United3dArtists Archive

Hi. I'm exploring the idea of creating a modeler for windows 8 metro. I used to enjoy truespace 7 workspace and I think that some of the philosophies there have some really good points. So I wondering what you people that use truespace for your projects think. What features do you really enjoy and what you think should be different.

trueSpace "workSpace" is awesome but not finished. The number one problem I see for a new user without having VRay would be the Material Editor. Also you cannot have multiple layers of materials.
The modeling tools are pretty good but missing a lathe tool (without Clintonman's script), a bend tool (like Modelers), Surface Tools-Edge Mode with Surface Snapping and a Real-Time displacement rendering.
Good Luck and keep us posted!

I personally think that the time has come for a new generation of modelers.
What the people here loved about Truespace was the strongly icon driven interface and that the software could
be used even after some time without big use of anything 3d.......
its not like Blender where you have to learn every day...
what this new app should be doing is to work with the built in touchscreen and pen functionality.
If you want a good idea how that is done look at moi3d.... thats one of the first that was built for tabs...
BUT it was built for nurbs only.. and here comes the big gap .... there is nothing realy on the market
that works with polygons and handles like a nurb modeler.. ( thats what Truespace actually did) and also can
be worked with a pen on a screen.
All I can tell you is start small with a very limited basic toolset and expand from there.....
so good luck !
Peter

The best thing about trueSpace for me is the ability to go in and edit every single part of a polygon based 3d model with great ease. I do not need a lot of keyboard shortcuts to select a tool because everything is already on my screen.

If you wish to make a 3D application for future modelers, look at the big programs like 3ds Max, Maya, Modo and even Blender for the technical aspects such as exporting abilities, rendering power, cpu usage and how the program utilizes the computer in terms of capacity, memory usage etc.
However, for the interface, the part people will actually be using and learning, I suggest you very much go for an approach trueSpace has taken in making the necessary tools as easy to use as is possible. I think Zbrush might also be a great example of how they made a program focused on a good/fast workflows for the user.

Good luck on your project!

Features that i really love in workspace is for example the rectangle zoom. That one`s really fast and handy to work with. You end too often in a disorted view though. Or the point edit snapping. Something that i`ve ignored for a pretty while, that i happily use very regularly now, and something that i heavily miss in Blender.

What i hate is the incomplete unfinished edgeloop stuff. It`s always use and pray if it does the job.

A good app to look at is also still Silo, even when i have never used it. A real shame that the nevercenter folks have abandoned the development for the sake of making a game instead.

Featurewise this little modeler here could also be worth a look: http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74005"

Currently it goes too much into the direction of a hotkey UI. Not really funny to work with. But i think that this modeler would kick ass when it would have a more graphical UI driven interface.


Hm, coding a modeler is lots of work. Have you considered to grab an existing one, and extend it to your needs? What about a tS style graphical UI for Blender for example

This discussion looks promising!

I like the workspace also, with it's viewport using a "game engine". I use TS mainly to take advantage of that. I love working the lighting and shadows. Compaired to Autodesks's viewport it's lacking DOF, AO and LOD and other small features... but it certainly runs smoother and quicker with similar results (and 2 years earlier)!

If you could also take advantage of DirectX 11 and render engines like that of most modern games today, or even an unbiased render engine would also make things work well.
Also Like what Steinie said: make the materials editing simpler yet just as powerful + layered textures and better alpha testing/transparency in the realtime render engine(current has layering error in the render engine)

Simple physics like that of TS also is good, just needs to be faster.

The Animation and IK rigs of TS are awesome concepts. Especially a fully body IK rig, making animation more like puppetry instead of robotry. I see great potential there. Also it has simple easy animation with everything you need, from dopesheets, programmed keysets, fcurves, clips and morphs. The clip blending is a different concept to most software, but it is handy and has more potential I think. The rigging is very very very intuitive, easy and quick to use. It is also very powerful and easy, making animation very fast to learn in TS (comparing to Autodesk).
It just has some IK bugs that are easily triggered, some skinning bugs also easily triggered, and some difficulty to reskin/reparent/change things without corruption upon the rig creation. Also it is buggy to add squash and stretch, and a little difffucult to add muscles and other features. If there was an easy way to do this, it would be a riggers dream!
Also it would be good to also add intuitive expression editors to morphs and the like, like controls for morphs.
Also concerning the Fcurve, dopesheet and clip editor, there are some standared navigation and control features that don't make too much sense or has been too dumbed down. I would add more standard UI controls in those areas, but keep it simple as is.
Especially in the Fcurve area, with time stretching keyframes, add selection, subtract selection, merge selection, better handle controls, etc.

I love the potential of LE. I can't code, but LE makes that a little simpler. Also it is fully available to code if needed, and development possibilites are endless. I view it like a buggy version of ICE of Autodesks's.
I recommend an easier LE with coloured data flow, more intuitive mathematical functions with explanations so anyone can understand how to use it along with more efficient LE navigation (ctrl select = add node to selection), selection and understanding when it comes to point vertex data edit, data information, maybe added particle system like that of softimage ICE (super handy and easy and infinate powerful), animation behaviours/trigger (gaming, animation), crowd controls, deformers, modifyers, etc. It can be professional and powerful, it just needs some more control that will stop loops automatically happening, crash detection, error detection, error prevention, prevent data conflicts and help the user understand data flow better with information of the such.

Talking of the LE, I would also help change the parenting system and also add/change Local and Global matrix info to objects. Also easier to access position/rotation/scale constraints on the local and global positions. TS does have both, but it seems the local and global values are connected and it's hard to constrain one and not the other, also hard to move something only globally or only locally.

Also try make the LE parenting system clearer/simpler, using trees instead of nesting. Object attributes/material and mesh attributes are good nested in the LE, but not too far deep. Especially with Materials. But parenting makes more sense linked as visual trees. A possiblity to select the tree is needed too (R click parent node)



The Button/thumbnail Interface with popup labels and slide out menus and ability to drag, copy, and delete buttons to make menus is perfect and should be kept.

the PE system is good, and the edge create and loop create is good, tho the loop can improve. The SD algorithms could be improved. There needs to be a select a row of items from selection 1 to selection 2 and fill in what is in between, like select partial loops (hold down alt+shift select 1 select 2 to add to a partial loop with another partial loop. )

Like what Steinie said, the modeling tools are good, but lacking in some logical and needed features like deformations, lattice deformation, nurbs, lathe, sweep, chamfer, fillet, etc.

Also the Polygon adding in the MS is very powerful and would be great to have it in the WS.

The sculpting and soft selection of WS is very powerful already and I use it to a great degree, it just needs better image stamping/texture painting, option of autofaceting like in Sculptris. Also the added feature of texture painting would be good.

The UV is already good, but UV unwrap feature would be nice and is sometimes needed in WS.

The realtime lights are awesome, and I use them a lot. Just a IBL, AO light, proper Area light, and shadows with infinate light, point light and other lights need to be added.

Also the collaborative feature of TS is novel and fun to use, and has potential for other features. If it could be sped up, made more efficient and equally available with a strong ecosystem, it can potentially be as powerful as IMVU or other 3D social systems or games.

This is my opinion for trueSpace WS and how I would improve it to compete on par with most commercial software with touch abilities. The concept of usability, touch friendly interface, ease of use and ease of understanding all 3D concepts, ease in animation and strong easy full body ik/fk rigging, programming and development potential, powerful modeling tools, nurbs + polygon modeling, powerful realtime render engine and the potential of taking advantage of your video card while you model/animate/share and all in all: ease of use + program stability and open development - something TS lacks sometimes.

I would buy your new software for windows 8 if it had all of the above, hands down (well... with a reasonable price that is, considering the simplified workflow and potential ability of the program is for people learning 3D, teaching 3D, sharing 3D projects, and want to do productions quickly and cheaply with a low learning curve and efficient usability, or fast development of concepts and code. I would not compete with workhorse software out there, tho I would offer a perfect alternative to workhorse software out there to keep the market open to those who do 3D already.)

I thinik the DLL's of ts are open, just not the SDK.....

Thanks for all your feedback I really appreciate that you took the time to write what you like or think needs to be improved in workspace mode.

@Tiles I looked at silo when it came version 2.0. It looked to me like a very powerful modeler because it focused on streamlined interface. Same can be said about workspace modeling in truespace to some degree. Problem in using an open source modeler and improving on it is the fact that coding for windows 8 metro imposes some restriction on what functions you can call on windows. So if you try to make a touch first 3d editor better start from scratch.

@RAYMAN I totally agree that new modelers should be viewed different and made specially for the touch or pen. I looked at moi3d and it seams to have some clean interface.

@Steinie I never thought of material editor as having problems in ts as I only used it for low poly and exporting in game formats but I think for an offline renderer the material system needs an overhaul.

@Draise your review of truespace is amazing and while I consider the LE editor to be truespace biggest feature I don't know if for a casual user that system is not too powerfull. THe nested concept in truespace is what allowed LE to handle both code and visual programming. It's inherited in it's COM underlying model and while not as user friendly as an hierarchy it does allows for great extensibility and performance optimizations.

As for nurbs modeling is it such high in demand? Can it be replaced efficiently by subdividing the low poly model in your workflows?

The LE spaghetti station was something that has scared users. It`s too intransparent to handle. For nurbs modeling, i would say this is a chapter for a later point. First implement the basics. Then extend.

Just curious, how big is your staff? Developing something big like a 3D modeler is usually something for a big team and several years

Why do all that work to make a new modeler just for one very specific operating system? If you hope to sell it then you would just exclude many potential customers. Make it versatile in the OS/machines it can run on.

Touch screen UI would be good but many may not have or want touch screens. Have versatility in the UI to appeal to different preferences. TS had that: use 3D widgets or not, icons, keyboard control if you prefer. Some hobbyists can't afford equipment like tablets or touch screens so UI versatility helps there too.

As already noted by Draise don't try to compete with the big guys (workhorses). Do try fit into their workflow. Make things import/export friendly with them and consider plugins to interface with them.

If it is realtime render based then have access to external renderers like Vray. Exporters or such.

Make it capable of 3rd party plugins and scripts.

Do you have the resources (manpower with the variety of skills needed, investment capital, etc.) to do this and to publicize/market it?

Who are your target markets or users? Would your modeler be competitive vs. existing ones (especially if it is to be commercial)? Would enough people use it to make money for you or to be worth the effort?

A 32 bits unfinished software have no futur for me. Question of time. I still use the modelside for my job and i don't know what modeler and render engine will be my next tool. But a 64 bits software seem necessary today for complex work (more ram). The use of the gpu wil be important too. That is the real problem of trueSpace.

ChMar wrote:Hi. I'm exploring the idea of creating a modeler for windows 8 metro. I used to enjoy truespace 7 workspace and I think that some of the philosophies there have some really good points. So I wondering what you people that use truespace for your projects think. What features do you really enjoy and what you think should be different.

I think the item missing most in ts workspace side (for me), is a built in rendering engine. There are some add ins such as YafaRay and Indigo, but they are very slow in rendering process and are not that easy to use. I didn't count Vray as it is no longer available for TS. The workspace side modeling tools are incomplete, but still very capable and are easy to use. The screen display for lighting and materials are still unmatched, in my opinon, by any program that I am aware of and there are alot of plugins tools (free) available. I agree with some others that Silo modeler is easier and more quicker to use than TS, but its just a modeler.

I think to develop a new program requires one to have new idea or concept that none of the other programs have, and I have no idea what that would be, but some thoughts might be a extremely simple interface, instant (almost) render display and complete rendering base of materails already developed and included.

ChMar wrote:Thanks for all your feedback I really appreciate that you took the time to write what you like or think needs to be improved in workspace mode.

@Tiles I looked at silo when it came version 2.0. It looked to me like a very powerful modeler because it focused on streamlined interface. Same can be said about workspace modeling in truespace to some degree. Problem in using an open source modeler and improving on it is the fact that coding for windows 8 metro imposes some restriction on what functions you can call on windows. So if you try to make a touch first 3d editor better start from scratch.

Like some have said, building from the ground up, but keeping the concepts, would be ideal.. Easier maybe?

ChMar wrote:@RAYMAN I totally agree that new modelers should be viewed different and made specially for the touch or pen. I looked at moi3d and it seams to have some clean interface.

I wouldn't only make it touch. I like TS because the interface COULD be easily programmed to the keyboard, easily used with widgets, and/or just mouse point, click and drag anywhere for immediate easy results. I would try keep it precise to a way, because there will be many elements.
A touch interface I would keep similar to TS's, with blown icons possibly, and new widgets that blow in size on activation, and fade on release, with easier slider controls, drop down menu's, LE links and controls, and IK controls. Maybe all with finger blow-up-size-on-contact menu/widgets. With mouse this feature would automatically disable, to save on screen space.
I would add multi touch object navigation into the 3D space also. Maybe even multitouch rotate, scale and translate. One finger tap, select object. One finger press and hold to click and drag (navigation widget appears after 1 second of holding over the object, thus you can change translation properties when you lift then tap on widget x,y,z constraint and axis reference, or even widget control pint), add a finger to toggle rotate, rotate clockwise = rotate Z screen axis; drag two finger up = rotate Y screen axis, etc; or hold two finger to add new popup widget with toggle rotate axis's and constraints. Add a third finger and it would toggle the scale with option to hold for similar axis toggle widgets under the fingers. Drag 3 fingers up = scale vertical. Drag 3 fingers left/right = scale horizontal. pull three finger diagonal = scale uniform. I would double tap on an object to enter PE mode, then using different gestures to select different elements. Once an element is selected, again you can toggle a 1, 2 or 3 finger scale, rotate, translate widgets or other gesture defaults of movement to rotate Z screen/ move X-Y world/ scale uniformly, etc. I would also keep all keyboard and mouse input due to the very nature of nearly all 3D artists possibly with similar widget toggles, but without the blow up widget optimized for fingers or pen.. but with the benefits and options of multitouch 3D manipulation and menu drag, select, edit etc with the widgets that would blow to finger size ease of use when mouse not used. Just an idea....

Also with the view, you can use the multitouch. If you toggle to view navigation instead of object edit or PE edit mode. Then using one finger drag will pan up or down, two will rotate the image, and three will zoom. three up and down = zoom in or out, two finger rotate clockwise, anticlockwise = orbit left or right. Move two finger up or down = orbit up or down, etc. Double tap on an object will focus on the element/object. L draw with two fingers will rectangle zoom.
I could also have an assigned screen area or view widget without having to toggle to view mode.

Also, what also moved me from other programs is 4 axis of movement, world (global), object(local), normal and screen. Most just have global and local.

ChMar wrote: @Draise your review of truespace is amazing and while I consider the LE editor to be truespace biggest feature I don't know if for a casual user that system is not too powerful. The nested concept in truespace is what allowed LE to handle both code and visual programming. It's inherited in it's COM underlying model and while not as user friendly as an hierarchy it does allows for great extensibility and performance optimizations.

As for nurbs modeling is it such high in demand? Can it be replaced efficiently by subdividing the low poly model in your workflows?

I do like the nested concept overall, just not the object hierarchy parenting system. Object hierarchies should be a little more clearer without having to dig into nesting to see a parent's children. An alternative is to have a windows like file/folder hierarchy view also I suppose.

The trick, just like ICE in Softimage and soon Maya, is that it's a system not understood well, because it's a new concept to programming and 3D for artists and programmers. You need to find a way to dumb it down enough so that any artist can use it easily and intuitively. I would love that, and I think that's a strong selling point where someone can easily and intuitively link behaviours to a character to trigger animations when another object get's close, or that you can quickly make automatic doors, explosions, reactions, etc, like quick and fast game programming in an artistic manor.

@NURBS = Technically yes, SD is sufficient, but there is nothing wrong with extra modeling tools for a larger audience..

I would prefer keeping it simple like the old icon driven Truespace interface; the workspace side has always been a bit odd compared to earlier versions of TS. Simplifying the scripting method would really help in getting away from having to use a C++ compiler to make plug-ins and create controlers for rendering and animation; if you study the Anim8or 3D method that uses a simple text editor to compile user scripts this is what I'm refering to in terms of the scripting. Something similar to the method that Python uses would be awesome. SDK documentation would help users decifer what can be done on the users end and make it much more useful overall.

BNG wrote:documentation would help users

Documentation! What ever you do please create extensive documentation on every part of it and keep it up to date with each version. From getting started basics through to advanced topics.

Would be cool to see that happen ChMar.

I'm looking forward to the final release or first Alpha/Beta developments!!

What.. happened to the development of this project? Is there any news?

The two handed (Multitouch interfaces) touchpad with graphics will be the immediate wave of the future.

Combine that with voice control, DNA security access and ocular definition - then you have the command bridge on a Star Ship.

Rather then create something totally new perhaps are more realistic option would be to continue develop and evolve Truespace 7.61. Creating a totally new modeling software is no easy task in itself. Season's greetings to all btw. Leroy.

I'm kinda sad to not hear much about this project... seemed to have fizzled...

Rather then create something totally new perhaps are more realistic option would be to continue develop and evolve Truespace 7.61.

We would need the source code to evolve really. And programmers. And i fear it would be easier to start from scratch than to dive into the tS source code after five years of development stop.

Hmm, has somebody actually tried to contact Microsoft and asked for access? Nowaday we have crowd funding. We would still need programmers though ...

Blender might be a good option as it's all open source and creating a Caligari style interface could probably be a lot easier then messing with the dated Caligari code that will probably never actually get released. I've noticed a few releases that use blender as the base software and then changing things around in the variants of blender. The interface is pretty odd, but then again I've heard the same comments about the Caligari interface. My favorite feature about Truespace are the icons that are right clickable to adjust settings, right click editing, etc. An interface facelift for Blender would be very cool to mimic the UI of a Truespace like option for Blender; it already has options for customizing to a users preferences. Greetings to all btw, Leroy.

I guess that messing with the Blender UI is as hard as messing with the old trueSpace UI. They did some weird things to it. And it is really really hard to customize.