Maya 2018 legacy viewport?

[moonpotato]

Hi, 

Ive installed the new maya 2018 and noticed there is no legacy viewport, 

i always use legacy viewport to animate in, as viewport 2.0 is on average 10-15 fps slower than legacy, 

in legacy you can animate in realtime, in viewport 2.0 you have to playblast in order to see what your doing, 

this isn't just a single rig or character, this is across every project I've worked on since viewport 2.0 was released, 

the current proj im working on, 2018 viewport 2.0 is 12fps, maya 2017 legacy viewport is 22.5fps (almost realtime) 

the difference in workflow is night and day. is there a way to enable legacy viewport in 2018 ? if not, then i guess that 

means 2017 is the end of the line for us animators on tight deadlines ???... BUMMER!!!! 

animating at half the frame rate on a tight deadline is like doing look dev at a quarter res- you just can't see what your doing... 

[moonpotato]

Hi, 

Ive installed the new maya 2018 and noticed there is no legacy viewport, 

i always use legacy viewport to animate in, as viewport 2.0 is on average 10-15 fps slower than legacy, 

in legacy you can animate in realtime, in viewport 2.0 you have to playblast in order to see what your doing, 

this isn't just a single rig or character, this is across every project I've worked on since viewport 2.0 was released, 

the current proj im working on, 2018 viewport 2.0 is 12fps, maya 2017 legacy viewport is 22.5fps (almost realtime) 

the difference in workflow is night and day. is there a way to enable legacy viewport in 2018 ? if not, then i guess that 

means 2017 is the end of the line for us animators on tight deadlines ???... BUMMER!!!! 

animating at half the frame rate on a tight deadline is like doing look dev at a quarter res- you just can't see what your doing... 

[stumanchu]

Yes, Please bring back the Viewcube!!!  I can't even begin to describe how many uses it has and why I would use it, but it's sort of

like cutting off one of my thumbs, they seem so insignificant until you lose one.

[stumanchu]

Yes, Please bring back the Viewcube!!!  I can't even begin to describe how many uses it has and why I would use it, but it's sort of

like cutting off one of my thumbs, they seem so insignificant until you lose one.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Hi,

Same problem here.

I have a scene that runs real time and as fast as I want under legacy viewport, but the playback literally dies under viewport 2.0, which makes it totally unusable.

As soon as I scrub the timeline (in v 2.0) I get the "thinking circle, on Windows, for every frame. It's impossible to work with it.

When I switch to legacy everything is buttery smooth and works in real time.

This happens in Maya 2016, 2016.5 and 2018 (we don't have 2017 installed).

Worst thing is that in Maya 2018 there isn't legacy viewport anymore (unless you don't set the variable). I don't get it, why force the worst viewport?

[MannaTheBerserk]

Hi,

Same problem here.

I have a scene that runs real time and as fast as I want under legacy viewport, but the playback literally dies under viewport 2.0, which makes it totally unusable.

As soon as I scrub the timeline (in v 2.0) I get the "thinking circle, on Windows, for every frame. It's impossible to work with it.

When I switch to legacy everything is buttery smooth and works in real time.

This happens in Maya 2016, 2016.5 and 2018 (we don't have 2017 installed).

Worst thing is that in Maya 2018 there isn't legacy viewport anymore (unless you don't set the variable). I don't get it, why force the worst viewport?

[Christoph_Schaedl]

thats not like ti should be... send a repro scene and a bug to autodesk... 

[Christoph_Schaedl]

thats not like ti should be... send a repro scene and a bug to autodesk... 

[MannaTheBerserk]

No need for that anymore.

We just found out that Viewport 2.0 doesn't evaluate each frame properly, so it basically gets unbelievably slow when, for example, it comes to expression driven transparency gradients.

Legacy Viewport behaves correctly instead, and has no problems what so ever.

It's a shame that in Maya 2018 they forced Viewport 2.0 as the default and only one (unless you don't set the variable, which in my case did not work), which means Maya 2018 only viewport is the worst among the two, making the software pretty much unusable thanks to other serious bugs that I have already submitted using the application tool.

[MannaTheBerserk]

No need for that anymore.

We just found out that Viewport 2.0 doesn't evaluate each frame properly, so it basically gets unbelievably slow when, for example, it comes to expression driven transparency gradients.

Legacy Viewport behaves correctly instead, and has no problems what so ever.

It's a shame that in Maya 2018 they forced Viewport 2.0 as the default and only one (unless you don't set the variable, which in my case did not work), which means Maya 2018 only viewport is the worst among the two, making the software pretty much unusable thanks to other serious bugs that I have already submitted using the application tool.

[mspeer]

Hi!

The Ramp is one of the textures that has to be baked for Viewport Display.

Legacy Default Viewport + Default Settings for Hardware Texturing results in a pretty low resolution ("32x32").

In Viewport 2.0: Bake Resolution for Unsupported Textures is set to "64" at default, change this to "32" that should make it as fast as Legacy Viewport.

For further help please upload a scene-file.

[mspeer]

Hi!

The Ramp is one of the textures that has to be baked for Viewport Display.

Legacy Default Viewport + Default Settings for Hardware Texturing results in a pretty low resolution ("32x32").

In Viewport 2.0: Bake Resolution for Unsupported Textures is set to "64" at default, change this to "32" that should make it as fast as Legacy Viewport.

For further help please upload a scene-file.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Yes, I have done all of that of course.

As I said we've determined that Viewport 2.0 cannot evaluate expressions and textures (or the combination of both) per frame properly.

I cannot upload the scene file because is Jaguar Land Rover property.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Yes, I have done all of that of course.

As I said we've determined that Viewport 2.0 cannot evaluate expressions and textures (or the combination of both) per frame properly.

I cannot upload the scene file because is Jaguar Land Rover property.

[mspeer]

Hi!

An other option you could try is set Evaluation Mode to "DG" instead of "Parallel". I doubt it helps here, but it's worth a try.

[mspeer]

Hi!

An other option you could try is set Evaluation Mode to "DG" instead of "Parallel". I doubt it helps here, but it's worth a try.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Tried that too, but it didn't help.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Tried that too, but it didn't help.

[mspeer]

Hi!

I have seen some cases where the Legacy Viewport was indeed faster without a sensible explanation, but the difference was not that much and there was no further slow down with Viewport 2.0 when using it's enhanced features.

There might be a bug (not the only one for Viewport 2.0*), but without a scene-file there is no chance reproduce this and get it logged.

*One bug with Viewport 2.0 for example: It still cannot display Render Tessellation for Nurbs (it displays Tessellation based on default settings but does not recognize changes) and this is one that is easily reproducible.

[mspeer]

Hi!

I have seen some cases where the Legacy Viewport was indeed faster without a sensible explanation, but the difference was not that much and there was no further slow down with Viewport 2.0 when using it's enhanced features.

There might be a bug (not the only one for Viewport 2.0*), but without a scene-file there is no chance reproduce this and get it logged.

*One bug with Viewport 2.0 for example: It still cannot display Render Tessellation for Nurbs (it displays Tessellation based on default settings but does not recognize changes) and this is one that is easily reproducible.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Actually the difference is almost embarrassing.

The Legacy Viewport plays everything in real time without a hiccup, whereas the V2.0 struggles to maintain a decent frame rate, or even gets stuck thinking who knows what.

Truth is that Viewport 2.0 should be the option and Legacy the default, and not vice versa, until Viewport 2.0 will be finally a complete implementation instead of a work in progress (as a matter of fact it is a constant beta release).

Autodesk should not replace something that works with something that has proven serious issues.

That said, I hope that the next update of Maya will get rid of the most serious problems, like this one and the one that prevent the software to open it's own files when they are over 2 GB.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Actually the difference is almost embarrassing.

The Legacy Viewport plays everything in real time without a hiccup, whereas the V2.0 struggles to maintain a decent frame rate, or even gets stuck thinking who knows what.

Truth is that Viewport 2.0 should be the option and Legacy the default, and not vice versa, until Viewport 2.0 will be finally a complete implementation instead of a work in progress (as a matter of fact it is a constant beta release).

Autodesk should not replace something that works with something that has proven serious issues.

That said, I hope that the next update of Maya will get rid of the most serious problems, like this one and the one that prevent the software to open it's own files when they are over 2 GB.

[Anonymous]

My problem with Viewport 2.0 is that it doesn't render normal maps correctly or even acceptably. It's an odd fault in 3d software that you have to take your assets into another package to see your work represented faithfully.

[Anonymous]

My problem with Viewport 2.0 is that it doesn't render normal maps correctly or even acceptably. It's an odd fault in 3d software that you have to take your assets into another package to see your work represented faithfully.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Yes, that is another super annoying thing.

I have always wondered why. I mean, Autodesk has Stingray engine that works a lot better in that area.

[MannaTheBerserk]

Yes, that is another super annoying thing.

I have always wondered why. I mean, Autodesk has Stingray engine that works a lot better in that area.

[Anonymous]

Most of these issues will be addressed in upcoming releases when Nvidia acquires Maya.

[Anonymous]

Most of these issues will be addressed in upcoming releases when Nvidia acquires Maya.

[mspeer]

Hi!

"My problem with Viewport 2.0 is that it doesn't render normal maps correctly or even acceptably."

What is correct or acceptably? Normal maps are like many other things in the 3d world not standardized. This is also the reason why it's not so easy to change an engine during a project, it is a lot of work to transfer a scene including all assets, because every engine has it's own features, implementations and tools. That's the same problem for offline renderer like Arnold, Mental, Vray and others. Everyone handles things differently.

I also remember someone being surprised that after moving his object to an other 3d software and doing smooth mesh subdivision it looked different than with subdivision in the previous application.

If you want Maya to match the display of Normal maps in Unity, please use this:

Help -> Speak Back -> Ideas for Maya

The last time i tested data exchange between Maya and Unity it worked fine, but the normal maps could have been from Mudbox (don't remember).

[mspeer]

Hi!

"My problem with Viewport 2.0 is that it doesn't render normal maps correctly or even acceptably."

What is correct or acceptably? Normal maps are like many other things in the 3d world not standardized. This is also the reason why it's not so easy to change an engine during a project, it is a lot of work to transfer a scene including all assets, because every engine has it's own features, implementations and tools. That's the same problem for offline renderer like Arnold, Mental, Vray and others. Everyone handles things differently.

I also remember someone being surprised that after moving his object to an other 3d software and doing smooth mesh subdivision it looked different than with subdivision in the previous application.

If you want Maya to match the display of Normal maps in Unity, please use this:

Help -> Speak Back -> Ideas for Maya

The last time i tested data exchange between Maya and Unity it worked fine, but the normal maps could have been from Mudbox (don't remember).

[Anonymous]

When working with a Z up axis normal maps show seams everywhere. This is only a Maya Viewport 2 problem. It doesn't occur in any other 3d software, in Unreal or in the Maya legacy high quality viewport. Asides that, the lighting in Viewport 2 is generally very poor. Maybe there's a setting somewhere but it doesn't work by default.

[Anonymous]

When working with a Z up axis normal maps show seams everywhere. This is only a Maya Viewport 2 problem. It doesn't occur in any other 3d software, in Unreal or in the Maya legacy high quality viewport. Asides that, the lighting in Viewport 2 is generally very poor. Maybe there's a setting somewhere but it doesn't work by default.

[mspeer]

Hi!

Maya defaults to Y-Up. Did you try Unity with Z-Up or Unreal with Y-Up?

I maybe wrong but shouldn't it be fine to use Y-Up in Maya and when importing in Unreal orientation will be adapted?

Please upload a scene-file + normal map that does work in Unreal or Unity but not in Maya.

[mspeer]

Hi!

Maya defaults to Y-Up. Did you try Unity with Z-Up or Unreal with Y-Up?

I maybe wrong but shouldn't it be fine to use Y-Up in Maya and when importing in Unreal orientation will be adapted?

Please upload a scene-file + normal map that does work in Unreal or Unity but not in Maya.

[Anonymous]

I've worked in various axes but Y up works for Unity and Z up for Unreal. Currently we use Z up in Maya (matching Unreal). Changing axes on export is not an option for various technical reasons. Any scene in maya will not render normal maps correctly with a Z up axis in viewport 2 so anyone (a lot of game devs using Unreal) who sensibly work in Z up will now no longer be able to view their normal maps correctly.

[Anonymous]

I've worked in various axes but Y up works for Unity and Z up for Unreal. Currently we use Z up in Maya (matching Unreal). Changing axes on export is not an option for various technical reasons. Any scene in maya will not render normal maps correctly with a Z up axis in viewport 2 so anyone (a lot of game devs using Unreal) who sensibly work in Z up will now no longer be able to view their normal maps correctly.

[mspeer]

Hi!

Please upload a scene with an object that shows the problem (+ Normal map).

[mspeer]

Hi!

Please upload a scene with an object that shows the problem (+ Normal map).

[Anonymous]

Just look at any object with a normal map with the scene in Z up. You'll notice really quickly that there are seams everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Just look at any object with a normal map with the scene in Z up. You'll notice really quickly that there are seams everywhere.

[Anonymous]

For those that want to skip the reading...

1. Create a text file named: Maya.env

2. Write the following in it: MAYA_ENABLE_LEGACY_VIEWPORT = 1

3. Save it in: \Users\username\Documents\maya\version

4. Open up Maya

[Anonymous]

For those that want to skip the reading...

1. Create a text file named: Maya.env

2. Write the following in it: MAYA_ENABLE_LEGACY_VIEWPORT = 1

3. Save it in: \Users\username\Documents\maya\version

4. Open up Maya