I mean using some parts of your simple brush, currently I'm not using the pickBuffer but raycasting.
Le 10 mai 2013 à 01:17, Steven Caron <[email protected]> a écrit : > awesome! > > btw, merged with mine? what do you mean? > > *written with my thumbs > > On May 9, 2013, at 5:21 AM, Ahmidou Lyazidi <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >> @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 <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> 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 >> <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 >> <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 >> <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >> 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 <[email protected]> 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: [email protected] >> 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 :) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
