Maya's "Select by element" equivalent in max ?
polycounter lvl 12
so yeah, is there an equivalent in max ? there's the "select element" tick box in the UV editor, but it's only usable within the unwrap modifier, not for the geometry. I'd like the same thing in editable poly sub-object, like the ' grow' function' but automatically expanding to the whole corresponding UV element.
You would do a good deed helping a super tired folk with no cigarettes left, and a barely functioning brain.
Thanks!
You would do a good deed helping a super tired folk with no cigarettes left, and a barely functioning brain.
Thanks!
Replies
Hope this helps!
string $sjNewUVsel;
if ($sjNewUVsel == 0) {$sjNewUVsel = `scriptJob -e SelectionChanged "polySelectBorderShell 0"`;}
else if ($sjNewUVsel != 0) {$sjNewUVsel = 0; scriptJob -ka;}
Edit: Oops, looks like I had what you were asking completly wrong...hmm, dont think thats possible in any efficient way. Will dig through the MaxScrit refrence and see if can get any leads on how to pull that off without a uvw modifier.
I can think of two ways to work around this.
1) Select the boarders of your UV's while you're in UnwrapUVW, apply Edit Poly, go to edge mode and break the edges, or chamfer with a setting of 0. Making each UV piece an element unto itself. Making it possible to use element mode the way you want...
2) assign each island a unique smoothing group (hopefully you have less than 32 islands) and select by smoothing group.
Neither of these is very desirable but there are scripts to help with this, its late you can check scriptspot on your own. Personally I would rather have the Max UV editor work like Maya's and not be dependent on modifiers... but yea probably never going to happen.
but i guess you are new in 3D so it is fine
for the history of it this is a "fresh" feature in maya and a very old one in 3dsmax.
3dsmax still has far more selection options and methods.
You can select in any way you need actually even in ways not available to other tools yet.
Regarding UV elements,
It's just one click in the UV editor or simply in the viewport that is if you want to select by UV element all you need to do is select in UV unwrap, collapse it and it will be automatically selected when you go back in your object.
Regarding Polygon Elements,
If you simply want to select polygon element simply press 5 while you have your polygonal object selected OR right click
Regarding Selections in General
you can also select by smoothing angle, vertex, smoothing group, material id... etc.
instead of smoothing that our friend suggested i would recomment you simply assign fifferent material ID to quick select OR you can simply select the surface you need and created sub-object named selections like you do with objects.
pick the appropriate way to select depending on what you want to do.
also keep in mind that max apart from square selection also has circle, paint selection, lasso and polygonal lasso selections, and all you need to do to acess them is press Q continually to circle between them.
you you can easily convert your selection to vertex, edge, polygons, etc, simply by pressing control and clicking on the icon of your required sub-object at the command panel.
I hope you found this helpful and sorry for me laughing
Also, if you don't want to do this to the entire mesh because you're worried about messing up the smoothing groups, you could either do this to portions of the mesh, or could always detach to separate objects, then apply the Unwrap to a group of objects.
renderhjs' "swap UVW XYZ" tool in TexTools might help. For example, you could easily assign different smoothing groups to each island, or whatever.
This is actually a horrible workflow compared to Maya's method - in Maya you simply select any element in the 3d viewport and CTRL+right click -> "To UV Shell".
In Max you have to add Unwrap UVW modifier, go into the separate Unwrap UVWs window, make sure "select by element" checkbox is enabled, select the element you want, then collapse the stack. Much, much slower.
And you might want to tone down your self-righteous ignorance in future
This isn't always true, collapsing an Unwrap UVW modifier will only convert your selected Faces to the Editable Poly selection, but for some stupid reason it does not work with Edges and Vertices.
This is what the original post is asking for I think?
As MoP said, in Maya, UVs being just an extra Component type (Vertex, Edge, Face, UV), it's very easy and much more intuitive to convert back and forth between Components on the fly (please do this in Max Autodesk...
I guess then you must be the hardcore maya type
this might sound childish now but, can you list them please?
"This is actually a horrible workflow compared to Maya's method - in Maya you simply select any element in the 3d viewport and CTRL+right click -> "To UV Shell" "
this is simply one method to do it.i didn't say i would do it like that. simply he wanted to do something from his previous maya workflow that has other and easier methods to be done in max. i offered some other methods that were far more simple. perhaps somehow they skipped your radar.
"And you might want to tone down your self-righteous ignorance in future
sure thing
You are right Bal,
It only works for polygons, which you can easily convert. But this is a workaround and it would be nice (although i don't really see much purpose to it) if it was supported on other sub leveles too.
I just don't see a reason why would someone want to go in UV mode in order to do something else that UV mapping. SO maybe that is not what he was asking.
I think he was simply asking how to select "Element". He just brought the UV as an example because usually that is how some people would select elements in combined objects (afaik) in maya before the concept of element was introduced.
Talking about self-righteous ignorance, In max all you need to do in order to select an element, is simply press 5.
And i am sorry that i am saying this to an administrator of such a prestigious community, but if all you had to say was this, i think you are seriously biased and on top of it not aware of simple selection methods in 3ds, that exist since DOS.
edit: i repeat my plea from a larger post that is missing, and since you jumped on me in such way, please list all methods that maya offers for selection and back up your claim.
this will be educational for everyone.
second edit: i just realized we might also be referring to different "elements"
If i am not mistaken in maya, vertices, edges, polygons are elements,
while in 3dsmax they are called "Sub-Objects" and Element is one type of them along with verts, edges, borders and polygons as far as editable poly is concerned.
A lot of us are dual users, myself included. I started off with Maya switched to Max, prefer max and stay current in Maya. Most people will tell you learn both at some point, it helps widen number of jobs you can apply for and its really the only fair way to compare the two. But that means dropping your heavy bias, which you seem pretty attached to...
I'll try and explain why its better in Maya for this one thing rather than getting into the tired old Max Vs Maya debate. They're both tools, they both have pros and cons learn them both to the same level if you're going to compare... bla bla bla...
Maya:
Its a mode you enter at any time, not a modifier you apply. It doesn't require you to collapse or apply any new modifiers bloating your stack, adding a bunch of clicks to get a half assed selection passed.
It actually allows you to do things like edit UV's once something is rigged and skinned which with Max technically you can but your modifier stack grows and grows or you run the risk of inserting and collapsing below, thats risky.
If they magically ported it over without saying where it came from you'd like it and would think its was a great idea.
Max:
Max has inconsistent selection methods, it depends on what modifier your using and how much work they put into that specific selection method. With UVWunwrap applied, why can't you convert a selection of edges to faces or vert like you can in Edit Poly?
Why can't you select loops/rings or convert selections, when working on a projection cage?
Going from vert/edge selection to polys grows the selection, when you go back to verts/edges. Sometimes shrink gets you back to the original selection (yea more clicks) and sometimes it doesn't work, so you're stuck cleaning up the selection instead of just moving on.
You can pass selections up into modifiers also if you apply the modifier with a sub-object selection active. I do this all the time with soft select and modifiers like noise. Collapse much? It sounds like you're using Max's Modifier stack like Mayas history stack? The modifier stack in Max is one of its strongest features and it sounds like you're not even using it?
Seriously you sound like someone arguing that Edit Mesh is far superior to Edit poly... Or Physique to skin.
PLEASE don't take this post to mean that I'm flying a Maya flag and have just declared war on Maxtopia. I'm just trying to explain the difference.
By now everyone knows that ctrl-clicking on a vertex/face/edge/border alows you to convert your selection (setting ctrl-1,2,3,4,5 keyboard shorcuts for this is very useful), what I didn't know is that by doing ctrl-alt-click you can convert to the outline of your selection, and ctrl-shift-click converts to only the inside of your selection.
I use it alot now, haven't looked into Maya to see if it has an equivalent, but probably.
You have mis-read my post. I was only talking about UV element selection, as you said in your original post. My point had nothing to do with the Editable Poly "select by element" mode which you reach by pressing 5. I was talking about selecting by UV element directly on a mesh. No need for the UV editor to do this in Maya, but you do need the UV editor to do this in Max. That was my point. Please read more carefully in future.
Come on, man, don't be an ass. I have been using 3ds Max since version 2.5 (sorry if I'm not old enough to have ever used the DOS version), I have only been using Maya since version 8.5, so if anything I have more experience in Max than in Maya. Believe it or not, I know what I'm talking about in both programs, while you only seem to know anything about Max itself.
In Maya, vertices, edges and polygons are called "components", and only occasionally referred to as "elements". Yes, this is what Max calls "sub-objects".
To clarify, an "element" in Max is referred to as a "shell" in Maya.
However Maya distinguishes between "mesh shells" which are equivalent to an Editable Poly "element", and "UV shells" which are the same as Max's "UV elements".
Both "UV shells" and "mesh shells" are directly accessible in the viewport in Maya, while in Max only "mesh shells" are accessible in the viewport - to select by UV shell in Max you must go through the Unwrap UVW workflow like I mentioned previously (unless they added a new feature in Max 2009+ that I don't know about, I'm still using Max 2008 here at work).
I'm not trying to flame you or anything, you have just been posting in a very "knowledgeable" manner, while not seeming to know much about how Maya actually works.
I am a technical artist by trade and routinely use both Max and Maya at work and at home, please understand that I do know what I am talking about... while it sounds like you are primarily a Max user and don't know much about Maya, judging by what you've written here.
Bal: Nice tip, I found that out by accident a few months ago too!
J/k.
I'm a max guy and am hardcore modelling in maya since a couple of days, and I must say, at first it felt like I was working with 2 left hands but once you stop mimicking Max and just accept the ways that Maya does its stuff, it's pretty cool. I'm still finding out new stuff that'd deffinately miss in max when/if I go back.
My conclusion is, they both have really good stuff, and really stupid stuff, but I like them both haha.
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=98&t=294982
No i am not one of those who say that editable mesh is best. I am one of those who say that the ribbon is great and the command panel should start taking a hike in favor of more interactive workflows
What it all boils down to is psychological comfort for the individual artist. But when it comes to actual features, workflows, and productivity there is no place for sentiments.
I think what version of maya you first used and what version i last used makes the difference regarding our personal preference and although i agree that maya has improved immensely in the field of game development especially with versions 7-8 and more so after Autodesk picked up and is stuffing it with 3dsmax features (sorry but it is true) which i admit in some cases are better implemented than 3dsmax. You can see people cheering for features that as you know since you are long time max user, we had in max since the dawn of time.
I have been using 3dstudio for almost the entire 15+ years of my career.
I know its strengths and weaknesses pretty well. And if we are talking about non destructive workflow .. please.. although maya is more capable the last 2 versions .. just please... you can't possibly compare maya's history with max's stack workflow.
I read a lot the word inconsistency... which in fact is something i see maya users pop a lot to convince others that 3dsmax is confusing or i don't know what.
For every time i read the word inconsistency, i replace it with the word VERSATILITY. 3dsmax caters for a huge user base which creates art and design for almost every sector imaginable. There are tools in there that fit to what these people are doing and that is why they prefer 3dsmax over maya or XSI. Yes there are tools in there that are not perfectly integrated, others that are obsolete etc. ofc no tool is perfect and it will never be the best forever etc. Some versions are better than others. Some are even revolutionary. I am one of those who say that there should be a good clean up in 3dsmax and autodesk seems about to deliver.
A quick estimate of max's userbase in M&E alone would tally easily 60% of the entire userbase and we all know that this is a fact. Well i do not think that this is a coincidence or ignorance on the account of hundreds or even a couple of thousand TDs out there in some of the best studios! Mind you most studios that maya put a foot in, didnt switch really but complimented their 3dsmax workflow.
Over the years i have used maya consistently for about 2 years and i had been trying it on and off from version 1 till version 5-6. At that point i stopped bothering. I have tried XSI, and i try its every single new version and i think although i do not personally like to use it for my artwork, that if any software could claim (and be right about it too) that is more efficient at some point XSI was it.
With the advent of series 2011 it isnt anymore as it seems when it comes to game development.
I am currently a creative director (have been art director, lead artist.. junior.. coffee maker, the whole 9 yards as they say) by trade with many many artists and TDs who worked with me over the years using every software that exists. I have helped along with their feedback to streamline my production methodologies and achieve tremendous speeds for pretty high quality assets. I am lucky enough to work with one of the best art teams in the country i currently live in. Their speed consists on the degree of freedom and my insistence on using certain tools from different apps.
I have done visualizations dome theater presentations, multimedia content DTP virtual rides, VFX, ofc games, and have worked with almost every satellite software imaginable.
What i am saying is not only based only on my personal preference which is clearly 3dsmax and not out of stubbornness or disappointment with what i could\couldn't do with some other tools but mainly from the workflow and usage that i have experienced through my entire career with some damn good artists who usually juggle between all major 3 and by studying which tools an entire team of artists uses and for which tasks and which produce results faster and more efficiently. Usage data proven in production in many studios and under different managements budgets , circumstances.
You understand i am not talking just my personal preference here but a professional view that has been formed over countless projects and pipelines that i have worked with and those I have designed and evaluated.
There are many people who do not realize what certain features mean in their workflow after many years of using 3dsmax. You can't blame the hammer if someone wasn't aware or can't be creative enough to think of a different use except hammering nails. Some use it to make amazing metallic objects and sculptures.
I was lucky enough at the beginning of my journey in 3d to have some of the legends of 3d often at my side most of them have received Autodesk Master's awards for their contribution in 3D mostly in the field of productivity and technology and they are using every software imaginable so i had (and still have every now and then) similar conversations like this one we are having right here.
I am by no means cancelling anyone's personal opinion or experience. You can keep your opinion that you have formed over years of experience and you should promote your paradigm. What i am saying is, i know there are people who were bitter with 3dsmax left and haven't looked back. But eventually and as the time turns, i believe, it will be their loss. It's like those studios who didn't believe in Wii initially because they were disappointed by gamecube sales
But seriously, just look at the workflow that 3dsmax 2011 suggests see how many different options an animator has, see how much better 3dsmax was and still is for lighting artists.. and is only getting better. True, many complain that iray didn't make it in max this time around.. but still.. no tool has a tool like quicksilver.
This is going to revolutionalize art asset creation for everyone. It almost cancels unwrapping and minimizes preview times to a minimum! btw i am a huge fan of mudbox as well. I am sure some will find it weird too but more and more i feel that i made the right choice
Bottom line, It is just a matter of perception and philosophy. There will be good times and not so good times, and this is seriously a good time to be an artist using 3dsmax and for very good and solid creative reasons.
eric i haven't tried it, but i think someone posted a script in this thread that does the same.
also i am not sure but i think polytools (graphite tools) has a similar feature?
i am still not sure if this is what he was asking though, and i don't remember ever having the need to actually select something this way.
However you have not really explained how you come to promote 3DS Max features as "better" than Maya in so many ways, when you clearly are not a very experienced Maya user. Your first post was wrong in several regards to Maya tools, and you wrote as if Max is better in every regard without giving a qualified reason as to why other than "I say it is".
You even said you have not really used Maya since version 6 (that was released in 2004, so whatever Maya knowledge you had then is about 6 years out of date now). So I don't see how you can reasonably try to compare features between Max and Maya when you don't even know what features Maya has now!
I personally enjoy many features of Maya and 3ds Max, and I am very comfortable modelling, animating, lighting, rendering and scripting in both packages.
My only concern in this thread, and your manner of posting, is that I hate to see misinformation be spread..
In future if you feel you want to compare packages and try to make an argument one way or another, please do it objectively, rather than simply making up things, not checking your facts, or working off information that is 6 years out of date.
As you said yourself, packages are being improved all the time, and many people "switch application" completely every few years and just get used to working with a different workflow, and see their current package get improved, while missing out on all the improvements being made to the other package. Now their view is skewed, because they compare what they have now in their current package, with what they remember from their old package 3-5 years ago.
Personally I try to keep current with all the major packages, and I can model/rig/light/animate/render just as effectively in Max as in Maya, so it really pains me to see people trumpeting "their" package of choice as the "best" one, purely because they are basing their arguments on outdated or simply incorrect information.
I am sure you love 3ds Max, as you say, you have been using it since the DOS versions, so of course you are going to prefer it - you know pretty much everything about it. However, that is no reason to assume that simply because you don't know how to do something similar in a different package, makes 3ds Max better in any way.
Of course we can agree that various packages have better features X and Y than other packages, that's simply fact (eg. Max's Modifier Stack is very powerful and Maya has very little to counter that), but there are also features which are very similar, and just because you don't know they exist or how they work does not mean you should discard them.
All I am asking is please try to provide a balanced view when talking about comparisons between 3D apps, and if you don't know enough about the other one to make a reasonable comment, simply don't say it.
I asked earlier for a list of selection related features so we can actually and objectively compare. It might sound like a pissing contest, but only after comparing features one by one you can objectively come to a conclusion. (we obviously cant compare thousands of features and implementations and the topic of the argument was selection tools)
The main strength and problem (for others) with max is actually its versatility. While maya has a pretty straight forward way of doing things common for all (which is very good), max also has tools specifically designed for architectural or engineering workflows which allow level designers flexibility and methods not available in other tools and this is a well known and admitted fact.
Many people are not aware of simple things that make a huge difference in 3dsmax. i.e. they are not aware that ; repeats your last action because it's not written anywhere. or that with alt ctrl shift you get different quads that make your work so much faster, or that by flicking fast your right click on your quad category title you enable the highlighted (blue) option (or if you are slow just left click on the quad title), unlike maya where you have to go to the exact category to select a command if you want to fall back to what you were previously doing and not just repeat the last one. I met animators who didn't know that their curves can have bezier handles in max too, simply because max didn't expose them by default in earlier versions and they were under the wrong impression that maxs curve editor was weak, the reference option while duplicating is something many users do not understand, the functionality and flexibility it gives to level designers and environment modelers and is mostly underused... and so on and so forth.
I didn't say that maya or other tools don't have these too some are there others are not. I am just saying that people don't know what max can really do simply because nobody has documented all these little but important things or taught them in school and you have to dig deep in forums to find them. Therefore their judgment is not based on solid ground. There are of course limitations but mostly I find them from people who expect to do things the way they used to do them in their previous application. i.e. positioning the pivot point in max the way you do in maya. In fact max offers a great deal flexibility when it comes to pivot placement and alignment interactively on your viewport. Only doesnt have it the way maya does. It gives more flexible and precise control combined with the plane locks on transformation axis.
But as i said; my professional reasoning doesn't come from my personal preference. It comes after evaluating certain pipelines over the years in actual production. From my post at this point of my career I wouldn't have to be a user to decide which is better. I could simply observe and study pipeline efficiency data. Yet i am very much involved and i constantly and actively try to find tools and features that would improve our production methodology along with our TDs and feedback from leads and junior artists.
i.e. using tool\methodology x has decreased production time and allowed greater flexibility and reusability of the asset.
There are many things that artists would like to have in their favorite tool. We talk about these things often as we encounter them in our daily work either from maya or 3dsmax or XSI.
i.e. for many years people wanted soft selection in maya, or vertex weight list, or the simple fact that textures were automatically refreshing on the viewport. You are a TD so you must have been asked by someone to actually make a script for that at some point am i right? i know there was a mel script doing the rounds but it was not functioning consistently, (which they got lately) or simply a way to lock your transforms on certain planes which still isn't there and place it exactly where you want with less effort. from maya i see many animators asking for the cool interactive dynamics system or the simplicity and versatility maya and xsi have when it comes to scripting. TDs love maya and XSI that is for sure and that is because they could script easier there and I dont see this changing for a while
What you can do with the stack and the tools alone is a HUGE productivity boost by itself though and not a small difference to be taken lightly.
That is if you use it properly and not just as a display of your modifiers
i.e. cut and paste of your skin modifier (or any modifiers that perform certain actions on a model such as UV modifiers, bend etc)on a box and after you tweak your entire model reapply it or transfer it to other models which is something that as far as I know cant be done in maya.
The fact that 3dsmax is the most widely used 3d tool says a lot by itself.
Same as the fact that maya is the most widely used tool in VFX production and for a reason. And it is well respected for that. But i think we are talking about game development here and not in general. In general there are many other factors to take into consideration rendering lighting, renderer options and availability MR integration etc.
In my book max wins at the points in game development (as they say in boxing matches i think) and definitely not by knockout. It's a great "match" that over the years has empowered both applications and of course us. I am also talking about 3dsmax as it is now taking graphite tools and what they offer in the equation which is actually a lot! I guess you are aware of polyboost and its latest incarnation as graphite tools and how powerful tools and methodologies they offer. i.e. tweaking UVs without having to add a modifier or open a window, but interactively only by moving vertices around, or the powerful freehand topology tools etc.
Still though, a fact remains; the tool doesn't make the artist.
I say my personal preference is 3dsmax.
BUT i also said that i am implementing mixed pipeline professionally. That means i acknowledge and take seriously into consideration the strong points of maya and not reject maya altogether as you possibly think. As a professional I would be blind ignorant and stupid doing that.
Professionally i do not see 3D applications; I see pipeline\workflow efficiency for the type of work we perform with the engines we use which is development of games for PC-DS-Wii-PS2-PS3 etc. with Unreal, Vision, Infernal and other proprietary engines.
@ vig the chugnnuts uv script lets you convert selections, although it's buggy.
As various people have described, the only way to do this by default in Max is to add an Unwrap UVW modifier, make sure "select by element" is enabled, select the UV element you want, then collapse the stack.
It's not about selecting polygons by "element" alone (ie. all connected geometry), it's about selecting polygons by connected UV area alone. This means you can select a whole portion of a larger "element" based on its UV mapping, without ever having to open any UV editor at all.
yiannisk: I'm not sure why you have to make this into a "I think Max has better features than everything!" thread, are you being sponsored or something? Clearly you don't have very good knowledge of Maya, so please stop talking like you know it all.
As for a "pissing contest", it was you who started this when you said:
You are just plain wrong and uninformed on this point. Please do a feature review of Maya 2010's selection methods before you start spewing nonsense like this. Like you said yourself, you last used Maya at version 6, therefore your knowledge of Maya is far, far behind.
I'm not sure why you're so insistent that 3ds Max is the best application for everything, ever. Just because you like it a lot doesn't mean everyone should jump up and use it. Give it a break, please. If you want to do an actual feature comparison based on current versions of both programs, then please start a new thread for this, because currently you're not helping anyone.
I see your wall of text, and raise one of my own. It takes you many a sentence to reverse your stance, but I'm glad its happening.
15 years of max experience, impressive. In another 15 years of Maya experience you'll be qualified to compare the two packages fully. We can probably discuss specific features much sooner as you learn them. Until then discussing and comparing them is pointless because you only have 50% of the information that is required to speak with any kind of authority on the subject.
The best way to talk knowledgeably about a subject is to BE knowledgeable about it. In other words you need more Maya experience before talking about what Maya lacks.
It's interesting you changed the "argument" (that you started btw) to Max Vs Maya after finding out that Max was bested in this one feature set. Rather than admit Maya did something well, you would rather derail the thread and turn it into a very tired, very old debate.
Thank you for attempting to school everyone, unfortunately none of the nuggets of wisdom you mentioned (which where actually few and far between the rambling), where personally enlightening since I already knew about every last one of them. None of them change the fact that max has inconsistent selection methods built for whatever specific modifier you're using. You asked for specific examples and earlier before that I asked you two specific questions and you have not answered them.
Because scrolling up past your walls of text is a chore I'll list them here. I will also add that you say that these inconsistencies are actually versatility but I'll argue that they are strengths added to certain modifiers while not being added to others. Autodesk has realized this, Ken Pimentel specifically by saying (I'm paraphrasing here since I'm not about to go digging through his blog for the exact quote) "That is one of the draw backs of upgrading a popular tool like edit poly, suddenly everyone wants that functionality in other places". Indeed. Yet instead of dispersing those cool new features so everything is consistent we get "tough potato cakes, these weaknesses are STRENGTHS!"
Well I call BS.
It would be nice to be able to select edges and loops when editing a projection cage.
It would be nice if the UV editor selection methods mirrored Edit Poly.
It would be nice if the UV editor was not modifier dependent.
It would be nice if Max was actually context sensitive to mode or actions you where preforming. For example Ctrl-B in the UV editor breaks edges, but only with Keyboard Shortcut override on which derails other keyboard shortcuts. With it off Ctrl-B toggles sub-object select in the modifier stack. Wouldn't be better if I had the UV editor window active and had an edge selected Ctrl-B actually broke the edge?
Same story for R relax and many other shortcuts through out the program. These inconsistencies have lead me to go in and drastically overhaul their default keyboard shortcuts and replace them. Often with multiple KBS that do the exact same thing in but in other modes.
Other apps like Silo and Modo are truly context sensitive and negate this whole issue. You probably don't care because you haven't personally used the other tools. If all you know is brokenness it doesn't seem so broken. Which brings us back to the main thrust of the derailment, you need to educate yourself before posting misinformation.
It would be nice if Max had one editable mesh type. Instead it has Editable Mesh, Edit Mesh, Editable Poly, Edit Poly. These legacy features create 4 categories of mesh types and all have inconsistencies in their tool sets.
For example:
Editable Poly > Border mode: Select all (ctrl-a) selects all the boarders or open edges in a mesh.
Edit Poly > boarder mode: Select all (ctrl-a) It selects all edges.
Thanks but if I wanted all the edges selected I would select all in edge mode.
Now you can try and tow the party line and play these inconsistencies off as strengths but when used they are weaknesses pure and simple. They don't enhance max in any way they just create the need for useless mouse clicks and bazaar work-a-rounds.
Notice I'm not comparing Max to Maya but Max to Max. Maya has similar issues but rather than listing them there and giving you fodder for the next thread you derail, I encourage you to go use Maya and find them for yourself.
Also understand that I'm a max user, I prefer it over Maya I converted to Max from Maya. If you asked me which app do you prefer to use I would say Max. With that said I think you're being unreasonably unfair to Maya and espousing half truths general nonsense.
You're attempting to compare a flathead screwdriver (Max) to a Philips head (Maya). They're both just tools you should have in your toolbox. They do virtually the same thing (secure screws) but work in slightly different ways. Would you use a philips head screwdriver on a Flathead screw? No, of course not. There are somethings that one tool does better than the other and vice versa. Not fully understanding how they both work so you can make an accurate comparison just makes you look uninformed. You can attempt to post more walls of text trying to make yourself look like an expert in other areas but really its just a big smoke screen.
With 15 years of experience you should know better by now. But I guess I shouldn't equate age with wisdom.
PS I'm being a bit of an ass because you're being unusually thick headed.
About selecting UV shells in Max, after using tangent-space normal maps some more, I see the benefit of breaking vertex normals along UV seams. Selecting shells in Editable Poly would go a long way towards making this easier to do. Maybe that's the OP's intent.
Here's a diagram of selection methods comparing Maya 2008 and Max 2010. I'm using the same mesh and achieving the same results in both packages. I have documented the steps required to achieve each one.
Conclusions
For selecting geometry elements (geometry connected together regardless of UVs):
For selecting UV elements (geometry connected together by UVs):
I am using the term "actions" here to mean anything that could be a button press in UI, a mouse click to select something, or a hotkey to toggle something. As far as I am aware there are no other shortcuts that can cut down these "action" times as described above.
Therefore Maya and Max are equal in terms of workflow speed for selecting geometry elements, while Max is considerably slower for selecting UV elements.
I've even been pretty generous with Max's workflow there, since if you don't have a the Unwrap UVW modifier button in your button set, you will have to scroll through the modifier list to select it.
Additionally if you don't have "Always Bring Up the Edit Window" option enabled, then you have an extra click to open the Edit window before you can select your geometry.
Finally, if your "Select by Element" checkbox in the Unwrap UVW window is not enabled, that's another click to enable it (and one more later whenever you want to turn it off again, since it's modal).
Therefore the worst case in Max would be 9 actions in order to simply select a UV element on an Editable Poly mesh, and the best case is 5 actions, which even then is a clunky workflow (adding and collapsing a modifier just to get the selection? madness!).
Additionally, it's worth noting that the Maya method can be performed entirely in a single viewport with no additional controls visible - it is all done through the right-click context-sensitive Marking Menus.
The Max workflow is impossible to do without at least opening up the Edit UVWs window, which would most likely appear on a second monitor, leading you further away from your current work area, or alternately would obscure your main viewport, possibly obscuring your selection in the 3D viewport.
If you think I've done this workflow wrong in either package, or if there is a faster way I don't know about, please tell me how to do it more efficiently. I did look around in all the Editable Poly options in Max 2010 and saw no options for selecting by UV element without adding an Unwrap UVW modifier.
Also I am working with default unmodified applications in both cases, this is purely a test of the default workflow without augmenting it with scripts.
As I said earlier, I am not trying to "bash" any application, I am interested purely in workflow and being able to do everything I want, as fast as possible.
I am not a Max "hater", in fact I'd be the first to say that it does many things better than Maya, but for people (yiannisk, I'm looking at you) to blindly claim that their preferred application is better purely because they don't know enough about the other applications, is simply ridiculous.
As I said, if you can give me a faster, more efficient workflow to do what I described using the default 3ds Max toolset, I would be very grateful, since I use this workflow fairly regularly at work.
If we're counting number of mouse clicks its VERY clear without even needing to count.
Good lord man, can you really not accept that Max isn't perfect? Using other packages gives you a much, much broader view of these things, try it some time.
Max, while very powerful, is inconsistent. A lot of software is, but that's not the point. I know you didn't respond to Vig's post, or you did so in one of your mammoth posts, but his example is perfect: every separate modifier might have different shortcuts and options, despite them serving very similar purposes.
That's a fact.
I use Max regardless of said fact, but I reserve the right to wish this wasn't so. If --as a professional user-- you can't find fault with your package of choice, you're either not pushing it, or you should get yourself checked for signs of fanboy's disease.
edit: Ah, I see Vig posted to much the same effect, later on.
Also, fuck flathead screws. Philips for life!
Mop I just read your post LOL...
If I had to just select the head I would use the lasso select mode with ignore back faces off. If you have windowed selection mode on it also make selecting things fast. I was wondering if you did this for modeling, convert selection from uv shell to polys.
As far as Max being inconsistent.... Really???? (being sarcastic) I have been using this app since version 2.5 and while it is versatile, how can I put this, it's the most inconsistent piece of crap I have ever seen. I mean where can I begin, just in the selection tools, I can write for days. Yeah I love Max but damn, it sucks when it comes to being consistent.
I mean by now since they introduced a way to convert selections for example, all modifiers that allow you to select at the subobject level should be able to do this. Don't get me started! It shouldn't take a few releases to update these. And lets not get into why epoly and edit poly need separate shortcuts,
I have tried to split by placing a name over where i answer questions that someone asked specifically.
I see a lot of personal insults overall while i am talking only about features and software and never personally. That tells me that it is not me who has to be checked for fanboism. Pointed out certain strong points, all i got back is mostly insults and replys of the type "bah-pfff urghh you don't know crap, stop acting like you do" sorry but what i say in my every post is very specific and clear. I clearly said which field i think max and maya excel which is even common knowledge in the industry not just my new unheard of idea, and mentioned twice that professionally i respect, accept and use maya too in production.
Disclaimer
I guess based on the responses i got i have to clearly state the obvious that ofc there are flaws in every software.
i.e. in max after a gazillion versions you still have certain modifiers collapsing to editable mesh if you do that at the stack
Also to remind that we are not discussing bugs in general or making a wishlist. There is a long list of bugs and wishes for every software. Do not derail the conversation.
We were talking about selection options. And i am still waiting for this list
http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/cory/what_s_new_in_2011
http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/ken/3ds_max_2011_announced
Regarding inconsistencies, I simply take some things as facts, i expect them to be fixed at some point, but I arrange my workflow accordingly until they do. Never had issues. Never was bothered or had blocks because of an inconsistency. I don't stop in the middle of my work and say "OMG another inconsistency what am i going to do now?!?!" every time i stumble upon one. When i use edit poly (not very often, i prefer modeling at the base level and doing only variations with modifiers or perform one off bends etc.) i do it keeping in mind its limitations and differences. I guess i have a different mindset. In general i like to keep my models clean and collapsed unless absolutely necessary. If needed i will keep a second version with the modifiers intact. My only blocks so far would come from rendering large images or heavy compositions. Inconsistent shortcuts can be easily changed if they bother you.
Also i might have to repeat what i say in my every post that FOR ME max is a better tool. for me PERSONALLY.
caps are for emphasis just in case rage is blinding some
For many others is not. perfectly fine and normal. We all are free to choose our tools.No reason to get agitated and loose temper and manners because someone prefers something else and has different opinion. I will start by asking, would you attack someone who says "i believe that bananna flavor is the best for me, and chocolate suxx. In fact banana is the best in the world". While yes it can be argued, it is pointless
So in fact it is not me starting an argument.. but you, so that we won't loose our track
I initially only made this statement, "3dsmax still has far more selection options and methods." which is true and it can be proven easily!
I will also repeat that in my workplace we take advantage of both applications for what they do best. So therefore i know both their weaknesses and strengths after discussing with our TDs and artists and looking at the effects on our productivity.
Last but not least, nobody needs to wait 15 years for me to learn maya. In fact it took me about 10-15 days to pick it up in full speed when i needed to work with maya and worked with it for about 2 years when it was needed. I'm not stupid, honestly!
Vig
This is also relevant to something that MoP asked, an easier method is simply select your material ID on the object and then apply the unwrapper. you won't need to flick through ids. I have learned since a junior artist that it is very helpful and it will allow you to quickly select entire areas if you separate them by material IDs. A very basic max workflow. Try it and thank me later
You still have to show me how it was "bested". Max doesn't have the concept of UV Shells but offers other methods. The answer i just gave you about how material ids can be used to do that, should be enough.
Also i never had a different stance to change it
I am only saying that it seems pretty obvious that with the new features of 2011 series well.. even if we disregard graphite tools that are already there.. Viewport Canvas is like Photoshop\Body Paint in max which could be compared with modo that you mentioned or quite possibly even Photoshop! Well it is kind of a big thing don't you agree?
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=shEl4iMebxM[/ame]
Some of what you mentioned are bugs not inconsistencies or weaknesses (and some are old ones too) but since a bug is a malfunction in a way they are weaknesses. Others are wishes those I do not see as weaknesses sorry but ofc there is room for a lot of improvement in every tool. Most are valid though, except a few.
Also this is a quote from here: http://area.autodesk.com/maya2011
"A revitalized user interface offers a more consistent, improved user experience across all supported Maya platforms."
so,
Control+B DOES break faces edges and vertices. You have to select more than one edge though. Vertices and faces break anyway.
Regarding selection conversion. Supposedly you can. They are all there under the "Select" menu of the unwrap window but not every conversion works properly unfortunately. It seems that minor conditions apply
If i want to move all vertices or edges that surround a face... i simply select the face
Indeed the Unwrap tool is one of the things that need cleaning up improving and straightening out a bit.
The override is enabled\disabled automatically no need to press it usually. It might get stuck sometimes but it's quite rare.
Loop and ring in projection cage.. if there were edges is a good idea. Yes.
But I can work without it though as usually only small areas need tweaking and not entire rows.
Max is context sensitive pretty much in its every aspect. It has more years in the market than modo though, more versions and i also guess a lot more programmers and design philosophies have passed so it is bound to be "inconsistent". Modo is a newer and more modern tool that has grown a lot.
A quote from here: www.luxology.com/community/profiles/john_hayes/
"The major issues with Maya is that it has a very steep learning curve, and constantly needs additional MEL scripts created just to get many tasks done! modo on the other had is fairly easy to learn, and all the tools work with each other and are less cluttered and more accessible."
That is what that guy who moved from maya to modo thinks.
Now regarding the UI of max. It is dinausauric, we all know that.
Autodesk announced great plans for the GUI. This is what they have done for 2011 and it is a great improvement. They have done similarly with maya.
[ame]
Regarding editable mesh.. i really have no idea why they still keep Rex at home
I am not autodesk. I am just a user like you. I don't care, don't use and in general simply ignore its existence.
They claim compatibility reasons but after so many versions that everyone uses polygon tools doesn't make much sense. Maybe some tools are still dependent on these classes but still they should not be in there as some new users might get confused (i met one). You might want to take a look at that "webinar" they had held some time back. They announced pretty much everything they are working on and GUI is something they are putting a lot of thought into.
http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/ken/excalibur_xbr_revealed
According to Ken they are cleaning up with this XBR project so lets wait and see. Personally i am not much bothered. I simply use the tools i need, and i collapse to poly with a shortcut so no biggie there.
Thank you for your various insults, great way to communicate with people! Although i do not understand how it is allowed for someone to extend totally uncalled for personal insults to another just like that.
Given the above, and regarding the "rambling" comment i can't really characterize your post differently if not worse regardless the PS. If you think by insulting me you make my head softer,
When it comes to "my nuggets of wisdom" you have to consider that many people read these posts and not only you. I didn't post for you personally. It is great that you know them. I had written that the small tips are meant for those unaware of them
MoP
about me knowing "anything" regarding max.. i will swallow it, although greatly incorrect and if we had worked together you would know it. but the sponsored comment was a bit on the too much side and i am very sorry you went for such a low punch.
I never said max is better for everything and i do not understand how you came to that conclusion. In fact i specified, "game development" and i acknowledged clearly maya's better feature set in the field of film production. I never said i know it all and when i was not sure i even said so
Further bellow i am suggesting a couple of faster alternatives that do not require you to use unwrap window at all, and you can set them even before you unwrap.
In fact, it is better to do so.
That workflow you suggested is wrong and in fact even unthinkable in 3dsmax as it is indeed inefficient. A UV Shell is alien to its design philosophy. 3dsmax offers at 2.5 different methods at this level to do that easily, without opening a single extra window.
1.Material IDs
2.Smoothing Groups
0.5
The concept of "Shells" doesn't apply in 3dsmax and you shouldn't think of it as equivalent to something in maya. I see you parallelizing shells with elements in one of your posts and i think there is where misconception begins.
The proper workflow in order to be able to select quickly any subset area that belongs to an Element (such as head or arms, hands etc) is when you define the parts to assign a different material ID. Very simple no need for unwrap windows at all. You can have different material ids without having different materials.
>Select the object
>press 4
>select one face from the area you want
>Select by Material ID.
Secondarily, you can use smoothing groups but i prefer to keep my flexibility there and define them for their original use.
Eric mentioned you might want to split the edges. I never did so for that purpose and i don't recommend it, not that it is harmful but you have to keep in mind to weld them back afterwards and it might cause human errors in the long run. I would assign different smoothing groups (works the same for normal maps) or do what i mentioned above. Much easier cleaner and faster.
Eric
Yes they are now there that is why i had a parenthesis saying (they were added lately) i was not aware of the control clicking that was added to select additional axis though. It was something long due. Thank you for mentioning it.
I don't want to assign new material IDs or smoothing groups just to be able to select a set of UVs that are already on their own shell! That's just ridiculous, and inefficient.
Also I am not sure why you keep bringing up a ton of other Max features that have nothing to do with this thread, this thread has always only been about the selection methods and how there are various ways of doing things that are faster in one package than the other and vice-versa.
Please stop muddying the waters by bringing up totally unrelated issues and features.
Splitting the vertices themselves creates worse seams in the normal map. I only wish to split the vertex normals (thus, smoothing groups). Maybe there's a better way to assign hard edges between UV islands.
Material IDs and Smoothing Groups are generally not a good idea for storing selection "sets" as they can create extra vertex splits in the exported game-ready mesh.
I guess you could always remove them before exporting, but using them for selections means they will directly conflict with using Multi/Sub-Object materials and smooth shading. And if you edit your UVs then you would want to also alter your SGs/MatIDs to keep them usable as selection "sets".
Seems pretty inefficient to me. An Editable Poly UV-element selection method would make a lot more sense.
Reading this post may induce bleeding of the eyes.
yiannisk, if you don't like reading walls of text you shouldn't post them. There is so much there to go over its hard to hit it all but I will try.
This would be because you only ever really use max and don't question its authority over your workflow. If you've never used a better solution then the only solution you use will be the best one you find. This does not mean there are not better ways to work. It just means you're not looking for better methods.
Your solution to accept them for what they are (flaws), keep silent, never complain and just deal as is, is robbing you of performance enhancing techniques. There are better ways to do some things and it isn't unreasonable to point them out when the issues come up, its how features get added and now most requests are submitted to tech artists.
Welcome to Maya's History stack, thanks for ignoring one of the most powerful features in Max.
It's not a matter of personal taste. You can do 10-11 steps in max or you can do 1 in Maya. When it comes to a question of which is faster, easier and more versatile, in this one case, its Maya. How and why you keep translating that into "Maya is king of the universe, Max blows ass" is beyond me. Maya does something well, who knew?
You where pretty insulting in your first few posts and it set the tone for the replies. Yes totally childish, unnecessary and off topic. Yet you kept persisting.
Again dragging up other features rather than admit Maya does something well. You either don't understand how unbelievably simple this is to do in Maya or you're blinded by your irrational fanboi love of Max.
Clearly you personally don't take advantage of Maya otherwise this entire derailment would have never started. Just because someone in the same building uses Maya doesn't mean you magically absorb their knowledge through osmosis.
You need equal experience in both before you can begin to compare. The fact that this thread is still going stands as a monument to your lack of Maya knowledge. How you can still maintain a position that Max's 10-12 steps are better than Maya's one step is astounding. Even after a giant visual example... simply astounding.
It doesn't matter how you filter the material id's before or after applying UVWunwrap you still have to filter the ID's, its an extra, unnecessary step. I also have to bring up what if you need to select multple shells that reside in different material ID's? Now you're taking more steps than just filtering the shells in the editor. Even then you need to freeze uv shells. 1 step in Maya, 10+ in Max. See MoP's giant visual example. Bested, plain and simple. It can't be made any more clear than that.
Why are we talking about Viewport Cavnas? Well since we're on the subject...
I have thought it was pretty cool ever since I started using it, when it was added to Polyboost. Thinking this was a new addition that only became available in 2010 underscores your unwillingness to seek out fast efficient ways to work. It seems like if you can do it one way you're happy with it even if its slow and convoluted. If that works for you, I guess that's ok it gets the job done. Lucky for you there are a lot of other people out there that found polyboost and really liked it, so much so they added it to 2010. Lucky for all of us that someone with the know-how and skill did what Autodesk hadn't done. Buying a plug-in and rolling it in is not the same as coming up with those features on their own. It's scary how many functions of Max have been added like this.
Also know that you could have been using a lot sooner if you had been a bit more adventurous. Hopefully this thread has taught you that.
Soo... other apps have problems so we shouldn't expect the app we use to work the best that it can?
I'll also quote Ken. I think you're one of the people that needs to keep reading his blog and adjust your expectations accordingly. It sounds like you're hanging too many hopes on Quicksilver like a lot of other people and they won't be delivering all your hopes and dreams, at least not at first.
You tell me oh wise Maya guru with 10-15 days experience. I thought you said you learned all you need to learn in that time? If you would like examples of how keyboard shortcuts are properly contextually sensitive check out Modo or Silo. Maya isn't without its inconsistancies, oh wait I mean its perfect in every way they never could have done anything better and its problems are merely FEATURES! (yes I'm mocking you).
But it doesn't work like it does in edit poly. Inconsistent application of the same features.
Your solution to not being able to carry a selection of verts or edges out of UVWunwrap was to convert the selection to polys, collapse and then in editable poly, covert the selection of polys to edges or verts. Which isn't the original selection of verts or edges, it has grown to encompass all edges and polys attached to the polys.
Example:
- Select an edge
- Convert the selection to poly
- Now convert it back to edges
- You now have more than just the original edge selected.
If you keep doing this eventurally the entire mesh will be selected. This is the basic flaw in your suggestion to
Well thats the problem some keystrokes need override on and others need it off so while you're working in UVWunwrap you need to toggle it off and on to get the default keystrokes to work, total garbage, it should work optimally from the defaults. The solutions are as you pointed out set up a full customized set of keyboard shortcuts or bind KBSO to a keyboard shortcut so its easier to toggle. I've needed to tweak rings and loops on a projection cage and wasted time going around selecting all the edges. If the users will benefit from unified selection methods, then they should have it. If they pack cool features into one modifier and people like and come to depend on it, roll it into the others so they don't have to stop and think "how would I do this if edit poly was broken and I couldn't select rings and loops. This basic principle of Autodesk to half ass features into a few areas while not upgrading all the areas that would benefit from it is what gives Max its frankenstien
So because max is old and bloated we should pity it, accept its flaws, and choose to work slower and take longer? May the best app win. Autodesk, compete or be left behind.
If you don't like offensive reactions to your offensive posts, maybe you shouldn't post offensive things. I don't recall insulting you before you posted, in fact I didn't even know you existed...
But be thankful your post didn't just disappear into the black void.You would have missed out on this wonderful correction to your perceptions and attitude. But I guess if the asshat fits, wear it?
Some people might take the high road, I thought the only way to get through to you was to mirror how you where acting. Sometimes its easier to speak with an accent even when you don't have one just so others can understand you better.
In other words, if you don't like the way people respond to "LAWLZ ur all a mornons. u doin it rong. problum is teh ez" then don't post like that.
I suggest re-reading this sticky, especially the "Don't Be a Dick" section.
If you're still doubting, take a look at his posting history to make up your mind. Convinced? Alright!
Here's how you achieve that: click on his name, then on the 'user lists' dropdown, and choose 'add to ignore list'. Be sure to confirm!
There, now this thread is an informative and pleasant read again. My pleasure.