Very well put Brad,
Luke, with all due respects, that was a really dumb question. You of
all people, who have always had been harping on about the necessity of
particles, fluids, hypervoxels, muscle deformation and comprehensive
deformation management, should realise that there are far more pressing
issues than perfect symmetry modelling in XSI.
6.0 introduces this feature part of the way, and as Luc Eric has
mentioned on XSIBase, is included in the roadmap for future modelling
improvements.
I get so fed up when people compare XSI to specialised tools like Silo,
Modo, Zbrush or whatever when one need only look at Max and Maya and
realise those apps have barely addressed symmetry modelling.
I would much rather use the best of breed tool than have a half baked
implementation inside XSI, and as Brad said, the limited scope of
symmetry modelling in XSI 6.0 is by no means a show stopper.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf
Of Bradley Gabe
Sent: December 20, 2006 8:54 PM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: RE: symmetry in XSI 6.0
I too am speculating, but I believe it has to do with how a program is
designed from its core.
A pure modeling program can, from inception, be designed to have
symmetry built into all of its operators, because it doesn't have to
worry about envelope deformations, or shape animation, or constraints,
or geometry being fed through a rigid body simulation, or the
implications on rendering, etc. A pure modeling program can basically
assume you will lock a model at the origin and do all your building
there.
XSI is by no means a pure modeling program. While modeling is important,
so is animation, and simulation, and rendering, and any implementation
of symmetry needs to take all those work flows into account. And I would
never want to be confined in what I can do deformation or render-wise
just to make modeling symmetry work.
The thing is, we currently have symmetry that doesn't break the
animation and rendering workflows. And when it doesn't work, we can
always do the old split and clone trick, or use GATOR, or a half dozen
others that work well enough.
Are they perfect solutions or as simple as using modo or zbrush? Heck
no. But it's not like it's a wall we can't get over in production, and
at the end of the day, it hopefully isn't costing users all that much
time. I suspect it would take an entire redesign and reworking of the
current modeling operator system in XSI to get symmetry to work the way
you are expecting.
On the other hand, there are plenty of other production necessities that
have *NO* easy solution, *NO* workaround, and do offer substantial walls
to get over. Frankly, I hope those other issues get tackled first. If
rebuilding the operators is required to get over those walls, I'm sure
Soft would invest the resources to implement the symmetry improvements
in there, since it would probably be a minor issue in the relative scope
of that project.
-Brad
> I may be ignorant on the subject and probably have little
> understanding of complexity involved in implementing such feature but
> why is this so difficult to implement for a team of 3d experts and
> requires a few releases (few years) to implement? Especially since
> this is such a sought after feature.
>
> It seems that it's available in modeling programs (from their
> inception or at least initial versions) that are sold on a much lesser
> scale (and probably do not have such 3d expertise on the development
> team - just speculating here).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
> Behalf Of Stuart Hall
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:17 AM
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: RE: symmetry in XSI 6.0
>
>
>
> Me too. Which is one of the reasons I prefer to use Modo when I start
> off modeling. In other ways I prefer XSI to model in. Just waiting for
> that perfect app...
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
> Behalf Of Kris Rivel
> Sent: 20 December 2006 02:09
> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> Subject: Re: symmetry in XSI 6.0
>
>
>
>
> Yeah, hopefully this makes it into the next release. I would love to
> build edges on a polymesh in symmetry mode sometimes.
>
> Kris
>
> Ahmidou Lyazidi wrote:
>
> it seems not
> http://www.xsibase.com/forum/index.php?
> board=1;action=display;threadid=28209;start=0#msg182493
>
> 2006/12/20, lpiasecki76 <lpiasecki76(at)rogers.com>:
>
> Just a quick question about symmetry in XSI 6.0:
>
>
> Are all poly operations now supported in symmetry mode, including
> operations that modify topology? Is there support for tangent based
> symmetry?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
---
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
