On   2009-11-26 22:34:40, zhudsd@msn.com wrote:
On   2009-11-26 07:51:29, Flay wrote:
	We render HD sequences on it with 10 render nodes. Trick is to know what the render settings do and set them accordingly. Even then, it'll take a bit of time but it IS possible on, even on a TV schedule.
On   2009-11-26 05:49:37, E Bittner wrote:
	Unless I've got an 8,000 render farm the software is "rendered" useless.
On   2009-11-18 21:10:27, wrote:
	Me and many other fellow 3d artist have worked with Vue demos in the past. Our opinion was always the same. Vue, is more like a overly expensive game engine than a true 3d animation software app.
On   2009-11-13 01:30:55, tom@tsoe.com wrote:
	To me Vue looks like a marketing approach (take it ore leave it). The products look less. When doing arch. viz. most renderings need 3-4000 pix. w. Never saw a top (=beleavable, real looking, in photo fitting) rendering of ore with vue at that size. Tried their demos. Not well. Staying with LW, far better.
On   2009-11-06 09:10:55, Jason wrote:
	I agree with most of your comments, but let's be honest, I've tried the other three packages for terrain and vegetation and can tell you nothing comes close to Vue. Take a close look at Vue and tell me any other 3d package Lightwave or Maya that can render the scenes that Vue creates. I do hope they fix the render times and bugs in the plugins, but come on how many different software packages work's well within each other!
On   2009-11-03 15:03:50, MarcoValenzuela.com wrote:
	I and many other 3d artist boycott VUE and all e-on or Cornucopia 3d products. This is due to the shady EULA associated with their applications. The EULA states in very vague terms that e-on or Cornucopia 3d OWNS the 3d content YOU generate with VUE or other 3d applications. I discovered this fact only after being threatened by Cornucopia 3d for releasing custom content (models, textures, scenes) I created. It seems e-on and Cornucopia 3d pick and choose when and where to enforce this nearly criminal user agreement. Due to this fact, more and more VFX studios have decided against any use of e-on or Cornucopia 3d products until the EULA reflects a more common industry standard. E-on or Cornucopia 3d have never made it very clear to the public exactly what media created with VUE belongs to them, and what if any media belongs to the end user. So if you plan to produce 3d for profit or financial gain, choose what software you use wisely.
On   2009-06-12 20:37:08, bmillerr wrote:
	Xstream 7.5 with LW9.6 (both 32 and 64 bit) seem to work consistently and predictably. No funky memory crashing issues, failure to start or gradualy incraseing brightness issues.
On   2009-05-31 06:01:51, contact@rorymcleish.com wrote:
	There are a few nice looking upgrades in this release, but I'm not upgrading this software again until I they fix the render engine. And by 'fix the render engine', I mean actually make it useable. Which reminds me, Terragen 2 is looking pretty cool these days...
On   2009-05-30 07:42:42, tsy168@sohu.com wrote:
	thinks
On   2008-11-13 17:22:04, Flay wrote:
	I'll back you s on the Xtreme not working so well. Luckily, there are other third party tools which will enable you to work between Lightwave and Vue. We use them sucessfully and yes, we've been able to render animation while managing the flicker sucessfully. Even the top render presets won't cut it, go in and set it all up manually...
On   2008-11-13 14:20:43, cary_howe@yahoo.com wrote:
	I use Vue heavily for matte painting but it's pretty useless for animation. Slow and the flickering issue is devastating and just doesn't seem to get better with each release. Also X-Stream is useless. I've tried it both on Maya and Lightwave. It was slightly more stable on LW but once you go past a a tree or two and a hill it just crashes. A lot of times I can get one test shot to render but then the final render crashes every time so it's a waste. Use it for 2D backgrounds and you'll be very happy. Sad because the texturing is a lot of fun and it's amazing to see a character rendered in a Vue environment with reflections and all but I've been using it since it was released and I've never gotten a single usable shot with X-Stream. Total waste of time and money.
On   2008-11-10 19:25:07, Bill wrote:
	Flay, 4 quad boxes, what's the additional cost for the render nodes on those boxes?
On   2008-11-06 14:32:41, Flay wrote:
	It really depends on what you do. My partner does matte painting so, for her, the learning curve (which yes, does include figuring out how to work around the bugs), was totally worth. I, being the tech head, was simply along for the ride. Once you understand what limitations you're under, Vue as it stands is pretty terrific.
On   2008-11-06 14:14:33, john.marchant@lineone.net wrote:
	Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Totally Agree there, had enough problems with Vue 5 & 6 not to buy into this until there are quite a few reviews and bug fixes
On   2008-11-06 09:21:38, Flay wrote:
	We've got six quads with Vue's distributed renderer on them now. And will probably be investing in a few more boxes. It can render animations, you just need to test heavily for flickering and buzzing then expect it to be some time before the elements come out the other end.
On   2008-11-06 07:36:25, Bill wrote:
	Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
On   2008-11-06 01:27:26, mk wrote:
	yes, Vue is very slow (render engine). Don't expect to use it as a renderer (for animation) Use it to create Matte painting. For me it's more a plugin to create vegetations, rocks, landscape. I always export the geometry to render my scene with LW.
On   2007-08-25 20:58:46, PK wrote:
	I love Vue, but DAMN!!! Those renders take WAY to long. It's the program you @#$% hate but love at the same time.
On   2007-08-13 11:25:30, lunarpost@sbcglobal.net wrote:
	Vue is great, but still buggy, and takes way too long to render even a single high-detail tree. We had to make the decision to cut it's use in our project.
On   2007-08-09 17:44:42, Flay wrote:
	We use it a lot at work. Mostly for matte paintings. Trick to that is to render out of Vue and then reproject onto geometry if you can...
On   2007-08-08 21:15:15, wrote:
	Yeah.... All is good and well with Vue, but!.. ...no one will ever tell you that in order to render good quality animation, even in PAL rez, you'll gona need ILM's render farm or a year ahead to render out! This software must have the SLOWEST rendering engine EVER made !!
On   2007-08-08 03:17:16, contact@rorymcleish.com wrote:
	It's looking like a great package, but in order to get good images out of it, you're looking at super looooooong render times.
On   2007-02-24 10:42:23, JustMe wrote:
	So how is that package coming along these days? Anyone using it?
On   2006-07-24 21:14:33, mancg@sohu.com wrote:
On   2006-06-30 05:38:05, zx7-hanjiageng@163.com wrote:
On   2006-06-23 03:58:57, Nick wrote:
	The main reason they waited so long to create XStream for LW is because it only works with LW 9. They needed the 9 beta to work with, and even now only 9 beta users can use XStream.
On   2006-06-22 04:52:44, JustMe wrote:
	Ok, I'm jumping the gun a little then... Good to hear!
On   2006-06-22 04:31:53, Nick wrote:
	Technically the C4D and LW XStream Pre-Release is still beta. Most of the major bugs have been fixed, still needs a little work though. It's a very cool program.
On   2006-06-21 15:04:44, Mike wrote:
	Well, to be fair, I think when the webpages were written that only the Maya and Max plugin were done. LW and C4D versions were still in beta.
On   2006-06-18 18:24:48, JustMe wrote:
	The link works and all. But All they talk about is Max/Maya. They mention LW and C4D but everywhere they hype a feature all that's mentioned is Max/Maya. That kinda sucks! NT did the bundle deal with them and got them thousands of new seats (yes I KNOW it's in the thousands) and this is how they act? Hmmm... :-/ Doesn't seem right to me. O-Well, maybe their software is less partisan and better behaved than e-on marketing staffers. - Shrug.
On   2006-06-12 21:48:20, Mike wrote:
	I've read in two places on e-onsoftware's site that wind animation for plants and eco-systems IS supported in Vue xStream. In the features list, and in the press release for the LW version.
On   2003-09-18 11:34:24, John Pattullo wrote:
	if you read the info on the import export capabilites its only postion scale and orientations you can export animation wise =(
On   2003-09-18 07:47:55, Flay wrote:
	Don't know. And we might not until it's released but I'd join a Vue-specific list or group in an attempt to find out.
On   2003-09-18 05:15:16, robo wrote:
	Can you export the wind motions into other 3d apps? for example; I need a tree blowing in heavy wind, can I create the motion in Vue then export the scene into lightwave and keep the wind motion of the tree intact?
On   2002-07-24 05:27:42, wrote:
On   2002-07-21 03:02:40, jason wrote:
	if the lnk doesnt work try "digitalblasphemy.com"
On   2002-07-15 16:38:05, Flay wrote:
	What, the link? Works fine from here.
On   2002-07-15 16:12:30, blob wrote:
	does not seem to work