Hi, That's a very impressive claim. I will be happily awaiting reports from testers on this.
I suggest to further close this thread and move to the code review for the technical feedback and testing. -Ton- -------------------------------------------------------- Ton Roosendaal - [email protected] - www.blender.org Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute Entrepotdok 57A - 1018AD Amsterdam - The Netherlands > On 11 Feb, 2016, at 14:21, Juan Linietsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ton, > > Here's some facts you are missing: > > -My Collada exporter works with Unity, Cryengine and imports correctly in > Maya/Max too via OpenCollada plugin. > -My Collada importer opens perfectly any scenes exported from Maya and Max > (Using OpenCollada plugin), XSI and Lightwave. Of course it also opens > scenes from my Collada exporter. > > You are free to test this yourself. > > The reason this failed consistently in Blender is because you guys didn't > care about having experienced developers spend time making it work. > Had Campbell Barton worked on it as he did on FBX, Collada would work > wonderfully. I just used his same approach to make my Collada exporter, > using OpenCollada library was a huge mistake. > > Still, I understand your concern and it is true that Collada was > originally devised as an exchange format. But if you read the specification > you will realize that, with each version, it quickly migrated to a format > used to export assets for game engines. As an exchange format between 3D > DCCs it's severely limited. > > So my proposal is the following: > > -Deprecate current Collada export support in Blender and replace it for > mine. Change the focus so it works well with game engines as a priority. > Having an alternative to FBX for this is a lot more important, both for > commercial game engines and (most vitally) for OSS game engines. > If the focus is for DCC exchange, we know it will never work properly for > any use case and it sucks as a format for that anyway. > > -Deprecate current Collada import suppot in Blender and work together with > me to implement my library, which has extremely high compatibility. > > -Find a more useful long-term solution for asset exchange between Blender > and other 3D DCCs. I don't think even FBX is up to this task. If it was up > to me to decide, I think the best solution would be to implement a > dedicated .blend importer/exporter plugin for Maya, and make sure every > single use case works. From there, you can go to any other Autodesk > software using Maya Import/Export. > > What do you think? > > > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ton Roosendaal <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Juan, >> >> I think we mix up different use cases. >> >> - COLLADA was meant to be a cross platform 3d exchange format. Even >> Khronos recognizes that this goal has issues. COLLADA has design flaws, it >> is disputed, very hard to get to work. >> >> - Many Blender developers have put time on getting COLLADA exchange to >> work. With Python, with OpenCollada, with own C++ code. We tried a lot, >> discussions go back to 2004 already. In days of work, it had similar (or >> more) attention as developers gave to FBX. >> >> - You made a COLLADA exporter to work as native format for Godot. That is >> cool, COLLADA works fine that way. >> >> What we tried is something else, it is 3D exchange: a format to work in a >> mixed tools pipeline. That means Maya to Blender and back. And that is what >> FBX currently offers to the industry. COLLADA could have offered it too, >> but after 12 years we better conclude it won't work for this. >> >> Conclusion: Blender can just get multiple COLLADA exporters to "save as >> Godot" or "save as 2ndlife" or "save as Maya", for as much developers wish >> to support that. >> >> Laters, >> >> -Ton- >> >> -------------------------------------------------------- >> Ton Roosendaal - [email protected] - www.blender.org >> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute >> Entrepotdok 57A - 1018AD Amsterdam - The Netherlands >> >> >> >>> On 10 Feb, 2016, at 21:41, Juan Linietsky <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Guys I'm sorry. I've seen this situation happening over and over to no >> end >>> for more than a decade. >>> How about some self-criticism from Blender instead of blaming Autodesk? >>> >>> If you guys really had cared about open standards and getting along well >>> with game engines, you would have done the following: >>> >>> 1) Make sure you export proper Collada. The specification is pretty >> clear. >>> 2) Push game engines to fix their importers. >>> >>> Blender support for Collada has always been a disaster. There was never >> any >>> will to fix it. >>> >>> -I originally insisted against using OpenCollada due to the huge binary >>> bloat, and the fact the spec is pretty simple. You guys wanted to go >> with >>> it. >>> -The exporter was huge and full of bugs. I insisted that a lot of >> features >>> missing in the spec needed to be implemented, was ignored. >>> -Meanwhile, all the missing Collada features were implemented in FBX, >> such >>> as blend shapes, proper keyframe baking. constraint baking, exporting all >>> actions, etc. >>> -I wrote for you guys a proper Collada exporter in a few lines of Code >> that >>> supported the full spec, you guys refused it to add it to mainline >> Blender. >>> -I insisted, the answer was "Yeah we can put it at some development repo >>> and if anyone cares about it we move it to mainline". Of course, everyone >>> was using FBX , so who would care about Collada? >>> >>> Now you cry that FBX is evil and blame Unreal, Unity and Autodesk. >>> Now you complain that there are not any open standards being pushed. >>> >>> You know what guys? cry me a river.. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Daniel Stokes <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> With regards to glTF exporting, we have a glTF exporter as part of the >> Real >>>> Time Engine addon project [1]. The exporter[2] output passes >> validation[3] >>>> for the glTF 1.0 (not sure if draft or final) specification. It is >>>> currently missing animation support, and could have better support for >>>> materials and textures. This weekend I will move this exporter out of >> the >>>> project it is currently in and in to its own repo so it can more easily >> be >>>> used for creating a simple glTF export addon. >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/Kupoman/BlenderRealtimeEngineAddon/ >>>> [2] >>>> >>>> >> https://github.com/Kupoman/BlenderRealtimeEngineAddon/blob/develop/brte/converters/blendergltf.py >>>> [3] >>>> >> https://github.com/KhronosGroup/glTF/tree/1.0-final/specification/schema >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Daniel Stokes >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Fabio Pesari <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 02/10/2016 04:44 PM, Ton Roosendaal wrote: >>>>>> A crowd-funder for 1 feature only is very risky. What precisely do we >>>>> define to fund? Who would crowdfund a developer to just fix bugs and >>>>> maintenance for 2 years? I doubt people would pay for that. I wouldn't >>>> even >>>>> know where to find such a coder... >>>>>> >>>>>> For 2.8 we can do a big fund raiser, and include this on the work >>>>> planning. I think professionals rather see us to keep working on the >>>> whole >>>>> pipeline, starting with good PBR shader editing in viewports. >>>>> >>>>> Why don't you do a fundraiser organized like this: >>>>> >>>>> Feature X [---] >>>>> Feature Y [---------] >>>>> Feature Z [------] >>>>> Maintenance [-----] >>>>> Marketing [--] >>>>> ========================================= >>>>> Total [---------------------------] >>>>> >>>>> When people donate, they can choose where to put their money and if >> they >>>>> don't, it goes to "Maintenance" by default, so most donors will fund >>>>> that. Also, any excess money from the implementation of other features >>>>> also goes to "Maintenance". >>>>> >>>>> It'd be even better if there were set goals for each feature (for >>>>> example, $40k for Feature X, and of course no limit on "Maintenance"), >>>>> so people would know how much they have to donate in order to make sure >>>>> the feature they need is implemented (with a disclaimer, of course). >>>>> >>>>> I think a lot more people are willing to donate if they know exactly >>>>> where their money is going. >>>>> >>>>> I think generic fundraisers often fail because there aren't set >>>>> objectives. The FSF recently managed to reach their goal because they >>>>> set a reasonable one ($450k), and they aren't nearly as popular as >>>>> Blender (you could say the industry hates them). >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Bf-committers mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Bf-committers mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bf-committers mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bf-committers mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers >> > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
