[David Solito]

+1

I always use Studio. Modo plugin is for me not enough integrated to modo. And is a waste of time IMO.
The ideal would be not to see it, just working with the parameter inside the modo's current menu (like material creation, light...)
Just hit render and choose wich renderer to use. I dont speak about conversion, but creating material and light inside modo (shader tree...).

[Polyxo]

I've been (not so subtly) hinting at my desire for more powerful UV mapping options in Studio for a while now -- whether that be native, plugin, or at least support for import/export of modified UV's from/to programs like ZBrush and 3D Coat (or any dedicated UV Layout app).

It would make a big difference for those of us who really need/want to use Studio... but we are in the minority.
Jason.

Hi Jason,
given that the Maxwell SDK allows for such it surely would not at all be difficult for a Programmer to bring Models and Material from 3DCoat to Studio as a Life-Link.
Then one could instantly switch back and forth between these Apps for all Texture/Uv-Work. These Links are free for 3DCoat-Users.
Look for the username VFXDomain in the 3DCoat-Forum - this young guy has written many of these Bridges including for Nuke, Fusion, Lightwave, Modo...
As he can make money with this I'm sure he's glad to help!

Heck he could also write the same for Sketchup, then you could through your Model from there to 3DCoat - and texture there - quickly hop over to Photoshop
and back to 3DC while keeping all Layers and finally go over to Maxwell - without ever having to care about where the Model and Textures go.

So you Studio Guys got happy and Next Limit could concentrate on the core Engine and Plugins, hehe...

[stu.dio]

Personally being long in the tooth with Cinema (10+years now) - and apologies to Jason - using MW solely within Cinema would be my favored approach - and it would go without saying how amazing it would be if that is where it stayed and developed - the older we get the harder and less willing we are to learn new things (well for me that is the case)

I'm not sure I speak for most people, but we use our respective 3d software because we are familiar and confident with them - to get the job done on time - with MW being so amazing and key to great results, I guess "compromise" is a by-product at this stage.

I appreciate this is the forum area for MW V2 and this thread is slowly going off track - sorry

[Half Life]

That is probably the majority view so no need to apologize

I love my plugin -- JD does a phenomenal job with what he has to work... but Sketchup just can't handle some things that Studio can handle with ease (high poly trees for one).

The only way I can ever see being able to stay exclusively in my host app and still be able to take full advantage of all Maxwell can do is if they institute the ability to externally link a proxy to a MXS model file on export (Xref type function)... and even then I still would have to work with those objects in Studio to prepare them for render.

I see Studio as a essential part of my Maxwell experience for the foreseeable future -- and in all honesty I also see Studio as one of the strong selling points for Maxwell as well... very few apps can handle setting up a Maxwell scene as efficiently as Studio does, not through any fault of the plugin but because the conventions of any given software are not designed around Maxwells needs.

Best,
Jason.

[lord.saddler]

Just wondering since I also use Cinema 4D:

Did you use "Use UVW for Bump" in the Cinema Texture Tag? This can sometimes cause weird artifacts like those in your first screenshots... at least I encountered this when using Cinemas internal renderer, so probably it translated this "error" to Maxwell as well.

[stu.dio]

Did you use "Use UVW for Bump" in the Cinema Texture Tag? This can sometimes cause weird artifacts like those in your first screenshots... at least I encountered this when using Cinemas internal renderer, so probably it translated this "error" to Maxwell as well.

No it turned out to be the smoothing check box being on (on what was quite a large displacement map within the mxm) - turning that off solved the issue. The whole scene just has mxms no cinema materials. They preview really well on screen now within cinema (with the latest plugin) - and are very well implemented into the cinema's interface (thanks JDHill)

[stu.dio]

"Half Life"-The only way I can ever see being able to stay exclusively in my host app and still be able to take full advantage of all Maxwell can do is if they institute the ability to externally link a proxy to a MXS model file on export (Xref type function)... and even then I still would have to work with those objects in Studio to prepare them for render.

I have started looking at cinema's xref system and applying mxms direct to a standard set I use - and it works really well - pain I know, but maybe your studio objects can be rebuilt into cinema (import obj files)?

[Half Life]

Yes, I can and do have pre-built and pre-maxwellized libraries (in Sketchup they are known as components) which are very convenient once they are made. The issue with Sketchup is really polygon count -- any type of organic mesh that would lend itself to realistic people, trees, and even cars is usually enough to slow Sketchup down to a crawl if not outright crash it.

Sketchup is great for what it's made for (architectural modelling) but for scene entourage you can quickly find it limiting... Studio does not have those limitations and so setup of large amounts of high-poly objects into a scene is not a problem and of course Maxwell is capable of rendering all of that with no issues at all.

I've looked hard at all the options and I realized some time ago that Studio negates the need for me to purchase another modeler because it fills in the gaps of my workflow perfectly... and I am also interested in things like RealFlow Integration as well.

But I am also aware that it is not as highly regarded by the majority of Maxwell users and will likely never take center stage as the premier Maxwell scene compositing environment.

Best,
Jason.

[Half Life]

given that the Maxwell SDK allows for such it surely would not at all be difficult for a Programmer to bring Models and Material from 3DCoat to Studio as a Life-Link.
Then one could instantly switch back and forth between these Apps for all Texture/Uv-Work. These Links are free for 3DCoat-Users.
Look for the username VFXDomain in the 3DCoat-Forum - this young guy has written many of these Bridges including for Nuke, Fusion, Lightwave, Modo...
As he can make money with this I'm sure he's glad to help!

Heck he could also write the same for Sketchup, then you could through your Model from there to 3DCoat - and texture there - quickly hop over to Photoshop
and back to 3DC while keeping all Layers and finally go over to Maxwell - without ever having to care about where the Model and Textures go.

So you Studio Guys got happy and Next Limit could concentrate on the core Engine and Plugins, hehe...

They have a similar thing called GoZ for ZBrush -- which I looked into but they say they aren't ready to release the SDK yet... right now I'm doing alot of work in ZBrush but when I get done 3DCoat is definitely on my list to look at.

I'm not concerned about the Sketchup integration aspect because while that would be easier to set up it would also be alot less effective due to Sketchups native limitations (polycount, poor support for large texture maps, etc).

Ideally a true 3DCoat or ZBrush plugin would solve those issues completely with many other benefits for users of those apps, but because of the non-scene based nature of those apps they are a poor fit for a full Maxwell plugin IMO... so a GoZ or Applink type Studio integration would be a good second option.

Best,
Jason.

[Polyxo]

Jason, I have Zbrush too and it's a great program.
Thing is only that if you want GoZ for Maxwell-Studio you'll have to wait. They do it for you,
if anybody. As GoZ however has some very smart Geometry processing features, which all can not
get harvested by Studio I most heavily doubt that there will ever be such a Bridge.
Every SubD-Modeler on the Planet was a more logical choice for them.

The Bridge to Maxwell Studio from 3DCoat again could be established in two weeks or so.
It's all documented, one just had to start if the interest is there. There's btw also an Applink from
3DCoat to Zbrush.

Concerning a possible Sketchup-App link - it could still make sense to send things over to 3DC.
When finished with UV's/Textures you could send pass the model over to Maxwell instead of going
back to SU.

[Half Life]

Well I don't want GoZ specifically -- check out this wish I made almost a year ago to get a better Idea of what I really want: http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 46#p323746

To be clear I envision no geometry changes -- just editing/creation of various maps... including AO/Cavity. Exporting SubD geometry back to Studio would not enter into the equation at all...

They do try to talk up the aspect that you can create your own GoZ for any application if you request the SDK but when I looked into it I got the run around... at the bottom of this page:
http://www.pixologic.com/zbrush/features/GoZBrush/

Actually their email link for that page wasn't even working and it took like a week to convince their tech support that the problems was they had a bad email link on the page... didn't leave me with the greatest impression.

Best,
Jason.

[Polyxo]

Jason, what you lay out in that thread should mostly work with 3dc.
By default though it only offers to create diffuse,spec, normal, displacement and creates them as a stack.
The easiest to implement workflow was:
Import from SU to Maxwell, start building your Scene, then without even having assigned materials send over
to 3dc and do your Texture work. Send back to Studio, let the Plugin Developer automatically hook up maps
according to their Suffix (that works in other programs too), tweak appearance with the Material-Editor and send back
to 3dc for as often as you think makes sense. I consider pretty likely that the Maker of 3dc will soon allow for further
custom map types to get transferred. The Character-Guys need Subdermal and Secondary Reflection and what not...

[mbbga1]

...glad you got it sorted....and nice looking render too!