myriadz

Hey guys,

has anyone tried installing lightscape on a Vista Machine yet.. Does it work? or should I just put it off completely?

Thanks

Ernest Burden

Lightscape worked well under W2k, much less well under XP (but it does work, I used it last week). It will probably work under Vista, unless the 'war on OpenGL' causes problems.

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering

pitt0413

I did it! it can work and better than XP!!
But,i still don`t use vista cz`CAD2006 is fail at VISTA!

del82

Why?

__________________
Beeeee!

pitt0413

in XP ,lightscape "bump maping" can`t be showed just like following image,but in vist can as usal in win2000.

Maybe my XP has problem,maybe!!

IF your "bump maping" is ok!!

please tell me why!!! please please please

Attached Images

22.jpg (55.4 KB, 48 views)

del82

Bump maping with reflections, yes
Can you post this under Vista?

__________________
Beeeee!

pitt0413

I restored XP already!

visualasylum

just a general question, why would you still use Lightscape when the technology is included into 3dsmax?
Just wondering, because staying with an old technology, seem you guys are missing lots new features.

No Offense intended.

Greg

Ernest Burden

That is a popular myth. The technology was not incorporated into Max. There are similar things, but it is not the same.

Lightscape's use of OpenGL is still the fastest I have ever used. I occasionally open a file in LS to check something, and transfer the model into C4D. Lightscape displays the same data faster.

Lightscape was slow to come to a lighting 'solution', but once it did, that lighting was wired into the model. It could almost pass for real-time GI. Now that processors and graphics cards are 100x faster than when LS was a current product, it can do some amazing things right on your screen just in OpenGL via its vertex-shaded model.

The raytracer in LS was exceptional both in speed and quality. I don't think anyone since has written a better one, or even one as good. That raytracer was used in a preview imager for one version of Viz or Max, I was told once by someone who knew the programs well. The raytracer was the work of one brilliant coder, and a few years ago I asked the head of the Max group and former owner of Lightscape, where that guy ended up working. He went to Pixar.

So on the one hand, Lightscape is dead. On the other, if you happen to still own a copy and can make it run under XP (which it doesn't like very much) then you are in for a treat any time you fire it up. And frustration--its missing a lot of things that you would want, like an 'undo'.

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering

visualasylum

The one I hated about lightscape is the way to model. with the new technology in ADT, the productivity has increased more than 5 fold, to me, going back to lightscape eventhough it may compute things faster, the modeling way, is to me, going back to the cave period.

I'm can understand what you mean, but convincing me to go back to the old way of modeling just to continue using lightscape, is just a definetely no-go for me.

Perhaps you found a shortcut that perhaps you are not sharing? are you modeling a different way, that lightscape accepts? or you never migrated to the new way of modeling?

I am curious.

Kind Regards,