Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Martin]

I wouldn't mind to buy Pepsi if it comes with Coke at the same price. The 
problem is if you haven't bought Coke in the past you won't be able to buy this 
offer ever and you'll have to drink only Pepsi forever unless you go to another 
store.

The problem is that they gave us only about three weeks to buy your last Coke 
since the EOL announcement. The problem is this is a very expensive Coke. In 
Japan a network license + Sub would cost you about $ 10K , yes it is more 
expensive than Maya.
Sadly I can't get 10K that fast so I guess I'll have to change my business 
plans drastically.

Martin
Sent from my iPhone

> On 2014/03/26, at 3:17, Andres Stephens  wrote:
> 
> Valid enough. 
> 
> Unfortunate either way.. 
> 
> From what I understood though, it is too expensive to “opensource” or 
> maintain thirdparty applications within SI. How much would it really cost to 
> maintain them? Would the low sales really come out as a deficit in the long 
> term? 
> 
> I don’t suggest leaving SI as opensource nor free - just keep selling it 
> longer. Sell seats. 
> 
> But yes, I agree with you Jean-Louis… Valid enough. 
> 
> From: Jean-Louis Billard
> Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎March‎ ‎25‎, ‎2014 ‎13‎:‎01‎ ‎
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> 
> Hi Andres,
> 
> Unfortunately Chris already explained that, and it makes sense: AD have to 
> pay for third parties libraries. It’s not worth it for them given the small 
> revenue stream.
> 
> I think we’re collectively tripping if we think we are going to get AD to 
> revoke their decision.
> What we need to do now (for those, like me, who want to stay with Soft) is to 
> make sure we keep using it to create great work, generate enough demand for 
> third parties to invest time in developing for it, and just keep having fun 
> using a great piece of software for the years to come until a credible 
> solution comes along and gives us the opportunity to move on in a graceful 
> way.
> 
> Regards,
> Jean-Louis
> 
> 
> Jean-Louis Billard
> 
> Digital Golem
> BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
> UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
> jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com
> http://www.digitalgolem.com/
> 53 Rue Gustave Huberti
> 1030 Brussels
> 
> On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:51, Andres Stephens  wrote:
> 
> Why are you refusing a sale to studios who want to invest years into a 
> product you already have, coded and no-longer need to develop much?
> 

Re: humanize Maya, SOFT top 5

[Eugene Flormata]

>
> Can someone elaborate the middle click for repeat action? Is that default?
> I've always had to press period.
>

I agree with everyone else's opinions.
Out of all if them though I think Maya's fcurves are the most annoying.

Also being able to paint objects in the viewport as different render
methods. So mix wireframe/ solid / texture that's handy.

Re: Oculus Rift

[Mirko Jankovic]

that is one big f***k! really
if FB buy this I will ignore completly and wait for something else.

get ready for VR FB and FB games in VR full of adds crap...

I sooo hate that crapbook...

morning before coffee not good


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:10 AM, Rares Halmagean wrote:

>  I think this is great for oculus and the team to fast trek their product
> and compete with 
> other
> initiatives  and to
> bring us more affordable options. So let the games begin!
>
>
> On 3/25/2014 6:09 PM, Paul Doyle wrote:
>
> yes, I'm gutted. What a shitty way to treat all the people that funded the
> kickstarter with Luckey's vision of a completely open VR platform. We'll
> probably still continue with the Fabric extension as even if we eventually
> change to a different VR system a lot of the work will remain valid.
>
>  Meh.
>
>
> On 25 March 2014 18:59, Francisco Criado  wrote:
>
>> guys, have you checked news? wtf!
>>
>>
>> http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/25/5547456/facebook-buying-oculus-for-2-billion
>>
>>
>> 2014-03-20 22:41 GMT-03:00 Paul Doyle :
>>
>>  We saw it and are excited :)
>>>
>>>
>>>  On 20 March 2014 21:33, Francisco Criado  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Helge! have you seen the new rift dev kit? they
 have positional tracking now :) Quite strange it uses a camera for that,
 thought that they were going to add a magnetic compass and an altimeter...
  F.



 On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado 
 wrote:

> Lack of programming knowledge (working on that) made me hire a
> freelance progammer for an idea i would like to make it work, but here in
> Argentina is quite difficult to find experienced coders involved in 3d
> or vfx. As you said Paul, there are a lot of possibilities for mixing
> different kind of tech available to all that would provide better tools 
> for
> vfx artists and supervisors.
>
>  F.
>
>
> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
> wrote:
>
> So far, everything we thought would be amazing has already been
> thought of (which is great imo - I love the movement behind the OR):
> http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/
>
>  It's nice to see how many people are pushing on this - I'm hopeful
> that some of them will jump on the free license of Fabric and start
> tinkering with the platform themselves. With the extension system we have,
> it's possible for anyone to hook up custom hardware or build on top of our
> reference implementations. The Sixens guys have some cool technology 
> coming
> in the summer (they developed the Razer Hydra) that should be great to 
> work
> with.
>
>  Man, now I'm all excited again :)
>
>
> On 27 February 2014 12:32, Francisco Criado wrote:
>
> Well guys if you run out of geeks for betatesting i don't have any
> trouble for burning my eyes with softimage and the rift!
> Paul you said interaction models, well arduino and a nine dof  board
> sounds great for a starting point ;)
>  F.
>
> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
> wrote:
>
> Please stop encouraging him. I might talk to them soon though if we
> get a good customer use case. Right now we're just thinking about a smooth
> path to get production data viewable - then we start thinking about
> interaction models and approaches. Scene assembly and lighting could start
> getting quite interesting :) For now it's just a science project to stop
> Helge going mad implementing various file extensions...
>
>
> On 27 February 2014 12:15, Francisco Criado wrote:
>
> you should convince your boss of buying xsens tech, and then you will
> find yourself like this:
> http://youtu.be/LtMfrkRqlRs
>
>  F.
>
> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado <
> malcriad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well Helge! is it there any chance to send you an argentine bbq as a
> bribe for that tool? name your price!
>
>  F.
>
>
> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
> wrote:
>
> We're not casual when we talk about it internally :) It's an absolute
> nerdfest of 'and then we can... and then and then"
>
>  It's a bit like this ;) Dude, Where's My Car ( And Then ??? 
> )
>
>
> On 27 February 2014 11:22, Tim Crowson  > wrote:
>
>  So casual, Helge...   :-D
>
>
> On 2/27/2014 10:02 AM, Helge Mathee wrote:
>
> I've just received mine and I'll integrate it into our system. Thus it
> will work in all DCCs.
>
> On 27.02.2014 15:51, Francisco Criado wrote:
>
> The first time i used them in unity, imported a set extension done for
> an old proj

ot: visual scripting

[Francisco Criado]

Guys have you checked blueprint on unreal engine 4? very interesting for
realtime!
thay have cleaned the awfull ui udk used to have.

F.

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Perry Harovas]

I guess what the issue (at least for me) is, is that while you are
correct that Autodesk did talk about moving development to Singapore,
Autodesk did NOT say that the product was
in a state of minimal development. This, along with Chris V.'s
statement led everyone (and how could it not) to think things were
business as usual. Different team, but everything would be fine,
things would be the same, just with  new people. This should not
denigrate the Singapore team, who did great work, especially towards
the end right before EOL announcement.

You all may have intended to keep Softimage alive, but had we known
that the status had changed to one of very little, or minimal
development, we would have known that the status had changed
with regards to what we would be getting in the future and how
Autodesk saw the product in the future.

Look, I fluctuate back and forth as to if Softimage was on the
chopping block when purchased, or not. I feel that the people
involved, especially Marc Petit, really thought it would survive.
And really, it doesn't matter to me as much as the fact that it was
not clear (it was basically hidden) that the status of Softimage
within the company
had changed to one where it would be maintained, or minimally developed.

I will gladly change my mind if you, Maurice, or anyone else can point
me to the statement where it was EXPLICITLY stated to us, the users,
that the status had changed.
I don't mean that we should have KNOWN it had changed, I mean a
statement where someone came right out and SAID it would be minimally
developed and/or maintained.
That may seem like splitting hairs, but I think it makes all the
difference in the world as to establishing the credibility of
Autodesk. One is just a general statement that
lets US decide what we think it all means, the other one (that I don't
remember ever reading) is a statement of FACT.

One final thought: Isn't it obvious that apologies (good, heartfelt,
honest apologies) about the mistakes that were made, would go a long
way here?
Part of the reason that people are so suspicious, frankly, is because
many of you don't exude much remorse, if any. That may be a corporate
culture thing, it may be the lack of
intonation that happens with email, but regardless, you need to know
that many of you are coming across as pretty casual
and unfazed (except with the amount of emails and questions you have
to answer multiple times).



On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Maurice Patel
 wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> We moved people off of other teams to work on Skyline too. And we did not say 
> anything to those users either - resources get moved around regularly in 
> organizations from project to project This is one of the reasons why we try 
> to avoid getting into discussions about how many engineers are working on X, 
> Y or Z - especially as that can always be subjective in terms of output 
> sometimes a small team can be more productive than a big team and vice versa. 
> When we moved all the Montreal engineers off of Softimage and moved 
> development to Singapore we did talk about it.
> maurice
>
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:51 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> Hi Maurice
>
> yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at Autodesk the 
> entity than you personally, I hope you understand.  and yes it was mashed, 
> but I hope to elaborate.
>
> Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great 
> engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the reason for 
> purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the time , whilst 
> assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the product was going to be 
> ok eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel that the Softimage user base at 
> that time were never informed properly of the true extent of the engineer 
> stripping until long afterwards .
>
> this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels like 
> your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back then there was 
> not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was going to be ok. as long 
> as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not all...
>
> so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely sure of 
> the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what point were the 
> Softimage customers informed that the entire engineering team had been moved 
> to a new application? was this only, as you say in Autodesk's statement of 
> intent? as this, in my opinion, was never truly communicated and somewhat 
> hidden to the user base until much later on.



-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visu

Re: Oculus Rift

[Rares Halmagean]

I think this is great for oculus and the team to fast trek their product 
and compete with other 
 
initiatives  and to 
bring us more affordable options. So let the games begin!


On 3/25/2014 6:09 PM, Paul Doyle wrote:
yes, I'm gutted. What a shitty way to treat all the people that funded 
the kickstarter with Luckey's vision of a completely open VR platform. 
We'll probably still continue with the Fabric extension as even if we 
eventually change to a different VR system a lot of the work will 
remain valid.


Meh.


On 25 March 2014 18:59, Francisco Criado > wrote:


guys, have you checked news? wtf!


http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/25/5547456/facebook-buying-oculus-for-2-billion


2014-03-20 22:41 GMT-03:00 Paul Doyle mailto:technove...@gmail.com>>:

We saw it and are excited :)


On 20 March 2014 21:33, Francisco Criado
mailto:malcriad...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi Helge! have you seen the new rift dev kit? they
have positional tracking now :) Quite strange it uses a
camera for that, thought that they were going to add a
magnetic compass and an altimeter...
F.



On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado
mailto:malcriad...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Lack of programming knowledge (working on that) made
me hire a freelance progammer for an idea i would like
to make it work, but here in Argentina is quite
difficult to find experienced coders involved in 3d
or vfx. As you said Paul, there are a lot of
possibilities for mixing different kind of tech
available to all that would provide better tools for
vfx artists and supervisors.

F.


On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle
 wrote:

So far, everything we thought would be amazing has
already been thought of (which is great imo - I
love the movement behind the OR):
http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/

It's nice to see how many people are pushing on
this - I'm hopeful that some of them will jump on
the free license of Fabric and start tinkering
with the platform themselves. With the extension
system we have, it's possible for anyone to hook
up custom hardware or build on top of our
reference implementations. The Sixens guys have
some cool technology coming in the summer (they
developed the Razer Hydra) that should be great to
work with.

Man, now I'm all excited again :)


On 27 February 2014 12:32, Francisco Criado
 wrote:

Well guys if you run out of geeks for
betatesting i don't have any trouble for
burning my eyes with softimage and the rift!
Paul you said interaction models, well arduino
and a nine dof  board sounds great for a
starting point ;)
F.

On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle
 wrote:

Please stop encouraging him. I might talk
to them soon though if we get a good
customer use case. Right now we're just
thinking about a smooth path to get
production data viewable - then we start
thinking about interaction models and
approaches. Scene assembly and lighting
could start getting quite interesting :)
For now it's just a science project to
stop Helge going mad implementing various
file extensions...


On 27 February 2014 12:15, Francisco
Criado  wrote:

you should convince your boss of
buying xsens tech, and then you will
find yourself like this:
http://youtu.be/LtMfrkRqlRs

F.

On Thursday, February 27, 2014,
Francisco Criado
 wrote:

Well Helge! is it there any chance
  

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[James De Colling]

Regarding the marketing, ive been in mostly maya based studios for the last
4 years and softimage based before that what really struck me though was
the Maya guys (and some Max guys) were all talking about Modo, how it was
such a fast modeller / uv tool etc. Not a single one of them had even
considered softimage, they knew of it, just nothing about what it did.

Maya and Max would come out with fanfare every release, write-ups, new
features videos etc. softimage just got a basic change list. fxguide is a
good example, even the "death of softimage" article got half a page, yet
"the future of Naiad" got multiple posts and pages. bifrost / naiad
received more fanfare than ICE did, for arguably a much less capable
product.

if existing customers of your own group of products don't know what your
selling. your really dropping the ball.





On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> Hi Francisco. I am waiting an internal reply on this one. I do not know
> why your reseller cannot sell you Softimage or is saying this.
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Francisco Criado
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 6:57 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> Hi Maurice, for the third time now ...(seems you are too much worried with
> the discusion and not with the replies :) ) i would like to purchase a
> couple of licenses of Softimage, and your offices from Argentina don´t know
> what Softimage is, and they say that Autodesk doesn´t sell this product.
> Can you give me a hand with this?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> F.
>
> (a simple latino from third world, nothing fancy here)
>
> 2014-03-25 19:45 GMT-03:00 Maurice Patel  >:
> Hi Rob,
> We moved people off of other teams to work on Skyline too. And we did not
> say anything to those users either - resources get moved around regularly
> in organizations from project to project This is one of the reasons why we
> try to avoid getting into discussions about how many engineers are working
> on X, Y or Z - especially as that can always be subjective in terms of
> output sometimes a small team can be more productive than a big team and
> vice versa. When we moved all the Montreal engineers off of Softimage and
> moved development to Singapore we did talk about it.
> maurice
>
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:51 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
> Hi Maurice
>
> yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at Autodesk
> the entity than you personally, I hope you understand.  and yes it was
> mashed, but I hope to elaborate.
>
> Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great
> engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the reason
> for purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the time , whilst
> assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the product was going to be
> ok eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel that the Softimage user base at
> that time were never informed properly of the true extent of the engineer
> stripping until long afterwards .
>
> this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels
> like your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back then
> there was not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was going to be
> ok. as long as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not all...
>
> so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely sure
> of the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what point were
> the Softimage customers informed that the entire engineering team had been
> moved to a new application? was this only, as you say in Autodesk's
> statement of intent? as this, in my opinion, was never truly communicated
> and somewhat hidden to the user base until much later on.
>
>

Re: Oculus Rift

[Paul Doyle]

yes, I'm gutted. What a shitty way to treat all the people that funded the
kickstarter with Luckey's vision of a completely open VR platform. We'll
probably still continue with the Fabric extension as even if we eventually
change to a different VR system a lot of the work will remain valid.

Meh.


On 25 March 2014 18:59, Francisco Criado  wrote:

> guys, have you checked news? wtf!
>
>
> http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/25/5547456/facebook-buying-oculus-for-2-billion
>
>
> 2014-03-20 22:41 GMT-03:00 Paul Doyle :
>
> We saw it and are excited :)
>>
>>
>> On 20 March 2014 21:33, Francisco Criado  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Helge! have you seen the new rift dev kit? they
>>> have positional tracking now :) Quite strange it uses a camera for that,
>>> thought that they were going to add a magnetic compass and an altimeter...
>>> F.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Lack of programming knowledge (working on that) made me hire a
 freelance progammer for an idea i would like to make it work, but here in
 Argentina is quite difficult to find experienced coders involved in 3d
 or vfx. As you said Paul, there are a lot of possibilities for mixing
 different kind of tech available to all that would provide better tools for
 vfx artists and supervisors.

 F.


 On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
 wrote:

 So far, everything we thought would be amazing has already been thought
 of (which is great imo - I love the movement behind the OR):
 http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/

 It's nice to see how many people are pushing on this - I'm hopeful that
 some of them will jump on the free license of Fabric and start tinkering
 with the platform themselves. With the extension system we have, it's
 possible for anyone to hook up custom hardware or build on top of our
 reference implementations. The Sixens guys have some cool technology coming
 in the summer (they developed the Razer Hydra) that should be great to work
 with.

 Man, now I'm all excited again :)


 On 27 February 2014 12:32, Francisco Criado wrote:

 Well guys if you run out of geeks for betatesting i don't have any
 trouble for burning my eyes with softimage and the rift!
 Paul you said interaction models, well arduino and a nine dof  board
 sounds great for a starting point ;)
 F.

 On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
 wrote:

 Please stop encouraging him. I might talk to them soon though if we get
 a good customer use case. Right now we're just thinking about a smooth path
 to get production data viewable - then we start thinking about interaction
 models and approaches. Scene assembly and lighting could start getting
 quite interesting :) For now it's just a science project to stop Helge
 going mad implementing various file extensions...


 On 27 February 2014 12:15, Francisco Criado wrote:

 you should convince your boss of buying xsens tech, and then you will
 find yourself like this:
 http://youtu.be/LtMfrkRqlRs

 F.

 On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado 
 wrote:

 Well Helge! is it there any chance to send you an argentine bbq as a
 bribe for that tool? name your price!

 F.


 On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
 wrote:

 We're not casual when we talk about it internally :) It's an absolute
 nerdfest of 'and then we can... and then and then"

 It's a bit like this ;) Dude, Where's My Car ( And Then ??? 
 )


 On 27 February 2014 11:22, Tim Crowson 
 wrote:

  So casual, Helge...   :-D


 On 2/27/2014 10:02 AM, Helge Mathee wrote:

 I've just received mine and I'll integrate it into our system. Thus it
 will work in all DCCs.

 On 27.02.2014 15:51, Francisco Criado wrote:

 The first time i used them in unity, imported a set extension done for
 an old project, and found myself walking on my set and saying wwwwww
 all the time!
 F.


 On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Arvid Björn 
 wrote:

 I can just imagine 3D artists looking around the room like he's doing,
 wondering where they put that darn cube they need.


 On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
 mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com>


>>
>

Re: LUTs in region render clipping

[Simon van de Lagemaat]

It's mapping from Alexa logC to the viewing space which is rec709 srgb.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Andy Jones  wrote:

> Some thoughts/guesses:
>
> From the command line you posted, it seems like the lut you have is trying
> to go from linear to your viewing space, correct?
>
> Is it possible your issues are stemming from
>
> a) linear luts coming from linear space generally only get applied to the
> data between 0 and 1 (because, where do you stop?)
>
> b) it takes a lot of values to encode linear space linearly, and you may
> be seeing significant quantization.  The difference between the lut in xsi
> and in nuke could possibly be due to different interpolation modes between
> the two programs.  Maybe Nuke is doing a better job approximating a curved
> response between data points in the lut?  I'm just speculating.
>
> I'm not sure why the lut would look overexposed in xsi.  Maybe it's the
> same quantization thing as b?
>
> Can you confirm what colorspaces the original 3dl is mapping between?
>
>
>

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Francisco. I am waiting an internal reply on this one. I do not know why 
your reseller cannot sell you Softimage or is saying this.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Francisco Criado
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 6:57 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Maurice, for the third time now ...(seems you are too much worried with the 
discusion and not with the replies :) ) i would like to purchase a couple of 
licenses of Softimage, and your offices from Argentina don´t know what 
Softimage is, and they say that Autodesk doesn´t sell this product. Can you 
give me a hand with this?

Thanks in advance,
F.

(a simple latino from third world, nothing fancy here)

2014-03-25 19:45 GMT-03:00 Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>:
Hi Rob,
We moved people off of other teams to work on Skyline too. And we did not say 
anything to those users either - resources get moved around regularly in 
organizations from project to project This is one of the reasons why we try to 
avoid getting into discussions about how many engineers are working on X, Y or 
Z - especially as that can always be subjective in terms of output sometimes a 
small team can be more productive than a big team and vice versa. When we moved 
all the Montreal engineers off of Softimage and moved development to Singapore 
we did talk about it.
maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

-Original Message-
From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:51 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
Hi Maurice

yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at Autodesk the 
entity than you personally, I hope you understand.  and yes it was mashed, but 
I hope to elaborate.

Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great 
engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the reason for 
purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the time , whilst 
assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the product was going to be ok 
eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel that the Softimage user base at that 
time were never informed properly of the true extent of the engineer stripping 
until long afterwards .

this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels like 
your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back then there was 
not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was going to be ok. as long 
as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not all...

so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely sure of 
the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what point were the 
Softimage customers informed that the entire engineering team had been moved to 
a new application? was this only, as you say in Autodesk's statement of intent? 
as this, in my opinion, was never truly communicated and somewhat hidden to the 
user base until much later on.

<>

Re: Oculus Rift

[Francisco Criado]

guys, have you checked news? wtf!

http://www.theverge.com/2014/3/25/5547456/facebook-buying-oculus-for-2-billion


2014-03-20 22:41 GMT-03:00 Paul Doyle :

> We saw it and are excited :)
>
>
> On 20 March 2014 21:33, Francisco Criado  wrote:
>
>> Hi Helge! have you seen the new rift dev kit? they
>> have positional tracking now :) Quite strange it uses a camera for that,
>> thought that they were going to add a magnetic compass and an altimeter...
>> F.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Lack of programming knowledge (working on that) made me hire a freelance
>>> progammer for an idea i would like to make it work, but here in Argentina
>>> is quite difficult to find experienced coders involved in 3d or vfx. As you
>>> said Paul, there are a lot of possibilities for mixing different kind of
>>> tech available to all that would provide better tools for vfx artists and
>>> supervisors.
>>>
>>> F.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> So far, everything we thought would be amazing has already been thought
>>> of (which is great imo - I love the movement behind the OR):
>>> http://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/
>>>
>>> It's nice to see how many people are pushing on this - I'm hopeful that
>>> some of them will jump on the free license of Fabric and start tinkering
>>> with the platform themselves. With the extension system we have, it's
>>> possible for anyone to hook up custom hardware or build on top of our
>>> reference implementations. The Sixens guys have some cool technology coming
>>> in the summer (they developed the Razer Hydra) that should be great to work
>>> with.
>>>
>>> Man, now I'm all excited again :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 February 2014 12:32, Francisco Criado wrote:
>>>
>>> Well guys if you run out of geeks for betatesting i don't have any
>>> trouble for burning my eyes with softimage and the rift!
>>> Paul you said interaction models, well arduino and a nine dof  board
>>> sounds great for a starting point ;)
>>> F.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Please stop encouraging him. I might talk to them soon though if we get
>>> a good customer use case. Right now we're just thinking about a smooth path
>>> to get production data viewable - then we start thinking about interaction
>>> models and approaches. Scene assembly and lighting could start getting
>>> quite interesting :) For now it's just a science project to stop Helge
>>> going mad implementing various file extensions...
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 February 2014 12:15, Francisco Criado wrote:
>>>
>>> you should convince your boss of buying xsens tech, and then you will
>>> find yourself like this:
>>> http://youtu.be/LtMfrkRqlRs
>>>
>>> F.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Francisco Criado 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well Helge! is it there any chance to send you an argentine bbq as a
>>> bribe for that tool? name your price!
>>>
>>> F.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Paul Doyle 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> We're not casual when we talk about it internally :) It's an absolute
>>> nerdfest of 'and then we can... and then and then"
>>>
>>> It's a bit like this ;) Dude, Where's My Car ( And Then ??? 
>>> )
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 February 2014 11:22, Tim Crowson 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  So casual, Helge...   :-D
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/27/2014 10:02 AM, Helge Mathee wrote:
>>>
>>> I've just received mine and I'll integrate it into our system. Thus it
>>> will work in all DCCs.
>>>
>>> On 27.02.2014 15:51, Francisco Criado wrote:
>>>
>>> The first time i used them in unity, imported a set extension done for
>>> an old project, and found myself walking on my set and saying wwwwww
>>> all the time!
>>> F.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thursday, February 27, 2014, Arvid Björn 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I can just imagine 3D artists looking around the room like he's doing,
>>> wondering where they put that darn cube they need.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
>>> mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Francisco Criado]

Hi Maurice, for the third time now ...(seems you are too much worried with
the discusion and not with the replies :) ) i would like to purchase a
couple of licenses of Softimage, and your offices from Argentina don´t know
what Softimage is, and they say that Autodesk doesn´t sell this product.
Can you give me a hand with this?

Thanks in advance,
F.

(a simple latino from third world, nothing fancy here)


2014-03-25 19:45 GMT-03:00 Maurice Patel :

> Hi Rob,
> We moved people off of other teams to work on Skyline too. And we did not
> say anything to those users either - resources get moved around regularly
> in organizations from project to project This is one of the reasons why we
> try to avoid getting into discussions about how many engineers are working
> on X, Y or Z - especially as that can always be subjective in terms of
> output sometimes a small team can be more productive than a big team and
> vice versa. When we moved all the Montreal engineers off of Softimage and
> moved development to Singapore we did talk about it.
> maurice
>
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:51 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> Hi Maurice
>
> yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at Autodesk
> the entity than you personally, I hope you understand.  and yes it was
> mashed, but I hope to elaborate.
>
> Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great
> engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the reason
> for purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the time , whilst
> assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the product was going to be
> ok eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel that the Softimage user base at
> that time were never informed properly of the true extent of the engineer
> stripping until long afterwards .
>
> this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels
> like your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back then
> there was not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was going to be
> ok. as long as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not all...
>
> so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely sure
> of the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what point were
> the Softimage customers informed that the entire engineering team had been
> moved to a new application? was this only, as you say in Autodesk's
> statement of intent? as this, in my opinion, was never truly communicated
> and somewhat hidden to the user base until much later on.
>

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Rob,
We moved people off of other teams to work on Skyline too. And we did not say 
anything to those users either - resources get moved around regularly in 
organizations from project to project This is one of the reasons why we try to 
avoid getting into discussions about how many engineers are working on X, Y or 
Z - especially as that can always be subjective in terms of output sometimes a 
small team can be more productive than a big team and vice versa. When we moved 
all the Montreal engineers off of Softimage and moved development to Singapore 
we did talk about it.
maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 5:51 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Maurice

yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at Autodesk the 
entity than you personally, I hope you understand.  and yes it was mashed, but 
I hope to elaborate.

Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great 
engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the reason for 
purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the time , whilst 
assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the product was going to be ok 
eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel that the Softimage user base at that 
time were never informed properly of the true extent of the engineer stripping 
until long afterwards .

this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels like 
your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back then there was 
not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was going to be ok. as long 
as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not all...

so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely sure of 
the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what point were the 
Softimage customers informed that the entire engineering team had been moved to 
a new application? was this only, as you say in Autodesk's statement of intent? 
as this, in my opinion, was never truly communicated and somewhat hidden to the 
user base until much later on.
<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[John Clausing]

Last year, we were fortunate to be written up in "3D World"..a rare 
occurrence for a Softimage project.

We sent a press release to Softimage and never heard a word. At that point it 
was clear to us that AD wasn't even trying.

I would have thought you could sell that sort of PR, but they didn't.
Really disappointing. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 25, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Bk  wrote:
> 
> "Also I would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was 
> never the case, we are always balancing efforts."
> 
> Nobody would expect that Autodesk as a company that has many products would 
> expend 100% of its effort into Softimage at the expense of all it's other 
> products.  What we would expect however is that softimage would be given 100% 
> of the relative attention it deserved as a product.
> 
> 
>> On 25 Mar 2014, at 21:22, Maurice Patel  wrote:
>> 
>> Also I would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was 
>> never the case, we are always balancing efforts.
> 

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Nancy Jacobs]

On Mar 25, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Paul Griswold 
 wrote:

> or B. Autodesk bought Softimage for it's patents, technology and developers,

Don't forget to add, and USER BASE

> then intentionally marginalized Softimage to the point of where a business 
> case could be made to shut it down and force users to move to Maya.

Um, yeah... USER BASE = Present and future income. Once the people are signed 
on for the ride, the driver can take them anywhere. So obvious...

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[John Clausing]

Last year, we were fortunate to be written up in "3D World"..a rare 
occurrence for a Softimage project.

We sent a press release to Softimage and never heard a word. At that point it 
was clear to us that AD wasn't even trying.

I would have thought you could sell that sort of PR, but they didn't.
Really disappointing. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 25, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Bk  wrote:
> 
> "Also I would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was 
> never the case, we are always balancing efforts."
> 
> Nobody would expect that Autodesk as a company that has many products would 
> expend 100% of its effort into Softimage at the expense of all it's other 
> products.  What we would expect however is that softimage would be given 100% 
> of the relative attention it deserved as a product.
> 
> 
>> On 25 Mar 2014, at 21:22, Maurice Patel  wrote:
>> 
>> Also I would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was 
>> never the case, we are always balancing efforts.
> 

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Bk]

"Also I would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was never 
the case, we are always balancing efforts."

Nobody would expect that Autodesk as a company that has many products would 
expend 100% of its effort into Softimage at the expense of all it's other 
products.  What we would expect however is that softimage would be given 100% 
of the relative attention it deserved as a product.


On 25 Mar 2014, at 21:22, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> Also I would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was never 
> the case, we are always balancing efforts.

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Rob Chapman]

Hi Maurice

yes sorry, my previous mail the 'you' was much more directed at
Autodesk the entity than you personally, I hope you understand.  and
yes it was mashed, but I hope to elaborate.

Now that 'you' (Autodesk) are making it is very clear that those great
engineers that were moved onto other projects were one part of the
reason for purchase, the other was Softimage the product. but at the
time , whilst assuring us the existing customers of Softimage the
product was going to be ok eg 'the future is bright' etc I do feel
that the Softimage user base at that time were never informed properly
of the true extent of the engineer stripping until long afterwards .

this is perhaps one of those lingering disagreeable tastes as is feels
like your obligation was fulfilled with minimum effort whereas back
then there was not a sense of EOL as we were assured the product was
going to be ok. as long as it was sold as a plugin. or a suite. or not
all...

so to clarify. with some actual history because yes I am not entirely
sure of the facts here and others may be more clued :) but at what
point were the Softimage customers informed that the entire
engineering team had been moved to a new application? was this only,
as you say in Autodesk's statement of intent? as this, in my opinion,
was never truly communicated and somewhat hidden to the user base
until much later on.

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

Crystal clear! I await your further actions...

Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

RE: planned transitional training?

[Jill Ramsay (Contractor)]

Hey Leendert,
Thank you for the offer and I hope to be able to give you something to 
communicate very soon. Just to be clear, planning has indeed been in place for 
transitional training materials, it's just that I am not fully up to speed with 
where that plan is at, having only just come on board - but I just read 
something very encouraging. I'm sorry, bear with me, more soon on this topic.

Jill

<>

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Yes the frustration is natural - I understand that
If only the world were simple and clear cut :(. Neither A  nor B is an adequate 
description of what happened and what did includes aspects of both. Also I 
would not say we put 100% of our effort into Softimage. That was never the 
case, we are always balancing efforts. Softimage was run as a separate division 
at Avid and was 100% focused on its products pre-acquisition - but they had 
also had to make some tough decisions to EOL some of their products. But yes 
that 100% focus was lost when it was acquired as it is for any company that 
gets acquired. No-one wanted to cause hardship to any of our users (3ds Max, 
Maya or Softimage). The dynamics of human systems are chaotic, it is never 
possible to fully predict outcomes.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:16 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

You do see the frustration here, right Maurice?

By nature I'd say most Softimage users are very logical, straight forward, 
thinking individuals who quite often either own their own business or work as 
freelancers and therefore have a good understanding of how to run a business.

Every reason given so far for this entire situation seems to fall under the 
concept of "plausible deniability" because otherwise none of it makes sense.  
You have to believe that Softimage either A. had an incredible string of bad 
luck which, despite Autodesk giving 100% of it's effort to develop, market and 
sell the product, caused it to fail.  or B. Autodesk bought Softimage for it's 
patents, technology and developers, then intentionally marginalized Softimage 
to the point of where a business case could be made to shut it down and force 
users to move to Maya.

-Paul

"I think...a more reasonable view...[is] trying to allow customers to do what 
they want to do instead of being heavy-handed and forcing customers to do 
things that are in their best interest."  - Carl Bass


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
No, and we are going round in circles as multiple topics are getting meshed 
together. I doubt anything I can write will make you less furious. If you want 
to talk I am open to that.
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

-Original Message-
From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Bk
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:55 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
So from the outset, you bought Softimage with the view to take all the 
engineers from it and put them onto another product?
If that is the case why not just be upfront about it and say this was your 5 
year plan instead of pretending you respected the userbase and pretending 
wanted to continue Softimage, then suddenly giving a months notice regarding 
the purchases of new licences?
Ive been frantic all month trying to figure out what I can or can't do with my 
new as yet unformed company regarding buying licences.
I'm sorry, but I'm still furious.




<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Doeke Wartena]

I have once seen an advertisement for softimage, i can't remember what
magazine it was.
It had this modelled lego parrot in it (untextured if i remember correct):
http://www.eurobricks.com/forum/uploads//133529/gallery_273_58_52809.png
And the interface was a bit cleaner then current version, as in things
missing.
Unfortunately it was a dream :( (i'm not kidding, i really dreamed this
like 2 years ago).

And Maurice and Chris, i really appreciate the time you guys take to write
answers. However i'm hurted really deep lately and it's only getting worse.
I lost my trust in Autodesk, not for all the lies but the choices made over
the years.
I think a major reason for maya and max being so big is that so many
companies use those products and there for schools teaches those products.
It's hard to break that cycle and i think it's where AD failed. If schools
with maya or max seats where teaching ICE as well then softimage would have
won slowly more ground. It's so sad that i always have to explain what
softimage is while they know what maya and 3d max is.

O yeah when was it 2008? Like 6 years ago. Why didn't AD tell the future of
SI is dark.

I hope i can turn away from AD products as long as possible. And seeing
what products they have left, it can't be that hard. I hope the choices
made by AD will hurt AD in the long term. Not because i'm evil, it's
because i want AD to learn a very valuable lesson. The worst thing of all
is the 2 year period, i think it's a big middle finger from AD to so many
customers. 2 years is nothing.

Even if you put one programmer on SI i will be happy. His taks could be
open SDK and driver support, nothing more. The problem however will be that
people will stop buying new products. And it's all about the fucking money.


2014-03-25 22:08 GMT+01:00 Maurice Patel :

> If you mash up bits of different emails you can make me say anything you
> want :)
> Chris and I have gone over this several times in past emails. In 2008 the
> world was very different. When we acquired Softimage we told everyone that
> we were doing it for two reasons. Softimage was good product and there was
> a highly trained and skilled engineering team that we wanted to work on
> other projects we had in mind. We already discussed this.
> maurice
>
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:07 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> please do! if your conversation can satisfy Paul then am sure a lot more
> of us will feel a heck of a lot more assured.
>
> the main issue being.  you 'suddenly discover' the fact that you have
> 3 competing products. if we knew this was to happen 5 years ago, myself,
> Paul and many others would have a 5 year head start on what we now are
> forced to embark upon.
>
> on one hand you say "we did not plan this" and in the other you say "this
> is what we said at the beginning"
>
> does. not. compute.
>
>
>
>
> On 25 March 2014 19:59, Maurice Patel  wrote:
> > . If you want to talk I am open to that.
> > maurice
>

RE: planned transitional training?

[Angus Davidson]

Hi Eric

Just to point out that the educational guys dont have the luxury of the 2 
years. Softimage ceased to be an option as of the day of the announcement, We 
have a course that starts in less then 3 months that will have to be Maya  / 
(LT). 

Yes people do need to step back a bit and be a bit more respectful of the guys 
that have been brought into help. However I do believe your last statement was 
the most accurate though. Things haven't been figured out.
They should have been in place for the announcement.

One thing they could do is speed up the release date. All the 2015 M&E releases 
are already out in the wild. At least give your actual customers the chance to 
get up to speed faster ;)

Kind regards

Angus


From: Eric Thivierge [ethivie...@hybride.com]
Sent: 25 March 2014 10:57 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: planned transitional training?

Leendert,

Some of us are transitioning to Max / Maya and need the resources being
discussed. For the time being I'm assuming things are pretty much a mess
across the board with the transition at every company using Softimage
and at AD. I don't care at this point how well this has been planned or
organized. The fact is, Jill has come out to tell you they are working
on it. She can't give you definite answers when she may not have them.
This is out of her control and thus there is nothing more to discuss.

We just have to wait for when they can give us the information. We don't
need to move quickly. We still have at the very least 2 years to
transition (more in fact since we can sit on our subscription with
Softimage continually) so there isn't a super rush. We have a bunch of
(50+ at least) people at work here that need the training material but
we're not in a panic rush. I think many others are in the same boat.

It's in my opinion that we all need to take a step back, take a few
breaths, and not try to pick apart everything that is being said to us
at this point. However deserving you think it is, it is what it is and
there isn't much we can do about it. Her reply is at least being honest
of where things stand. Things aren't figured out yet. Bottom line.

Best,
Eric T.

On 3/25/2014 4:30 PM, Leendert A. Hartog wrote:
> But that's an admittedly small part of the problem, isn't it? Autodesk
> expects people to transition to Max/Maya, deciding rather quickly
> between the two and obviously AD wants people to shy away from the
> competition, but cannot even commit itself clearly to some additional
> training material. While understandable on a rational level, it feels
> wrong...
>
> Greetz
> Leendert
>


=
 

This communication is 
intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original 
message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the 
permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to 
enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus 
advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the 
University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which 
are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the 
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and 
outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in 
writing to the contrary. 

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

If you mash up bits of different emails you can make me say anything you want :)
Chris and I have gone over this several times in past emails. In 2008 the world 
was very different. When we acquired Softimage we told everyone that we were 
doing it for two reasons. Softimage was good product and there was a highly 
trained and skilled engineering team that we wanted to work on other projects 
we had in mind. We already discussed this. 
maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Rob Chapman
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:07 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

please do! if your conversation can satisfy Paul then am sure a lot more of us 
will feel a heck of a lot more assured.

the main issue being.  you 'suddenly discover' the fact that you have
3 competing products. if we knew this was to happen 5 years ago, myself, Paul 
and many others would have a 5 year head start on what we now are forced to 
embark upon.

on one hand you say "we did not plan this" and in the other you say "this is 
what we said at the beginning"

does. not. compute.




On 25 March 2014 19:59, Maurice Patel  wrote:
> . If you want to talk I am open to that.
> maurice
<>

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

I understand all this and I will even shut up about this for now (after 
this post).

The planning of this, however, is bad.
And that's not necessarily anybody's fault on a personal level and I 
don't blame anyone.

But the idea that there seems to be nothing much in place so shortly
before we get "our hands" on the 2015 generation is still something 
noteworthy.
But that's all folks. I hope Jill understands that the offer I made to 
Maurice in an earlier mail in this thread,
in that I am willing to help to get a message across to the 
si-community, still stands...


Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

Re: planned transitional training?

[Eric Thivierge]

Leendert,

Some of us are transitioning to Max / Maya and need the resources being 
discussed. For the time being I'm assuming things are pretty much a mess 
across the board with the transition at every company using Softimage 
and at AD. I don't care at this point how well this has been planned or 
organized. The fact is, Jill has come out to tell you they are working 
on it. She can't give you definite answers when she may not have them. 
This is out of her control and thus there is nothing more to discuss.


We just have to wait for when they can give us the information. We don't 
need to move quickly. We still have at the very least 2 years to 
transition (more in fact since we can sit on our subscription with 
Softimage continually) so there isn't a super rush. We have a bunch of 
(50+ at least) people at work here that need the training material but 
we're not in a panic rush. I think many others are in the same boat.


It's in my opinion that we all need to take a step back, take a few 
breaths, and not try to pick apart everything that is being said to us 
at this point. However deserving you think it is, it is what it is and 
there isn't much we can do about it. Her reply is at least being honest 
of where things stand. Things aren't figured out yet. Bottom line.


Best,
Eric T.

On 3/25/2014 4:30 PM, Leendert A. Hartog wrote:
But that's an admittedly small part of the problem, isn't it? Autodesk 
expects people to transition to Max/Maya, deciding rather quickly 
between the two and obviously AD wants people to shy away from the 
competition, but cannot even commit itself clearly to some additional 
training material. While understandable on a rational level, it feels 
wrong...


Greetz
Leendert

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

You're right, everybody's a bit "on edge".  ;)
Sorry for the misunderstanding!

Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Ed Manning]

Icons really only work under limited circumstances.  Among them, when the
things being symbolized are few in number, and are themselves organizable
into a small number of classes. Maya sometimes seems as if its design
manual starts with "iconify... all the things!" with little regard for the
classification system as a whole.

Good, universally-intelligible icons are very very hard to design (I
certainly wouldn't try to do it -- I don't have the skills).  Maya's icons
are a bit of a mishmash, reflecting holdovers from the A/W interface as
well as various trends and whims of designers and (probably) committees and
executives over a long period of time.

In particular, and Maya is hardly alone in this, much of the icon set is as
others have noted, arbitrary, complex, and ambiguous.  I think much of this
stems from some very unfortunate design impulses in the early days of Maya.
 There is a childishness to many of the icons, as there is in calling
things by obfuscatory, "cool" names like Hypershade or Playblast.

I'm sure the intentions behind these early decisions were good, but man
does it make people sound like a bunch of 14-year-old Marvel Comics fanboys
when they're trying to have a serious technical conversation.

Part of my dislike of this is just personal taste.  But I think these
things actually reveal some important truths about the design philosophy or
philosophies that have resulted in the Maya interface and workflow.  In
particular, there is a feeling that much of it, especially the UI, was
designed by well-meaning, talented amateurs.  Kids, if you will.

And this isn't surprising -- this is a young industry, and those decisions
were made when we were all young(er) and inexperienced, with less-developed
sensibilities.

But nearly 20 years have gone by, and just as even Microsoft has begun to
realize that appearance counts, we as individuals and as an industry have
grown more sophisticated and have higher expectations for usability and
design.

The Sumatra/DS/XSI/Softimage interface went through a pretty questionable
stage if I recall -- those buttons without edges, meant to look like bumps
under a membrane, a really elegant but completely unintelligible icon set,
and other things.  But somehow, and I'm sure someone on the list could
explain just how and when, things got pulled back and streamlined into a
more functional, utilitarian design.

I don't know who runs UI/functionality/experience design at AD, or in the
M&E division, and I probably wouldn't be qualified to comment on their
abilities if I did know.

But I would like to ask that a complete, systematic, professional and
user-focused reconsideration of Maya's UI be part of any effort to move the
product forward.

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Martin]

Having a longer label option could be a nice solution. Decipher icons aren't an 
issue when you use Maya every day. Eventually you'll get used to them.

The problem is when you don't use it every day. I can be months or even years 
without using Maya at full (I think that may change a little from now on) and 
every time I forget what half of my shelf means.

And custom scripts without icons and only 4 chars labels are also another 
problem.

Martin
Sent from my iPhone

> On 2014/03/26, at 5:06, Luc-Eric Rousseau  wrote:
> 
> You can turn on the labels for the Maya shelf in the shelf editor (in
> its Option menu)  but the point is, the shelf, or toolbar in general,
> are quick shortcuts to things that are the menu, so having to decipher
> them is not an issue. The shelf is fun and made to play around.  You
> can tear off a menu to get a quick toolbar for one-click access to
> menu commands.  The only maya thing doesn't do correctly in that area
> is it's not showing you the shelf icon next to the menu item to help
> users learn that these two things are the same, which might be leading
> some of you to believe that these are different.  Now about the
> wonderfulness of text labels, I have no clue what a QuadChamfer is and
> if there is an ointment for that. :P
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Octavian Ureche  wrote:
>> Icons are great for people comfortable with the application, not that much
>> for everyone else. A perfect example of an elegant solution would be what
>> the sidefx dev team did when doing their own version of "the shelf". They
>> added 3 modes for displaying it: icons, text and icons with text underneath.
>> The shelf in maya, has always been icons only. Yes you can hover the mouse
>> over the icons and it will show you what that icon represents, but it's
>> pretty annoying to have to do that all the time, or learn the shapes of the
>> icons. Yes, you can also hack it, by building your own custom color square,
>> and use that for every single shelf button, and then add a custom label for
>> each, taking into account that you can't use more than 6 or 7 letters for
>> each square, thus reducing things like "rigid link" to "rgdlnk"...and this
>> is exactly the point - this is the maya way...hacking your way through with
>> a mental machete, instead of just having things layed out elegantly in front
>> of you.
>> The truly great thing about text is that it is usually consistent throughout
>> all 3d applications.
>> A sphere, an extrude, a cut, a material, a vertex etc, are all usually the
>> same in all apps, or similar concepts very easy to translate mentally. While
>> a square cut in 4 sides with one side greenish and arrow pointing at it
>> (component selection icon), or a set of bowling pins with a large circle
>> around them (rigid body from selection) is only in maya. If i am a max,
>> lightwave, c4d, houdini, xsi etc user, and i see a set of bowling pins, how
>> does that make me think of rigid bodies from selection? i could think of
>> nurbs or game engine tools or shading or who knows what. Each of us
>> understands an image differently, but a "rigid body from selection" is the
>> same to everyone working in 3d.
>> 
>> Does this make sense?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Octav
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Andy Goehler 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Would you want to ged rid of that massive arrow in the MCP too? :-)
>>> 
>>> Icons have their place, they need to communicate well and be used with
>>> care. The Nuke toolbar icons work great IMHO.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Andy
>>> 
 On 25.03.2014, at 17:40, Paul Griswold
  wrote:
 
 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the
 UV editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>>  Octavian Ureche
>> +40 732 774 313 (GMT+2)
>> CG & VFX
>>www.okto.ro

RE: planned transitional training?

[Marc-Andre Carbonneau]

Sorry Leendert, I was replying to Eric's mail which is referring to Jill's 
introduction. The negativity comment was not implying you or your comments.
But it shows how everybody is on its teeth on this list! Lol!

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leendert A. Hartog
Sent: 25 mars 2014 16:36
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: planned transitional training?

Sorry, now you're definitively picking on the wrong guy.
I am not being overly negative in any way. I asked a question that didn't seem 
unreasonable.
I even offered my help to get the message across.
And we're having a follow-up on that.
There are other threads that could benefit way more from this kind of 
criticism...

Greetz
Leendert

-- 

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

Sorry, now you're definitively picking on the wrong guy.
I am not being overly negative in any way. I asked a question that 
didn't seem unreasonable.

I even offered my help to get the message across.
And we're having a follow-up on that.
There are other threads that could benefit way more from this kind of 
criticism...


Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Bk]

We are going around in circles because it doesn't add up. I suspect that the 
bottom line is that there is dishonesty at the root of that, but I am no 
implying that it is on your part. I'm sure you are a nice guy and disclosing 
what you are allowed to.
It is easy to negotiate one question at a time, and yes it will invite another 
until the point where it all makes sense, You are right when you say that it 
will probably never arrive at a resolution, because I doubt there is an 
explanation that will contain enough honest facts about the real situation to 
bring closure. 



On 25 Mar 2014, at 19:59, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> No, and we are going round in circles as multiple topics are getting meshed 
> together. I doubt anything I can write will make you less furious. If you 
> want to talk I am open to that. 
> maurice
> 
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Bk
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:55 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
> 
> So from the outset, you bought Softimage with the view to take all the 
> engineers from it and put them onto another product?
> If that is the case why not just be upfront about it and say this was your 5 
> year plan instead of pretending you respected the userbase and pretending 
> wanted to continue Softimage, then suddenly giving a months notice regarding 
> the purchases of new licences?
> Ive been frantic all month trying to figure out what I can or can't do with 
> my new as yet unformed company regarding buying licences. 
> I'm sorry, but I'm still furious. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: planned transitional training?

[Marc-Andre Carbonneau]

Totally agree. I've been reading the list but was about to leave it be for a 
week and come back as it's just too much negativity...not enough creativity.

Welcome Jill, see you on the forums.

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eric Thivierge 
(Contact)
Sent: 25 mars 2014 16:25

To chime in, I think we need to also take a step back at this point and 
remember there are real human beings that are trying to help and may need some 
time to get their footing.

Perry already vouched for Jill so I think we need to take that with a 
significant amount of weight and with the perspective that someone from our own 
ranks has gone out of their way to do this. Let's give Jill some time to get 
information together for us. It's good to see someone is working on this for us 
in general. I'd rather they spend a good amount of time gathering info on what 
we'll need than rushing to promise things they can't deliver.

Best,
Eric T.

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

But that's an admittedly small part of the problem, isn't it? Autodesk 
expects people to transition to Max/Maya, deciding rather quickly 
between the two and obviously AD wants people to shy away from the 
competition, but cannot even commit itself clearly to some additional 
training material. While understandable on a rational level, it feels 
wrong...


Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Christoph Muetze]

On 25/03/14 19:44, phil harbath wrote:

I don’t doubt that people were letting their subscriptions lapse,


...at Glare we let our two Maya Entertainment Creation Suite subs lapse 
just yesterday.


I've been reading this mailing list carefully to find a reason to 
continue our business relationship with Autodesk but it was made 
absolutely clear by Maurice and Chris that Autodesk doesn't want to 
support a tool with a small user base, no matter how great the artistic 
outcome of this user base is.


all i read out of this is "masses instead of classes" - and as an artist 
who is depending on good tools to perform i couldn't disagree more...


Chris

Re: planned transitional training?

[Eric Thivierge]

To chime in, I think we need to also take a step back at this point and 
remember there are real human beings that are trying to help and may 
need some time to get their footing.


Perry already vouched for Jill so I think we need to take that with a 
significant amount of weight and with the perspective that someone from 
our own ranks has gone out of their way to do this. Let's give Jill 
some time to get information together for us. It's good to see someone 
is working on this for us in general. I'd rather they spend a good 
amount of time gathering info on what we'll need than rushing to 
promise things they can't deliver.


Best,
Eric T.

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:20:27 PM, Jill Ramsay (Contractor) wrote:

I do understand, but I'm not prepared to announce something until I know what I 
can deliver (I think that's the last thing you want). I think the webinars that 
Maurice mentioned are something different - not the training resources you are 
looking for. I do promise I am actively looking into it and anticipate having 
something more concrete to tell you soon.

Again, thank you for your patience.

Jill

RE: planned transitional training?

[Jill Ramsay (Contractor)]

I do understand, but I'm not prepared to announce something until I know what I 
can deliver (I think that's the last thing you want). I think the webinars that 
Maurice mentioned are something different - not the training resources you are 
looking for. I do promise I am actively looking into it and anticipate having 
something more concrete to tell you soon.

Again, thank you for your patience.

Jill

<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Paul Griswold]

You do see the frustration here, right Maurice?

By nature I'd say most Softimage users are very logical, straight forward,
thinking individuals who quite often either own their own business or work
as freelancers and therefore have a good understanding of how to run a
business.

Every reason given so far for this entire situation seems to fall under the
concept of "plausible deniability" because otherwise none of it makes
sense.  You have to believe that Softimage either A. had an incredible
string of bad luck which, despite Autodesk giving 100% of it's effort to
develop, market and sell the product, caused it to fail.  or B. Autodesk
bought Softimage for it's patents, technology and developers, then
intentionally marginalized Softimage to the point of where a business case
could be made to shut it down and force users to move to Maya.

-Paul


*"I think...a more reasonable view...[is] trying to allow customers to do
what they want to do instead of being heavy-handed and forcing customers to
do things that are in their best interest."  - Carl Bass *



On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> No, and we are going round in circles as multiple topics are getting
> meshed together. I doubt anything I can write will make you less furious.
> If you want to talk I am open to that.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Bk
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:55 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> So from the outset, you bought Softimage with the view to take all the
> engineers from it and put them onto another product?
> If that is the case why not just be upfront about it and say this was your
> 5 year plan instead of pretending you respected the userbase and pretending
> wanted to continue Softimage, then suddenly giving a months notice
> regarding the purchases of new licences?
> Ive been frantic all month trying to figure out what I can or can't do
> with my new as yet unformed company regarding buying licences.
> I'm sorry, but I'm still furious.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Max Evgrafov]

I do not want to offend people from AD ... but in slavonic language AD
means Hell. Strange coincidence and accidentally of course, I'm sorry, I'm
just sad :`-(




(Summatr)
https://vimeo.com/user3098735/videos


2014-03-26 0:06 GMT+04:00 Rob Chapman :

> please do! if your conversation can satisfy Paul then am sure a lot
> more of us will feel a heck of a lot more assured.
>
> the main issue being.  you 'suddenly discover' the fact that you have
> 3 competing products. if we knew this was to happen 5 years ago,
> myself, Paul and many others would have a 5 year head start on what we
> now are forced to embark upon.
>
> on one hand you say "we did not plan this" and in the other you say
> "this is what we said at the beginning"
>
> does. not. compute.
>
>
>
>
> On 25 March 2014 19:59, Maurice Patel  wrote:
> > . If you want to talk I am open to that.
> > maurice
>



-- 
Евграфов Максим.(Summatr)
https://vimeo.com/user3098735/videos
---
Хорошего Вам настроения !!! :-)

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Rob Chapman]

please do! if your conversation can satisfy Paul then am sure a lot
more of us will feel a heck of a lot more assured.

the main issue being.  you 'suddenly discover' the fact that you have
3 competing products. if we knew this was to happen 5 years ago,
myself, Paul and many others would have a 5 year head start on what we
now are forced to embark upon.

on one hand you say "we did not plan this" and in the other you say
"this is what we said at the beginning"

does. not. compute.




On 25 March 2014 19:59, Maurice Patel  wrote:
> . If you want to talk I am open to that.
> maurice

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Luc-Eric Rousseau]

You can turn on the labels for the Maya shelf in the shelf editor (in
its Option menu)  but the point is, the shelf, or toolbar in general,
are quick shortcuts to things that are the menu, so having to decipher
them is not an issue. The shelf is fun and made to play around.  You
can tear off a menu to get a quick toolbar for one-click access to
menu commands.  The only maya thing doesn't do correctly in that area
is it's not showing you the shelf icon next to the menu item to help
users learn that these two things are the same, which might be leading
some of you to believe that these are different.  Now about the
wonderfulness of text labels, I have no clue what a QuadChamfer is and
if there is an ointment for that. :P


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Octavian Ureche  wrote:
> Icons are great for people comfortable with the application, not that much
> for everyone else. A perfect example of an elegant solution would be what
> the sidefx dev team did when doing their own version of "the shelf". They
> added 3 modes for displaying it: icons, text and icons with text underneath.
> The shelf in maya, has always been icons only. Yes you can hover the mouse
> over the icons and it will show you what that icon represents, but it's
> pretty annoying to have to do that all the time, or learn the shapes of the
> icons. Yes, you can also hack it, by building your own custom color square,
> and use that for every single shelf button, and then add a custom label for
> each, taking into account that you can't use more than 6 or 7 letters for
> each square, thus reducing things like "rigid link" to "rgdlnk"...and this
> is exactly the point - this is the maya way...hacking your way through with
> a mental machete, instead of just having things layed out elegantly in front
> of you.
> The truly great thing about text is that it is usually consistent throughout
> all 3d applications.
> A sphere, an extrude, a cut, a material, a vertex etc, are all usually the
> same in all apps, or similar concepts very easy to translate mentally. While
> a square cut in 4 sides with one side greenish and arrow pointing at it
> (component selection icon), or a set of bowling pins with a large circle
> around them (rigid body from selection) is only in maya. If i am a max,
> lightwave, c4d, houdini, xsi etc user, and i see a set of bowling pins, how
> does that make me think of rigid bodies from selection? i could think of
> nurbs or game engine tools or shading or who knows what. Each of us
> understands an image differently, but a "rigid body from selection" is the
> same to everyone working in 3d.
>
> Does this make sense?
>
> Cheers,
> Octav
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Andy Goehler 
> wrote:
>>
>> Would you want to ged rid of that massive arrow in the MCP too? :-)
>>
>> Icons have their place, they need to communicate well and be used with
>> care. The Nuke toolbar icons work great IMHO.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> > On 25.03.2014, at 17:40, Paul Griswold
>> >  wrote:
>> >
>> > 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the
>> > UV editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.
>>
>
>
>
> --
>   Octavian Ureche
> +40 732 774 313 (GMT+2)
>  CG & VFX
> www.okto.ro

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

At this point a mere official announcement of the intentions would help 
tremendously I guess.

People have a feeling of loss over Softimage
and on top of that a feeling of being left alone in the dark concerning 
the transition.
Telling them they can still expect transitional training might help lift 
some moods a little.


Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

RE: Softimage to Maya rendering requests

[Laurence Cymet]

Thanks for the excellent input folks.

Pulling back a bit to the problems that need to be solved, the list here is 
very similar to the requests we see from Maya customers.  There are some cool 
problems to solve here, but as Ed mentioned - there is a core level of 
usability that is missing that should be our critical starting point. Once we 
have something worth trying, I can send beta invites for those interested.

We are continually listening so feel free to add anything that comes to mind, 
and I will certainly keep this list posted as we progress.


Thanks,

Laurence


From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] on behalf of Nuno Conceicao 
[nunoalexconcei...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 6:23 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage to Maya rendering requests

4. Please dont forget drag n drop funcionality! Dragging objects to partitions, 
shaders to partitions, overrides from partition to partition, partitions from 
passes to another pass, and probably a few more I dont remember now...

5. Light Partitions that work pretty much like the object partitions do



On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Laurence Cymet 
mailto:laurence.cy...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
Thanks for the input guys.  The timing of my inquiry is not ideal, but in the 
interests of moving forward I appreciate you taking the time to speak up.

So here's what I'm hearing is missing from Maya re: render layers:


1)  Stability is critical, no more "error parsing argument" broken layers, 
setups must be stable, and clear indications of missing dependencies are needed 
with the ability to address without breaking setups

2)  Layer overrides (shader assignments, attr changes) need to be made on a 
sub-set of the layer contents (a partition) - not directly on the object/attr 
itself. So that you just have to pop an item into that partition to inherit the 
override. Changes to referenced input scene data should clearly indicate what 
is not included in a partition so that new stuff can be easily identified and 
just be popped into the original partition to receive the same overrides.

3)  All overrides and memberships within a layer need to be clearly 
indicated in one UI (without the requirement to enter the layer)

Don't hesitate to call me out if I'm not getting something - this list is to 
ensure I understand what's missing, don't let me put words in your mouth.

Is there a way we can actually improve on the process? Perhaps overrides and 
assignments could be done conditionally with a dynamic rule? Is a stack better 
than a node graph? Let me know if you have had any wishes in the past.

As to the questions raised:

Yes - you can manage overrides with the attribute spreadsheet, which does 
include a newly added filter search function. But as you say, it does not 
clearly indicate what is happening in the layer specifically.

Why are we doing this now and not years ago? A good question that deserves an 
answer.  Maya is as much an "OS for CGI" as it is an out of box DCC (in many 
ways more so), and many Maya customers have built their own scene segmentation 
tools in Maya to accommodate their specific pipeline - so improving render 
layers was not a priority for these customers and the focus went elsewhere. 
Focus has turned back on the out-of-box experience, so we are exploring all 
options for improving this area.


Thanks,


Laurence



From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Ed Manning
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 3:22 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage to Maya rendering requests

Thanks for speaking up, Laurence.  I'm sure your intentions are good, and the 
effort is appreciated.  We are however, very upset with your bosses' 
decision-making and how it has played out so far.  Please don't take it 
personally.  It is rather a bitter pill that you guys are only speaking to us 
now about this.

Lighting and rendering has been my area of specialization for nearly 20 years 
of Softimage use and a bit less than 3 years in Maya.

I would very much like to participate in any discussion you'd like to have 
about possible improvements to Maya's L&R workflow, as I am clearly going to 
have to deal with it more and more.

The primary issue to me, other than render layers simply breaking for 
mysterious reasons (a complaint I hear far often from Maya-only artists than my 
limited Maya experience would have suggested to me), is the workflow and 
organizational overhead required of the user.

For example:  if I want to make a pass in which, say, primary visibility is 
turned off for a variety of objects, regardless of their parenting, in 
Softimage the workflow is:

  1.  make new pass (1 click)
  2. 

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

No, and we are going round in circles as multiple topics are getting meshed 
together. I doubt anything I can write will make you less furious. If you want 
to talk I am open to that. 
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Bk
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:55 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

So from the outset, you bought Softimage with the view to take all the 
engineers from it and put them onto another product?
If that is the case why not just be upfront about it and say this was your 5 
year plan instead of pretending you respected the userbase and pretending 
wanted to continue Softimage, then suddenly giving a months notice regarding 
the purchases of new licences?
Ive been frantic all month trying to figure out what I can or can't do with my 
new as yet unformed company regarding buying licences. 
I'm sorry, but I'm still furious. 




<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Bk]

So from the outset, you bought Softimage with the view to take all the 
engineers from it and put them onto another product?
If that is the case why not just be upfront about it and say this was your 5 
year plan instead of pretending you respected the userbase and pretending 
wanted to continue Softimage, then suddenly giving a months notice regarding 
the purchases of new licences?
Ive been frantic all month trying to figure out what I can or can't do with my 
new as yet unformed company regarding buying licences. 
I'm sorry, but I'm still furious. 



On 25 Mar 2014, at 19:23, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> We wanted an engineering team? I don’t think that as a secret we said so at 
> the time
> 
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
> 
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:22 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
> 
> I think every softimage user would concede to the arguments given by autodesk 
> if we had all witnessed them try their utmost in the marketing of softimage 
> in the past 5 years.
> However, it's been obvious from the outset of their plan and I believe that 
> the fact this has occurred 5 years post acquisition us no coincidence. It was 
> on the cards all along.
> Making excuses about sales is a nonsense considering the effort to drive 
> those sales.
> And if softimage was doing so badly why buy it?  Nothing adds up in autodesks 
> favour.
> 
> On 25 Mar 2014, at 19:13, Perry Harovas 
> mailto:perryharo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Maurice,
> 
> I appreciate the detailed answer. It does help to know the details, and of 
> course, you certainly know your own business better than we do.
> One thing that just seems odd, why did I never see ads for Softimage? I 
> understand that percentage wise, it was getting more ad dollars than
> Max or Maya (which in and of itself is weird, because they seemingly don't 
> need advertising as much as Softimage did, but anyway).
> I would expect that I am more likely to notice a Softimage ad than a Maya 
> user, because it already is something that I like and accept.
> Maybe that assumption is incorrect, but it seems to make some sense.
> 
> I don't recall ever seeing an ad for Softimage.
> 
> Ever.
> 
> I don't doubt they existed, just that I never saw one. I have an almost 
> insatiable thirst for CG news/content. It has been that way for 25 years now.
> Every day (multiple times per day) I scour the internet for information on 
> 3D, Softimage, new CG innovations, software, articles, reviews.
> I read all the magazines I have time for, and even if I don't have time to 
> read them, I flip through all the major ones, putting aside what I want to 
> read later.
> 
> With all of that, I would have thought I would have seen SOME advertising 
> about Softimage. But I didn't!
> The only things I ever saw were articles about Lagoa (not ads, but articles), 
> or articles about the acquisition.
> 
> Why was that (I am honestly asking, I am not being snarky)?
> 
> Also (and this has been asked so many times I feel that the answer to it is 
> being withheld because it includes the location of Jimmy Hoffa's corpse), WHY 
> WASN'T SOFTIMAGE PROMOTED ON YOUR HOMEPAGE?
> Seems like free advertising might be the best advertising when you are trying 
> to bring up the sales numbers of a fledgling product, no?
> 
> Thank you (and Chris) for answering these questions.
> We don't always like the answers you give, we may not always believe the 
> answers you give, but that does not mean that I don't appreciate that you and 
> Chris are
> trying to answer them anyway.
> 
> 
> Perry
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Maurice Patel 
> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
> Hi Perry,
> 
> Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases, 
> actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many 
> factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually 
> worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing 
> product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and distribution 
> channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically without 
> cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same results 
> with Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product lines were 
> growing fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know that it 
> would not have its own set of problems - but we felt we could tackle them. 
> When that did not work out we changed strategies to focus on Suites.
> 
> Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As mentioned 
> above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your product - it 
> requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a lot of systems 
> integration. We invested in making it available

RE: humanize Maya, SOFT top 5

[Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]]

Yup.

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Octavian Ureche
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:45 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: humanize Maya, SOFT top 5

Oh yes, i seem to remember that one, but doesn't it just give you horrible 
visual results, where nothing is separated and it's all a long character 
spaghetti?
My brain must be partially fried from so much app switching.

Re: humanize Maya, SOFT top 5

[Octavian Ureche]

Oh yes, i seem to remember that one, but doesn't it just give you horrible
visual results, where nothing is separated and it's all a long character
spaghetti?
My brain must be partially fried from so much app switching.

RE: planned transitional training?

[Jill Ramsay (Contractor)]

Hello Leendert,
Transitional training requirements are something I need to get my head around 
and figure out a plan. I apologize that I'm not completely up to speed yet on 
that topic but I'll attempt to get there as quickly as I can!

Thanks for your patience,
Jill

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leendert A. Hartog
Sent: March-25-14 3:25 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: planned transitional training?

Okay, thanks.
Please make sure to make your plans known at the earliest possible date (as 
people start to stop believing anything will still come from AD in this respect 
and that you "broadcast" it to the widest range of users (i.e. not only the 
Mailing List). If you were to contact me directly, I could push the info on the 
si-community.

Greetz
Leendert

-- 

Leendert A. Hartog - Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue - Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com


<>

RE: New discussion forum for Softimage -> Maya features/workflows

[Jill Ramsay (Contractor)]

Wow, thank you very much Perry. I'm deeply touched!

Jill

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
Sent: March-25-14 3:23 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: New discussion forum for Softimage -> Maya features/workflows

Everyone-

Jill is a good person. She has never lied to me, we have known each other since 
the days when I first used Maya.
Jill means everything she is saying here, and I wanted to make sure to say 
this, because I am perhaps the last person that
you would expect to say that, given my anger the last few weeks...

Jill is really a veteran in this field, and has been previously involved at the 
highest levels with Maya, years ago.
She was key in the implementation of the smoke and ocean fluids in Maya many 
years ago.

I want to be one of the first to say that this is a very welcome addition to 
the team, and regardless of my desire to move on to other DCC apps, I feel that
my effort would not be wasted if I helped Jill understand what could make Maya 
better.

I will, I am sure, get some flak for this, but I just wanted to let you all 
know that I have full confidence in Jill
as an honest and capable person.

Jill, so nice to see you here, and thank you for your introduction to the list.

Perry



On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jill Ramsay (Contractor) 
mailto:jill.ram...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
Hello everyone,

Let me introduce myself. I'm Jill Ramsay, and I've just joined Chris V's team. 
Some of you with mixed pipelines may remember me from the Alias days when I 
managed Maya for a few years.  I've been lurking on this list for the past 
couple of weeks, and the first thing I want to do is to offer my condolences to 
those feeling a great sense of loss; you are clearly a very passionate bunch of 
people and your pain and sadness is very evident.

I know you all have choices, and if your choice is to stay with Softimage for 
as long as possible, or to transition to a non-Autodesk solution, then I 
respect that. However, if you have chosen or are considering choosing to 
transition to Maya, I'm here to help in any way I can. You can email me 
directly at 
jill.ram...@autodesk.com>.
 (If you choose to transition to 3ds Max, and need any assistance there, let me 
know and I'll pass you on to someone who can help).

One thing that's become very clear to me is that there are some things that 
Softimage does extremely well. Not just big ticket features like ICE, but 
streamlined workflows that help you to be more productive. I want to understand 
those things and if and how we can implement them in Maya, for the benefit of 
all of our users.

I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that your list has been hijacked in the 
past couple of weeks with transition discussions, a lot them revolving about 
what Maya can or can't offer you. In order to give back this list to the people 
who need to get on with their everyday work in Softimage, I invite you to bring 
those discussions to a new discussion group within the Maya forum: 
http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Softimage-Workflow-Feature/bd-p/softimageworkflow.
 Everyone is very welcome there, and our product designers will be standing by 
to take your feedback and answer your questions where they can, as will I.

I'm looking forward to having some constructive, useful discussions. Thank you 
in advance for your input.

Best regards,

Jill Ramsay



--




Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)
<>

Re: AnimSchool Student Showcase

[Max Evgrafov]

AnimSchool is one of the few who teach on the basis of XSI. Respect for You,


2014-03-25 23:16 GMT+04:00 David Gallagher :

>
> Yes, all AnimSchool student work.
>
> We have different instructors for the various classes. I help in a
> supplemental session. Thanks!
>
>
>
> On 3/25/2014 1:00 PM, Jason S wrote:
>
> Wow all that is student work?   Very good teacher I guess :)
>
> On 03/25/14 14:25, Sebastien Sterling wrote:
>
> That was quite a daring choice on Emilio's part, Vintage Disney is very
> difficult to pull off.
>
>
> On 25 March 2014 17:04, David Gallagher wrote:
>
>> In case you're interested, our Modeling/Rigging Student Showcase.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6-R2xDP8I&list=UUPYQOUnJ3G1-QVUtZg62JNQ
>>
>> I worked with many of the students on their models and face rigs, mostly
>> bringing their models into Softimage to edit them for appeal. Note the work
>> of list member Emilio Hernandez!
>>
>> Dave G
>>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Евграфов Максим.(Summatr)
https://vimeo.com/user3098735/videos
---
Хорошего Вам настроения !!! :-)

Re: New discussion forum for Softimage -> Maya features/workflows

[Eric Thivierge]

Yeah... Jill posted the link to the forum for that purpose... you can't 
get people to go discuss things like transition in a certain place 
without informing them there is a place to do it in the first place.


Eric T.

PS - Welcome Jill. Thanks for letting us know.

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:31:06 PM, Emilio Hernandez wrote:

Well my first contribution to this subject is start a mailing list of
Softimage/Maya transition.  Please.

RE: humanize Maya, SOFT top 5

[Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]]

You can now set it to text and icons. Open the Shelf editor, go to options. The 
result is mucky as can be on some shelves, but it's a step in the right 
direction.

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Octavian Ureche
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:29 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

Icons are great for people comfortable with the application, not that much for 
everyone else. A perfect example of an elegant solution would be what the 
sidefx dev team did when doing their own version of "the shelf". They added 3 
modes for displaying it: icons, text and icons with text underneath. The shelf 
in maya, has always been icons only. Yes you can hover the mouse over the icons 
and it will show you what that icon represents, but it's pretty annoying to 
have to do that all the time, or learn the shapes of the icons. Yes, you can 
also hack it, by building your own custom color square, and use that for every 
single shelf button, and then add a custom label for each, taking into account 
that you can't use more than 6 or 7 letters for each square, thus reducing 
things like "rigid link" to "rgdlnk"...and this is exactly the point - this is 
the maya way...hacking your way through with a mental machete, instead of just 
having things layed out elegantly in front of you.
The truly great thing about text is that it is usually consistent throughout 
all 3d applications.
A sphere, an extrude, a cut, a material, a vertex etc, are all usually the same 
in all apps, or similar concepts very easy to translate mentally. While a 
square cut in 4 sides with one side greenish and arrow pointing at it 
(component selection icon), or a set of bowling pins with a large circle around 
them (rigid body from selection) is only in maya. If i am a max, lightwave, 
c4d, houdini, xsi etc user, and i see a set of bowling pins, how does that make 
me think of rigid bodies from selection? i could think of nurbs or game engine 
tools or shading or who knows what. Each of us understands an image 
differently, but a "rigid body from selection" is the same to everyone working 
in 3d.

Does this make sense?

Cheers,
Octav

On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Andy Goehler 
mailto:lists.andy.goeh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Would you want to ged rid of that massive arrow in the MCP too? :-)

Icons have their place, they need to communicate well and be used with care. 
The Nuke toolbar icons work great IMHO.

Cheers,

Andy

> On 25.03.2014, at 17:40, Paul Griswold 
> mailto:pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com>>
>  wrote:
>
> 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
> editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.



--
  Octavian Ureche
+40 732 774 313 (GMT+2)
 CG & VFX
www.okto.ro

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Martin Yara]

I don't think icons are bad, not being able to put more than 3 or 4
characters in the button is the problem.

And about repeat. I must add that Softimage has a "g" repeat button
(unassigned in the default SI keyboard layout I think) and the middle click
one as two different tools. Personally I use both all the time in SI.

Martin




On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:28 AM, Octavian Ureche  wrote:

> Icons are great for people comfortable with the application, not that much
> for everyone else. A perfect example of an elegant solution would be what
> the sidefx dev team did when doing their own version of "the shelf". They
> added 3 modes for displaying it: icons, text and icons with text
> underneath. The shelf in maya, has always been icons only. Yes you can
> hover the mouse over the icons and it will show you what that icon
> represents, but it's pretty annoying to have to do that all the time, or
> learn the shapes of the icons. Yes, you can also hack it, by building your
> own custom color square, and use that for every single shelf button, and
> then add a custom label for each, taking into account that you can't use
> more than 6 or 7 letters for each square, thus reducing things like "rigid
> link" to "rgdlnk"...and this is exactly the point - this is the maya
> way...hacking your way through with a mental machete, instead of just
> having things layed out elegantly in front of you.
> The truly great thing about text is that it is usually consistent
> throughout all 3d applications.
> A sphere, an extrude, a cut, a material, a vertex etc, are all usually the
> same in all apps, or similar concepts very easy to translate mentally.
> While a square cut in 4 sides with one side greenish and arrow pointing at
> it (component selection icon), or a set of bowling pins with a large circle
> around them (rigid body from selection) is only in maya. If i am a max,
> lightwave, c4d, houdini, xsi etc user, and i see a set of bowling pins, how
> does that make me think of rigid bodies from selection? i could think of
> nurbs or game engine tools or shading or who knows what. Each of us
> understands an image differently, but a "rigid body from selection" is the
> same to everyone working in 3d.
>
> Does this make sense?
>
> Cheers,
> Octav
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Andy Goehler <
> lists.andy.goeh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Would you want to ged rid of that massive arrow in the MCP too? :-)
>>
>> Icons have their place, they need to communicate well and be used with
>> care. The Nuke toolbar icons work great IMHO.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> > On 25.03.2014, at 17:40, Paul Griswold <
>> pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as
>> the UV editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>   Octavian Ureche
> +40 732 774 313 (GMT+2)
>  CG & VFX
> www.okto.ro
>

Re: New discussion forum for Softimage -> Maya features/workflows

[Emilio Hernandez]

Well my first contribution to this subject is start a mailing list of
Softimage/Maya transition.  Please.

People who are interested in dropping Softimage to go to Maya for any
reason will go there and start asking in a more pertinent way, and it would
stay into that scope, instead of being exposed to flak.

My two cents.

And thank you for introducing your self Jill.

---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.


2014-03-25 13:22 GMT-06:00 Perry Harovas :

> Everyone-
>
> Jill is a good person. She has never lied to me, we have known each other
> since the days when I first used Maya.
> Jill means everything she is saying here, and I wanted to make sure to say
> this, because I am perhaps the last person that
> you would expect to say that, given my anger the last few weeks...
>
> Jill is really a veteran in this field, and has been previously involved
> at the highest levels with Maya, years ago.
> She was key in the implementation of the smoke and ocean fluids in Maya
> many years ago.
>
> I want to be one of the first to say that this is a very welcome addition
> to the team, and regardless of my desire to move on to other DCC apps, I
> feel that
> my effort would not be wasted if I helped Jill understand what could make
> Maya better.
>
> I will, I am sure, get some flak for this, but I just wanted to let you
> all know that I have full confidence in Jill
> as an honest and capable person.
>
> Jill, so nice to see you here, and thank you for your introduction to the
> list.
>
> Perry
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jill Ramsay (Contractor) <
> jill.ram...@autodesk.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Let me introduce myself. I'm Jill Ramsay, and I've just joined Chris V's
>> team. Some of you with mixed pipelines may remember me from the Alias days
>> when I managed Maya for a few years.  I've been lurking on this list for
>> the past couple of weeks, and the first thing I want to do is to offer my
>> condolences to those feeling a great sense of loss; you are clearly a very
>> passionate bunch of people and your pain and sadness is very evident.
>>
>> I know you all have choices, and if your choice is to stay with Softimage
>> for as long as possible, or to transition to a non-Autodesk solution, then
>> I respect that. However, if you have chosen or are considering choosing to
>> transition to Maya, I'm here to help in any way I can. You can email me
>> directly at jill.ram...@autodesk.com.
>> (If you choose to transition to 3ds Max, and need any assistance there, let
>> me know and I'll pass you on to someone who can help).
>>
>> One thing that's become very clear to me is that there are some things
>> that Softimage does extremely well. Not just big ticket features like ICE,
>> but streamlined workflows that help you to be more productive. I want to
>> understand those things and if and how we can implement them in Maya, for
>> the benefit of all of our users.
>>
>> I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that your list has been hijacked
>> in the past couple of weeks with transition discussions, a lot them
>> revolving about what Maya can or can't offer you. In order to give back
>> this list to the people who need to get on with their everyday work in
>> Softimage, I invite you to bring those discussions to a new discussion
>> group within the Maya forum:
>> http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Softimage-Workflow-Feature/bd-p/softimageworkflow.
>> Everyone is very welcome there, and our product designers will be standing
>> by to take your feedback and answer your questions where they can, as will
>> I.
>>
>> I'm looking forward to having some constructive, useful discussions.
>> Thank you in advance for your input.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Jill Ramsay
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com 
>
> -25 Years Experience
> -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)
>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Paulo César Duarte]

I'm sure the Softimage user preferred to continue using the program
without these
tools, than having the software discontinued, for all these tools there is
an option. Even without these tools Softimage still a great software.


2014-03-25 13:33 GMT-03:00 Chris Vienneau :

>
> For Softimage, here are the big things that are third party libraries that
> are part of the commercial offering:
>
>
> * Mental ray
>
> * Syflex
>
> * Shave and a hair cut
>
> * Physx
>
> * Lagoa
>
>
>
>

2014-03-25 16:23 GMT-03:00 Maurice Patel :

> We wanted an engineering team? I don't think that as a secret we said so
> at the time
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:22 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> I think every softimage user would concede to the arguments given by
> autodesk if we had all witnessed them try their utmost in the marketing of
> softimage in the past 5 years.
> However, it's been obvious from the outset of their plan and I believe
> that the fact this has occurred 5 years post acquisition us no coincidence.
> It was on the cards all along.
> Making excuses about sales is a nonsense considering the effort to drive
> those sales.
> And if softimage was doing so badly why buy it?  Nothing adds up in
> autodesks favour.
>
> On 25 Mar 2014, at 19:13, Perry Harovas  perryharo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Maurice,
>
> I appreciate the detailed answer. It does help to know the details, and of
> course, you certainly know your own business better than we do.
> One thing that just seems odd, why did I never see ads for Softimage? I
> understand that percentage wise, it was getting more ad dollars than
> Max or Maya (which in and of itself is weird, because they seemingly don't
> need advertising as much as Softimage did, but anyway).
> I would expect that I am more likely to notice a Softimage ad than a Maya
> user, because it already is something that I like and accept.
> Maybe that assumption is incorrect, but it seems to make some sense.
>
> I don't recall ever seeing an ad for Softimage.
>
> Ever.
>
> I don't doubt they existed, just that I never saw one. I have an almost
> insatiable thirst for CG news/content. It has been that way for 25 years
> now.
> Every day (multiple times per day) I scour the internet for information on
> 3D, Softimage, new CG innovations, software, articles, reviews.
> I read all the magazines I have time for, and even if I don't have time to
> read them, I flip through all the major ones, putting aside what I want to
> read later.
>
> With all of that, I would have thought I would have seen SOME advertising
> about Softimage. But I didn't!
> The only things I ever saw were articles about Lagoa (not ads, but
> articles), or articles about the acquisition.
>
> Why was that (I am honestly asking, I am not being snarky)?
>
> Also (and this has been asked so many times I feel that the answer to it
> is being withheld because it includes the location of Jimmy Hoffa's
> corpse), WHY WASN'T SOFTIMAGE PROMOTED ON YOUR HOMEPAGE?
> Seems like free advertising might be the best advertising when you are
> trying to bring up the sales numbers of a fledgling product, no?
>
> Thank you (and Chris) for answering these questions.
> We don't always like the answers you give, we may not always believe the
> answers you give, but that does not mean that I don't appreciate that you
> and Chris are
> trying to answer them anyway.
>
>
> Perry
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Maurice Patel  > wrote:
> Hi Perry,
>
> Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases,
> actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many
> factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually
> worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing
> product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and
> distribution channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically
> without cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same
> results with Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product
> lines were growing fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know
> that it would not have its own set of problems - but we felt we could
> tackle them. When that did not work out we changed strategies to focus on
> Suites.
>
> Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As
> mentioned above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your
> product - it requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a
> lot of systems integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU
> bundle, through student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of
> as many pe

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Octavian Ureche]

Icons are great for people comfortable with the application, not that much
for everyone else. A perfect example of an elegant solution would be what
the sidefx dev team did when doing their own version of "the shelf". They
added 3 modes for displaying it: icons, text and icons with text
underneath. The shelf in maya, has always been icons only. Yes you can
hover the mouse over the icons and it will show you what that icon
represents, but it's pretty annoying to have to do that all the time, or
learn the shapes of the icons. Yes, you can also hack it, by building your
own custom color square, and use that for every single shelf button, and
then add a custom label for each, taking into account that you can't use
more than 6 or 7 letters for each square, thus reducing things like "rigid
link" to "rgdlnk"...and this is exactly the point - this is the maya
way...hacking your way through with a mental machete, instead of just
having things layed out elegantly in front of you.
The truly great thing about text is that it is usually consistent
throughout all 3d applications.
A sphere, an extrude, a cut, a material, a vertex etc, are all usually the
same in all apps, or similar concepts very easy to translate mentally.
While a square cut in 4 sides with one side greenish and arrow pointing at
it (component selection icon), or a set of bowling pins with a large circle
around them (rigid body from selection) is only in maya. If i am a max,
lightwave, c4d, houdini, xsi etc user, and i see a set of bowling pins, how
does that make me think of rigid bodies from selection? i could think of
nurbs or game engine tools or shading or who knows what. Each of us
understands an image differently, but a "rigid body from selection" is the
same to everyone working in 3d.

Does this make sense?

Cheers,
Octav


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Andy Goehler
wrote:

> Would you want to ged rid of that massive arrow in the MCP too? :-)
>
> Icons have their place, they need to communicate well and be used with
> care. The Nuke toolbar icons work great IMHO.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
> > On 25.03.2014, at 17:40, Paul Griswold <
> pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com> wrote:
> >
> > 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the
> UV editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.
>
>


-- 
  Octavian Ureche
+40 732 774 313 (GMT+2)
 CG & VFX
www.okto.ro

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

Okay, thanks.
Please make sure to make your plans known at the earliest possible date 
(as people start to stop believing anything will still come from AD in 
this respect and that you "broadcast" it to the widest range of users 
(i.e. not only the Mailing List). If you were to contact me directly, I 
could push the info on the si-community.


Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

We wanted an engineering team? I don’t think that as a secret we said so at the 
time

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:22 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

I think every softimage user would concede to the arguments given by autodesk 
if we had all witnessed them try their utmost in the marketing of softimage in 
the past 5 years.
However, it's been obvious from the outset of their plan and I believe that the 
fact this has occurred 5 years post acquisition us no coincidence. It was on 
the cards all along.
Making excuses about sales is a nonsense considering the effort to drive those 
sales.
And if softimage was doing so badly why buy it?  Nothing adds up in autodesks 
favour.

On 25 Mar 2014, at 19:13, Perry Harovas 
mailto:perryharo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Maurice,

I appreciate the detailed answer. It does help to know the details, and of 
course, you certainly know your own business better than we do.
One thing that just seems odd, why did I never see ads for Softimage? I 
understand that percentage wise, it was getting more ad dollars than
Max or Maya (which in and of itself is weird, because they seemingly don't need 
advertising as much as Softimage did, but anyway).
I would expect that I am more likely to notice a Softimage ad than a Maya user, 
because it already is something that I like and accept.
Maybe that assumption is incorrect, but it seems to make some sense.

I don't recall ever seeing an ad for Softimage.

Ever.

I don't doubt they existed, just that I never saw one. I have an almost 
insatiable thirst for CG news/content. It has been that way for 25 years now.
Every day (multiple times per day) I scour the internet for information on 3D, 
Softimage, new CG innovations, software, articles, reviews.
I read all the magazines I have time for, and even if I don't have time to read 
them, I flip through all the major ones, putting aside what I want to read 
later.

With all of that, I would have thought I would have seen SOME advertising about 
Softimage. But I didn't!
The only things I ever saw were articles about Lagoa (not ads, but articles), 
or articles about the acquisition.

Why was that (I am honestly asking, I am not being snarky)?

Also (and this has been asked so many times I feel that the answer to it is 
being withheld because it includes the location of Jimmy Hoffa's corpse), WHY 
WASN'T SOFTIMAGE PROMOTED ON YOUR HOMEPAGE?
Seems like free advertising might be the best advertising when you are trying 
to bring up the sales numbers of a fledgling product, no?

Thank you (and Chris) for answering these questions.
We don't always like the answers you give, we may not always believe the 
answers you give, but that does not mean that I don't appreciate that you and 
Chris are
trying to answer them anyway.


Perry



On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
Hi Perry,

Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases, 
actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many 
factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually 
worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing 
product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and distribution 
channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically without 
cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same results with 
Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product lines were growing 
fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know that it would not have 
its own set of problems - but we felt we could tackle them. When that did not 
work out we changed strategies to focus on Suites.

Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As mentioned 
above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your product - it 
requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a lot of systems 
integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU bundle, through 
student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of as many people as 
possible. Another is price. We kept the lower price and that initially was to 
see if this would broaden adoption - it did not. The third is product and the 
product is a great product.

For promotion, we invested in integrating it into Autodesk systems and we 
actually invested more than other Autodesk products typically get given the 
revenue tier Softimage was in. What we did not do was maintain a separate web 
site for the product (we don't do that for any of our products). People often 
ask us why there were no campaigns to try and get Maya or 3ds Max users to 
switch to Softimage but the answer to that should be self-evident - and it was 
certainly never going to be a serio

Re: New discussion forum for Softimage -> Maya features/workflows

[Perry Harovas]

Everyone-

Jill is a good person. She has never lied to me, we have known each other
since the days when I first used Maya.
Jill means everything she is saying here, and I wanted to make sure to say
this, because I am perhaps the last person that
you would expect to say that, given my anger the last few weeks...

Jill is really a veteran in this field, and has been previously involved at
the highest levels with Maya, years ago.
She was key in the implementation of the smoke and ocean fluids in Maya
many years ago.

I want to be one of the first to say that this is a very welcome addition
to the team, and regardless of my desire to move on to other DCC apps, I
feel that
my effort would not be wasted if I helped Jill understand what could make
Maya better.

I will, I am sure, get some flak for this, but I just wanted to let you all
know that I have full confidence in Jill
as an honest and capable person.

Jill, so nice to see you here, and thank you for your introduction to the
list.

Perry




On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Jill Ramsay (Contractor) <
jill.ram...@autodesk.com> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> Let me introduce myself. I'm Jill Ramsay, and I've just joined Chris V's
> team. Some of you with mixed pipelines may remember me from the Alias days
> when I managed Maya for a few years.  I've been lurking on this list for
> the past couple of weeks, and the first thing I want to do is to offer my
> condolences to those feeling a great sense of loss; you are clearly a very
> passionate bunch of people and your pain and sadness is very evident.
>
> I know you all have choices, and if your choice is to stay with Softimage
> for as long as possible, or to transition to a non-Autodesk solution, then
> I respect that. However, if you have chosen or are considering choosing to
> transition to Maya, I'm here to help in any way I can. You can email me
> directly at jill.ram...@autodesk.com.
> (If you choose to transition to 3ds Max, and need any assistance there, let
> me know and I'll pass you on to someone who can help).
>
> One thing that's become very clear to me is that there are some things
> that Softimage does extremely well. Not just big ticket features like ICE,
> but streamlined workflows that help you to be more productive. I want to
> understand those things and if and how we can implement them in Maya, for
> the benefit of all of our users.
>
> I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that your list has been hijacked in
> the past couple of weeks with transition discussions, a lot them revolving
> about what Maya can or can't offer you. In order to give back this list to
> the people who need to get on with their everyday work in Softimage, I
> invite you to bring those discussions to a new discussion group within the
> Maya forum:
> http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Softimage-Workflow-Feature/bd-p/softimageworkflow.
> Everyone is very welcome there, and our product designers will be standing
> by to take your feedback and answer your questions where they can, as will
> I.
>
> I'm looking forward to having some constructive, useful discussions. Thank
> you in advance for your input.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jill Ramsay
>



-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

-25 Years Experience
-Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Paul]

I think every softimage user would concede to the arguments given by autodesk 
if we had all witnessed them try their utmost in the marketing of softimage in 
the past 5 years. 
However, it's been obvious from the outset of their plan and I believe that the 
fact this has occurred 5 years post acquisition us no coincidence. It was on 
the cards all along. 
Making excuses about sales is a nonsense considering the effort to drive those 
sales. 
And if softimage was doing so badly why buy it?  Nothing adds up in autodesks 
favour. 

> On 25 Mar 2014, at 19:13, Perry Harovas  wrote:
> 
> Hi Maurice,
> 
> I appreciate the detailed answer. It does help to know the details, and of 
> course, you certainly know your own business better than we do.
> One thing that just seems odd, why did I never see ads for Softimage? I 
> understand that percentage wise, it was getting more ad dollars than
> Max or Maya (which in and of itself is weird, because they seemingly don't 
> need advertising as much as Softimage did, but anyway).
> I would expect that I am more likely to notice a Softimage ad than a Maya 
> user, because it already is something that I like and accept.
> Maybe that assumption is incorrect, but it seems to make some sense. 
> 
> I don't recall ever seeing an ad for Softimage. 
> 
> Ever.
> 
> I don't doubt they existed, just that I never saw one. I have an almost 
> insatiable thirst for CG news/content. It has been that way for 25 years now.
> Every day (multiple times per day) I scour the internet for information on 
> 3D, Softimage, new CG innovations, software, articles, reviews.
> I read all the magazines I have time for, and even if I don't have time to 
> read them, I flip through all the major ones, putting aside what I want to 
> read later.
> 
> With all of that, I would have thought I would have seen SOME advertising 
> about Softimage. But I didn't!
> The only things I ever saw were articles about Lagoa (not ads, but articles), 
> or articles about the acquisition.
> 
> Why was that (I am honestly asking, I am not being snarky)? 
> 
> Also (and this has been asked so many times I feel that the answer to it is 
> being withheld because it includes the location of Jimmy Hoffa's corpse), WHY 
> WASN'T SOFTIMAGE PROMOTED ON YOUR HOMEPAGE?
> Seems like free advertising might be the best advertising when you are trying 
> to bring up the sales numbers of a fledgling product, no?
> 
> Thank you (and Chris) for answering these questions.
> We don't always like the answers you give, we may not always believe the 
> answers you give, but that does not mean that I don't appreciate that you and 
> Chris are
> trying to answer them anyway.
> 
> 
> Perry
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Maurice Patel  
>> wrote:
>> Hi Perry,
>> 
>> Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases, 
>> actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many 
>> factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually 
>> worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing 
>> product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and 
>> distribution channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically 
>> without cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same 
>> results with Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product 
>> lines were growing fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know 
>> that it would not have its own set of problems - but we felt we could tackle 
>> them. When that did not work out we changed strategies to focus on Suites.
>> 
>> Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As mentioned 
>> above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your product - it 
>> requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a lot of systems 
>> integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU bundle, through 
>> student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of as many people as 
>> possible. Another is price. We kept the lower price and that initially was 
>> to see if this would broaden adoption - it did not. The third is product and 
>> the product is a great product.
>> 
>> For promotion, we invested in integrating it into Autodesk systems and we 
>> actually invested more than other Autodesk products typically get given the 
>> revenue tier Softimage was in. What we did not do was maintain a separate 
>> web site for the product (we don't do that for any of our products). People 
>> often ask us why there were no campaigns to try and get Maya or 3ds Max 
>> users to switch to Softimage but the answer to that should be self-evident - 
>> and it was certainly never going to be a serious option for us. The main 
>> purpose of marketing campaigns is to generate revenue and so they tend to  
>> focus on the where there is a revenue opportunity such as getting Maya or 
>> 3ds max users current (upgrades). 

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Hey don't mess with my baloney
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_sausage
It helped build an empire :)

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of phil harbath
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:11 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RwxdzP8rG4

:)


-Original Message-
From: Maurice Patel
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:06 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Phil,
Yes, I referred to that in my reply. The question I was answering was whether 
there had been a gain in traction recently. My answer was “no.” I described 
what we were seeing and I explained that the reason that’s subs were declining 
was for reasons already discussed on the list, such as the reason you state 
below. So it is not ‘baloney.’ The reasons you state and that I allude to are 
valid.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of phil harbath
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 2:44 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

I don’t doubt that people were letting their subscriptions lapse, I let a 
couple of ours lapse to make a statement (look where that got me), the last 
couple of releases were horribly subpar compared with pre-acquisition.   I 
hate that argument, it is just baloney.  I agree with others, with autodesk, 
Softimage dies,  it is just plain redundant and an underachiever compared with 
the big two, and embarrassment to them,  most anywhere else it probably 
survives (I did not say thrive, I understand that Softimage is a niche product).

<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[phil harbath]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RwxdzP8rG4

:)


-Original Message- 
From: Maurice Patel

Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:06 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Phil,
Yes, I referred to that in my reply. The question I was answering was 
whether there had been a gain in traction recently. My answer was “no.” I 
described what we were seeing and I explained that the reason that’s subs 
were declining was for reasons already discussed on the list, such as the 
reason you state below. So it is not ‘baloney.’ The reasons you state and 
that I allude to are valid.

Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of phil harbath

Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 2:44 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

I don’t doubt that people were letting their subscriptions lapse, I let a 
couple of ours lapse to make a statement (look where that got me), the last 
couple of releases were horribly subpar compared with pre-acquisition.   I 
hate that argument, it is just baloney.  I agree with others, with autodesk, 
Softimage dies,  it is just plain redundant and an underachiever compared 
with the big two, and embarrassment to them,  most anywhere else it probably 
survives (I did not say thrive, I understand that Softimage is a niche 
product).

Re: AnimSchool Student Showcase

[David Gallagher]

Yes, all AnimSchool student work.

We have different instructors for the various classes. I help in a 
supplemental session. Thanks!



On 3/25/2014 1:00 PM, Jason S wrote:

Wow all that is student work?   Very good teacher I guess :)

On 03/25/14 14:25, Sebastien Sterling wrote:
That was quite a daring choice on Emilio's part, Vintage Disney is 
very difficult to pull off.



On 25 March 2014 17:04, David Gallagher > wrote:


In case you're interested, our Modeling/Rigging Student Showcase.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6-R2xDP8I&list=UUPYQOUnJ3G1-QVUtZg62JNQ

I worked with many of the students on their models and face rigs,
mostly bringing their models into Softimage to edit them for
appeal. Note the work of list member Emilio Hernandez!

Dave G

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Perry Harovas]

Hi Maurice,

I appreciate the detailed answer. It does help to know the details, and of
course, you certainly know your own business better than we do.
One thing that just seems odd, why did I never see ads for Softimage? I
understand that percentage wise, it was getting more ad dollars than
Max or Maya (which in and of itself is weird, because they seemingly don't
need advertising as much as Softimage did, but anyway).
I would expect that I am more likely to notice a Softimage ad than a Maya
user, because it already is something that I like and accept.
Maybe that assumption is incorrect, but it seems to make some sense.

I don't recall ever seeing an ad for Softimage.

Ever.

I don't doubt they existed, just that I never saw one. I have an almost
insatiable thirst for CG news/content. It has been that way for 25 years
now.
Every day (multiple times per day) I scour the internet for information on
3D, Softimage, new CG innovations, software, articles, reviews.
I read all the magazines I have time for, and even if I don't have time to
read them, I flip through all the major ones, putting aside what I want to
read later.

With all of that, I would have thought I would have seen SOME advertising
about Softimage. But I didn't!
The only things I ever saw were articles about Lagoa (not ads, but
articles), or articles about the acquisition.

Why was that (I am honestly asking, I am not being snarky)?

Also (and this has been asked so many times I feel that the answer to it is
being withheld because it includes the location of Jimmy Hoffa's corpse),
WHY WASN'T SOFTIMAGE PROMOTED ON YOUR HOMEPAGE?
Seems like free advertising might be the best advertising when you are
trying to bring up the sales numbers of a fledgling product, no?

Thank you (and Chris) for answering these questions.
We don't always like the answers you give, we may not always believe the
answers you give, but that does not mean that I don't appreciate that you
and Chris are
trying to answer them anyway.


Perry




On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> Hi Perry,
>
> Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases,
> actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many
> factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually
> worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing
> product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and
> distribution channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically
> without cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same
> results with Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product
> lines were growing fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know
> that it would not have its own set of problems - but we felt we could
> tackle them. When that did not work out we changed strategies to focus on
> Suites.
>
> Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As
> mentioned above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your
> product - it requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a
> lot of systems integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU
> bundle, through student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of
> as many people as possible. Another is price. We kept the lower price and
> that initially was to see if this would broaden adoption - it did not. The
> third is product and the product is a great product.
>
> For promotion, we invested in integrating it into Autodesk systems and we
> actually invested more than other Autodesk products typically get given the
> revenue tier Softimage was in. What we did not do was maintain a separate
> web site for the product (we don't do that for any of our products). People
> often ask us why there were no campaigns to try and get Maya or 3ds Max
> users to switch to Softimage but the answer to that should be self-evident
> - and it was certainly never going to be a serious option for us. The main
> purpose of marketing campaigns is to generate revenue and so they tend to
>  focus on the where there is a revenue opportunity such as getting Maya or
> 3ds max users current (upgrades). Once we introduced Suites, the best
> revenue opportunity for Softimage was to get customers to upgrade to Suites
> and that was the focus.
>
> >From a business (and therefore marketing) perspective the question was
> always: could Softimage bring in net new business and how? Not how could it
> replace Maya or 3ds Max revenue. Given that it was actually cheaper,
> replacing 3ds Max or Maya would actually have meant a revenue decline not
> just a swap. Ultimately the hope was always that ICE would offer enough
> value to 3ds Max and Maya users drive Suite adoption. That was very much
> the product strategy and where the development team focused and so that is
> what we marketed. And yes I know that Softimage is more than just ICE and
> that it is a very capable a

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Andy Goehler]

Would you want to ged rid of that massive arrow in the MCP too? :-)

Icons have their place, they need to communicate well and be used with care. 
The Nuke toolbar icons work great IMHO.

Cheers,

Andy

> On 25.03.2014, at 17:40, Paul Griswold 
>  wrote:
> 
> 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
> editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.

New discussion forum for Softimage -> Maya features/workflows

[Jill Ramsay (Contractor)]

Hello everyone,

Let me introduce myself. I'm Jill Ramsay, and I've just joined Chris V's team. 
Some of you with mixed pipelines may remember me from the Alias days when I 
managed Maya for a few years.  I've been lurking on this list for the past 
couple of weeks, and the first thing I want to do is to offer my condolences to 
those feeling a great sense of loss; you are clearly a very passionate bunch of 
people and your pain and sadness is very evident.

I know you all have choices, and if your choice is to stay with Softimage for 
as long as possible, or to transition to a non-Autodesk solution, then I 
respect that. However, if you have chosen or are considering choosing to 
transition to Maya, I'm here to help in any way I can. You can email me 
directly at jill.ram...@autodesk.com. (If you 
choose to transition to 3ds Max, and need any assistance there, let me know and 
I'll pass you on to someone who can help).

One thing that's become very clear to me is that there are some things that 
Softimage does extremely well. Not just big ticket features like ICE, but 
streamlined workflows that help you to be more productive. I want to understand 
those things and if and how we can implement them in Maya, for the benefit of 
all of our users.

I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that your list has been hijacked in the 
past couple of weeks with transition discussions, a lot them revolving about 
what Maya can or can't offer you. In order to give back this list to the people 
who need to get on with their everyday work in Softimage, I invite you to bring 
those discussions to a new discussion group within the Maya forum: 
http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Softimage-Workflow-Feature/bd-p/softimageworkflow.
 Everyone is very welcome there, and our product designers will be standing by 
to take your feedback and answer your questions where they can, as will I.

I'm looking forward to having some constructive, useful discussions. Thank you 
in advance for your input.

Best regards,

Jill Ramsay
<>

RE: planned transitional training?

[Maurice Patel]

Sorry - It did get lost in all the threads

Yes we plan on rolling out webinars starting in May 

Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leendert A. Hartog
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:03 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: planned transitional training?

Well, that's slightly less response than I had hoped for obviously, but in 
itself it's an answer too, I guess

Greetz
Leendert

-- 

Leendert A. Hartog - Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue - Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com


<>

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Phil,
Yes, I referred to that in my reply. The question I was answering was whether 
there had been a gain in traction recently. My answer was “no.” I described 
what we were seeing and I explained that the reason that’s subs were declining 
was for reasons already discussed on the list, such as the reason you state 
below. So it is not ‘baloney.’ The reasons you state and that I allude to are 
valid.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of phil harbath
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 2:44 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

I don’t doubt that people were letting their subscriptions lapse, I let a 
couple of ours lapse to make a statement (look where that got me), the last 
couple of releases were horribly subpar compared with pre-acquisition.   I hate 
that argument, it is just baloney.  I agree with others, with autodesk, 
Softimage dies,  it is just plain redundant and an underachiever compared with 
the big two, and embarrassment to them,  most anywhere else it probably 
survives (I did not say thrive, I understand that Softimage is a niche product).

<>

Re: AnimSchool Student Showcase

[Emilio Hernandez]

Well all can say in my own experience through this adventure called
Animschool, is that they are amazing teachers.

---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.


2014-03-25 13:00 GMT-06:00 Jason S :

>  Wow all that is student work?   Very good teacher I guess :)
>
>
> On 03/25/14 14:25, Sebastien Sterling wrote:
>
> That was quite a daring choice on Emilio's part, Vintage Disney is very
> difficult to pull off.
>
>
> On 25 March 2014 17:04, David Gallagher wrote:
>
>> In case you're interested, our Modeling/Rigging Student Showcase.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6-R2xDP8I&list=UUPYQOUnJ3G1-QVUtZg62JNQ
>>
>> I worked with many of the students on their models and face rigs, mostly
>> bringing their models into Softimage to edit them for appeal. Note the work
>> of list member Emilio Hernandez!
>>
>> Dave G
>>
>
>
>

Re: planned transitional training?

[Leendert A. Hartog]

Well, that's slightly less response than I had hoped for obviously,
but in itself it's an answer too, I guess

Greetz
Leendert

--

Leendert A. Hartog – Softimage hobbyist
AKA Hirazi Blue – Administrator  @, NOT the owner of  si-community.com

Re: AnimSchool Student Showcase

[Jason S]

Wow all that is student work?   Very good teacher I guess :)

On 03/25/14 14:25, Sebastien Sterling wrote:

  That was quite a daring choice on Emilio's part,
Vintage Disney is very difficult to pull off.
  
  
  
  On 25 March 2014 17:04, David Gallagher 
wrote:
  In
case you're interested, our Modeling/Rigging Student Showcase.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6-R2xDP8I&list=UUPYQOUnJ3G1-QVUtZg62JNQ

I worked with many of the students on their models and face rigs,
mostly bringing their models into Softimage to edit them for appeal.
Note the work of list member Emilio Hernandez!

Dave G
  
  
  
  

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[phil harbath]

I don’t doubt that people were letting their subscriptions lapse, I let a 
couple of ours lapse to make a statement (look where that got me), the last 
couple of releases were horribly subpar compared with pre-acquisition.   I hate 
that argument, it is just baloney.  I agree with others, with autodesk, 
Softimage dies,  it is just plain redundant and an underachiever compared with 
the big two, and embarrassment to them,  most anywhere else it probably 
survives (I did not say thrive, I understand that Softimage is a niche 
product).  

Fabric in London - 7th-11th April

[Paul Doyle]

Hi guys - I'm going to be in London with Helge soon giving people a look at
what we've got cooking . We're there the week of the 7th April but time is
getting booked out - so If you're interested in us coming in to your studio
(Soho and nearby only) then drop me a line: paul.do...@fabricengine.com

I'll try and organise a beer for Thursday 10th as well...

Cheers,

Paul

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Toonafish]

yeah, pearls before swine I tell youpearls before swine...

AD seems to simply follow the road to the easyest buck with no 
consideration for much else. There's nothing wrong with making a buck. 
But a badly managed business that goes for the biggest profit possible 
by blindy following the route of taking as much as they can and giving 
back as little as possible in return, can easily end up something 
resembling a parasite.


And when I look at what AD has been giving us, in return for our hard 
earned subsciption money over the years. And what they have done with 
Softimage now, they are really striving for that. They suck up and burn 
3rd party innovation and customer cash without giving much in return.


-Ronald


On 3/25/2014 12:17, Emilio Hernandez wrote:
I am sorry to raise the fuel again on this one, and it has nothing to 
do with you Maurice nor Chris.


I have not read any answer from Autodesk that really is convincing of 
why Autodesk is not being able to still ship Softimage with Maya/Max 
after April 2016, or do the same thing as they are going to do with 
Toxic and Matchmover.


All is mumble jumble about "wanting to focuse" into products that are 
more popular, that does not mean they are better.


My personal conclution is that Softimage was getting more attention 
lately, and the Maya "innovation and creativity" project was starting 
to fall appart.  So the only viable solution for this was to put a 
bullet in the head and another one into the heart of Softimage. So 
people will turn away their sight from the death corpse after some  PR.




---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.


2014-03-25 4:43 GMT-06:00 Saeed Kalhor >:


He is a DICTATOR!!!


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Perry Harovas
mailto:perryharo...@gmail.com>> wrote:

If you really want to be scared, listen to this audio
interview with Carl Bass.

The link cuts right to the appropriate moment, but you should
listen to the entire thing if you have the chance.
Essentially, he is saying that when you have competing
products, it isn't a good idea to exert control, piss off
customers
and try to force them to use another one of your products,
when they already use one of yours.
He says killing a product will just lead to about half of them
saying, essentially, screw you.

Wow, he should take his own advice from 13 months ago...

Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9-yZ5JVOBA#t=1054

And he was only talking about a PLUGIN... He was talking about
T-Splines, and how customers would revolt and probably use the
competitors
products if Autodesk forced them use only use it with their
own software, instead of working in the apps of the competition.

The interview is also scary for how much (especially if you
listen to the entire interview) he wants all Autodesk apps on
the cloud.
ALL OF THEM.

Uh, no thank you. A choice, sure, but to have software only
available on the cloud would really annoy me, if I was still
using Autodesk products...




On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Emilio Hernandez
mailto:emi...@e-roja.com>> wrote:

Well it is not that we are "investing" in Softimage.

Let's put it on another perspective.

We want Maya or MAX to continue having the Softimage
plugin as it is.

Autodesk will have its money and we will have our Maya/MAX
with the Softimage plugin.



---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.


2014-03-24 17:21 GMT-06:00 Maurice Patel
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>:

If you buy a license now you will have a certain
flexibility later to add new licenses. But ultimately,
yes, the program was built for existing customers to
be able (if they want) to transition their licenses to
3ds Max and Maya and not really for new customers to
be able to invest in Softimage.
maurice



> On Mar 24, 2014, at 4:36 PM, Martin
mailto:furik...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Maurice
>
> I don't think anyone who is going to start a CG
career will do it based on SI even if you don't stop
selling it for a few months or years! It isn't logic
to do it. Only those who are already Softimage users
and have Softimage based projects running will need
new licenses to use a few years more.
>
> There are still too many projects based on Softimage
   

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Francisco Criado]

Hi Maurice, already asked this, but maybe was lost with all the mails on
the group.
I would like to adquire Softimage licences on April, for a studio that
doesn´t have any older Softimage license. Is there any chance to get them?
tried to talk to Autodesk Argentina, but their answer was that they don´t
sell this prodcuct (had to explain them what was softimage, ouch)

Thanks in advance,
F.



2014-03-25 14:50 GMT-03:00 Maurice Patel :

> Anything constructive to add? That could be implied and pre-acquisition is
> not relevant to the question which was about an apparent recent gain in
> traction
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jason S
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:44 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>
> On 03/25/14 13:41, Maurice Patel wrote:
>
> ..Softimage is less than 3%..
>
>
> Post-aquisition
>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Jason S]

Sorry I think it's the all the defending of the quite frankly hardly
defensible actions/inactions (which have not been of your
making) leading to this outcome, putting me in sort-of a
"non-accept mode".

Nothing personal.

Cheers,
J



On 03/25/14 13:50, Maurice Patel wrote:

  Anything constructive to add? That could be implied and pre-acquisition is not relevant to the question which was about an apparent recent gain in traction
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jason S
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:44 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

On 03/25/14 13:41, Maurice Patel wrote:

..Softimage is less than 3%..


Post-aquisition
  

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[olivier jeannel]

Agree 100%

Le 25/03/2014 19:01, Jean-Louis Billard a écrit :

Hi Andres,

Unfortunately Chris already explained that, and it makes sense: AD 
have to pay for third parties libraries. It’s not worth it for them 
given the small revenue stream.


I think we’re collectively tripping if we think we are going to get AD 
to revoke their decision.
What we need to do now (for those, like me, who want to stay with 
Soft) is to make sure we keep using it to create great work, generate 
enough demand for third parties to invest time in developing for it, 
and just keep having fun using a great piece of software for the years 
to come until a credible solution comes along and gives us the 
opportunity to move on in a graceful way.


Regards,
Jean-Louis


Jean-Louis Billard

Digital Golem
BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com 
http://www.digitalgolem.com/
53 Rue Gustave Huberti
1030 Brussels

On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:51, Andres Stephens > wrote:


Why are you refusing a sale to studios who want to invest years into 
a product you already have, coded and no-longer need to develop much?

Re: AnimSchool Student Showcase

[Sebastien Sterling]

That was quite a daring choice on Emilio's part, Vintage Disney is very
difficult to pull off.


On 25 March 2014 17:04, David Gallagher wrote:

> In case you're interested, our Modeling/Rigging Student Showcase.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6-R2xDP8I&list=UUPYQOUnJ3G1-QVUtZg62JNQ
>
> I worked with many of the students on their models and face rigs, mostly
> bringing their models into Softimage to edit them for appeal. Note the work
> of list member Emilio Hernandez!
>
> Dave G
>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Andres Stephens]

Valid enough. 

Unfortunate either way.. 

From what I understood though, it is too expensive to “opensource” or maintain 
thirdparty applications within SI. How much would it really cost to maintain 
them? Would the low sales really come out as a deficit in the long term? 

I don’t suggest leaving SI as opensource nor free - just keep selling it 
longer. Sell seats. 

But yes, I agree with you Jean-Louis… Valid enough. 







From: Jean-Louis Billard
Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎March‎ ‎25‎, ‎2014 ‎13‎:‎01‎ ‎
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com




Hi Andres,



Unfortunately Chris already explained that, and it makes sense: AD have to pay 
for third parties libraries. It’s not worth it for them given the small revenue 
stream.



I think we’re collectively tripping if we think we are going to get AD to 
revoke their decision.

What we need to do now (for those, like me, who want to stay with Soft) is to 
make sure we keep using it to create great work, generate enough demand for 
third parties to invest time in developing for it, and just keep having fun 
using a great piece of software for the years to come until a credible solution 
comes along and gives us the opportunity to move on in a graceful way.
















Regards,

Jean-Louis








Jean-Louis Billard




Digital Golem



BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563

UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119

jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com

http://www.digitalgolem.com/



53 Rue Gustave Huberti

1030 Brussels




On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:51, Andres Stephens  wrote:


Why are you refusing a sale to studios who want to invest years into a product 
you already have, coded and no-longer need to develop much?

RE: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]]

Correction Nonsacred tool

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Ponthieux, Joseph 
G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:57 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

Same here.

But I will clarify it. In Softimage there are literally tens if not more than a 
hundred "g" commands, one stored in  each button. In Maya there is only one 
unless you count the sacred tool. Then there are two. It doesn't even get close 
to being the same thing.

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Alastair Hearsum
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:53 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

Jean louis

You beat me to it. I was just about to say that.


Alastair
Alastair Hearsum
Head of 3d
[GLASSWORKS]
33/34 Great Pulteney Street
London
W1F 9NP
+44 (0)20 7434 1182
glassworks.co.uk
Glassworks Terms and Conditions of Sale can be found at glassworks.co.uk
(Company registered in England with number 04759979. Registered office 25 
Harley Street, London, W1G 9BR. VAT registration number: 86729)
Please consider the environment before you print this email.
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and attachments are strictly privileged, private and 
confidential and are intended solely for the stated recipient(s). Any views or 
opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of the Company. If you are not the intended recipient, be 
advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly 
prohibited. If this transmission is received in error please kindly return it 
to the sender and delete this message from your system.
On 25/03/2014 17:49, Jean-Louis Billard wrote:

Hi Shuting,



That's not the same thing at all I'm afraid. In Softimage *every* menu has it's 
own memory of the last command accessed. So you can middle click any menu and 
repeat its last command (as long as there has been one used within the session)



Regards,

Jean-Louis







Jean-Louis Billard



Digital Golem

BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563

UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119

jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com

http://www.digitalgolem.com/

53 Rue Gustave Huberti

1030 Brussels



On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:46, Shuting Chang 
 wrote:



Hi Paul,



I am a design in Maya team. I am collecting the feedback from this email group 
and use them to improve Maya.

I agree that Maya icons need some texts. But for "5", in Maya we have "g" to 
repeat last action. Hope this is helpful.



Thank you,

Shuting



From: Paul Griswold 
mailto:pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com>>

Reply-To: 
"softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>

Date: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM

To: 
"softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>

Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5



I think part of the problem with a lot/all of the devs working on Maya is - you 
guys use this stuff day in and day out and you already understand how & why 
things are the way they are.



I would strongly urge the entire Maya team to do some real user interface & 
usability testing with a 3rd party testing service.  Get people from all sorts 
of backgrounds and actually record them trying to use Maya to achieve specific 
tasks.  My gut instinct says, most of the team will be very surprised at how 
unintuitive and difficult Maya is for most people that don't live in the Maya 
universe.



As for top 5:



1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.



2.  Drag and drop divots & simple expressions.



3.  Consistent UI - this was my last wish for Softimage.  I wanted the FXTree 
to be updated to match ICE and the Ren

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Jean-Louis Billard]

Hi Andres,

Unfortunately Chris already explained that, and it makes sense: AD have to pay 
for third parties libraries. It’s not worth it for them given the small revenue 
stream.

I think we’re collectively tripping if we think we are going to get AD to 
revoke their decision.
What we need to do now (for those, like me, who want to stay with Soft) is to 
make sure we keep using it to create great work, generate enough demand for 
third parties to invest time in developing for it, and just keep having fun 
using a great piece of software for the years to come until a credible solution 
comes along and gives us the opportunity to move on in a graceful way.

Regards,
Jean-Louis


Jean-Louis Billard

Digital Golem
BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com
http://www.digitalgolem.com/
53 Rue Gustave Huberti
1030 Brussels

On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:51, Andres Stephens  wrote:

> Why are you refusing a sale to studios who want to invest years into a 
> product you already have, coded and no-longer need to develop much?

RE: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]]

Same here.

But I will clarify it. In Softimage there are literally tens if not more than a 
hundred "g" commands, one stored in  each button. In Maya there is only one 
unless you count the sacred tool. Then there are two. It doesn't even get close 
to being the same thing.

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Alastair Hearsum
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:53 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

Jean louis

You beat me to it. I was just about to say that.


Alastair
Alastair Hearsum
Head of 3d
[GLASSWORKS]
33/34 Great Pulteney Street
London
W1F 9NP
+44 (0)20 7434 1182
glassworks.co.uk
Glassworks Terms and Conditions of Sale can be found at glassworks.co.uk
(Company registered in England with number 04759979. Registered office 25 
Harley Street, London, W1G 9BR. VAT registration number: 86729)
Please consider the environment before you print this email.
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and attachments are strictly privileged, private and 
confidential and are intended solely for the stated recipient(s). Any views or 
opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of the Company. If you are not the intended recipient, be 
advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly 
prohibited. If this transmission is received in error please kindly return it 
to the sender and delete this message from your system.
On 25/03/2014 17:49, Jean-Louis Billard wrote:

Hi Shuting,



That's not the same thing at all I'm afraid. In Softimage *every* menu has it's 
own memory of the last command accessed. So you can middle click any menu and 
repeat its last command (as long as there has been one used within the session)



Regards,

Jean-Louis







Jean-Louis Billard



Digital Golem

BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563

UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119

jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com

http://www.digitalgolem.com/

53 Rue Gustave Huberti

1030 Brussels



On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:46, Shuting Chang 
 wrote:



Hi Paul,



I am a design in Maya team. I am collecting the feedback from this email group 
and use them to improve Maya.

I agree that Maya icons need some texts. But for "5", in Maya we have "g" to 
repeat last action. Hope this is helpful.



Thank you,

Shuting



From: Paul Griswold 
mailto:pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com>>

Reply-To: 
"softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>

Date: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM

To: 
"softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>

Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5



I think part of the problem with a lot/all of the devs working on Maya is - you 
guys use this stuff day in and day out and you already understand how & why 
things are the way they are.



I would strongly urge the entire Maya team to do some real user interface & 
usability testing with a 3rd party testing service.  Get people from all sorts 
of backgrounds and actually record them trying to use Maya to achieve specific 
tasks.  My gut instinct says, most of the team will be very surprised at how 
unintuitive and difficult Maya is for most people that don't live in the Maya 
universe.



As for top 5:



1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.



2.  Drag and drop divots & simple expressions.



3.  Consistent UI - this was my last wish for Softimage.  I wanted the FXTree 
to be updated to match ICE and the Render Tree (and possibly the schematic view 
to get updated as well).  There should not be more than 1 style of graph in 
Maya and all navigation should use the same mouse/key combo everywhere.  
Additionally, revisit what things are named.  As mentioned in a previous email 
- why is there at tab called Renderer and a tab called Rendering, or a tab 
called Shading and a tab called Surfaces? Maybe to long-time Maya users that 
makes sense, but if you open the software for the first time, that makes 
absolutely no sense at all.



4.  Sticky keys.



5.  Middle-click re

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Andres Stephens]

I do not think nor agree with: “XSI is a known entity and if people wanted to 
switch to it they would have already.”

No-one other than a few select (and those who do know it love it) here in this 
country know it (in South America). Only those tired of the traditional DCC 
apps search for alternatives, find it, and would stick to it if they could. Not 
many realize it’s an option, including students and Autodesk clients. Resellers 
do not give it as a viable option even if it was included in the suites. 
Education of it was not promoted as much as was Maya or Max, here in this 
country, and yes.. maybe because it didn’t need as much education to learn how 
to do FX and animation with SI as counterpart packages - thus less students 
learning about it? Students don’t need to learn as much on how to use this 
package, thus there is less educational demand for it! 

I agree that lately it has gained more traction, mainly for movies like 300, 
Lego Movie, etc and a number of amazing commercials and effects. And it IS much 
more or as powerful than nearly everything out there. 

I tell people “I work in SI”, and no one has a clue it existed here (South 
America) - and if they did, they loved it and wished their studios or 
universities used it. 

But it’s not the software that matters, it’s business planning and execution. 


Was it really just “let’s see if it lives within our ecosystem and offers” 
mentality with your current business model? 

Was there no “Let’s make a business from this asset, and come out on top as a 
whole benefitting from an already coded asset (instead of coding and investing 
in a completely new one = more expensive - not to mention “not ready yet” 
liability)? 

“Let’s create a better ecosystem that will empower other packages - with as 
little investment possible.”  = SI and it’s concepts that Bifrost and your Maya 
improvements are trying to work off.. 

Are you taking a riskier road to show “innovation” and you only caring about 
your majority? (what about the minority in your ecosystem?) Do the XSI user 
base have to become like some ethnic minority being forgotten and wiped out? 

Where is the true business mind in this? 

People still want to buy Softimage, as that is what is happening and being 
shown, and you refuse a sale.. because.. you refuse a sale? People want to keep 
on buying it in the future…. and you refuse a sale again? People want to buy it 
and they don’t even want you to keep on developing it!? No investment sale!? 
You refuse more investment from a satisfied customer, money into your system, a 
small 1/20th investment into your other products? Is not 1/20th better than 
none at all?



Why are you refusing a sale to studios who want to invest years into a product 
you already have, coded and no-longer need to develop much? 




Why are you refusing a sale: “Do you have Coke?” “No, it’s in storage and we 
don’t sell it anymore, only Pepsi, but it comes free with the desire to buy 
coke!” (yes, sounds generous) “Really?! that’s odd. Ah, no thanks *walks out of 
the store*”.It’s that simple. 

And also, this 1/20th income from the M&E sector could be a no-loss asset and 
profit for a few years, you wouldn’t need to invest development into that 
asset, only serverside-executable downloads and website maintenance (which is 
not expensive). This asset would earn cash just existing freeing you to have 
that much more kick into your next big solution that will remedy the rest (a 5% 
and growing low investment asset for the rest of your business). 

When the bugs for Bifrost come out, the new features being ironed out through 
trial and error, what will you be able to fall on? Who will be able to learn 
how a creative nodal system implemented into 3D work before it is even 
released? How can people learn how they work and their potential within the 
graphic scene unless it has a track-record? Why are you starting out UNDER your 
competition with a product still years behind them? Why not start AHEAD, years 
ahead of them!? 

Why can’t SI and ICE be sold to compliment Bifrost as the “Successor to ICE, 
check out these beautiful results and testimonies done in ICE. Bifrost is 
ICE/SI squared!” 

People will buy into SI (which you’d be maintaining for very little cost after 
April 2016, low cost asset, high turnover) and train in it preparing for the 
nodal system Bifrost would offer by then. You would earn more money from a 
division in your business that doesn’t need much uptake after two years! 
Schools would benifit, students will be ready for nodal systems, and your other 
platforms will be ready. But more, when the two years are up and you have that 
nodal system in place, you have something studios can fall on, a tried and true 
system - instead of the new and upcoming and buggy and untried system which 
will take years to mature. 

Maya right now has a liability of underdeveloped software and functionality. 
Max also, Bifrost is a liability till proven trustworthy

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Alastair Hearsum]

Jean louis

You beat me to it. I was just about to say that.


Alastair

Alastair Hearsum
Head of 3d
GLASSWORKS
33/34 Great Pulteney Street
London
W1F 9NP
+44 (0)20 7434 1182
glassworks.co.uk 
Glassworks Terms and Conditions of Sale can be found at glassworks.co.uk
(Company registered in England with number 04759979. Registered office 
25 Harley Street, London, W1G 9BR. VAT registration number: 86729)

Please consider the environment before you print this email.
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and attachments are strictly privileged, private 
and confidential and are intended solely for the stated recipient(s). 
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do 
not necessarily represent those of the Company. If you are not the 
intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in 
error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying 
of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If this transmission is received 
in error please kindly return it to the sender and delete this message 
from your system.

On 25/03/2014 17:49, Jean-Louis Billard wrote:

Hi Shuting,

That’s not the same thing at all I’m afraid. In Softimage *every* menu has it’s 
own memory of the last command accessed. So you can middle click any menu and 
repeat its last command (as long as there has been one used within the session)

Regards,
Jean-Louis



Jean-Louis Billard

Digital Golem
BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com
http://www.digitalgolem.com/
53 Rue Gustave Huberti
1030 Brussels

On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:46, Shuting Chang  wrote:


Hi Paul,

I am a design in Maya team. I am collecting the feedback from this email group 
and use them to improve Maya.
I agree that Maya icons need some texts. But for “5”, in Maya we have “g” to 
repeat last action. Hope this is helpful.

Thank you,
Shuting

From: Paul Griswold 
mailto:pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com>>
Reply-To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
Date: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM
To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

I think part of the problem with a lot/all of the devs working on Maya is - you 
guys use this stuff day in and day out and you already understand how & why 
things are the way they are.

I would strongly urge the entire Maya team to do some real user interface & 
usability testing with a 3rd party testing service.  Get people from all sorts of 
backgrounds and actually record them trying to use Maya to achieve specific tasks.  
My gut instinct says, most of the team will be very surprised at how unintuitive 
and difficult Maya is for most people that don't live in the Maya universe.

As for top 5:

1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.

2.  Drag and drop divots & simple expressions.

3.  Consistent UI - this was my last wish for Softimage.  I wanted the FXTree 
to be updated to match ICE and the Render Tree (and possibly the schematic view 
to get updated as well).  There should not be more than 1 style of graph in 
Maya and all navigation should use the same mouse/key combo everywhere.  
Additionally, revisit what things are named.  As mentioned in a previous email 
- why is there at tab called Renderer and a tab called Rendering, or a tab 
called Shading and a tab called Surfaces? Maybe to long-time Maya users that 
makes sense, but if you open the software for the first time, that makes 
absolutely no sense at all.

4.  Sticky keys.

5.  Middle-click repeat the last action.  I use this every day of the week.


-PG




On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau 
mailto:luceri...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Text not icons

I don't understand this one.  Which part of the UI is this a problem
with that it isn't in Softimage?

You have the shelf at the top of the UI, but that's just shortcuts to
things that are already in the menu.  Hide the shelf if you don't want
it (there is also a shelf in XSI)

For the viewport ("panel") toolbar, if you don't use it, you can hide
it (shift+ctrl+m) - these are all shortcuts to the items also in the
menu.  It certainly would not make sense to turn that into text
buttons, although they should be generally fewer and bigger buttons
there.

But again these are shotcuts to the text menus. Everything is
menu-based in Maya.

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Jean-Louis Billard]

Hi Shuting,

That’s not the same thing at all I’m afraid. In Softimage *every* menu has it’s 
own memory of the last command accessed. So you can middle click any menu and 
repeat its last command (as long as there has been one used within the session)

Regards,
Jean-Louis



Jean-Louis Billard

Digital Golem
BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com
http://www.digitalgolem.com/
53 Rue Gustave Huberti
1030 Brussels

On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:46, Shuting Chang  wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> I am a design in Maya team. I am collecting the feedback from this email 
> group and use them to improve Maya.
> I agree that Maya icons need some texts. But for “5”, in Maya we have “g” to 
> repeat last action. Hope this is helpful.
> 
> Thank you,
> Shuting
> 
> From: Paul Griswold 
> mailto:pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com>>
> Reply-To: 
> "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
> mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
> Date: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM
> To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
> mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
> Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5
> 
> I think part of the problem with a lot/all of the devs working on Maya is - 
> you guys use this stuff day in and day out and you already understand how & 
> why things are the way they are.
> 
> I would strongly urge the entire Maya team to do some real user interface & 
> usability testing with a 3rd party testing service.  Get people from all 
> sorts of backgrounds and actually record them trying to use Maya to achieve 
> specific tasks.  My gut instinct says, most of the team will be very 
> surprised at how unintuitive and difficult Maya is for most people that don't 
> live in the Maya universe.
> 
> As for top 5:
> 
> 1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
> editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.
> 
> 2.  Drag and drop divots & simple expressions.
> 
> 3.  Consistent UI - this was my last wish for Softimage.  I wanted the FXTree 
> to be updated to match ICE and the Render Tree (and possibly the schematic 
> view to get updated as well).  There should not be more than 1 style of graph 
> in Maya and all navigation should use the same mouse/key combo everywhere.  
> Additionally, revisit what things are named.  As mentioned in a previous 
> email - why is there at tab called Renderer and a tab called Rendering, or a 
> tab called Shading and a tab called Surfaces? Maybe to long-time Maya users 
> that makes sense, but if you open the software for the first time, that makes 
> absolutely no sense at all.
> 
> 4.  Sticky keys.
> 
> 5.  Middle-click repeat the last action.  I use this every day of the week.
> 
> 
> -PG
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau 
> mailto:luceri...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Text not icons
> 
> I don't understand this one.  Which part of the UI is this a problem
> with that it isn't in Softimage?
> 
> You have the shelf at the top of the UI, but that's just shortcuts to
> things that are already in the menu.  Hide the shelf if you don't want
> it (there is also a shelf in XSI)
> 
> For the viewport ("panel") toolbar, if you don't use it, you can hide
> it (shift+ctrl+m) - these are all shortcuts to the items also in the
> menu.  It certainly would not make sense to turn that into text
> buttons, although they should be generally fewer and bigger buttons
> there.
> 
> But again these are shotcuts to the text menus. Everything is
> menu-based in Maya.
> 
> 

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Anything constructive to add? That could be implied and pre-acquisition is not 
relevant to the question which was about an apparent recent gain in traction
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134


-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jason S
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:44 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

On 03/25/14 13:41, Maurice Patel wrote:

..Softimage is less than 3%..


Post-aquisition
<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Jean-Louis Billard]

Hi Maurice,

Thanks for the insight, it’s interesting to see the figures. 
But given what you say in your last paragraph, don’t you think it would have 
been worth trying to keep things going at least another year to see where this 
momentum was going?

Regards,
Jean-Louis


Jean-Louis Billard

Digital Golem
BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com
http://www.digitalgolem.com/
53 Rue Gustave Huberti
1030 Brussels





On 25 Mar 2014, at 18:41, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> Hi Jean-Louis,
> 
> That is not really the case. Our data shows that in the past two years there 
> was a significant decline in both new seat sales and subscription renewal 
> (note: this does not reflect declining usage as much as that usage was not 
> growing and that users were choosing not to renew Subscription for reasons 
> already discussed elsewhere). However more telling was what was happening 
> with Suites. There has been a consistent but extremely low usage of Softimage 
> in the Suites (less than 6% in 3ds Max ECS Premium, less than 2% in Maya ECS 
> premium. Skeptics will say yes but that is to be expected why would anyone 
> use two animation products. 
> 
> Things get very interesting (and telling) when you look at the ECS Ultimate 
> though - and remember we are talking about usage of a single user license.  
> Usage of 3ds Max is 53%  and Maya is 39% Softimage is less than 3%. So given 
> a choice users do use two 3D animation applications, they just do not seem to 
> want to use Softimage as much as they do either Maya or 3ds Max. Now before 
> my words get thrown back in my face this is just ONE data point and we use 
> many to make decisions - and like any data there are always caveats to take 
> into consideration with any given data point. 
> 
> As to why you feel things were gaining ground. There is a good reason for 
> that. There have always been great projects done by Softimage users - some 
> recently were maybe more high profile than usual. More importantly, over the 
> past year there has been an incredible increase in activity from Softimage 
> users themselves, promoting their work, as the community rallied together. 
> What you were seeing was more a result of that than an increase in the usage 
> of Softimage. And I am not going to argue that this community was way more 
> creative in doing this than Autodesk was, is or could be.
> 
> maurice
> 
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

[Shuting Chang]

Hi Paul,

I am a design in Maya team. I am collecting the feedback from this email group 
and use them to improve Maya.
I agree that Maya icons need some texts. But for “5”, in Maya we have “g” to 
repeat last action. Hope this is helpful.

Thank you,
Shuting

From: Paul Griswold 
mailto:pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com>>
Reply-To: 
"softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
Date: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 12:40 PM
To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

I think part of the problem with a lot/all of the devs working on Maya is - you 
guys use this stuff day in and day out and you already understand how & why 
things are the way they are.

I would strongly urge the entire Maya team to do some real user interface & 
usability testing with a 3rd party testing service.  Get people from all sorts 
of backgrounds and actually record them trying to use Maya to achieve specific 
tasks.  My gut instinct says, most of the team will be very surprised at how 
unintuitive and difficult Maya is for most people that don't live in the Maya 
universe.

As for top 5:

1.  Text based everything - I hate the shelf in Softimage as well as the UV 
editor.  Get rid of icons entirely.

2.  Drag and drop divots & simple expressions.

3.  Consistent UI - this was my last wish for Softimage.  I wanted the FXTree 
to be updated to match ICE and the Render Tree (and possibly the schematic view 
to get updated as well).  There should not be more than 1 style of graph in 
Maya and all navigation should use the same mouse/key combo everywhere.  
Additionally, revisit what things are named.  As mentioned in a previous email 
- why is there at tab called Renderer and a tab called Rendering, or a tab 
called Shading and a tab called Surfaces?  Maybe to long-time Maya users that 
makes sense, but if you open the software for the first time, that makes 
absolutely no sense at all.

4.  Sticky keys.

5.  Middle-click repeat the last action.  I use this every day of the week.


-PG




On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau 
mailto:luceri...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Text not icons

I don't understand this one.  Which part of the UI is this a problem
with that it isn't in Softimage?

You have the shelf at the top of the UI, but that's just shortcuts to
things that are already in the menu.  Hide the shelf if you don't want
it (there is also a shelf in XSI)

For the viewport ("panel") toolbar, if you don't use it, you can hide
it (shift+ctrl+m) - these are all shortcuts to the items also in the
menu.  It certainly would not make sense to turn that into text
buttons, although they should be generally fewer and bigger buttons
there.

But again these are shotcuts to the text menus. Everything is
menu-based in Maya.

<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Jason S]

On 03/25/14 13:41, Maurice Patel wrote:

..Softimage is less than 3%..


Post-aquisition

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Jean-Louis,

That is not really the case. Our data shows that in the past two years there 
was a significant decline in both new seat sales and subscription renewal 
(note: this does not reflect declining usage as much as that usage was not 
growing and that users were choosing not to renew Subscription for reasons 
already discussed elsewhere). However more telling was what was happening with 
Suites. There has been a consistent but extremely low usage of Softimage in the 
Suites (less than 6% in 3ds Max ECS Premium, less than 2% in Maya ECS premium. 
Skeptics will say yes but that is to be expected why would anyone use two 
animation products. 

Things get very interesting (and telling) when you look at the ECS Ultimate 
though - and remember we are talking about usage of a single user license.  
Usage of 3ds Max is 53%  and Maya is 39% Softimage is less than 3%. So given a 
choice users do use two 3D animation applications, they just do not seem to 
want to use Softimage as much as they do either Maya or 3ds Max. Now before my 
words get thrown back in my face this is just ONE data point and we use many to 
make decisions - and like any data there are always caveats to take into 
consideration with any given data point. 

As to why you feel things were gaining ground. There is a good reason for that. 
There have always been great projects done by Softimage users - some recently 
were maybe more high profile than usual. More importantly, over the past year 
there has been an incredible increase in activity from Softimage users 
themselves, promoting their work, as the community rallied together. What you 
were seeing was more a result of that than an increase in the usage of 
Softimage. And I am not going to argue that this community was way more 
creative in doing this than Autodesk was, is or could be.

maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jean-Louis Billard
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:37 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Chris,

And thanks for having taken the time to write such a long explanation.

I too have been around Softimage for twenty years (as a user, but also as an 
instructor) and have followed it along its bumpy road, so nothing that you 
recount surprises me.

However, what *does* intrigue me is the fact that recently, in the last couple 
of years, and despite the lack of marketing push and development by Autodesk, I 
truly believe that Softimage was finally beginning to gain ground. Many, many 
high profile commercials had been made with it, as well as playing a big role 
in a few features (Lego being the obvious and most pertinent example).
This was in large part due to ICE, of course, but nevertheless it seemed that 
Softimage was being talked about more than ever before, and infact it seemed to 
be gaining ground in a few educational facilities too.

Of course I'm not privy to information about number of users or seats sold, but 
I can't help wondering if the figures haven't been skewed by the introduction 
of bundles that effectively show up as Maya or 3DSMax licenses, despite the 
fact that Softimage was the software being used. 

Care to comment?


Thanks,
Jean-Louis



Jean-Louis Billard


<>

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Eric Thivierge]

No, the worst thing would be if Avid simply canned it and didn't sell 
it.


Eric T.

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:32:46 PM, Srecko Micic wrote:

Unfortunately, XSI was bought by AD and that was worst thing that
could happen to it, we all witnessed it. I am 100% sure that Foundry
or Dassult bought them, today we would have totally opposite situation.

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Srecko Micic]

Unfortunately, XSI was bought by AD and that was worst thing that could
happen to it, we all witnessed it. I am 100% sure that Foundry or Dassult
bought them, today we would have totally opposite situation.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Jason S  wrote:

> YES! Softimage was "taken care of" alright!
>
>
> On 03/25/14 13:07, Maurice Patel wrote:
>
>> Hi Perry,
>>
>> Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases,
>> actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many
>> factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually
>> worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing
>> product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and
>> distribution channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically
>> without cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same
>> results with Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product
>> lines were growing fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know
>> that it would not have its own set of problems - but we felt we could
>> tackle them. When that did not work out we changed strategies to focus on
>> Suites.
>>
>> Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As
>> mentioned above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your
>> product - it requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a
>> lot of systems integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU
>> bundle, through student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of
>> as many people as possible. Another is price. We kept the lower price and
>> that initially was to see if this would broaden adoption - it did not. The
>> third is product and the product is a great product.
>>
>> For promotion, we invested in integrating it into Autodesk systems and we
>> actually invested more than other Autodesk products typically get given the
>> revenue tier Softimage was in. What we did not do was maintain a separate
>> web site for the product (we don't do that for any of our products). People
>> often ask us why there were no campaigns to try and get Maya or 3ds Max
>> users to switch to Softimage but the answer to that should be self-evident
>> - and it was certainly never going to be a serious option for us. The main
>> purpose of marketing campaigns is to generate revenue and so they tend to
>>  focus on the where there is a revenue opportunity such as getting Maya or
>> 3ds max users current (upgrades). Once we introduced Suites, the best
>> revenue opportunity for Softimage was to get customers to upgrade to Suites
>> and that was the focus.
>>
>> > From a business (and therefore marketing) perspective the question was
>> always: could Softimage bring in net new business and how? Not how could it
>> replace Maya or 3ds Max revenue. Given that it was actually cheaper,
>> replacing 3ds Max or Maya would actually have meant a revenue decline not
>> just a swap. Ultimately the hope was always that ICE would offer enough
>> value to 3ds Max and Maya users drive Suite adoption. That was very much
>> the product strategy and where the development team focused and so that is
>> what we marketed. And yes I know that Softimage is more than just ICE and
>> that it is a very capable all round animation solution - as did Marc Petit
>> and the other execs in charge - but the strategy was to build, market and
>> sell a suite of interoperable products (which we spent a lot of money
>> doing). As a percentage of revenue Softimage got more investment than other
>> products. In total dollar amounts a lot less (because it was a higher
>> percentage of a much, much smaller base) . So whether we invested or not is
>> relative to what point of view you take.
>>
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-bounces@
>> listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:39 AM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> My appreciation of the effort you took to write all that, and the thought
>> that must have went into it is considerable.
>> I truly and honestly appreciate that you did that, and I look forward
>> (more than before) to your second part where you explain
>> why Autodesk can't just keep Softimage around (and perhaps why doing that
>> is diffeent than doing that with Toxik and MatchMover).
>>
>> Does this solve everything? Does this make me a renewed Autodesk
>> customer? No, but your email really helped a lot with regards to
>> understanding the
>> lay of the land as it has been leading up to now.
>>
>> One other thing that would be helpful is:
>>
>> Why Softimage was not marketed. Yes, you can blame (or partially hold as
>> culpable) Microsoft and Avid as to the small sales numbers for Softimage,
>> but after Autodesk
>> acquired it, in many ways 

RE: humanize Maya, SOFT top 5

[Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]]

Over a decade ago I spent hours to make my own icons for my own MEL tools. You 
get 6-7 characters to describe your tool under an icon? What is the logic 
here? How does this make it easier to use the tool?

Incidentally from the shelf editor you CAN change the shelves to have icons 
listed with custom names or strings beside or below the icon. You can even list 
just text. But the implementation of these features lacks separators and lacks 
multi-lines making it impractical with the exception of icons with short names.

For example, see the FUR shelf vs the RENDERING shelf with ICON/Text Below set 
on. It's a valiant attempt, but it's an unfinished feature. RENDERING looks 
like one long word. The FUR shelf looks pretty decent. Who did the Q&A on this? 
Same with text only. Its unusable because it's not readable.

ICON/Text Below implementation on custom shelves with MEL scripts is just mind 
boggling. It will try to list multiple lines under the icon if you let it 
display the code, but if you rename it will only list about a thirty characters 
on a single line pushing the icons far apart and making the shelf go to 
multiple rows if you have a lot if scripts on the shelf. How is that easy to 
use?

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Martin Yara
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:58 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

Now I see the point. I have those problems with my scripts. You can already put 
text over your icons but 4 letters aren't enough for some cases so I guess it 
should be easily fixed by adding a width option to the shelves icons, and a 2 
lines text option.

Months later after a non-Maya project, and I can't remember what were those 3 
or 4 letter icons on my shelf :D

Martin


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES] 
mailto:j.ponthi...@nasa.gov>> wrote:
I think what he is trying to say is what was a common complaint over a decade 
ago. Some people like shelves, but don't like the icons. They want the icons in 
the shelves to be replaceable with TEXT. Just like some people see art as 3d 
and others see art as 2d, for some people deciphering complicated icons is time 
consuming compared to reading. Too many of the icons are too similar. Further 
old people who depend on glasses might not be able to see every miniscule 3-5 
pixel differentiation in some icons that are similar. The argument is not to 
replace the shelve and use menu commands, but to replace the icon on the shelf 
with text on the shelf.

--
Joey Ponthieux
__
Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not
represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.


-Original Message-
From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Luc-Eric Rousseau
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:25 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: humanize maya, SOFT top 5

> Text not icons

I don't understand this one.  Which part of the UI is this a problem with that 
it isn't in Softimage?

You have the shelf at the top of the UI, but that's just shortcuts to things 
that are already in the menu.  Hide the shelf if you don't want it (there is 
also a shelf in XSI)

For the viewport ("panel") toolbar, if you don't use it, you can hide it 
(shift+ctrl+m) - these are all shortcuts to the items also in the menu.  It 
certainly would not make sense to turn that into text buttons, although they 
should be generally fewer and bigger buttons there.

But again these are shotcuts to the text menus. Everything is menu-based in 
Maya.

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Jason S]

YES! Softimage was "taken care of" alright!

On 03/25/14 13:07, Maurice Patel wrote:

Hi Perry,

Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases, 
actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many 
factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually 
worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing 
product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and distribution 
channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically without 
cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same results with 
Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product lines were growing 
fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know that it would not have 
its own set of problems - but we felt we could tackle them. When that did not 
work out we changed strategies to focus on Suites.

Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As mentioned 
above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your product - it 
requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a lot of systems 
integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU bundle, through 
student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of as many people as 
possible. Another is price. We kept the lower price and that initially was to 
see if this would broaden adoption - it did not. The third is product and the 
product is a great product.

For promotion, we invested in integrating it into Autodesk systems and we 
actually invested more than other Autodesk products typically get given the 
revenue tier Softimage was in. What we did not do was maintain a separate web 
site for the product (we don't do that for any of our products). People often 
ask us why there were no campaigns to try and get Maya or 3ds Max users to 
switch to Softimage but the answer to that should be self-evident - and it was 
certainly never going to be a serious option for us. The main purpose of 
marketing campaigns is to generate revenue and so they tend to  focus on the 
where there is a revenue opportunity such as getting Maya or 3ds max users 
current (upgrades). Once we introduced Suites, the best revenue opportunity for 
Softimage was to get customers to upgrade to Suites and that was the focus.

> From a business (and therefore marketing) perspective the question was 
always: could Softimage bring in net new business and how? Not how could it 
replace Maya or 3ds Max revenue. Given that it was actually cheaper, replacing 3ds 
Max or Maya would actually have meant a revenue decline not just a swap. 
Ultimately the hope was always that ICE would offer enough value to 3ds Max and 
Maya users drive Suite adoption. That was very much the product strategy and where 
the development team focused and so that is what we marketed. And yes I know that 
Softimage is more than just ICE and that it is a very capable all round animation 
solution - as did Marc Petit and the other execs in charge - but the strategy was 
to build, market and sell a suite of interoperable products (which we spent a lot 
of money doing). As a percentage of revenue Softimage got more investment than 
other products. In total dollar amounts a lot less (because it was a higher 
percentage of a much, much smaller base) . So whether we invested or not is 
relative to what point of view you take.

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:39 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Chris,

My appreciation of the effort you took to write all that, and the thought that 
must have went into it is considerable.
I truly and honestly appreciate that you did that, and I look forward (more 
than before) to your second part where you explain
why Autodesk can't just keep Softimage around (and perhaps why doing that is 
diffeent than doing that with Toxik and MatchMover).

Does this solve everything? Does this make me a renewed Autodesk customer? No, 
but your email really helped a lot with regards to understanding the
lay of the land as it has been leading up to now.

One other thing that would be helpful is:

Why Softimage was not marketed. Yes, you can blame (or partially hold as 
culpable) Microsoft and Avid as to the small sales numbers for Softimage, but 
after Autodesk
acquired it, in many ways the marketing was FURTHER reduced. This, I believe, 
leads mostly towards the mindset people have that either Autodesk was trying to 
kill it, or Autodesk didn't care if it died, or Autodesk only bought it for the 
technology and if it sold that was icing, but that it wasn't a goal. Those 
things directly come from a couple things: Lack of Softimage appearing on the 
home page, lack of advertising, lack of features while under Autodesk.
I would be int

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Jason S]

Right we just -have- to kill it.. (however you may feel about
it)

With all due respect, the only reason we have the privilege of having
your and others' responses here (in respects to SI), 
is to fulfill your (PR) mandate to provide a mere -illusion- of dialog
and consideration (of whatever proposition).
and to defend by whatever argument (anything is good),
already pre-decided decisions.

As if you yourselves had any actual say about it. 
(otherwise it would mean that you yourselves would be pretty
inconsiderate, and I don't believe that.)


On 03/25/14 12:33, Chris Vienneau wrote:

  Ok part II. Toxik and Matchmover were not part of the DCC nuclear arms race so they developed in relative vacuums and because they ran on multiple platforms a lot of code was written just to do basic things as there were very few libraries available. The only real big expense there was codecs and in the free versions we have had to turn off some codecs. To keep up, Softimage got features by integrating third party technology and those agreements are only for commercial versions of the software. Given they were not the market leader they often paid more for technology.

For Softimage, here are the big things that are third party libraries that are part of the commercial offering:


* Mental ray

* Syflex

* Shave and a hair cut

* Physx

* Lagoa

This is just touching the surface as there are libraries we license for all sorts of things like codecs, importers, linux emulation, etc... . If we wanted to do what we did with Toxik you would have to remove all those features above, no ability to render any video longer than 5 seconds, and no linux. This is a massive code base requiring at least 4-5 developers plus support just to keep it running and maintaining and to give you an idea the lines of code in Soft are about 10 times that of Toxik and 20 times that of Matchmover. Open source is not an option given how much code that is in Maya and 3dsmax is in Softimage. We could not release enough of it to be worth putting a team around.

Someone here referred to the linked in numbers of 3dsmax, Maya, and Softimage and it comes down to 25000 for max, 25000 for maya and 1000 for Softimage. Since linked in does not usually capture Asia and Africa this is more of a north American/European view but it gives you a sense of the overall relative sizes that Carl referred to. Just to give you another idea of scale there are over 1 m trial downloads of 3dsmax and Maya per year and hundreds of thousands of students who get to download and use every piece of software we make for free. We track student usage very heavily and they are split with max and maya with soft less than 5%. That is with no marketing and no prompting. Now there are exceptions but the amount of young people that have used a pirated copy of max or maya is huge and that was due to Autodesk investing heavily in early education as far as twenty years ago.

So two years of paying support to all these companies and maintaining a team big enough to deal with all the bugs, escalations, and fixes is a big commitment dollar wise and a far better send off than what XSI's brother DS got last year. We respect what XSI brought to this industry and we are working with all of our customers who want to work with us to help with the transition. Many of the larger customers had already begun this transition a couple of years ago and they might take a few more as multi-year projects work their way through the system. Schools have a much more tough transition and the main group who has the biggest group to make is the group of freelancers who either ran their own businesses or supported the larger business with contract work.

The big customers are happy we changed the policy for keeping soft licenses alive as that covers older projects but they are full blast into planning their next moves whether that be with Autodesk or The Foundry or Side FX or all of it mashed together. I am glad we have had some constructive threads on what we can do to make Maya better for everyone (Not just softimage users) and we have to show progress fast. We have enough bandwidth to handle unique cases and a lot of private threads are going on to deal with them so Maurice and I are the conduits.

I am not a suit. I was in the DCC wars where we fought to have 3dsmax and then Maya switch back and forth vs Softimage and I always respected their spirit given the odds against them and the bum hand they were dealt by being part of Avid. I will not stop working to help out those that want our help.

Cv/


From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Emilio Hernandez
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:28 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Thank you for taking the time to response Chris.
This is all clear to me as I bought a couple of Digital Studio stations at version 2.0  whil

Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Stephan Haitz]

This is also my impression about it. Think of all the amazing third 
party developments starting from Softimage: i. e. Arnold, Redshift, and 
many Plugin developers brought out a Softimage version though there was 
this small userBase.


I had the feeling that there are more and more people interested in 
Softimage. (Perhaps others had this feeling too and this is the reason 
for assuming a conspiration ? ). But apparently it was wishful thinking...


But I´m also interested in the comment to this...

Stephan Haitz

Hi Chris,

And thanks for having taken the time to write such a long explanation.

I too have been around Softimage for twenty years (as a user, but also as an 
instructor) and have followed it along its bumpy road, so nothing that you 
recount surprises me.

However, what *does* intrigue me is the fact that recently, in the last couple 
of years, and despite the lack of marketing push and development by Autodesk, I 
truly believe that Softimage was finally beginning to gain ground. Many, many 
high profile commercials had been made with it, as well as playing a big role 
in a few features (Lego being the obvious and most pertinent example).
This was in large part due to ICE, of course, but nevertheless it seemed that 
Softimage was being talked about more than ever before, and infact it seemed to 
be gaining ground in a few educational facilities too.

Of course I’m not privy to information about number of users or seats sold, but 
I can’t help wondering if the figures haven’t been skewed by the introduction 
of bundles that effectively show up as Maya or 3DSMax licenses, despite the 
fact that Softimage was the software being used.

Care to comment?


Thanks,
Jean-Louis



Jean-Louis Billard

Digital Golem
BE: +32 (0) 484 263 563
UK: +44 (0) 7973 660 119
jean-lo...@digitalgolem.com
http://www.digitalgolem.com/
53 Rue Gustave Huberti
1030 Brussels




On 25 Mar 2014, at 14:34, Chris Vienneau  wrote:


HI Emilio,



I think that now you have heard from Carl I think I will weigh in here and what I am 
writing comes from having been in and around softimage for twenty years as I grew up 
in Montreal and came onto the tech scene around 1993 when Softimage was on fire and 
right before it got bought by Autodesk. There is no doubt that Softimage starting in 
1986 had the early lead in animation software and when I started at Discreet Logic 
even had a claim on Flame code with Eddie. Microsoft was a crazy rising star at that 
point and bought them up as all entertainment tools were sold 

RE: Merge two meshes + transfer weights - Adapting Softimage workflow in Maya

[Graham Bell]

I never said there's the exact same GATOR functionality and feature in Maya, 
only you can do much of the same stuff.

This is where you start to see the differences between how Maya and Softimage 
structures data and you look at the different Maya nodes in the dependency 
graph. When you looks these nodes, you can do a lot of the GATOR stuff, but I 
agree that it's way way simpler, easier and cleaner in Softimage using GATOR.


From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Martin Yara
Sent: 25 March 2014 16:46
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Merge two meshes + transfer weights - Adapting Softimage workflow 
in Maya

Yes, pretty much everything requires a lot more clicking in Maya.

BTW, you can't change topology without messing up your weights, so you'll need 
to or save your weights by global position with an script like doraSkinWeights, 
or duplicate your mesh and keep it as a weight container to copy weights to 
your edited mesh.

I don't think there is a way to edit your mesh and keep the original weights 
just like they are, like you can in Softimage. You can get only approximations 
with copy weights or scripts, relying in UVs or global position.

After doing all of this, now you need one more edge in your model? well, start 
again with the whole process.

So yes, the workflow is a mess compared to SI and is a lot more time consuming.

I disagree with Graham. You can't do GATOR inside Maya. You can get a similar 
final results with 10x more clicks, but it isn't the same, and you don't have a 
Gator op alive.

The send to Softimage is a good alternative when you can do it (basically 
envelope, uv and mesh modeling). Sadly, there are a lot of features that can't 
be translated between them like Maya crease edges or sets, or Softimage hard 
edges, so you'll have to re-build them. I haven't tried shapes + send to SI.

Martin

<>

RE: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Perry,

Softimage was marketed. It was marketed in ways that have, in most cases, 
actually proved successful for other Autodesk products but there are many 
factors at stake here. Hindsight is 20-20 but we used a model that actually 
worked extremely well for the Alias integration. We had one rapidly growing 
product (3ds max) added Maya and because of Autodesk's sales and distribution 
channel we were able to scale the Maya business dramatically without 
cannibalizing 3ds Max. Was it unreasonable not to expect the same results with 
Softimage? At the time of the acquisition all three product lines were growing 
fast and so it was assumed so - not that we did not know that it would not have 
its own set of problems - but we felt we could tackle them. When that did not 
work out we changed strategies to focus on Suites.

Marketing is a mix of things: product, price, promotion, place. As mentioned 
above 'place' is critical. It is the means of distributing your product - it 
requires all kinds of investment to do probably including a lot of systems 
integration. We invested in making it available in every EDU bundle, through 
student downloads, Suites etc to get it into the hands of as many people as 
possible. Another is price. We kept the lower price and that initially was to 
see if this would broaden adoption - it did not. The third is product and the 
product is a great product.

For promotion, we invested in integrating it into Autodesk systems and we 
actually invested more than other Autodesk products typically get given the 
revenue tier Softimage was in. What we did not do was maintain a separate web 
site for the product (we don't do that for any of our products). People often 
ask us why there were no campaigns to try and get Maya or 3ds Max users to 
switch to Softimage but the answer to that should be self-evident - and it was 
certainly never going to be a serious option for us. The main purpose of 
marketing campaigns is to generate revenue and so they tend to  focus on the 
where there is a revenue opportunity such as getting Maya or 3ds max users 
current (upgrades). Once we introduced Suites, the best revenue opportunity for 
Softimage was to get customers to upgrade to Suites and that was the focus.

>From a business (and therefore marketing) perspective the question was always: 
>could Softimage bring in net new business and how? Not how could it replace 
>Maya or 3ds Max revenue. Given that it was actually cheaper, replacing 3ds Max 
>or Maya would actually have meant a revenue decline not just a swap. 
>Ultimately the hope was always that ICE would offer enough value to 3ds Max 
>and Maya users drive Suite adoption. That was very much the product strategy 
>and where the development team focused and so that is what we marketed. And 
>yes I know that Softimage is more than just ICE and that it is a very capable 
>all round animation solution - as did Marc Petit and the other execs in charge 
>- but the strategy was to build, market and sell a suite of interoperable 
>products (which we spent a lot of money doing). As a percentage of revenue 
>Softimage got more investment than other products. In total dollar amounts a 
>lot less (because it was a higher percentage of a much, much smaller base) . 
>So whether we invested or not is relative to what point of view you take.

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:39 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to Carl Bass

Hi Chris,

My appreciation of the effort you took to write all that, and the thought that 
must have went into it is considerable.
I truly and honestly appreciate that you did that, and I look forward (more 
than before) to your second part where you explain
why Autodesk can't just keep Softimage around (and perhaps why doing that is 
diffeent than doing that with Toxik and MatchMover).

Does this solve everything? Does this make me a renewed Autodesk customer? No, 
but your email really helped a lot with regards to understanding the
lay of the land as it has been leading up to now.

One other thing that would be helpful is:

Why Softimage was not marketed. Yes, you can blame (or partially hold as 
culpable) Microsoft and Avid as to the small sales numbers for Softimage, but 
after Autodesk
acquired it, in many ways the marketing was FURTHER reduced. This, I believe, 
leads mostly towards the mindset people have that either Autodesk was trying to 
kill it, or Autodesk didn't care if it died, or Autodesk only bought it for the 
technology and if it sold that was icing, but that it wasn't a goal. Those 
things directly come from a couple things: Lack of Softimage appearing on the 
home page, lack of advertising, lack of features while under Autodesk.
I would be interested in knowing how you respond to that.

Again, much appreciated, Chris

AnimSchool Student Showcase

[David Gallagher]

In case you're interested, our Modeling/Rigging Student Showcase.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6-R2xDP8I&list=UUPYQOUnJ3G1-QVUtZg62JNQ

I worked with many of the students on their models and face rigs, mostly 
bringing their models into Softimage to edit them for appeal. Note the 
work of list member Emilio Hernandez!


Dave G

Re: Merge two meshes + transfer weights - Adapting Softimage workflow in Maya

[Siew Yi Liang]

?!? That's pretty awesome, actually! Going to see if I can try that with 
the school's 2014 maya/xsi package for fun one of these days :D


Finally 'send to' has a use, haha!

Yours sincerely,
Siew Yi Liang

On 3/25/2014 9:53 AM, Emilio Hernandez wrote:
Yew Siew for delivering in Maya the Send to Softimage button for me is 
a lifesaver.  I do all the correctives and shapes in Softimage and 
send them back to Maya.  Specially when you merge two geometries with 
each one has shapes. Softimage handles that amazingly.  You will get 
two sets of shapes in the shape manager in a single object.  Extract 
the shapes send them to Maya and reconnect the whole stuff.


With a script I made

---
Emilio Hernández   VFX & 3D animation.


2014-03-25 10:46 GMT-06:00 Martin Yara >:


Yes, pretty much everything requires a lot more clicking in Maya.

BTW, you can't change topology without messing up your weights, so
you'll need to or save your weights by global position with an
script like doraSkinWeights, or duplicate your mesh and keep it as
a weight container to copy weights to your edited mesh.

I don't think there is a way to edit your mesh and keep the
original weights just like they are, like you can in Softimage.
You can get only approximations with copy weights or scripts,
relying in UVs or global position.

After doing all of this, now you need one more edge in your model?
well, start again with the whole process.

So yes, the workflow is a mess compared to SI and is a lot more
time consuming.

I disagree with Graham. You can't do GATOR inside Maya. You can
get a similar final results with 10x more clicks, but it isn't the
same, and you don't have a Gator op alive.

The send to Softimage is a good alternative when you can do it
(basically envelope, uv and mesh modeling). Sadly, there are a lot
of features that can't be translated between them like Maya crease
edges or sets, or Softimage hard edges, so you'll have to re-build
them. I haven't tried shapes + send to SI.

Martin