Speed Tree

[Craig Ramsay]

Any of you guys use Speed Tree?

 

If so, is it any good???

 

I use onyx tree storm and altho the trees it produces are really good they have massive polly counts so I am looking for a decent alternative

 

Any help would be much appreciated!

 

Cheers

 

Craig

[Jeff Mottle]

With any luck I will be posting a review of both SpeedTree and Bioantics natFX this weekend.

[Craig Ramsay]

Sweet!

[Ernest Burden III]

Originally posted by Jeff Mottle:

With any luck I will be posting a review of both SpeedTree and Bioantics natFX this weekend.

Not that I mean to give you additional work to do, but I think the time is fast approaching that we need a comprehensive 'round-up' of tree resourses, maybe all types of entorage (including skies). These things are central to producing our work, and a centralized place to comare what's available would be a very valuable thing.

[Ernest Burden III]

I hope you're not grading for spelling.

[vizwhiz]

hi There

 

Eric,

 

check This out:

 

This is my attempt at creating an On-Line Object-Oriented Database for us MAX/VIZ users:

 

Main Index:

 

http://www.viz2000.com/htm0/0000-linkquik.html

 

SITE TREE MAPS:

 

http://www.viz2000.com/htm0/03H3-QUIK-SITE-TREE-MAPS.html

 

SITE TREE OBJS:

 

http://www.viz2000.com/htm0/03H4-QUIK-SITE-TREE-OBJS.html

 

SITE TREE PLUG:

 

http://www.viz2000.com/htm0/03H5-QUIK-SITE-TREE-PLUG.html

 

****

 

also check This out:

 

INTR FLRG MAPS:

 

http://www.viz2000.com/htm0/0123-QUIK-INTR-FLRG-MAPS.html

 

There are links to Area Rugs, Carpet, Concrete, Floor and Ground, Granite, Laminate, Limestone, Linoleum, Marble, Mosaic, Onyx, Quartzite, some Sandstone, Slate, Specialty Flooring, Stone, etc Surfaces, Tiles, Travertine, Vinyl, Wood

 

some are links to CG Textures, the links to Marble, Granite and etc Stones are real-world Texture Images provided by the companys

 

****

 

let me know what you Think,

 

Thanks

 

Randy

 

i acutally have thought of a more "simple" way to do This Interface but it would mean letting go of all the work i have already done

 

just List everything alphabetically (in English)

and then put all the Links to that Object on one Page (d*mn, makes too much sense, but i still might end up doing It, anyway)

[Jeff Mottle]

Does that mean you want to volunteer Ernest.

Actually you have a great idea, but as always time is the biggest issue. I'll see what I can do but no promisses.

 

And yes spellllinggs alwayz count.

 

[ September 19, 2002, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Jeff Mottle ]

[Ernest Burden III]

Originally posted by Jeff Mottle:

Does that mean you want to volunteer Ernest

Not really, for two reasons. The first is the same as you--available time. The second is that I do not know the material. I am following the tree/entourage discussions with much interest because I am trying to learn what is available and what works in a production environment.

 

Most trees/people I still draw and paint even in otherwise digital renderings. I want to take that more into digital, so must choose a horse like so many others here.

 

However, may I suggest a format where forumers submit a product and fill in a form with some basic information about method (be it a 2D, 3D or hybrid), usability, love/hate rating, cost (more likely that would be moderator research), coverage (few trees vs. many, for example) plug-in vs. stand-alone. While this is sounding like a lot of work just to set up, if done with a little fore-thought it could provide a good template for compiling real-user data about products pitched at us. In essence, an open-ended survey.

 

Just a thought...

[Jeff Mottle]

Ernest, I really like this idea about user product ratings. It actually crossed my mind the other day, but one thing that would concern me is frivolous voting and user comments. Something that product vendors may not take lighty and ultimate reflect poorly upon my site. Take the links section on CGA for example. While there is a voting system in place to rank links (in this case user sites) it appears that many have decided to turn this into playground for tying to ruin the rep of their competitors. I have seen amazing work (VERY AMAZING) get a vote of 1 out of 5. Clearly the system is being abused. (BTW, for those that are doing this GROW UP! )

 

If anybody has a suggestion of how this can work without having to worry about abuse, I'd love to know. I suppose one solution would be moderated votes (ie checked before they are posted) Also if somebody gave a poor review, we would have to know exactly why with a text box. A simple 2 out of 5 may not be desciptive enough.

 

Amazon and many other sites do allow for user feedback, but I do believe that the comments are moderated. Something to consider for CGA2 that is for sure. Thanks Ernest.

[Ernest Burden III]

Originally posted by Jeff Mottle:

...one thing that would concern me is frivolous voting and user comments..

That would be controled by having the survey items be mostly informational, not so subjective. i.e. 'library size = sm/med/lg The point being to have an informative list of available solutions, not freeform reviews. So don't have ratings past stuff like usability = poor/good/indispensible.

 

Forget the user ratings of people's websites, then. And while you're at it, of forum members, too. I prefer to judge people on my experience with them, and we can block jerks, right?

 

Amazon and many other sites do allow for user feedback, but I do believe that the comments are moderated..

See, I wasn't imagining that much user input, just enough to make sure that we have a current list of libraries and applications (etc) to meet our needs with a little info about content and usability. This listing should mostly build itself via a form, as users find a new solution they can post it, or 'comment' on existing items but just within the form's fields.

 

Anyone with a lot to say about a product can submit a review or start a discussion thread...as many already do.

[nisus]

Hi all,

 

The topic turned out to be something completely different than it's title, but I like it a lot, especially Ernest's solution for a kind of controlled way of survey. A checkbox system with 5 levels instead of 3 (S M L) looks better to me to get a more weighted results, but that's only a small remark. The person who sets up the list has a lot of control over the direction of the survey by choosing the points to review. I hope this will stand over abuse.

 

rgds

 

nisus