![]() It's probably very neat and productive working with it, but the lack of manpower is seriously hurting the "open source" aspect of this program. Maybe slightly off-topic: I feel like going with Erlang is both a blessing and a curse for Wings3d. I suspect this is the case for most programmers who are used to imperative programming languages. I've actually toyed with the idea of picking it up, but that has yet to materialize. Going into functional programming has a steep learning curve (I'm well versed in some of the theory behind it, but have yet to ever apply it). I'm a programmer myself and don't know how to code in Erlang. ![]() I think that is because of all these things that Wings3d is growing slowly. I don't believe we can say that Wings3d has a developer team. ![]() Oort, ggaliens and I, we are just sporadic contributors.Įach one producing at their own time what think to be useful, interesting or was asked for someone. I don't believe that would be easy to "attract new developers".Ĭurrently, how many people are coding for Wings3d? I can think only about two people: dgud and optigon. The amount of people coding in this software language is very small compared to any C compliant language. (02-05-2013 07:12 PM)micheus Wrote: Differently of those softwares, Wings3d is coded in Erlang. Being artist-friendly is one thing, but downplaying the technical aspect would be a huge mistake. I don't think I'd continue to use it if it lost the technical merits and became an "eyeball precision" kind of program like Sculptris. That's arguably its main selling point, and why people still use it today despite the slow development. I disagree with the implications of this quote in particular: "modeling tools of today are more sophisticated and more related to the artist without much technicality." Wings3D already has a great balance of technicality and artistry. Neat! But what does it have to do with Wings3D?). Sculptris is "easy to use" and you can draw polygons in Modo. Those tools look nice, but they're hardly central to "the future of modeling." There have always been many different workflows to achieve the same result, and those videos, while cool, don't make a strong case for any specific addition to Wings3D. That being said you can do some neat stuff with Wings3D > Tools > Sculpt. Sculptris can handle many more polys than Wings3D can so Wings will never be able to do what Sculptris can. Wings3D is very popular due to its ease of use so I am surprised you do not find it easy to use. I think YafaRay has a foundation but that has not increased the activity on its development.īeing part of GSOC would be good but I think the developers have to be involved with it and they don't have much time to do what needs to be done with coding Wings3D. If I remember right it used to be possible to donate to Wings3D but that didn't happen much. ![]() ![]() I couldn't find the website for BubbelEd to get more info on what can be made with it. It looked neat.not sure what one would gain by adding those features. The problem with all but one of those tools is that they are creating models with faces and Wings3D requires modeling with a closed mesh.īubbelEd features is the only one that would have any chance at all of being added. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |