Hum… Maybe you were (just a wee bit?)
eh ? no capitalization and no expletives it would grade 0/10 on the rantometer
All I want to say is – try the tool (I didn’t yet) see its strengths, its weak points, and get the word out.
why would I need to ? I can turn around a typical compiled mod in a morning a bit longer if it needs a gizmo. Its more about the idea/demand/end user requirements not the tool “creation tool”. a tool prototyper for artists I can see that maybe useful.
geez thats a mouthful !
pluginGraphDependencies = #(@“C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\Twist.maxcompound”,@“C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\DeformMeshPoints.m axcompound”,@“C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\RotatePoint.maxcom pound”,@“C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\ProjectionLength.m axcompound”,@“C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\MeshBoundingSphere .maxcompound”)
exactly the same as i said above. some sort of a tool for pure orphans
for artists with no tools support
You guys sounds like old people yelling how maps are so much better then those GPS devices that never work
You guys sounds like old people yelling how maps are so much better then those GPS devices that never work
battery never runs out on a map. It’s a pretty rubbish analogy too
“hey my kit car is as good as your ferrari” might be closer to the mark
pluginGraphDependencies = #(@"C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\Twist.maxcompound",@"C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\DeformMeshPoints.m axcompound",@"C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\RotatePoint.maxcom pound",@"C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\ProjectionLength.m axcompound",@"C:\Program Files\Autodesk\3ds Max 2016\MaxCreationGraph\Compounds\MeshBoundingSphere .maxcompound")
am i only one who scared having these absolute paths in a parameter block?
This is an unpacked graph, those compounds can come from anywhere so abs is allright here. Packed will not have this.
i agree that is not a good idea to scold before we test the tool.
but also an opposite is right too. don’t sing the praises before you really worked with the tool…
here are two plugins for enthusiasts.
can anyone repro them using CMG and tell us about how long it took, and compare the performance please?
simple stuff (1 point in my grade of complexity form 0 to 10):
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=7306988&postcount=1
more complicated (3-4 points):
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=7554786&postcount=17
Exactly my impression
“What? You use 3dsMax? I can code and compile my own DCC in a month, tops! And it will perform heaps better than yours!”
“What? You buy ready made PCs? I can build my own just by buying the parts! And it will be cheaper and faster than yours!”
“What? You buy PC parts? I can design and build my ow processor and assembly language not based on deprecated x86 instructions. And it will run light years faster than yours!”
And on and on
As I said from the beginning, maybe this tool isn’t a big deal for the 5% who rock at SDK and Maxscript. But for the other 95%, it may be very, very useful
Let me just jump in, because this MCG thing makes me kind of angry…
3D Studio Max is a software for professionals. There is no need to develop tools that make it usable by every little kid. Most of us needed years to come to the point we are at right now. They should use other 3D software!
It’s the same as someone saying “Hey, I do 3D, too!” starting Photoshop which has the ability to create 3D stuff now… wtf.
I know that the MaxScript and SDK stuff is hard to learn. But that’s no problem, as long as some experts exist, that help others to learn it or that create tools for those people not able to. And yes, some people, like me, even make money with these tools/scripts/plugins!
I hope that MCG will not kill existing developers… the graphic business is getting harder and harder even without “easy to use tools” that can be handled by every 10 years old.
i’m not the same angry… but have to agree. unfortunately i see last years of max ‘improvements’ as play with new toys only. it was nothing done for last 5-8 years to make max better from professional point of view. but we have a lot doubtful additions: Nitrous with all its shading modes, Caddy controls, MaxRibbon…
still no one answered my question – why CMG has to work better than mxs and sdk?
just give me please a points…
for example: shorter learning curve, faster development, better debugging, better performance, easier extending, open source, etc.
why?
for instance i can tell what’s wrong with mxs and sdk plugins development, and what benefits are.
It’s faster because it compile a program before running it using .NET. The same things that you can find in the max SDK. You can use similiar nodes and object classes as can be found in the SDK. (trimesh, quadmesh etc…)
You can create custom objects, custom modifiers, maxscripts, or even compounds, that you can use to build other plug-ins.
Since modifiers is pretty hard to handle via maxscript, because you just can use inherited classes, you don’t have the ability to make things with the modifier that is not part of the inherited class. (if you inherit your modifier from an edit poly class you just can reach the methods that the edit poly class has) With this you can make custom modifiers that is not an inherited class, but an individual class. If you are using modifiers for modeling for example, you can create a circle modifier that is creating a circular polygon from a single vertex, you can parameterize it, and it will be the part of the modifier stack, so you can proceduraly change it’s values, like the radius, or extrusion or whatever you like. Or you can create custom modifiers for animation purposes. And because it is compiled in C# via .NET it will be faster than an interpreted maxscript. So you can create modifiers and not tools, that are working on top of an edit poly or editable poly or any kind of object, but you can use it as a modifier with the chance to turn on or off the modifier. So it’s a custom class, with it’s own properties and methods.
- You don’t have to write, I think. :keenly:
- a node having one input and two outputs is more “bulletproof” (*) than code?
(*) you can’t generate exceptions if the line you drop at the input doesn’t attach because it’s un-plausible