Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Resurrecting Wings...
01-28-2016, 03:13 AM
Post: #11
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
Micheus, when I said that it is dead I did not mean that it is not in use anymore. Surely, I suspect there are many people who still use it (and even who are addicted to it : -). I used the expression regarding its further development. It is no secret that its development is almost dead for some years now. All here we know it. This is not said with an aim of scorning it. Just the contrary: it is said because of having a concern about it. I still have it as my main modeling app and I would like to see progress in its development. It is a great app and it would be a pity to remain abandoned.

Cyseal, the new tool requests can be made from everyone here. The programmers are not the only users of the app. The simple users can express -and must express- their tool needs and then there can be a discussion about their implementation's feasibility. This is the natural way that such an app evolves.
Reply
02-02-2016, 01:49 PM
Post: #12
Thumbsup RE: Resurrecting Wings...
Wings is still in development, I made this account just to express this fact.
last stable release was in August 2015, yes, but they've written on there download page this "Even though we have a release listed as Stable, quite often the Development edition includes fixes for bugs reported in the Stable, as well as new features.".

And the last dev version was made in December 18th, guess what the name of thedev version is? 2.0.2

So, if you can, share the news about the new 2.0 update to as much people as you can, I think it will get people on board for this program and make it closer to release, and when all I need is dx libs (or whatever they're called) reporting bugs is fun (I don't even know code, I just like software!)
Reply
03-01-2016, 08:08 AM
Post: #13
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
The biggest problem with Wings' developmental acceptance and adoption has been the fact that it was written in erlang. A language that simply doesn't have wide range appeal among the general internet populous -- or, at the very least, among the types of developers that would be interested in developing for Wings in their spare time.

On top of this, from what I understand (since I am no programmer) erlang is quite different from most other languages, which makes hobbyist adoption fairly difficult.

I don't blame anyone, bjorn chose the language with which he was most comfortable and with which he thought would be best. Can't fault anyone for that. Biggrin

But, it has had long term ramifications.

Your best bet, as a developer, is to try and port the Wings methodologies to something like Blender.
Reply
03-01-2016, 11:03 AM
Post: #14
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
Being terse, functional, and pattern matching at heart ... these are super reasons to love the approach taken.
Erlang rules. Wings3D rules. E3D rules.
Reply
03-01-2016, 09:36 PM
Post: #15
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
(03-01-2016 08:08 AM)Geta-Ve Wrote:  The biggest problem with Wings' developmental acceptance and adoption has been the fact that it was written in erlang.
...
Your best bet, as a developer, is to try and port the Wings methodologies to something like Blender.
Well, that can be true in a long future.
For those who have lost the Wings clone in C++ thread, they have been working for the last two years and maybe this year they will release the first beta.

Maybe we will be able to know if the language is/was really the problem to not have more people engaged. Wink

My Wings3D Collection at G+
Reply
03-02-2016, 05:31 AM
Post: #16
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
I'd say that it is long past the point where Wings will get any kind of mass adoption. Tools have moved so far beyond simple polygon modeling that Wings will be hard pressed to retain any kind of foothold in an actual working pipeline.

I am not saying that it has no place at all, but the vast majority of industries out there reliant on computer graphics, are also reliant on high density meshes -- for whatever the purpose.

This is why the core tools and methodologies are better suited to be ported over to another package like blender or Maya, where the userbase far exceeds that of Wings. Because that is where Wings shines best, is in the way it approaches polygonal modelling workflows. The strength, in my opinion, has always been in the depth of its toolset and ease of use for quality of life features. It does one thing and it does it REALLY WELL.

You can see its methodologies in so many other packages these days, from Maya's now-native Nex tools (simply called its modelling tools), to basically all of Silo and even through to packages like blender and Modo (though modo strays from the traditional by doing alot of things differently. But the core is still there.

But, even with all of that, none of them do it as well as Wings was ever able to. (again my opinion).

I will be very curious if/when the C++ version ever releases how widely it is adopted and how well it works. I think having retopology capabilities within Wings itself would kick it right to the forefront of most other retopo solutions. Being able to retopo and more in one package would be deadly.

Yes you can do that in Maya, but I've never been a huge fan of Maya's lackluster approach to modelling. It has gotten better over the years, but with a package as massive as it is, the development of some tools simply gets left behind.
Reply
03-03-2016, 01:31 PM
Post: #17
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
Quote:For those who have lost the Wings clone in C++ thread, they have been working for the last two years and maybe this year they will release the first beta.
Whoa, this looks really cool, a 3D Modeler with the great Wings3D style + Animations possibilities, i need see this.
Reply
03-22-2016, 04:23 AM
Post: #18
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
Hi Everyone,

I've not posted anything for a long time but I do lurk on the forum so I keep an eye on things, looking out for suggestions, niew releases , gain inspiration from the fantastic models I see getting created by various peoples (and getting envious) and generally trying to learn techniques and methods to become a better modeler.

Wings 3D is certainly not dead, but I do think we all, and that includes me, need to be more active in creating and displaying our efforts. The gallery for the main website has good samples, but why cant we do something like they have in Blender and Povray (although Povray to a certain extent suffers the same way as Wings - people have created fantastic images that get shared internally but rarely seen outside).

But if anyone things Wings is not being taken up, let me tell you of a recent experience. I was looking at the Art of Illusion and at the end of last year the creator of the program put out a sort of SOS. He has reached a point where he can no longer really keep improving and adding the functionality because of the calls on his time in real life. He started a discussion about the future of the program. And there was a lot of debate about the positioning of AoI as regards to whether they should aim to make it a more professional product or pitch it to the casual artist. Then there was the question of take up. Wings has a good healthy following that is fortunate in that the few really talented contributors are also easily approachable when it comes to help and advice. AoI has a handful of people who are regulars on their forums and and even fewer who are contributors with regards to producing images and such. In some ways their woes are similar to ours but on a bigger scale. I think though that unlike AoI that claims to be easy to use it's not as intuitive or as quick and easy to pick up as our Wings.

So I think we have it good, but there are areas that could be improved, better gallery, getting the documentation up to date , more tutorial videos and documents. Perhaps a central documentation repository for anyone with written tutorials can be added and accessed.

Anyway sorry for the long post, just making up for lost time Biggrin
Reply
03-31-2016, 09:51 AM (This post was last modified: 03-31-2016 09:59 AM by Extrudeface.)
Post: #19
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
I've got deep into blender, in recent years. I model with it. Still, whenever I need to do some serious, complex, and fast organic modelling I ALWAYS end up launching wings and starting there, just exporting to blender when I have the mesh at full detail, ready to uv map, texture, render, or animate.

People can say whatever. I am a professional character modeler, among other things, and Wings subdiv super fast workflows keep non beaten, imho...

Yeah, right... Not going to think it is as a zbrush replacer,(then again, I have no more needs than Sculptris or SculptGL(quads, yummy), in that department...) or having the variety of next gen stuff covered as 3D Coat, Modo, Mudbox have. But I do not, in my day work, intend it to be so. (for texturing I'd prefer things like Substance Painter coupled with their Designer, and the like, even better than those modelers mentioned... I always liked specialized tools that are rocking good at what they do. The ability to swap environments is no prob, for me. I don't trust ANY general package/modeler to do it all at maximum quality. Blender does a lot, though. Rendering improved vastly, but also all the package. )

I am an illustrator, is with what I earn lately my plate of food. And let me make you an accurate comparison -in my view- . A 2B pencil cannot actually paint in color, neither has the durability of oil paintings. Yet so, I will still do my 2B pencil sketch, and I do it till the last detail, then I might continue with oils or acrylics, based on that drawing, in a canvas(but not tracing it). I have that way of working in traditional techniques, different to others', and that wouldn't be , by far, as comfortable and clean doing it directly with oils. I know as I painted all directly before... Also, the more I train with pencils, I get better at it, and it is an art thing with its own artistic full value.. Please, I want to keep my pencils.... Wink
Reply
04-09-2016, 04:05 PM
Post: #20
RE: Resurrecting Wings...
I like what @extrudeface has to say about the tool in comparison to painting. Thanks.
Personally I'd like to do more in wings3d.
ggaliens fantastic work is what keeps it alive for me.

I see only one major drawback with wings3D. on high poly models - like doing a voronoi workflow or smoothing on any complex model - and the whole system goes away for maybe 10 minutes and my machine has 16 cores (which can't be taken advantage of).
IMHO this is because of the Erlang language but maybe it can be optimised one day. Because of course Erlang is why its here at all. So we can't really complain about it, and GGaliens is doing his fine work because of Erlang.
Only what do we do about large models Sad ??

As I've indicated before I worked on the original S-Geometry system (and the rest of the S-Products) from 87-92 (when Symbolics collapsed). The code was licensed? by Nichimen and then IZware and Mirai came out of it(still based in LISP). Followed by Nendo - a rewrite in C/C++ which was blisteringly fast.
These companies have gone and the products lapsed even though the code is still workable.
The last big project (that I'm aware of) that used those tools, was for the facial animation for Gollum in LOTR II, III. So Wings3D is in very good company. Its a solid design (even if we don't have wires as a primitive Smile)

I will keep using it - mainly for 3D printing now, as the watertight objects inherent in a winged edge design are pefect for this.
Best wishes to all... Keep up the good work.
Reply


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)