Poll

Which 3D soft to integrate into next?

Modo
133 (40.1%)
Rhino
28 (8.4%)
Any CAD software (comment which one)
20 (6%)
Lightwave
44 (13.3%)
Vue
11 (3.3%)
Exporter Blender -> Corona standalone
41 (12.3%)
Maya
27 (8.1%)
Houdini
28 (8.4%)

Total Members Voted: 331

Author Topic: Which 3D soft to integrate into next?  (Read 99631 times)

2012-11-04, 15:14:32

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 8416
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
The title says it all ;) In which 3D software besides 3dsmax would you like to have Corona next?

Disclaimer: this is only for my info, I am not actually starting integration into anything else any time soon

If I forgot some 3D package, write it here and I'll add it
Rendering is magic.
Private scene uploader | How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)

2012-11-04, 15:22:41
Reply #1

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 8416
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
BTW: if you know some expert C++/graphics programmer, I am willing to provide them with reasonably easy-to-use Corona API in C++ to do the connection in exchange for possible future profits if it starts selling.
« Last Edit: 2012-11-04, 15:26:03 by Keymaster »
Rendering is magic.
Private scene uploader | How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)

2012-11-04, 17:58:10
Reply #2

loocas

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 89
    • View Profile
Considering the current state of Corona and who it's aimed at, I'd say modo makes most sense.

Competing with Arnold or PRMan on the Maya/Softimage battlefield will be extremely tough and without proper particle/volumetric rendering it'd be pointless, imho.

2012-11-04, 19:22:32
Reply #3

lacilaci

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 710
    • View Profile
That's not true. Well competing with arnold or prman is of course pointless when it comes to volumetrics or particle and hair rendering but how many cannot compete with them even having those features yet still they are present for maya/si?

And when it comes to what corona is capable of and what it already excels at (may it be visualisation and mainly closed spaces with complex lighting scenarios) then PRman and Arnold are no competition.

PRman and 3Delight is very inefective to use in visualisation and I did try it(3delight). For arnold... well arnold is a bad joke once you expect it to lit up an interior with just an HDRi dome light even using area lights in windows will force you to get your settings sky high to get some decent noise level. It's useless for this purpose at its current state.

The only competitor would be vray and that's the same as with 3dsmax.

and maya/xsi is much more popular than modo.

no hard feelings, just my 2cents.

2012-11-05, 23:37:06
Reply #4

yolao

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Please do a Maya version, it seems to be the most widely used app in studios around the glob.

2012-11-06, 00:32:47
Reply #5

wilsimar

  • Users
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
yes, maya version please. Modo render is crazily fast, modo render for maya (moma) is fast too, but very limited for now. Arnold in maya not has support for multi uv channels, opacity map in shaders is strangely slow. Renderman no good for visualizations and complex setup; the mentalray integration in maya is a bad joke.

2012-11-06, 17:32:29
Reply #6

ledman

  • Guest
in my opinion you would intergate corona with archicad :"P

2012-11-06, 18:33:50
Reply #7

maru

  • Corona Team
  • Active Users
  • ****
  • Posts: 6358
  • Marcin
    • View Profile

2012-11-07, 13:32:44
Reply #8

igni

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
in my opinion you would intergate corona with archicad :"P
It does not make sense. If the CR released in standalone version, then it does not matter which editor you will use. To make simple connector\exporter is much easier than integrate CR in each 3D-editor in the world. :-)
In my opinion CR should be integrated in most popular 3D-editors (3dsmax, Maya, Softimage). And for others have a connectors\exporters for standalone CR.
« Last Edit: 2012-11-07, 13:41:29 by igni »

2012-11-07, 14:15:53
Reply #9

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 8416
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
From what I understand standalone renderers suck, and nobody is using them anyway
Rendering is magic.
Private scene uploader | How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)

2012-11-07, 15:07:01
Reply #10

igni

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
From what I understand standalone renderers suck, and nobody is using them anyway
I'm using MR standalone in 3dsMax and Maya. Indigo in Sketchup. Octane (in beta-testing year ago) with scenes made by different editors. (I'm crazy program and beta-testing maniac :-D )
And i have a lot of fellows 3D-modellers and CG artist who prefer standalone rendering.
Standalone - is best choice for artist for whom not important which editors they operate. Or for studios in which work in many editors.

IMO - standalone is way to professionalism. Not suck.)))
« Last Edit: 2012-11-07, 15:12:57 by igni »

2012-11-08, 09:17:10
Reply #11

ledman

  • Guest
exporter/connector would be great too :'P

2012-11-08, 11:22:05
Reply #12

Paul Jones

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
I much prefer having things built into max. Never understood why you have to export scene, then create shaders in a standalone, seems like doubling up the potential problems to me. OK there are a few benefits in standalone renderers, but drawbacks also.

I'm loving the direction c* has taken, think it's a very astute move workflow and business wise. I've tried indigo, maxwell, fry etc but the standalone app for shaders, lighting etc bit drives me nuts

2012-12-17, 21:13:29
Reply #13

lacilaci

  • Active Users
  • **
  • Posts: 710
    • View Profile
Let's say that in some distant future :D you have worked out maya API and already have some unstable corona plugins .dll built for Maya... Now, I'm not familiar with Visual Studio (which I think you use on windows, not sure..) I've only used it like once or twice :D... Is there a way for whatever IDE you use to cross compile (using lets say MingW) for linux? Or would the linux .so(.dll) files in have to be compiled in linux? In that case, are you familiar with codeblocks etc and maybe GNUCC? Is it possible to expect a different platform build in general?

2012-12-17, 21:39:03
Reply #14

Ondra

  • Administrator
  • Active Users
  • *****
  • Posts: 8416
  • Turning coffee to features since 2009
    • View Profile
It is, but it would take some time (I would have to wrap the winapi calls, find their linux equivalents, get rid of MSVC-specific extensions from the code, etc.), so I won't be doing it until it is really needed ;)
Rendering is magic.
Private scene uploader | How to get minidumps for crashed/frozen 3ds Max | Sorry for short replies, brief responses = more time to develop Corona ;)