Wysiwyg VS Capture

[numberwrong]

Hi,

 

I currently use Wysiwyg report and was going to upgrade todesign to ‘Design’ so I can produce renderings and work in 3d.

 

That is until I had a look at Cast’s Capture.

 

The general consensus seems to be that Wyg is better atrendering and creating paper work but more expensive. I’ve had a good look atthe Capture demo and I really like the plot style much more than wyg. It seemsmuch more intuitive in general. Also I think the paperwork and reports actually look pretty good.

 

Does anyone have any tips or caveats that I should be awareof if planning on switching to Capture? Is the intuitiveness of Capture at theexpense of power/features?

 

I need software that can primarily produce plots and reportsand do the odd rendering.

 

I should addthat I feel pretty competent at Wig but I’m self-taught so some of my grievanceswith Wig could be my inexperience that I could rectify with some training. Wyg does seempretty clunky to me and some of the so called advantages like producingpaperwork I often export to excel and do it myself instead if using the builtin features.

 

Youropinions appreciated ?

 

 

[indyld]

Not sure intuitive is the first word that leaps to mind regarding the Capture UI. It takes some getting used to if you come from a CAD background. Capture can be fast and you can get results and vis pretty quickly. Its not really a CAD package in the traditional sense.

 

Paperwork is OK and functional for plans and lists etc. I still like to use spreadsheets for stuff too.

 

I think Capture is good value for money and that WYG is costly and overkill for many users.

 

Don't expect a magic bullet, whatever you choose.

[johnhuson]

We've been using Capture for several years now and are very happy with it. Price wise it's a no brainer. WYSIWYG is certainly the industry 'standard' but the greater cost doesn't outweigh the performance difference...essentially you're paying a premium for it being the standard. It's a bit like buying a Rolex watch for thousands or a much more sensibly priced watch, they both tell the time but you pay the extra to have a Rolex on your arm.

 

I think with the latest versions of Capture it's unfair to say that WYSIWYG is better at renders, Capture has come on in leaps and bounds in that area.

 

I would agree that Capture isn't the most intuitive when you first look at it. The UI is completely different to any other Windows program or for that matter any other CAD program but once you get your head round it, it clicks and does not under perform.

 

Support is also second to none with Capture, although I can't speak for Cast's support as I've never had to deal with them.

 

Paperwork wise I've never found Capture lacking, I can produce many different plots including rigging plots. Especially once you get into Plot Styles and Layer Sets.

 

Ultimately it comes down to price and do you need to be able to exchange drawings with other WYSIWYG users? If you don't I'd say Capture wins hands down.

[Tomo]

Cast Wysiwyg is not really an industry standard anymore. It's pretty much a historical artifact that's slowly dying (and jacking up the price).

 

Capture has become the industry standard for small to mid-size events, while Vectorworks Spotlight is the current top-end standard.

 

Honestly, if you have the cash (and ROI) for Wyg Perform, buy Vectorworks Spotlight.

[gareth]

^^ This.

 

Cast like to think that WYG is the 'industry standard' - and perhaps it used to be - but it isn't. I started with WYG back somewhere around release 7, and gave up on it after R19. They didn't listen to suggestions from users, some fundamental CAD functionality which really should have been present was never added (but increasingly pointless library items seemed to be a priority), and from beginning to end it's an exercise in repeatedly extracting large sums of money from users.

 

VW is probably as close as you'll find to an 'industry standard' these days, certainly from the CAD and paperwork/reports point of view. But it's expensive, whereas what I've seen of Capture has impressed me very much, and it's a much more affordable product. If I was in the market for a CAD/reporting/visualisation product again now, that's probably the way I'd go.

[Judge]

Cast Wysiwyg is "Doing a Strand" I think. They were once the only game in town and knew they could charge whatever admission fee they wanted. Capture came along and not taken seriously initially. It has come a long way in the last few years and although I cannot actually compare the render of a WYG model side by side with a Capture one, I have found that Capture is good enough certainly.

 

Cannot complain about the price either - although many people did when their new pricing structure was announced with Atlas. Its incredibly good value, and a one off purchase. You dont have to pay subscription or upgrade if you dont want to. You can get on the forums and ask questions and the chance are Lars will reply quickly. They are open to suggestions and comments.

 

Like Rob said, the interface is not intuitive, but it just takes a bit of getting used to and it is fast and efficient.

[DonkiDonki]

I have been a long time user of Wyg Perform and have recently picked up Capture in the hope of being able to produce the same kind of results without the extremely high cost of Wyg membership (Design is quite a bit less than Perform but still costs a fair bit).

Since I purchased Captue (Atlas Quartet) there has been a version update to Nexium, I think it cost me about £150 to update. While there are no annual membership costs for a version of Capture and minor updates are free, they do charge when a new major version is released; though the pricing seems quite reasonable.

 

From my own point of view, there are a number differences which I will try to share.

 

Wyg is intended for all aspects of lighting design and has deliberate support for paperwork, plots, rendered visuals and live visualisation for pre-programmng.

There are multiple versions of Wyg with varying levels of these and with pricing to match the functionality. There is built-in CAD functionality which is basic compared to any serious CAD package but it is possible to produce reasonably complex models completely within Wyg.

 

Capture seems to have initially been intended largely for live visualisation, with decent paperwork and plot support being a recent addition. Most features are offered in all versions apart from limits on things like DMX universes and video streams.

There is almost zero CAD built-in to Capture, the drawing tools are extremely basic (though some users have managed to create some pretty decent models with it), the intention is to produce basic models only and concentrate on the lighting elements. (It does have good support for importing models from other CAD sources) You can't really edit imported CAD models so it is a good idea to import models as multiple small items rather than as a single model if you are likely to want to tweak things.

It does have libraries of truss and some staging and production elements so basic stage layouts are easy to create.

 

 

To get the best from Capture, certainly if working with existing CAD models then you really need to combine it with a dedicated CAD program. AutoCad and VectorWorks are well suppoerted as well as Sketchup. (I chose Sketchup as it is free and have since upgraded to the Pro version as that handles DWG files too)

You can get away without these for a lot of things in Wyg although it is still handy to have one. For example, some venues provide architect cad files which have the entire building in them, too much for Wyg to cope with; these files need trimming back to just what you need before importing into Wyg.

 

Both Wyg and Capture have been making a lot of improvements to their CAD engines recently but Wyg manages to stay ahead significantly in terms of creating and editing models.

 

 

The current live visualisation from both programs is excellent, making the need for ray-traced renderd stills mostly unnecessary. That said, Wyg has the edge in several areas of live vis. It can render reflective surfaces in live view and recent versions have added beam pass-through on transparent surfaces along with intensity reduction and colour-shift.

 

I often produce fairly detailed models of sets and venues and good visualisation really helps to produce quality visuals, both for pitch use and proof of concepts. I used to spend a lot of time running ray-trace renders for these but now the live visuals are almost as good. (in fact the latest live visuals do things even the renders cant)

 

 

Overall, both are excellent tools.

 

I can live with using an external CAD package so Capture is viable for me; the cost of ownership is comfortable for a freelancer like myself unlike Wyg which seems to be aimed more at the large lighting company level.

 

It's still a learning process for me moving from Wyg to Capture but it looks like I made a good decision. That said, I still find the Capture interface quite alien and may yet have to get myself some help with learning it properly.

 

If money was no object then I would be happy to stick with Wyg but in the real world I for one can't justify the annual outlay.

 

 

 

As to the option of purely using a CAD program, that depends on how you currently use Wyg. Personally, I often use Wyg/Capture to quickly test lamp types/positions and so on that require features not found in normal CAD programs so I would miss these features. I guess you could consider something like Spotlight for Vectorworks but I have no experience with those. (And Vectorworks itself is another pricey bit of kit)

 

 

Anyway, I hope some of this rambling proves useful to you.

Best of luck with your decision.

[numberwrong]

Thanks for replies, very helpful

 

Most of the work I do, as I'm sure is common, is adding lighting to a set design or venue already drawn in CAD/Sketch up etc so only basic CAD drawing tools is not a massive problem.

 

annoyingly I put a post on the capture forum asking some fairly basic question about the software's features which has remained un-answered for almost 2 weeks! not very encouraging from a support point of view

[DonkiDonki]

Personally I prefer Wyg for most tasks (and I'm on quite an old version, R28).

 

If you're used to Wyg and the annual cost of Design is within your budget then you may want to consider upgrading to that.

 

Capture is cheaper than Wyg (particularly in my case as a Perform user), mainly due to the lack of membership costs but it is still some way behind in terms of features in most areas.

 

That said, I am slowly getting used to Capture and am managing to achieve most of the things that I have done with Wyg. Hopefully the feature set will get even closer with future updates.

 

As for tech support, I have found the Capture forum to be a bit of a mixed bag. Lars the developer frequently answers queries personally and can be very helpful at times but seems to ignore a lot of queries for whatever reasons.

 

The tech support from Cast for Wyg has been excellent, so long as your membership is current they provide top notch support.

I once had an issue with one of my Wyg projects and contacted tech support via email; expecting a reply within a few days.

To my surprise I quickly received a phone call from their tech support (I think based in Canada while I'm UK) and after about an hour of trying things with guidance over the phone, Gilray the MD joined in conference call and spent several more hours sorting everything with me. I was pretty stunned with that level of service and my project got sorted.

Service like that combined with Wyg's superior features go a long way to justify the premium price, however you do have to be able to afford it.

 

For me personally, I will persevere with Capture in the hope that it will continue to improve in the areas I would like.

However, if the cost ever stops being an obstacle I would go back to Wyg.

 

(I have been tempted to use Wyg via the lease option rather than buy it outright; my version is too old to be worth bringing the membership upto date. The lease cost seems cheaper than buying and paying membership)

 

Either way, they are both powerful pieces of software which should serve you well. Good luck making your choice.

 

Thought I should add that I have been using Wyg Perform since R16, so quite a while now. (I dread to think exactly how long that's been!)