I've done some beta testing on headus UVlayout, I must say for me it's the best UV tool I've ever used, it takes the "boring, slow, I don't want to do this" out of UV layouts, plus the results without any tweaking are pretty dam solid!!! I mean, who wants to spend time doing UV's when u really want to get texturing?
I'd love to see this kind of tool within XSI!!
js
======================
// jason slabber {cgmonkey};
// condor {cape town, SA};
http://www.condorcape.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Tim Leydecker
Sent: 04 August 2006 01:52 AM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Re: XSI needs UV editor improvements
Personally, I find XSI´s UVediting very difficult due to the default
settings and the fumbly handling of things, even if there is probably
more functionality than what the Maya UVtextureeditor has to offer,
I prefer the tidier Maya look&feel for most tasks. But I´d also guess
that headus´ UVlayout is becoming superior for many of the latest tasks.
In a more general look at things, I really like XSI for many of it´s concepts
but must say that I - personally - feel I run into more implementation bugs
compared to Maya, while Maya seems to have significantly slowed down
in innovations/release due to changing owners quite a bit the last three years.
I really hope Autodesk does give them the freedom to invent that made Maya
such a great package in the beginning, as this also will inspire Softimage to
strive for at least the same or even better solutions, e.g. will boost competition.
tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Norm Olsen" <nrg_alpha(at)hotmail.com>
To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 12:17 AM
Subject: Re: XSI needs UV editor improvements
> "Agreed. Adding complete new additions is great and worth the massive effort
> required to do so, but I don't want to see the core tools in my main app fall
> behind as a result."
>
> Too late (in my case anyway). As a modeler/texture artist, I feel that while XSI's
> modeling and texturing tools are 'o.k' at best, they have already fallen behind the
> curve somewhat. I have already submitted to Soft what I would like to personally
> see improved already, so no need to repeat it all here again. But I will say
> this...
>
> It is admittedly frustrating when smaller lower cost apps like Silo or Modo can
> come up with great improvments (on the topic of modelling / texturing..no matter
> how little they may seem on their own accord), thus shaving off many small quirks
> and imperfections which result in better productivity over the long haul while a
> multi-thousand dollar app like XSI (using ESS and ADV as the example here.. for me
> especially, ESS, as this is what I bought) cannot seem to get up to speed.
>
> Now I understand that there are many variables and other unknows in the big
> equation of development. Perhaps it is the many layers of corporate bureaucracy
> that is partly guilty for the hinderance of tool set developments. Small dev teams
> like Silo don't have many people to answer to (if at all), which is an extreme
> blessing in its own right. But apps like Silo are solely focused on modelling,
> which enables them to develop and refine awesome modelling toolsets while apps like
> XSI are all general purpose 3d packages (sure, XSI is a character package, but
> let's be frank, you need to model the characters to be able to animate them,
> unless you use another package, which in my opinion starts to bog down things, not
> to mention additional expenses). So this all pupose functionality is a curse if
> many of the elements fall behind (which is happening to some extent with XSI).
>
> Perhaps a viable solution is to hire small teams that are solely focused on coding
> what they are good at (exmaple, two or three kick ass poly modelling toolset
> designers/programmers who's sole task is to listen to the community, watch what
> others (like Silo) are doing and develop only kick ass modelling tools XSI version
> after version.. same for animations, particles, etc.. etc.. Having small focused
> 'sub teams' of very talented people who are good at what they do, covering all
> bases of what XSI has, and contantly develope and refine their respective areas of
> expertise would ensure that XSI is always on the ball in all areas.
>
> Perhaps one of the problems with this is that dedicated kick ass talent may be hard
> to find. In either case, I constantly wonder what exactly is the current structure
> at Softimage, and how can they improve on it. Because to be very frank, when I see
> small apps like Silo and Modo start delivering better workflow (going by what I am
> hearing and seeing from videos and whatnot), it makes XSI look alittle troublesome
> (as powerful as it is, and yes, XSI definately has its strong points.. otherwise, I
> would not be using it. It has its extreme advantages over those (and other) apps).
>
> All in all.. this thread does strike some very interesting (and valid) points. Now,
> the next version is obviously in development.. And I do know that Softimage does
> listen to their costumers.. but from the frequent complaints about how people have
> been asking for features since version (god knows how long ago), and from seeing
> with my own eyes some of the glaring issues, one has to wonder if it is an issue
> such as lack of sufficient staffing (not sure if this is an Avid thing or a
> Softimage thing), or if it is perhaps the quality of its staff (which Im sure this
> is not the issue.. they seem quite talented).. or lord knows that else. I
> understand that big clients like Blur are important.. and I am going to hazard a
> guess that what the big studio clients wants, they get.. but this is the whole
> point to my response.. Having small focused teams that bolster their respective
> areas of specialties within XSI will make the app even better than it already is.
>
> People are expecting one hell of a kick ass release for version 6. Time will tell
> what all in all has been augmented and what has been left behind. I'm still hoping
> for the best, however. I know Soft is a good company overall, and XSI is a great
> product overall. But leaving systems to fall behind isn't the most appealing to
> see.
>
> Just my $0.02.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Norm Olsen
>
>
>
>
>>From: James Edwards <jedwards(at)digitalextremes.com>
>>Reply-To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>>To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
>>Subject: Re: XSI needs UV editor improvements
>>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 16:10:35 -0400
>>
>>Agreed. Adding complete new additions is great and worth the massive effort
>>required to do so, but I don't want to see the core tools in my main app fall
>>behind as a result. There's plenty that can be done to improve things between
>>releases and this is exactly what makes applications like Modo and Silo so good.
>>The refinement and attention to details the developers are putting into tools and
>>features that have been there since the beginning is what keeps me using those
>>tools.
>>
>>What softimage did with XSI's tweak tool, I'd like to see happing in more areas
>>within XSI. Such a great improvement to an existing, core tool.
>>
>>James
>>
>>
>>Kris Rivel wrote:
>>
>>>Yeah, you have some good ideas there. I will have to give Modo, Unfold3D and
>>>UVlayout a try but it still would be really nice to have these features in XSI. I
>>>could go on about having built in 3d paint but thats a beast of a request and
>>>going to another app for that is fine for now. I would much rather have much more
>>>robust and intuitive UV tools built into XSI.
>>>
>>>Kris
>>>
>>>James Edwards wrote:
>>>
>>>>Kris Rivel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>The one thing I thought was pretty cool was Modo's UV editor. I think it blows
>>>>>XSI's UV editor out of the water in several areas. I like how you can select
>>>>>polys in the UV layout just like you would in a viewport. That makes total
>>>>>sense. I'm sick and tired of just moving points around sometimes or sinking my
>>>>>UV selection to a selection I made in a viewport. We need to have some good
>>>>>built in pelt mapping stuff too I think. I know there are some tools out there
>>>>>for this but really powerful UV tools for quickly laying out character UV maps
>>>>>is becoming the norm in every other package except XSI.
>>>>>
>>>>>Kris
>>>>>
>>>>>---
>>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>>>>>unsubscribe xsi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>This is funny because for the last year or so I've been requesting XSI UV
>>>>features to be added into Modo whenever the developers ask how we can improve
>>>>Modo's UV tools. Stuff like overlapping UV highlight colors is a direct request
>>>>from XSI users for instance. =] But then there's stuff like the unwrap tool and
>>>>the new UV pinning feature of the Relax tool that come more from blender than
>>>>anywhere else. Point being that lux does listen very closely and follows through
>>>>on a lot of user requests. I do agree that Modo has a great UV editing
>>>>environment now... especially with the full support of all native 3d selection
>>>>and transform tools. I do all my UV editing in Modo now, as unwrap is my most
>>>>important tool, and the new paint engine just makes it easier to keep more of the
>>>>3d/2d process in the same application. I still miss some XSI UV tools though,
>>>>especially the UV match tool and island healing. Modo does edge stitching pretty
>>>>well though so it sort of makes up for lack of island heal, but the match tool in
>>>>XSI is sorely missed when I'm working in Modo. One tool I've been drooling over
>>>>since I first saw it was Polyboosts 3D UV tweak mode. With this you can tweak
>>>>UVs right on the 3d mesh in a viewport... this is much easier and more intuitive
>>>>than doing it in a flat texture view, as you can see the texture being affected
>>>>whereever you tweak.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Warning, more 'improvements' requested below. Ignore if you please.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Selection workflow in XSI is one of my biggest beefs with the program when it
>>>>comes to modeling. The one thing that would make everything easier for me is to
>>>>be able to just have a simple 'edit' mode for models - where all elements are
>>>>selectable (much the same way that the tweak tool works now) this would eliminate
>>>>having to use multiple keybinds to switch element selection types. If you want a
>>>>really good example of how much this can improve workflow, download Silo and give
>>>>the demo a try. It has a multi-selection mode that does just this. The mode is
>>>>bound to my thumb button on my mouse and it also doubles as a 'clear selection'
>>>>tool so that it can revert to being able to select any element your mouse passes
>>>>over. Once an element is selected you can only select/deselect more of that
>>>>element until you drop the selection.
>>>>Something like this could easily be added to the spacebar as a state toggle from
>>>>object to element selection in XSI. Then all you'd have to worry about are your
>>>>methods, such as window, lasso, paint etc. These could also use some
>>>>streamlining instead of binding them to specific element types, which more than
>>>>triples the amount of keybinds you need just for doing basic selections. I'd
>>>>sooner just have a dropdown menu on one of my toolbars or some kind of mode
>>>>cycling (perhaps bound to a key/mousewheel combination). My point being that
>>>>selection methods should not be tied to specific element types.
>>>>Paint selection is one of my most used selection methods. Would be awesome if I
>>>>could use the mousewheel to grow/shrink an actual paint cursor that gets
>>>>remembered for each element type. So for edges and polygons I might have it
>>>>reduced to just the size of the cursor most of the time - the way it works now.
>>>>But for verts I might keep it a little larger for capturing more points within a
>>>>stroke. Being able to combine a modifier (sticky) key with the left mouse button
>>>>might also be a good way to switch selection methods on the fly.
>>>>Anyway, I ramble because I care. =D
>>>>Might or might not be the right place to post this but I figure so long as the
>>>>possibility exists that someone in the right place sees it and something actually
>>>>happens as a result then it's all worth it.
>>>>
>>>>James
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>>>>unsubscribe xsi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>---
>>>Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>>>unsubscribe xsi
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>---
>>Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
>>unsubscribe xsi
>
>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi
>
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
