> >>>> "**** >>>> >>>> ??**** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> 2013/4/8 olivier jeannel <olivier.jean...@noos.fr>**** >>>> >>>> They do modo for birds ? >>>> >>>> Le 08/04/2013 20:27, pete...@skynet.be a écrit :**** >>>> >>>> I’m pretty sure there’s neither gentlemen nor ladies on this list.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> as for Modo vs SI – a little bird tells me there’s more important >>>> issues at stake than selection.**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> *From:* Rob Chapman <tekano....@gmail.com> **** >>>> >>>> *Sent:* Monday, April 08, 2013 3:35 PM**** >>>> >>>> *To:* ron...@toonafish.nl ; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com **** >>>> >>>> *Subject:* Re: Softimage 2014**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> now now gentlemen, there are ladies present on the list too! **** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> lets just say , when it comes to apps and selection methods, leave the >>>> race courses for the race horses..!**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> :)**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> On 8 April 2013 15:32, Toonafish <ron...@toonafish.nl> wrote:**** >>>> >>>> ...but I prefer brunettes with bigger boobs. If you get the idea J >>>> >>>> That's prolly because bigger boobs aren't obstructed so much, so they >>>> are much easier to select in shaded mode ;-) >>>> >>>> - Ronald**** >>>> >>>> **** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>>> ** ** >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it >> and let them flee like the dogs they are! >> > > > > -- > Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it > and let them flee like the dogs they are! >
