Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
As a freelancer I only represent a single seat that’s not current nor under maintenance, but for an initiative like this, where an investment would equal tangible results – I’d gladly put in my share - as well as doing the rounds of my clients to suggest they do the same. That was my motivation for stopping maintenance in the first place – not the amount of money, but the believe that most of it did not feed back into the software, and not into tools I really needed. Without knowing anything of these things, my hunch is that a crowd funded entity to develop Softimage integrated tools based on Fabric – could have a more significant impact than what we’ve seen the past few years in regular updates. Any tools to keep up with emerging standards – as alembic, EXR 2.0, openVDB, ptex,openSubdiv... - scene assembly tools, a revamped hair system, instancing on steroids, vegetation, ecosystem, destruction, fluids and pyro tools. All of these right in the interface, doing the heavy lifting externally and with tight integration into rendering – That’s where I would like to see things go. One can dream right? Viewport cubes, integrated chat tools, camera sequencers, on the cloud invoicing per mouseclick – those are things I can do without. From: Jean-Louis Billard Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 7:11 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Hi Vincent, I’m glad someone’s picked up on this. I’m dead serious about it - I am willing to put my money where my mouth is, but of course strength will be in numbers, and I too am curious to know how many people/seats would be ready to invest. I have 8 Softimage seats here at Digital Golem. I’ll gladly put their yearly maintenance into something more worthwhile. Fabric Engine would be the safest bet, since it seems to offer future portability. Needs to be discussed but I’d be curious to hear other voices. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 18:57, Vincent Fortin vfor...@gmail.com wrote: Cool work! I'd like to comment on Jean-Louis' idea... There clearly are benefits for studios to keep Softimage in their tool box a few more years, as expressed by many users here. And I hope to see it happen instead of watching this community burst. But for those willing to go that route, collaboration must play its part in order to - stop the whining. - gather numbers: how many active seats? Can we borrow/buy licenses from other studios? Share assets. - define what's needed to keep SI up-to-date in the market as long as possible. - and like Jean-Louis suggests, gather money and put developers under contract. I have no idea if 750,000$/year is possible (i doubt) but I'd put it all in the hands of Fabric Engine. They represent your best way to extend the functionality of your beloved software as well as make your investment fructify beyond Softimage's real lifespan. Because it will become obsolete one day or the other. If Fabric Engine are interested in the amount brought to the table, then you can figure-out a plan that will be beneficial to both parties for the upcoming years. Imagine hiring someone like Eric Mootz full time to develop both FE and SI. But in order for this to work properly, people will need to organize even if this means adopting some minimally legal convention, obviously depending how far you want the collaboration to go. This tightly knit community has always played a major role in the success of Softimage and the studios exploiting it. For me, the only way for those studios to continue to excel (read survive) despite the circumstances is to build stronger links between each other and make clever moves. my 0.02c On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.com wrote: Hi Peter, No - subscription hasn’t gotten us much in the past few years. I would, however, be happy to put the subscription money into funding a dev team, as was suggested in another thread. For the sake of argument: if there were just the equivalent of 1000 Softimage licenses worldwide for which individuals or companies were prepared, like me, to pay their subscription money to keep developing Softimage addons/tools/plugins, you would have (assuming $750/year/seat) $75/year, which is 7 or 8 full time developers + administrative costs. Makes you think… Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 00:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: It’s a good lesson for the future – if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do you really want to pay subscription?
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Bunch of fabric engine based tools, Spliced to SI would push SI on steroids for years to come and honestly would be more progress than SI saw in AD for years. Well if not for years to come then at least pumping adrenalin till something that can actually replace SI is there. On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:31 AM, pete...@skynet.be wrote: As a freelancer I only represent a single seat that's not current nor under maintenance, but for an initiative like this, where an investment would equal tangible results - I'd gladly put in my share - as well as doing the rounds of my clients to suggest they do the same. That was my motivation for stopping maintenance in the first place - not the amount of money, but the believe that most of it did not feed back into the software, and not into tools I really needed. Without knowing anything of these things, my hunch is that a crowd funded entity to develop Softimage integrated tools based on Fabric - could have a more significant impact than what we've seen the past few years in regular updates. Any tools to keep up with emerging standards - as alembic, EXR 2.0, openVDB, ptex,openSubdiv... - scene assembly tools, a revamped hair system, instancing on steroids, vegetation, ecosystem, destruction, fluids and pyro tools. All of these right in the interface, doing the heavy lifting externally and with tight integration into rendering - That's where I would like to see things go. One can dream right? Viewport cubes, integrated chat tools, camera sequencers, on the cloud invoicing per mouseclick - those are things I can do without. *From:* Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.com *Sent:* Thursday, March 20, 2014 7:11 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Hi Vincent, I'm glad someone's picked up on this. I'm dead serious about it - I am willing to put my money where my mouth is, but of course strength will be in numbers, and I too am curious to know how many people/seats would be ready to invest. I have 8 Softimage seats here at Digital Golem. I'll gladly put their yearly maintenance into something more worthwhile. Fabric Engine would be the safest bet, since it seems to offer future portability. Needs to be discussed but I'd be curious to hear other voices. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 18:57, Vincent Fortin vfor...@gmail.com wrote: Cool work! I'd like to comment on Jean-Louis' idea... There clearly are benefits for studios to keep Softimage in their tool box a few more years, as expressed by many users here. And I hope to see it happen instead of watching this community burst. But for those willing to go that route, *collaboration* must play its part in order to - stop the whining. - gather numbers: how many active seats? Can we borrow/buy licenses from other studios? Share assets. - define what's needed to keep SI up-to-date in the market as long as possible. - and like Jean-Louis suggests, gather money and put developers under contract. I have no idea if 750,000$/year is possible (i doubt) but I'd put it all in the hands of *Fabric Engine*. They represent your best way to extend the functionality of your beloved software as well as make your investment fructify beyond Softimage's *real* lifespan. Because it *will* become obsolete one day or the other. If Fabric Engine are interested in the amount brought to the table, then you can figure-out a plan that will be beneficial to both parties for the upcoming years. Imagine hiring someone like Eric Mootz full time to develop both FE and SI. But in order for this to work properly, people will need to organize even if this means adopting some minimally legal convention, obviously depending how far you want the collaboration to go. This tightly knit community has always played a major role in the success of Softimage and the studios exploiting it. For me, the only way for those studios to continue to excel (read survive) despite the circumstances is to build stronger links between each other and make clever moves. my 0.02c On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.com wrote: Hi Peter, No - subscription hasn't gotten us much in the past few years. I would, however, be happy to put the subscription money into funding a dev team, as was suggested in another thread. For the sake of argument: if there were just the equivalent of 1000 Softimage licenses worldwide for which individuals or companies were prepared, like me, to pay their subscription money to keep developing Softimage addons/tools/plugins, you would have (assuming $750/year/seat) $75/year, which is 7 or 8 full time developers + administrative costs. Makes you think... Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 00:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: It's a good lesson for the future - if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Well done my friend! looks great. :-) Jordi Bares jordiba...@gmail.com On 19 Mar 2014, at 11:50, Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.com wrote: Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Hi Jean-Louis, This is fantastic work. I love your resolve, too. Paul Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
On 03/19/14 16:44, Sven Constable wrote: What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? On 03/19/14 17:47, Matt Lind wrote: .. but if they handled it far different (meaning with humility and care), this may not have become such a shit storm. On 03/19/14 19:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: its not only about the art - this is also a job, and thats where I see the major issue. This decision will hurt business. Less studios using it, less job opportunities, outsourcing possibilities, demand for Softimage specific assets, available talent, clients losing confidence since you use old tools, perhaps driving down budget because of it, less willingness to start long term, large projects with it. Stopping dev to concentrate on something else is one thing. But that (the mere official labeling) is exactly what would have been the -easiest- thing to not do, and what did do the most (quite unnecessary) damage. While labels don't actually change anything, it's like a psychological thing (not unlike a manipulation) And was exactly the (very much shameful) point of doing exactly that. The cheapest way to improve a product's capability/workability, (or the impression of it) is to choke it's nearest comparative reference (as completely as possible) (especially easy if you also own it) at (seemingly) whatever collateral damage it may entail. Quite shameful indeed.
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
The way it was announced had a major impact in the education sphere ;( From: Jason S jasonsta...@gmail.commailto:jasonsta...@gmail.com Reply-To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Date: Thursday 20 March 2014 at 1:51 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful On 03/19/14 16:44, Sven Constable wrote: What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? On 03/19/14 17:47, Matt Lind wrote: .. but if they handled it far different (meaning with humility and care), this may not have become such a shit storm. On 03/19/14 19:18, pete...@skynet.bemailto:pete...@skynet.be wrote: it’s not only about the art - this is also a job, and that’s where I see the major issue. This decision will hurt business. Less studios using it, less job opportunities, outsourcing possibilities, demand for Softimage specific assets, available talent, clients losing confidence since you use old tools, perhaps driving down budget because of it, less willingness to start long term, large projects with it. Stopping dev to concentrate on something else is one thing. But that (the mere official labeling) is exactly what would have been the -easiest- thing to not do, and what did do the most (quite unnecessary) damage. While labels don't actually change anything, it's like a psychological thing (not unlike a manipulation) And was exactly the (very much shameful) point of doing exactly that. The cheapest way to improve a product's capability/workability, (or the impression of it) is to choke it's nearest comparative reference (as completely as possible) (especially easy if you also own it) at (seemingly) whatever collateral damage it may entail. Quite shameful indeed. table width=100% border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style=width:100%; tr td align=left style=text-align:justify;font face=arial,sans-serif size=1 color=#99span style=font-size:11px;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. /span/font/td /tr /table
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
If not all spheres.. Yet on a more positive note, it is also quite possible (if not similarly easy) to see through (mere) labels :) On 03/20/14 8:11, Angus Davidson wrote: The way it was announced had a major impact in the education sphere ;( From: Jason S jasonsta...@gmail.com Reply-To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Date: Thursday 20 March 2014 at 1:51 PM To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful On 03/19/14 16:44, Sven Constable wrote: What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? On 03/19/14 17:47, Matt Lind wrote: .. but if they handled it far different (meaning with humility and care), this may not have become such a shit storm. On 03/19/14 19:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: it’s not only about the art - this is also a job, and that’s where I see the major issue. This decision will hurt business. Less studios using it, less job opportunities, outsourcing possibilities, demand for Softimage specific assets, available talent, clients losing confidence since you use old tools, perhaps driving down budget because of it, less willingness to start long term, large projects with it. Stopping dev to concentrate on something else is one thing. But that (the mere official labeling) is exactly what would have been the -easiest- thing to not do, and what did do the most (quite unnecessary) damage. While labels don't actually change anything, it's like a psychological thing (not unlike a manipulation) And was exactly the (very much shameful) point of doing exactly that. The cheapest way to improve a product's capability/workability, (or the impression of it) is to choke it's nearest comparative reference (as completely as possible) (especially easy if you also own it) at (seemingly) whatever collateral damage it may entail. Quite shameful indeed. 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: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Cool work! I'd like to comment on Jean-Louis' idea... There clearly are benefits for studios to keep Softimage in their tool box a few more years, as expressed by many users here. And I hope to see it happen instead of watching this community burst. But for those willing to go that route, *collaboration* must play its part in order to - stop the whining. - gather numbers: how many active seats? Can we borrow/buy licenses from other studios? Share assets. - define what's needed to keep SI up-to-date in the market as long as possible. - and like Jean-Louis suggests, gather money and put developers under contract. I have no idea if 750,000$/year is possible (i doubt) but I'd put it all in the hands of *Fabric Engine*. They represent your best way to extend the functionality of your beloved software as well as make your investment fructify beyond Softimage's *real*lifespan. Because it *will* become obsolete one day or the other. If Fabric Engine are interested in the amount brought to the table, then you can figure-out a plan that will be beneficial to both parties for the upcoming years. Imagine hiring someone like Eric Mootz full time to develop both FE and SI. But in order for this to work properly, people will need to organize even if this means adopting some minimally legal convention, obviously depending how far you want the collaboration to go. This tightly knit community has always played a major role in the success of Softimage and the studios exploiting it. For me, the only way for those studios to continue to excel (read survive) despite the circumstances is to build stronger links between each other and make clever moves. my 0.02c On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.comwrote: Hi Peter, No - subscription hasn't gotten us much in the past few years. I would, however, be happy to put the subscription money into funding a dev team, as was suggested in another thread. For the sake of argument: if there were just the equivalent of 1000 Softimage licenses worldwide for which individuals or companies were prepared, like me, to pay their subscription money to keep developing Softimage addons/tools/plugins, you would have (assuming $750/year/seat) $75/year, which is 7 or 8 full time developers + administrative costs. Makes you think... Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 00:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: It's a good lesson for the future - if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do you really want to pay subscription?
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Hi Vincent, I’m glad someone’s picked up on this. I’m dead serious about it - I am willing to put my money where my mouth is, but of course strength will be in numbers, and I too am curious to know how many people/seats would be ready to invest. I have 8 Softimage seats here at Digital Golem. I’ll gladly put their yearly maintenance into something more worthwhile. Fabric Engine would be the safest bet, since it seems to offer future portability. Needs to be discussed but I’d be curious to hear other voices. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 18:57, Vincent Fortin vfor...@gmail.com wrote: Cool work! I'd like to comment on Jean-Louis' idea... There clearly are benefits for studios to keep Softimage in their tool box a few more years, as expressed by many users here. And I hope to see it happen instead of watching this community burst. But for those willing to go that route, collaboration must play its part in order to - stop the whining. - gather numbers: how many active seats? Can we borrow/buy licenses from other studios? Share assets. - define what's needed to keep SI up-to-date in the market as long as possible. - and like Jean-Louis suggests, gather money and put developers under contract. I have no idea if 750,000$/year is possible (i doubt) but I'd put it all in the hands of Fabric Engine. They represent your best way to extend the functionality of your beloved software as well as make your investment fructify beyond Softimage's real lifespan. Because it will become obsolete one day or the other. If Fabric Engine are interested in the amount brought to the table, then you can figure-out a plan that will be beneficial to both parties for the upcoming years. Imagine hiring someone like Eric Mootz full time to develop both FE and SI. But in order for this to work properly, people will need to organize even if this means adopting some minimally legal convention, obviously depending how far you want the collaboration to go. This tightly knit community has always played a major role in the success of Softimage and the studios exploiting it. For me, the only way for those studios to continue to excel (read survive) despite the circumstances is to build stronger links between each other and make clever moves. my 0.02c On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.com wrote: Hi Peter, No - subscription hasn’t gotten us much in the past few years. I would, however, be happy to put the subscription money into funding a dev team, as was suggested in another thread. For the sake of argument: if there were just the equivalent of 1000 Softimage licenses worldwide for which individuals or companies were prepared, like me, to pay their subscription money to keep developing Softimage addons/tools/plugins, you would have (assuming $750/year/seat) $75/year, which is 7 or 8 full time developers + administrative costs. Makes you think… Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 00:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: It’s a good lesson for the future – if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do you really want to pay subscription?
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Must be done in some of Autodesk's more powerful programs. Great stuff! On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:39 AM, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.comwrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
RE: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
+1 this! great work by the way JL _ From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jean-Louis Billard Sent: 19 March 2014 11:51 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their innovation right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I'm concerned they've just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Very Softimage =p On 03/19/14 7:50, Jean-Louis Billard wrote: Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Congratulations on your work! And you are right. If it is working, no need to fix it. Cheers! --- Emilio Hernández VFX 3D animation. 2014-03-19 6:23 GMT-06:00 Jason S jasonsta...@gmail.com: Very Softimage =p On 03/19/14 7:50, Jean-Louis Billard wrote: Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their innovation right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I'm concerned they've just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.comwrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Congrats! Amazing! It's the same pipeline i'm beginning to use! This is just another proof AD is wrong. To Softimage users keep doing your best, and show the world all the beautiful things you can do with it. On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Jean-Louis Billard jean-lo...@photon3.comwrote: Thanks for the kind comments. Yes all in Softimage, naturally! Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their innovation right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I'm concerned they've just killed a member of my family. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.comwrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com mailto:tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com mailto:malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins. Le 19/03/2014 20:10, David Gallagher a écrit : Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com mailto:tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com mailto:malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
That'll be me then. On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins. Le 19/03/2014 20:10, David Gallagher a écrit : Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
A maya license Le 19/03/2014 20:33, Rob Chapman a écrit : whats the prize ? On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins.
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
whats the prize ? On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins.
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
... you look aged on your photo. Possibly you'll die before, end then ...I'll win that is a joke ;)) e 19/03/2014 20:26, Bk a écrit : That'll be me then. On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins. Le 19/03/2014 20:10, David Gallagher a écrit : Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com mailto:tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com mailto:malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
If I die I definitely win! On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:29, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: ... you look aged on your photo. Possibly you'll die before, end then ...I'll win that is a joke ;)) e 19/03/2014 20:26, Bk a écrit : That'll be me then. On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins. Le 19/03/2014 20:10, David Gallagher a écrit : Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Literally the best line of the entire horrendous situation. Thanks for the great out loud laugh, Paul! On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Bk p...@bustykelp.com wrote: If I die I definitely win! On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:29, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: ... you look aged on your photo. Possibly you'll die before, end then ...I'll win that is a joke ;)) e 19/03/2014 20:26, Bk a écrit : That'll be me then. On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins. Le 19/03/2014 20:10, David Gallagher a écrit : Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their innovation right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I'm concerned they've just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.comwrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem ! -- Perry Harovas Animation and Visual Effects http://www.TheAfterImage.com http://www.theafterimage.com/
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Damn... Le 19/03/2014 20:37, Bk a écrit : If I die I definitely win! On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:29, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: ... you look aged on your photo. Possibly you'll die before, end then ...I'll win that is a joke ;)) e 19/03/2014 20:26, Bk a écrit : That'll be me then. On 19 Mar 2014, at 19:21, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: We're all in the same boat now. The last of us who transition to Maya, wins. Le 19/03/2014 20:10, David Gallagher a écrit : Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com mailto:tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com mailto:malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
RE: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation? There are so many workarounds, especially in Softimage so that we are not have to rely on a specific software or version. At least not for the next five years and thats a long time. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of David Gallagher Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 8:11 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their innovation right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as Im concerned theyve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Hi Sven, I understand what you are saying, and there are aspects of it that I agree with 100%. For instance, you are totally correct with the statement that old tools can still create great work. Of course they can, and the analogy you created was perfect. What I disagree with is that clients don't really know or care about the software. They actually know almost nothing, except the name Maya. When you say Softimage they do look skeptical, yes, but if the work is good, they don't care that much. However, now that Softimage is EOL, they will see that (many, many of them look up what software is standard and many also ask around to producer friends they know. When they mention Softimage now, it will instill fear, not faith. They may know next to nothing about the software, but when they look into it (and they will), they will all of the sudden become scared. The other thing is that the last sentence you wrote gave me pause. 5 years in this business is an eternity. We will be lucky to get 2 years out of it with things starting to change enough that it will become a problem much after that. No we don't NEED the newest updates, but often there are updates that make us able to compete with others who would be using non-EOL software. Things that will make it harder over time, not a long amount of time, to do what we do. I say 2 - 3 years at the most. Really non of us knows for sure, of course. All I know is that I won't be hanging all I have on Autodesk to find out. On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.dewrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation? There are so many workarounds, especially in Softimage so that we are not have to rely on a specific software or version. At least not for the next five years and thats a long time. sven *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *David Gallagher *Sent:* Wednesday, March 19, 2014 8:11 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their innovation right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I'm concerned they've just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
I agree. I hate all this 'Softimage is dead' talk. Yes it's not being developed by AD, and will eventually become harder to work with, but that's a way off. If a slick feature page was made highlighting all the 'features' that had been made for Softimage ( for free) in the last year. ( just look at Rray.de for evidence ) I think it would seem far from dead. Softimage will continue to grow in tools and abilities without AD. It's not like they added much anyway but at least 2015 has some nice ICE enhancements and I'm grateful to the developers for that. (the management's guidance was probably ' Softimage? Oh whatever.. You two just put in what you want') So at least for the next few years, those of us that can, will continue to enjoy the thrill of going to work and firing up ICE and innovating and creating with it. On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:44, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation? There are so many workarounds, especially in Softimage so that we are not have to rely on a specific software or version. At least not for the next five years and thats a long time. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of David Gallagher Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 8:11 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my family. Exactly right. Trying to keep my anger tamped down. Cheers, Jean-Louis On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.com wrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Perry, if you're on subscription, you'll get a copy of Maya anyway. If the clients come in. Just send to maya and look busy. On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:50, Perry Harovas perryharo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Sven, I understand what you are saying, and there are aspects of it that I agree with 100%. For instance, you are totally correct with the statement that old tools can still create great work. Of course they can, and the analogy you created was perfect. What I disagree with is that clients don't really know or care about the software. They actually know almost nothing, except the name Maya. When you say Softimage they do look skeptical, yes, but if the work is good, they don't care that much. However, now that Softimage is EOL, they will see that (many, many of them look up what software is standard and many also ask around to producer friends they know. When they mention Softimage now, it will instill fear, not faith. They may know next to nothing about the software, but when they look into it (and they will), they will all of the sudden become scared. The other thing is that the last sentence you wrote gave me pause. 5 years in this business is an eternity. We will be lucky to get 2 years out of it with things starting to change enough that it will become a problem much after that. No we don't NEED the newest updates, but often there are updates that make us able to compete with others who would be using non-EOL software. Things that will make it harder over time, not a long amount of time, to do what we do. I say 2 - 3 years at the most. Really non of us knows for sure, of course. All I know is that I won't be hanging all I have on Autodesk to find out. On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation? There are so many workarounds, especially in Softimage so that we are not have to rely on a specific software or version. At least not for the next five years and thats a long time. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of David Gallagher Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 8:11 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse and choke on it -- as far as I’m
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
OK Paul, now you almost cost me a monitor, because I just did a spit-take and barely missed spraying my monitor with the water I was drinking! At least I am getting some good laughs out of this, mixed in with the depression and anger. Thanks Paul! On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Bk p...@bustykelp.com wrote: Perry, if you're on subscription, you'll get a copy of Maya anyway. If the clients come in. Just send to maya and look busy. On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:50, Perry Harovas perryharo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Sven, I understand what you are saying, and there are aspects of it that I agree with 100%. For instance, you are totally correct with the statement that old tools can still create great work. Of course they can, and the analogy you created was perfect. What I disagree with is that clients don't really know or care about the software. They actually know almost nothing, except the name Maya. When you say Softimage they do look skeptical, yes, but if the work is good, they don't care that much. However, now that Softimage is EOL, they will see that (many, many of them look up what software is standard and many also ask around to producer friends they know. When they mention Softimage now, it will instill fear, not faith. They may know next to nothing about the software, but when they look into it (and they will), they will all of the sudden become scared. The other thing is that the last sentence you wrote gave me pause. 5 years in this business is an eternity. We will be lucky to get 2 years out of it with things starting to change enough that it will become a problem much after that. No we don't NEED the newest updates, but often there are updates that make us able to compete with others who would be using non-EOL software. Things that will make it harder over time, not a long amount of time, to do what we do. I say 2 - 3 years at the most. Really non of us knows for sure, of course. All I know is that I won't be hanging all I have on Autodesk to find out. On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.dewrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation? There are so many workarounds, especially in Softimage so that we are not have to rely on a specific software or version. At least not for the next five years and thats a long time. sven *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *David Gallagher *Sent:* Wednesday, March 19, 2014 8:11 PM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful Our pipeline is Softimage-Arnold-Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can tell you I have
RE: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Nothing amusing about it, Perry. Just tell them you are using software they'll find fancy. I have no problem to tell them I'm using Maya if they think Maya is great. When they're expecting 3D-Animation is produced with Microsoft Outlook, hell yeah I will tell them I use Outlook. And its true, I'm using outlook since 15 years :) From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 10:11 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful OK Paul, now you almost cost me a monitor, because I just did a spit-take and barely missed spraying my monitor with the water I was drinking! At least I am getting some good laughs out of this, mixed in with the depression and anger. Thanks Paul! On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Bk p...@bustykelp.com wrote: Perry, if you're on subscription, you'll get a copy of Maya anyway. If the clients come in. Just send to maya and look busy. On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:50, Perry Harovas perryharo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Sven, I understand what you are saying, and there are aspects of it that I agree with 100%. For instance, you are totally correct with the statement that old tools can still create great work. Of course they can, and the analogy you created was perfect. What I disagree with is that clients don't really know or care about the software. They actually know almost nothing, except the name Maya. When you say Softimage they do look skeptical, yes, but if the work is good, they don't care that much. However, now that Softimage is EOL, they will see that (many, many of them look up what software is standard and many also ask around to producer friends they know. When they mention Softimage now, it will instill fear, not faith. They may know next to nothing about the software, but when they look into it (and they will), they will all of the sudden become scared. The other thing is that the last sentence you wrote gave me pause. 5 years in this business is an eternity. We will be lucky to get 2 years out of it with things starting to change enough that it will become a problem much after that. No we don't NEED the newest updates, but often there are updates that make us able to compete with others who would be using non-EOL software. Things that will make it harder over time, not a long amount of time, to do what we do. I say 2 - 3 years at the most. Really non of us knows for sure, of course. All I know is that I won't be hanging all I have on Autodesk to find out. On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
(to go back to the start of the thread - Nice job from Digital Golem!) If things like Elysium and 98% Human and many more have been made with Softimage - that’s enough for me. I don’t think I’ll ever need more, I have not explored all the possibilities and still have a lot to learn and plenty of room to grow in Softimage. In the end, what matters is the art you create. and this tool will allow you to do just that but, it’s not only about the art - this is also a job, and that’s where I see the major issue. This decision will hurt business. Less studios using it, less job opportunities, outsourcing possibilities, demand for Softimage specific assets, available talent, clients losing confidence since you use old tools, perhaps driving down budget because of it, less willingness to start long term, large projects with it. And if you decide to go change platforms, this also has a cost attached – in retraining time, in recreating tools and workflows, you will lose efficiency - temporarily for sure – arguably for good. (since we believe we are on the most efficient platform and no better alternatives are out there) Yes – Softimage is not dead – and while it may persist in one way or other, the damage is done. A very real damage AD is inflicting upon the Softimage userbase and is not willing to make up for. (continuing to pay subscription to migrate to Maya is not a compensation by any stretch of the imagination) A damage that will be felt by all Softimage users in one way or other, and the ones being punished the hardest are those loyal customers that have been paying subscription. It’s a good lesson for the future – if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do you really want to pay subscription? From: Bk Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 9:55 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful I agree. I hate all this 'Softimage is dead' talk. Yes it's not being developed by AD, and will eventually become harder to work with, but that's a way off. If a slick feature page was made highlighting all the 'features' that had been made for Softimage ( for free) in the last year. ( just look at Rray.de for evidence ) I think it would seem far from dead. Softimage will continue to grow in tools and abilities without AD. It's not like they added much anyway but at least 2015 has some nice ICE enhancements and I'm grateful to the developers for that. (the management's guidance was probably ' Softimage? Oh whatever.. You two just put in what you want') So at least for the next few years, those of us that can, will continue to enjoy the thrill of going to work and firing up ICE and innovating and creating with it. On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:44, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything with it? Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them from going bankrupt. Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than that, but using newest software didn't help them. Somehow I think we are more concerned
RE: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
The principle behind the subscription model is to put the effort to develop something, behind the point in time the costumer will pay for it. Some companies have the problem not beeing payed for their updates because costumers will not update due to lack of benefits. The companies tried to establish a new business model: Having their costumers paying for the updates *before* they will actually receiving it. That will put them into the situation that they can develop a product without any risk. Because costumers have already payed for it. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of pete...@skynet.be Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 12:19 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful (to go back to the start of the thread - Nice job from Digital Golem!) If things like Elysium and 98% Human and many more have been made with Softimage - that’s enough for me. I don’t think I’ll ever need more, I have not explored all the possibilities and still have a lot to learn and plenty of room to grow in Softimage. In the end, what matters is the art you create. and this tool will allow you to do just that but, it’s not only about the art - this is also a job, and that’s where I see the major issue. This decision will hurt business. Less studios using it, less job opportunities, outsourcing possibilities, demand for Softimage specific assets, available talent, clients losing confidence since you use old tools, perhaps driving down budget because of it, less willingness to start long term, large projects with it. And if you decide to go change platforms, this also has a cost attached – in retraining time, in recreating tools and workflows, you will lose efficiency - temporarily for sure – arguably for good. (since we believe we are on the most efficient platform and no better alternatives are out there) Yes – Softimage is not dead – and while it may persist in one way or other, the damage is done. A very real damage AD is inflicting upon the Softimage userbase and is not willing to make up for. (continuing to pay subscription to migrate to Maya is not a compensation by any stretch of the imagination) A damage that will be felt by all Softimage users in one way or other, and the ones being punished the hardest are those loyal customers that have been paying subscription. It’s a good lesson for the future – if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do you really want to pay subscription? From: Bk mailto:p...@bustykelp.com Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 9:55 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful I agree. I hate all this 'Softimage is dead' talk. Yes it's not being developed by AD, and will eventually become harder to work with, but that's a way off. If a slick feature page was made highlighting all the 'features' that had been made for Softimage ( for free) in the last year. ( just look at Rray.de for evidence ) I think it would seem far from dead. Softimage will continue to grow in tools and abilities without AD. It's not like they added much anyway but at least 2015 has some nice ICE enhancements and I'm grateful to the developers for that. (the management's guidance was probably ' Softimage? Oh whatever.. You two just put in what you want') So at least for the next few years, those of us that can, will continue to enjoy the thrill of going to work and firing up ICE and innovating and creating with it. On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:44, Sven Constable sixsi_l...@imagefront.de wrote: I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe it comes through somehow. CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any machinery they use. Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Hi Peter, No - subscription hasn’t gotten us much in the past few years. I would, however, be happy to put the subscription money into funding a dev team, as was suggested in another thread. For the sake of argument: if there were just the equivalent of 1000 Softimage licenses worldwide for which individuals or companies were prepared, like me, to pay their subscription money to keep developing Softimage addons/tools/plugins, you would have (assuming $750/year/seat) $75/year, which is 7 or 8 full time developers + administrative costs. Makes you think… Jean-Louis On 20 Mar 2014, at 00:18, pete...@skynet.be wrote: It’s a good lesson for the future – if paying subscription does not guarantee the survival and future of a software - do you really want to pay subscription?
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Bravo, charming clean and powerful :) On 18 March 2014 21:12, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful
Nice! All in Softimage? On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado malcriad...@gmail.comwrote: Excelent work, so nice! On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 Kudos to Digital Golem !
