> Trust me, I've dealt with investors & setting up a budget for a new company. > If you can save $5k per seat by simply picking one package over another, it > will get noticed. I've been trying to get Autodesk to realize that for a > long time. New companies spring up all over the world every day, so why not > sell them some Softimage licenses?
I think this scenario is absurd because it makes the case for saving 5000$ based on the assumption that startup studios would 1) want to use XSI in any great numbers and 2) are considering shelling out for Nuke at 5000$ to do "some compositing" on those 3D seats, when it's the kind of money you'd put in a dedicated compositing seat. Not do you toxik for free, you can get access to all Adobe apps including Photoshop+AE per seat for 70$/month. Or just rent After Effects itself for 20$. If you actually _needed_ nuke seats, I think you're probably doing a whole lot of things that wouldn't be present or well implemented in a "revamped" fxtree. The FxTree didn't replace the much simpler Shake seats when shake was 10,000$ and XSI+FxTree was just 3000$. A "revamped" FxTree probably wouldn't replace Nuke seats. Screw logic and clone enough of nuke and give it away for free anyway? I think there's little reason to think that product could be any superior than Toxik. They had a big and experienced team work on that one for many years. If Autodesk cared about compositing, revamping the Toxik UI would reach many more people. On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Paul Griswold <pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com> wrote: > I'm saying - when someone is looking to set up a new shop & has a limited > amount of investment to deal with. Having a modern version of the FXTree > becomes a selling point if it does most of what you need and is included > with the software. The argument would be - for now, lets put the money in > Softimage because it's the most complete package out on the market right > now. ICE, CrowdFX, Face Robot, solid rigging tools, the animation mixer, > and a built-in compositor, etc. So why spend $5k+ per seat additional to > get Nuke when Softimage is going to do fine in most cases? That money can > be put to better use elsewhere like Arnold licenses, additional render > boxes, etc. > > Trust me, I've dealt with investors & setting up a budget for a new company. > If you can save $5k per seat by simply picking one package over another, it > will get noticed. I've been trying to get Autodesk to realize that for a > long time. New companies spring up all over the world every day, so why not > sell them some Softimage licenses? > > On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Luc-Eric Rousseau <luceri...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> what are these small shops using now to do 3d and compositing? how are >> they getting work done at all? they would spend the money and the trouble >> to switch to xsi? who did you speak to to know that these people exist? >> >> Le 2013-04-07 09:55, "Paul Griswold" >> <pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com> a écrit : >> > >> > The FXTree. >> > >> > The FXTree desperately needs a complete overhaul. I'm guessing most >> > people don't even know it exists. >> > >> > It's one of those things that could help sell Softimage to smaller shops >> > who don't want to spend the money on Fusion or Nuke, but still need some >> > compositing. >> > >> > -PG
