Attached Link: http://www.pandromeda.com/page/create/downloadtransporter.html

Pandromeda's MojoWorld is in there, alongside Alias/Wavefront, Discreet and ATI.

If you like Vue, you'll love MojoWorld! MojoWorld can also be a source of new terrains for Vue, through the terrain export capabilities in version 1.1.

If you haven't checked out MojoWorld, grab the free Transporter and take it for a spin!

Also, see the MojoWorld galleries at pandromeda.com and on 3DCommune. There are some awesome planets coming out for everyone to explore... You can get some of those in the Free Stuff section there, and others from our web site. The Transporter lets you explore, animate and render them for free!

-Mo

PS- If you want to try the full MojoWorld Generator, which retails for US $249, you can do it by joining our beta test program. But hurry--there are only a few days of testing of version 1.1 left! Contanct Chas Smith--chas@pandromeda.com--if you're interested, and he'll set you up.

Please "DocMojo", avoid promoting softwares in
the VUE forum :
a community of people generously sharing ideas
and stuff.

MojoWorld is maybe a great application, but it
isn't the place to promote it, especially by
someone who comes here only with this purpose
("DocMojo", created for the occasion ?...no
gallery, no previous post, no contribution).

Imagine what this forum would become if Bryce or
World Builder were sending advertising messages ?

I have no doubt that the other members of this
forum share my opinion.

Eric

Hey Doc! Thanks for the update and for the link to the beta test. :)

OOOOOOOps almost forgot, Congrats on the 2001 Innovation Award too! That's an awesome achievement!! btw. Can u explain the terrain export capability to us? What format does MojoWorlds export? Can it be possible that MojoWorlds has adopted Vob format? enquiring minds need to know :)

Kind of hard for him to do that, Audit, since we don't have a MojoWorld forum.

Hi Mo!..."Pandromeda's MojoWorld is in there, alongside Alias/Wavefront, Discreet and ATI."...this is really great news!...congraulations! I have in mind how I can use MojoWorld someday to work along with Vue. I have this idea for creating sea waves and high sea kind of terrain and be exported for use with Vue. As I have only the transporter, guess there is nothing much I can do about. "..a few days of testing of version 1.1 left"...how long to be specific. Are you saying that version 1.1 is to be release soon. Just asking because if I do go for the beta, guesss I have to know how to use the MW Gen first. Thanks for the info :)

Well, personally, I'm not big on the idea of people coming in here to advertise their commercial products, particularly when what they're essentially saying is, "We have something better for you...". But, we're pretty open-minded here, so I'll let it slide. DocMojo, you may feel free to answer Sacred Rose's question about the terrain export, which I know you want to do, because I know you didn't only come here to advertise. :)

Please accept my apologies, everyone, for coming in to promote our product. But if you're a Vue user, you really should know about MojoWorld. It takes things we're all interested in, in a whole new direction. So there's some real informational value to my squalid post. ;-) Okay, apology aside, here are some of the formats MW 1.1 exports: - obj - dxf - vrml - lwo (limited to 180x180) - 3ds (limited to 256x256) - png (8 bit) - dem - bt - pgm (16 bit) MojoWorld also exports entire planets, as six height fields. As for how much longer the beta test cycle will last, well, we want to complete it in the coming week. (Famous last words, we all know--predicting when software will be ready--I should know better!) At any rate, it will be a while before we get a demo version of the Generator out. We're a tiny team here. So this beta test may be your last chance for a while to try the full Generator for free. And please don't get me wrong--MojoWorld won't replace Vue, Bryce or any of your other tools. It's just another very cool tool to add to your software tool chest. Actually, we're most interested in seeing these apps work together. That way each company doesn't have to keep reimplementing what others have already done, and done well. There's too much cool new stuff to bring into the mix! -Mo

Well, thank you, Mo, really. I didn't mean to sound harsh about it, but, you know, gotta say something, I suppose. You know, we can't have people coming in here specifically doing promotions. If I say nothing, I might run the risk of setting a precedent. Well, that aside, I'd like to have a look at this MojoWorld, really. The planet thingie sounds cool. I will send an email to the address you listed. It's always cool to have something new to use. Plus, y'all are in pretty good company there with Maya and Discreet. :) Cheers, Mike

Thanks! And apologies again for the shameless self-promotion. It's just that no one knows of our existence yet, and we're doing this on a shoestring. And again, I'm sure you'll all enjoy this new product. -Mo

I had downloaded the trial of this soft some weeks ago and was very disappointed. I never got out something interesting. It's, in my opinion, very difficult to use, extremely slow for poor results. But that's just my opinion :-) Guitta

Guitta: It's changed a lot over the last several weeks. You should try it again when 1.1 comes out, probably later this week. Here's the official dope from from our engineer who does our export coding, whose name is--I kid you not--Bryce: From: "Bryce Loughnan" To: "Ken Musgrave" Subject: Re: Terrain Export Formats Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 20:03:20 +1300 Hi Mo Parameter Bomb (exporting of local terrain patches) terrain export meshs: obj DXF VRML LWO (has limits to what size it will export, keep to less than 256x256) LWO v6.0 (has limits to what size it will export, keep to less than 2^24x 2^24) 2^24 = 16777216 3DS (has limits to what size it will export, keep to less than 181x181) terrain export heightmaps: PNG ( 8bit, 16bit ) DEM BT PGM (8bit, 16bit ) World Export terrain export meshs: Export 1 mesh made up of 6 objects, the map resolution refers to the resolution of one object. obj DXF LWO (has limits to what size it will export, keep to less than 104x104) LWO v6.0 (has limits to what size it will export, keep to less than 2^24x 2^24) 2^24 = 16777216 3DS (has limits to what size it will export, keep to less than 181x181) terrain export heightmaps: Exports 6 heightmaps PNG ( 8bit, 16bit ) DEM BT PGM (8bit, 16bit ) Both world and terrain export can also export texture maps at any resolution of supported types. PNG BMP TIFF JPG thanx bryce

Hey Doc, I wrote to Chad...no reply for my 'free' copy for beta? Bill

If you email me at I'll get you and Chas hooked up. And it's "Chas," not "Chad." We prefer not to leave our employees hanging... ;^) -Mo

LOL!...sorry Mo and to Chad...oh!...Chas I mean. Send him my apology too.

Yeah, I sent him an email too, also requesting to do the beta thing, and also haven't heard anything....

No offense, docM., but you plug, so I'll preach. Bear with me, I think the battle between landscape apps is fascinating. Personally, I'm sure that the kind of procedural approach you use is the future (any Bryce or Vue user knows the fascination of procedural tex's). Unfortunately, seeing the MojoWorld gallery, I'm also sure the future hasn't arrived yet. Lovely images, to be sure, smacks of Terragen's glass-painting-clear light, and Bryce's when it's best. But as with pre-5 Bryce, the shortcomings are painfully obvious to any Vue'er : no real vegetation. I love those sci-fi/fantasy images as much as anyone, but they tend to get monotonous after a while. Take it from an addicted Brycer. Some nitty-gritty, down-to-earth grass, bushes and tress begin to lure one back to Vue sooner or later, despite the inferior quality of Vue's renderer. There's little if anything in the MojoWorld gallery that couldn't be done in Vue, but there's a lot in the Vue galleries that couldn't be done in MojoWorld, as far as I can see. To be brutally frank, I can't really see that (still picture) 3D artists need another landscaping app, especially one that's in its early, feature-poor stages. The Corel Bryce team realized this, and began to add those features only Vue'ers enjoy : realism and vegetation. Terragen is facing the same unpleasant fact (check out the future plans on the website). The people behind both apps seem to realize that superlative rendering is not the decisive factor alone - content counts, perhaps decisively. It's going to be interesting to see whether Bryce 6 adds some realistic vegetation (instead of the toy version it has now), or Vue 6 finally manages to incorporate a full-blown ray-tracer. That would most likely send the rest of the pack to the cult niche for good. It's none of my business to tell you how to run your business - but I'd start looking at Vue and trying to re-create a lot of its features in MojoWorld. Preaching done - and BTW, thanx for the plug. I agree it's naughty to plug "foreign" software in another software's forum, but MojoWorld makes interesting viewing, and I STILL think procedurals are the future.

And since this is becoming a "multi-app" thread where two people have already mentioned comparisons of various apps, might as well ask it here. I'm about to get a copy of WorldBuilder 3.0, which will add another app to the mix of world design/landscape software. When/if I get a handle on it, would any of you be interested in getting together in here [or somewhere] to try and do a comparison of what each of them has to offer, what each does better than the others, what all of them do similarly, and what features could be improved on each? Bryce, MojoWorld, Vue, WorldBuilder, Terragen... all of them have strengths and weaknesses. I know I'm an old bryce fan, but I've never seen a good point by point breakdown between Bryce 4/5 and Vue features. We'd have to keep it objective and on the merits of the software and features. If we get into a "your software preference sucks and mine rocks" thing, I might as well ask this in C&D and do it there from the beginning. ;]

Im not as good as the rest of the vuers here bear, but you can count me in to help with the comparison tests :)

Well, I use both, and would definitely like to show where each has strengths... Let me know how you think of going about it...

Will do. Wait til my copy of WorldBuilder arrives via UPS, and I can see what it's capable of so I'll have some input on that one. Bryce I already know pretty well. What do you think... maybe start a new thread in here called "3D Worlds Apps comparisons" or something like that? And then the people who know the various apps we're dissecting can post with what they think the strengths/weaknesses of their apps are, maybe with renders or screenshots to show what they're saying?

It's almost pointless. Vue is in a catagory all it's own I'd say. It's easy to use therefore it stands out from the crowd. The only program that can even come close to the quality is Bryce. Take a look at the galley at " Scuba ". You just try to render than in any of these other programs and it will become apperent real fast that the sad truth of the matter is I'm right.

Vue, best value, Has realistic vegetation, Easy to use, Super complex meshes possible. Scuba is suppose to be 250 meg. Down side? Well Atmosphere editor is a bit tricky till you get use to it.

Bryce: Nice render. Forget it if you get too complex. Plastic vegetation, Sloooooooooowwwww. Same bugs in version 3 are still in version 5 demo. Impossible to edit complex scenes.

WorldBuilder: Interesting. Fast, Difficult to use. Some things would be impossible to make in here. Well maybe not impossible but would take a life time to figure out. I like the unlimited vegetation but there just alpha trees can do that in vue already. Tough to tell with just the demo. What I've seen in the demo can't justify the cost they want for it.

Mojoworld: Interesting but not much use to anyone. It's got it's points for sure but it's realy limited. Oh it's not too fast eather if you turn up the quality. Where is the vegetation? Basically have very little control to do what you want in this program. Easy to use though.

Terragen: WorldBuilder with no trees. Easier to use though. Too limited to even bother with. Not exactly easy to use. Price is right.

There ya have it. Mighy Pete's Quick and Dirty review. If you do a real point by point comparison I'd be interested in reading it but I don't think you'll manage to change my mind.

All roads lead to Vue.

So much for avoiding the "My app rocks, your's sucks" debate. I think your off on the "too complex" in Bryce tho. I've run multimesh, 350mb scene files pretty regular. Impossible to edit is only apt if you neglect to use forethought in scene design and element naming. Forget it.

I never said that. It's a free world man you can use any software ya want. I forgot my summery: Got no cash: Terragen Need planets Don't need trees, short on cash Mojoworld. Lots of cash no time to wait for renders and you have lots of time to figure out how to use the program. WorldBuilder Lots of patience, Lots of time, Not too short on cash, no need for lots of realistic vegetation: Bryce All of the above and more: Vue and a whole lot easier to use to boot.

Attached Link: http://www.the3dscene.com

WEll, I think were looking at this from the wrong point of view.. It's not a matter of what's better or worse, it's more like, what tool is good for the job.. For instance, both Bryce and Vue have their own personalities... One of the things I really like about Vue is the skies... I wish I could get skies like that in Bryce... But on the other hand, when I want to do some heavy duty terrain editor work, Bryce's terrain editor is far more versatile and you get better results... Also, try applying a texture from a picture you fly in to a terrain created object, that has to fit the terrain.. Forget it, it doesn't work in Vue... But in Bryce, it works like a dream... However, I wouldn't say vue is better than Bryce or vice versa... So, those are just some brief examples that if I wanted to do one thing, I would use either Bryce or Vue...

Oh ya know guys I discovered something about importing pictures into Vue to work as terrains and also bump maps. It HAS to be Black and White to work properly. I don't know why, you wouldn't figure it woud make a difference but it makes a huge difference.

Looks pretty close to "clarity of color" to me. ;] I tend to like Bryce for atmospherics, reflect and metals. Bryce metals can be fantastic. Render times get long with a lot of reflection, but I can live with it for the looks. I've spent some time with the free [magazine] version of Vue, but I get frustrated trying to achieve the look that I want in images there.

That's okay thip ;) Don't worry mate, as I said the limitations are with the settings you are allowed to fiddle with in the "User" settings. I think it is time that the rendering engine was opened up to allow more user tweaking ;) One thing you mention about the colours...try turning down the ambient settings for all the elements in your scene, and make up for the added "darkness" with fill lights. You may find that it may go some way to curing your "clarity of colours" blues ;) Cheers

Iron bear: I'm all for this thread comparing the various landscape apps. Creating an app/feature comparison matrix has been on my to-do list for some time now, and it's not rising to the top... Let's do it! I think it would be interesting and informative for all, plus, it could help direct we product developers to fill the obvious holes and, perhaps, avoid wasting lots of time on redundant functionality. -Mo

Thip--on vegetation in MojoWorld: Vegetation is a very difficult thing to model well; much harder than the inorganic natural phenomena like terrain, clouds, water and atmospherics that all landscape apps tackle. For MojoWorld, vegetation must accommodate changes in level of detail over a huge range of scales. It must be a surface material when viewed from great distances, as when looking at a planet from space, a volumetric model at intermediate distances, and detailed geometry when seen up close. And, it must do this using reasonable amounts of memory and computation. The mathematical problems in this are formidable. So much so that no one has solved them, not even in the research literture. It's a rediculously hard problem. (MojoWorld has a way of forcing some of the hardest research problems in the area of modeling natural phenomena.) In light of this, our solution is to utilize an open architecture, and to encourage third-party developers--like Xfrog--to provide vegetation via plug-ins. MojoWorld is designed to become cyberspace, the ultimate repository for everything in your computer. So we'll tackle this issue, and many more, in the future. -Mo

Ko, Dac... when I get my anxiously awaited delivery, I'll start 'er up and we can play. ;] Have to say... I've been playing around with Mojoworld as time allows. It's capable of some neat things - but definately not userfriendly. The interface seems to be the biggest bar to my getting a decent grasp on the tool. Hrmmm... interface design and ease of use/ease of learning has to go into the comparison study when we do it. I'm given to understand, as Pete mentioned, that WorldBuilder has a steep learning curve. Definately a minus on an app, at least for a beginner with it.

You know the easy way to figure out how hard a program is to run is think up a test scene like underwater with fishies say and try to make that one scene in every app. That gives you a good yard stick to measure with. May be not underwater but you get the idea. One project not something default. Include at least one mesh that has to be imported and textured. Ya one thing World Builder is a incredibly powerfull app but By looking at the gallery for it it becomes very apperent that few have mastered it. That's the way I judge software BTW. I just go to the galleries and see what real people create with it. Not the sofware company hired expert artists, just regular people like you and me. I look at the quality and the quantity of the good stuff. Is there lots of good stuff from lots of different people? If there is chances are it's a fine easy to use program. It's a real eye opener.

That's how I'd inform myself, too, MightyPete. -Mo

Doc - don't get me wrong, I have the greatest respect for your work on MW. I'm sure that MW (and/or some other fractal-based app) will one day be "the ultimate repository for everything in your computer. So we'll tackle this issue, and many more, in the future." I'll be one of the first to adopt the new app when it gets there, in the future. My point is simply that, until then, the humble pics in my head can only be beamed into reality through Vue. Considering Bryce's hopscotch life history so far, who knows, maybe we'll see a MojoVue when that future arrives - stranger things have been known to happen.

I would like that--a MojoVue. I hate to see all the duplicated effort in all these different apps, when there are so many interesting new problems to solve; new functionality to implement for all. But for historical reasons, it's rarely possible. MetaCreations was a conglomeration of a lot of disparate companies with disparate products. Once united under the Meta banner, users rightly expected them to interact seamlessly. But, in fact, the code bases had nothing in common, the engineering groups remained separate, and such integration never happened. Software design is in its infancy. We're still building houses of cards, for the most part. We've designed MW as well as we are able, to be able to grow and mature gracefully. MW's open architecture allows, in theory, it to communicate well with other programs. So, in the future, we'll look at making MW use other programs as plug-ins, and, where possible, letting MW serve as a plug-in to others. MW has the procedural texture engine from hell under the hood. Everything is implemented in 4 dimensions, too. So the MW texture engine should be ported to all programs that have open architectures that support such plug-ins. -Mo PS- In the end, it always comes down to the precious resource of programmer's time. Lack of that is why these things rarely are actualized.

Count Draculas on the award Doc, well deserved in my humble opinion.. haven't played with MojoWorld but I do play a bit in Vue and Terragen.. Vue is good for closeups terrainwise.. and terragen bettre for distance shoots. both have athmospheric effects that can be added and subtracted. like any graphics programme.. both have good points and bad.. and the good, for me, outweigh the bad. I've seen some of the artwork from MW.. and it looks really outstanding...

Thanks, Wizzard! -Mo