Article View: comp.graphics.animation
Article #817Re: 3D Studio vs. Lightwave
From: Don Burnett
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:11
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:11
58 lines
3105 bytes
3105 bytes
In article <1imlfgINNss3@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> aa794@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Pete Nofel) writes: > > One of the contributors to the "Imagine . . ." string asked for a >comparison of Autodesk 3D Studio to Imagine. While my experience with >Imagine is limited (I prefer Video Toaster Lightwave), I'd have to say that >Amiga 3D packages usually produce better images. But, 3D Studio has some >advantages. One advantage to Imagine is it's more sophisticated motion capabilities, although the interface is not designed for artists, but computer people > 3D Studio Advantages: A good user interface for object >construction; I find it more straight-forward than Lightwave Modeler. A >great interface with AutoCAD. The ability to play animations in real-time >(but not at 30 fps). Good modeler. I don't think the user interface is as nice as others out there, although useable.. I think the best interface on the market is a program called Caligari24 for the Amiga.. This guy did it right. It does realtime wireframe on even ancient 68000 based machines.. > 3D Studio Disadvantages: Price -- you can get a complete Video >Toaster for the price of 3D Studio. "Hiddens" on the part of Autodesk -- no >matter how many pieces of equipment you buy, you always need one more. >After we invested $5,000 in an existing 486-33 in software and equipment we >found that we still needed to drop another $2K - $5K to get quality images >to video tape (broadcast quality, that is). Low resolution -- 3D Studio >colors are nice, but resolution is limited to 320 x 200 in VGA; circles >look like stop signs. Lighting control is medium-to-poor. That price is coming down and may even now be unrealistic, in terms of scan converters, etc. The video equipment is coming down.. I think 3D Studio was done by Thom Hudson who started 3D software life on the Atari ST. =DonB= > As much as I prefer MS-DOS machines for DTP, CAD, word processing, >and structured drawing, they are poor video machines. By the time you have >invested in a 486, a video i/o card, a frame buffer card, and software, you >could have purchased an Amiga/Toaster and two quality VTRs and a camera. > We now only use 3D Studio as a pass-through in translating AutoCAD >drawings into Lightwave. > >-- >Pete Nofel, aa794, primary sysop >It's a Mystery - The Mystery Literature Group >Cleveland Freenet, Cleveland Ohio -- ****************************************************** dburnett@emunix.emich.edu EMU Mathematics Lab Consultant Enabling Solutions PO BOX 318, Ypsilanti, MI 48198 *****************************************************
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1993Jan12.161100.14619@zip.eecs.umich.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!sdd.hp.com!caen!umeecs!emunix.emich.edu!dburnettReferences:
<1imlfgINNss3@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.graphics.animation Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!sdd.hp.com!caen!umeecs!emunix.emich.edu!dburnett From: dburnett@emunix.emich.edu (Don Burnett) Subject: Re: 3D Studio vs. Lightwave Message-ID: <1993Jan12.161100.14619@zip.eecs.umich.edu> Sender: news@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Mr. News) Organization: Eastern Michigan University References: <1imlfgINNss3@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:11:00 GMT Lines: 59