RE: Torn
and what did they do? They made a slightly better version of the Lightwave interface. They based this new Next-Gen 3d program off of one of the WORST UI’s in the 3d industry and from what I can see didn’t even bother looking at any of the other programs out there other than maybe a feature list. Sure that have all these gee-whiz features, but the part of the program you deal with to get anything done is just crap. I am completely disgusted by how poorly thought out this program really is. It’s really sickening. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sergio Mucino Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 6:58 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Torn Hi Sam. In the spirit of fairness, I just wanted to add some info to your observations regarding Modo. You can snap your rotations by holding down the CTRL key. This should help you achieve precise values. Snaps are turned on and off using F11. No need to fool around with menus. You can change the snap type from the snaps popup, but that's only required when changing what you're snapping to. You can also map your favorite snaps to hotkeys using commands. Granted, it's not as out-of-the-box as SI or Maya, but it can be done. I, for one, prefer the different layouts. It's nice for me to be able to focus on different things and have the tools I need at hand. There's someone who developed an alternate UI (google Cadjunkie Zen)... I have yet to try it, but it looks extremely clean and focused. I'll give it a shot soon. Regarding bones, I guess the main difference is that Modo doesn't use bones (like SI)... It uses joints (like Maya). There are fundamental differences between both, so proper joint orientation is paramount. The same has to be done in Maya (actually, Michael Comet's tools come in really handy for these tasks). It's fine if you didn't agree with Modo. We all have our preferred way of working (I didn't agree with Lightwave at the time I tried it, which was like 18 years ago). I just wanted to add this info for the benefit of those looking around at options and thinking of giving Modo a go. I can't comment on Blender, since I have yet to get my hands dirty with it. Cheers! Sergio Muciño. Sent from my iPad. On May 2, 2014, at 1:24 AM, Sam Bowling sbowl...@cox.net wrote: I’ve been looking around at alternatives to Softimage and not having any luck. Modo have some great features, but the interface is just crap. There are way too many different layouts for things that should mostly be done in one or maybe 2 different layouts. Things like snapping rotations (or snapping in general) seem to require you to click checkboxes or be enabled in other menus where in Softimage, you can just hold down a modifier key to enable most of those functions without dropping your current tool. Modo seems full of tons of one use tools, whereas in Softimage I have a few tools that I use most of the time that cover 99% of what I need to do. I was looking up rigging in Modo the other day and it’s a mess. After you draw out you bones you have to go in manually and correct all your individual joint rotations so they work correctly. In the amount of time the guy built a basic spine I could have had the entire character skeleton done in Softimage with working IK. After massing with Modo for a short time I usually give up in frustration at the terribly slow and clunky interface. Sure I could probably get used to it in time and be productive, but why should I have to settle for such and inferior and slow UI and workflow. The whole layer based approach to modeling makes me want to punch kittens. I also tried Blender which seems to get a lot of praise because it is free and has all these gee-whiz features, but again, the interface on that program is horrid. Sure it’s better than the old one, but it’s still terrible. Also, all the development seems to be on these qee-whiz features and some things like beveling are mostly useless. This is one of the problems with open source programs, no one wants to write the simple mundane features, they would rather write the big flashy features so they can brag about them and the simple tools get left unfinished, on never even added. When I initially switched from lightwave to Softimage, everything was just amazing. The workflow was amazing, the documentation and tutorials were some of the best I’d ever seen at the time (these have both declined since Autodesk took over). Being able to get help with a tool by hitting F1 while in the tool and having the help open to the information for that tool was just amazing. Being able to crate basic tools or automat repetitive tasks by just copying from the history to the script editor was great and allowed me to do things I could never have done with my meager scripting abilities. All the things that make Softimage a great tool have been in there for years
Re: Torn
Hi Sam Select Snapping and hold down the ALT key. It brings up a lot of options for snapping. https://www.dropbox.com/s/azfx1hp91oxux6l/modo_Snapping.png By adjusting the inner and outer range you can find a fit to your snapping needs. There are a few things that are in Modo that should be enabled by default instead of rooting through the preferences. How it handles colour for example. They tend to err on the side of people starting out rather then people who are used to a certain workflow and speed along. The next part is my rant and most definitely not directed only at Sam. :) *Rant* Modo isn’t Softimage, and never will be. Even with Luceric working on the interface Maya will never be Softimage either. This is something that all softimage users need to accept. Workflows and features you are used to are going to be different / missing in other packages. This whole why can’t X DCC package be like Softimage whining needs to stop. We are better then that. What we can do is engage with people like SideFx, TheFoundry even Blender etc to try and reduce these annoyances but it needs to be done constructively. The commercial licences guys still have two years minimum of Using Softimage. Use that time to get under the hood of whatever package your interested in and see if its not something that is just a preference setting. Most of my obstructions with Modo have been fixed by changing preferences I never knew existed. *Rant off* Have a good weekend folks ;) From: Sam Bowling sbowl...@cox.netmailto:sbowl...@cox.net Reply-To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Date: Saturday 03 May 2014 at 8:35 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com softimage@listproc.autodesk.commailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: RE: Torn RANT WARNING! This started out as a reply to Sergio about Modo, but quickly turns into a rant as I keep running across absolutely moronic issues with this stupid program. If you have no interest in Modo you probably should just skip this whole post. Looks like my problem was that in Softimage I can start rotating an object and hit SHIFT at any time to snap the rotations, but in Modo you have to hold the CTRL key before you start rotating. F11 in Modo pops up a menu that allows you to enable one kind of snap (as far as I can tell) where in SI I can enable multiple kinds of snapping at once and I don’t even have to turn it on. If I’m modeling or animating and I decide I want to snap to a vertice, or object or anything, I just have to Hold down CTRL and snapping is turned on until I let go of CTRL. In Modo I have to stop whatever I’m doing and move my mouse up and click on snapping to turn it on and if it’s not set to the type of snap I want I then have to hit F11 to open the snapping menu and chose what I wanted to snap to. Just a terrible and disruptive workflow. On top of that the snapping in Modo seems very weak. I didn’t even realize I had snapping on at first because if you move the mouse sort of fast it’s not really noticeable. Maybe there’s a setting to change it, but out of the box, it’s pretty terrible. I took a look at the Cadjunkie Zen layout and it’s an improvement in the layout, but it really doesn’t fix the real problem I have with Modo, which is the way that the tools work. Despite all my complaining about Modo, I really want to like the program. The features look good (on paper at least) and I owned an early copy of Modo before I switched to Softimage and I can get Modo 801 for an extremely cheap upgrade price. Unfortunately all I see when I use this program is a more advanced version of Lightwave with most of the issues that eventually made me stop using Lightwave in the first place. It’s also inconsistent, for example if you select an edge and chose bevel, it bevels it, but if you select a polygon and chose bevel it does and extrude with an inset… Completely different behavior. Then there are redundant tools like scale and uniform scale, which seem to do the exact same thing. And rotate and axis rotate, which seems to be pretty much the same thing, except the axis rotate only work son one axis and rotates around wherever you click. Why not just move your center and use the rotate tool? I also noticed while messing with bevels and rounded edges is that dragging on the numeric entry arrows (you know, the little arrows you drag to increase the numbers instead of typing them in), is terrible. There is ZERO feedback on how many edges you have added until you let go. I did this on a model that couldn’t have had more than 100 edges, but because there was no feedback on the round level as I drug the little arrow thing around when I let go I had a value of 80 for the round level and it completely locked the program up for so long I finally had to kill it. On many of the tools
Re: Torn
that eventually made me stop using Lightwave in the first place. It’s also inconsistent, for example if you select an edge and chose bevel, it bevels it, but if you select a polygon and chose bevel it does and extrude with an inset… Completely different behavior. Then there are redundant tools like scale and uniform scale, which seem to do the exact same thing. And rotate and axis rotate, which seems to be pretty much the same thing, except the axis rotate only work son one axis and rotates around wherever you click. Why not just move your center and use the rotate tool? I also noticed while messing with bevels and rounded edges is that dragging on the numeric entry arrows (you know, the little arrows you drag to increase the numbers instead of typing them in), is terrible. There is ZERO feedback on how many edges you have added until you let go. I did this on a model that couldn’t have had more than 100 edges, but because there was no feedback on the round level as I drug the little arrow thing around when I let go I had a value of 80 for the round level and it completely locked the program up for so long I finally had to kill it. On many of the tools, there is ZERO visual feedback when using the number arrow things (on tools such as extrude) until you hit apply. Select a polygon and hit extrude and when you drag on the little arrow widget thing the numbers increase of decrease, but nothing moves un the viewport until you hit apply! What is this 1990? Why can’t this program display the changes that are happening when I adjust the numeric values for the extrude? To make things even worse, when switching between quad view and a single view of any of the viewports the framing changes. Frame up and object while in quad view so it fills all the viewports and then switch any of them to a single view (0 on the num pad) and you now have tons of room around the objects. If you frame it up in a single view and switch to quad, the everything that was near the edge of the viewport is now outside of the view. It gets even worse though, because your zoom setting for all the iso views are connected. Zoom in in the top and you are zooming in in the front and side view.. Why? Oh, and I just noticed it does the same when panning in the ISO views… WHY? This is terrible! While I’m talking about views, is it just me or is there way too much lens distortion/fisheye in the perspective views compared to … pretty much every other 3d program out there? Maybe It’s accurate for a camera, but it really suck when you are trying to model something like a human head when the perspective seems to change as you get closer to the model. I’ve never had an issue with this in any other 3d programs, but I remember having issues with it when I used the program years ago and I noticed it right away when using 701 and it’s really bugging me again. I am seriously getting angry about this. This is one of the youngest 3d programs out, these guys had the opportunity to look at all the existing programs like XSI, Maya and MAX and what did they do? They made a slightly better version of the Lightwave interface. They based this new Next-Gen 3d program off of one of the WORST UI’s in the 3d industry and from what I can see didn’t even bother looking at any of the other programs out there other than maybe a feature list. Sure that have all these gee-whiz features, but the part of the program you deal with to get anything done is just crap. I am completely disgusted by how poorly thought out this program really is. It’s really sickening. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sergio Mucino Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 6:58 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Torn Hi Sam. In the spirit of fairness, I just wanted to add some info to your observations regarding Modo. You can snap your rotations by holding down the CTRL key. This should help you achieve precise values. Snaps are turned on and off using F11. No need to fool around with menus. You can change the snap type from the snaps popup, but that's only required when changing what you're snapping to. You can also map your favorite snaps to hotkeys using commands. Granted, it's not as out-of-the-box as SI or Maya, but it can be done. I, for one, prefer the different layouts. It's nice for me to be able to focus on different things and have the tools I need at hand. There's someone who developed an alternate UI (google Cadjunkie Zen)... I have yet to try it, but it looks extremely clean and focused. I'll give it a shot soon. Regarding bones, I guess the main difference is that Modo doesn't use bones (like SI)... It uses joints (like Maya). There are fundamental differences between both, so proper joint orientation is paramount. The same has to be done in Maya (actually, Michael Comet's
Re: Torn
done is just crap. I am completely disgusted by how poorly thought out this program really is. It’s really sickening. *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [ mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.comsoftimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Sergio Mucino *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 6:58 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Torn Hi Sam. In the spirit of fairness, I just wanted to add some info to your observations regarding Modo. You can snap your rotations by holding down the CTRL key. This should help you achieve precise values. Snaps are turned on and off using F11. No need to fool around with menus. You can change the snap type from the snaps popup, but that's only required when changing what you're snapping to. You can also map your favorite snaps to hotkeys using commands. Granted, it's not as out-of-the-box as SI or Maya, but it can be done. I, for one, prefer the different layouts. It's nice for me to be able to focus on different things and have the tools I need at hand. There's someone who developed an alternate UI (google Cadjunkie Zen)... I have yet to try it, but it looks extremely clean and focused. I'll give it a shot soon. Regarding bones, I guess the main difference is that Modo doesn't use bones (like SI)... It uses joints (like Maya). There are fundamental differences between both, so proper joint orientation is paramount. The same has to be done in Maya (actually, Michael Comet's tools come in really handy for these tasks). It's fine if you didn't agree with Modo. We all have our preferred way of working (I didn't agree with Lightwave at the time I tried it, which was like 18 years ago). I just wanted to add this info for the benefit of those looking around at options and thinking of giving Modo a go. I can't comment on Blender, since I have yet to get my hands dirty with it. Cheers! Sergio Muciño. Sent from my iPad. On May 2, 2014, at 1:24 AM, Sam Bowling sbowl...@cox.net wrote: I’ve been looking around at alternatives to Softimage and not having any luck. Modo have some great features, but the interface is just crap. There are way too many different layouts for things that should mostly be done in one or maybe 2 different layouts. Things like snapping rotations (or snapping in general) seem to require you to click checkboxes or be enabled in other menus where in Softimage, you can just hold down a modifier key to enable most of those functions without dropping your current tool. Modo seems full of tons of one use tools, whereas in Softimage I have a few tools that I use most of the time that cover 99% of what I need to do. I was looking up rigging in Modo the other day and it’s a mess. After you draw out you bones you have to go in manually and correct all your individual joint rotations so they work correctly. In the amount of time the guy built a basic spine I could have had the entire character skeleton done in Softimage with working IK. After massing with Modo for a short time I usually give up in frustration at the terribly slow and clunky interface. Sure I could probably get used to it in time and be productive, but why should I have to settle for such and inferior and slow UI and workflow. The whole layer based approach to modeling makes me want to punch kittens. I also tried Blender which seems to get a lot of praise because it is free and has all these gee-whiz features, but again, the interface on that program is horrid. Sure it’s better than the old one, but it’s still terrible. Also, all the development seems to be on these qee-whiz features and some things like beveling are mostly useless. This is one of the problems with open source programs, no one wants to write the simple mundane features, they would rather write the big flashy features so they can brag about them and the simple tools get left unfinished, on never even added. When I initially switched from lightwave to Softimage, everything was just amazing. The workflow was amazing, the documentation and tutorials were some of the best I’d ever seen at the time (these have both declined since Autodesk took over). Being able to get help with a tool by hitting F1 while in the tool and having the help open to the information for that tool was just amazing. Being able to crate basic tools or automat repetitive tasks by just copying from the history to the script editor was great and allowed me to do things I could never have done with my meager scripting abilities. All the things that make Softimage a great tool have been in there for years most of them since V4 or 5 which was the time I started using it. It’s just mind boggling that there really isn’t another program out there that even comes close to workflow and ease of use that Softimage has had for years. Where I work I do 3d animation part time, sometimes not using Softimage for weeks, and it’s great that Softimage
Re: Torn
it is with Softimage, so I gave 3- Coat another try and I’m really impressed with it. I hated it when I used it several years ago, but now it blows Mudbox out of the water and is much, much more user friendly that the mess that is called Zbrush. I did some retopo work with 3d-coat recently and I like it much, much more than Topogun. I absolutely love the Voxel sculpting tools. So, it looks like Autodesk is going to be missing out on any future money from me. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 6:06 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Torn Or stay with softimage till there is actualy something like it.. maybe next. Couple years On May 1, 2014 3:02 PM, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and some houdini too) Read that message and obey. Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol
Re: Torn
Difficult one I guess ;) Forget the software, where do you want to be in 2 years? When you go on a trip you first pick your destination and then figure out how to get there right? just some thoughts... On 1 May 2014 10:41, Tony Naqvi i...@tonynaqvi.co.uk wrote: Hi All, Not sure if a consensus was reached on this, but I’m torn between which way to turn in learning a new package. Want to stay away from Maya as much as possible (since I already know it pretty well) and will continue to use Soft for as long as I can, but thought it worth at least starting to look at an alternative since it will probably mean more employment options. At the moment I’m looking at the three main alternatives; Houdini, C4D and Modo. I like Houdini, having had a very brief look into it already. I also like the look of Modo 801 – particularly with the tie-up with other Foundry tools (which I assume will only get stronger in the future). But Cinema 4D also has some nice tools – particularly Xpresso which seems to be heading towards the ICE direction from what I’ve seen. I’ve also been sideways looking at Blender – although at the moment I just can’t seem to battle past the interface! Anyone have any insights into these that they can share that may help sway my decision? Again, apologies if this has done the rounds already! Cheers T.
Re: Torn
I'm still struggling. There's a lot to take on board.
Re: Torn
the question is what is your area of expretese what do you wanna do, are you cahracter animator, effects guy, simulations cloth, lighting rendering.. al full generalist and wanna deliver final product from modeling to final rendering. that can help out choosing On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Chris Marshall chrismarshal...@gmail.comwrote: I'm still struggling. There's a lot to take on board.
Re: Torn
I've gone for a blender-houdini-nuke thing adding modo to the pipe as soon as resources become less scarce :) i would keep on with blender, you'd be surprised where you can fit it into your pipeline. currently, it's my main modeller, idea/face shape sculpter (skin mesh + dyna-topo is fantastic) and story board/previs tool current work is due to wrap in a couple of months so i've planned to take some time off to really get to grips with houdini/nuke -- Jon Swindells jon_swinde...@fastmail.fm On Thu, May 1, 2014, at 02:54 PM, Mirko Jankovic wrote: the question is what is your area of expretese what do you wanna do, are you cahracter animator, effects guy, simulations cloth, lighting rendering.. al full generalist and wanna deliver final product from modeling to final rendering. that can help out choosing On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Chris Marshall [1]chrismarshal...@gmail.com wrote: I'm still struggling. There's a lot to take on board. References 1. mailto:chrismarshal...@gmail.com
Re: Torn
Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol
Re: Torn
You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and some houdini too) Read that message and obey. Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol
RE: Torn
I don’t know what we’ll go to when Softimage is eventually phased out of our pipeline. (more than one app, that's for sure) But we’ve been evaluating C4D and its far better than I thought it was going to be. (Based on its perception in the industry) There is some really cool stuff in there. I’m looking forward to testing it a bit more once my current project is wrapped up. Ed From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 9:06 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Torn Or stay with softimage till there is actualy something like it.. maybe next. Couple years On May 1, 2014 3:02 PM, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.frmailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and some houdini too) Read that message and obey. Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol
Re: Torn
Have any of you tried TurbulenceFD with C4D? It truly is startling how good it is. Stuff I really struggled with is easy. On the other hand, stuff that was easy in ICE, well, I reserve judgement until I know more, but TurbulenceFD doesn't seem to have the controls to art direct the fluid (gaseous only, not liquid) to do exactly what I want if it isn't physically natural. Yet. In FX work, that is obviously of high importance, but I don't have enough time with it to say for sure. C4D is really quite good at a LOT of stuff, though. Stuff we struggle with usually, that we just accept as hard or we have accepted as something that just takes a long time. In C4D, many of these things are not only fast, look good, but EASY. How often does THAT happen? I am in the same boat as others here. I am evaluating C4D, Modo, Houdini They all have their strengths, and one major weakness (they aren't Softimage). On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Ed Harriss ed.harr...@sas.com wrote: I don’t know what we’ll go to when Softimage is eventually phased out of our pipeline. (more than one app, that's for sure) But we’ve been evaluating C4D and its far better than I thought it was going to be. (Based on its perception in the industry) There is some really cool stuff in there. I’m looking forward to testing it a bit more once my current project is wrapped up. Ed *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Mirko Jankovic *Sent:* Thursday, May 01, 2014 9:06 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Torn Or stay with softimage till there is actualy something like it.. maybe next. Couple years On May 1, 2014 3:02 PM, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and some houdini too) Read that message and obey. Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol -- Perry Harovas Animation and Visual Effects http://www.TheAfterImage.com http://www.theafterimage.com/ -25 Years Experience -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES)
Re: Torn
All good advice On 1 May 2014 14:19, Perry Harovas perryharo...@gmail.com wrote: Have any of you tried TurbulenceFD with C4D? It truly is startling how good it is. Stuff I really struggled with is easy. On the other hand, stuff that was easy in ICE, well, I reserve judgement until I know more, but TurbulenceFD doesn't seem to have the controls to art direct the fluid (gaseous only, not liquid) to do exactly what I want if it isn't physically natural. Yet. In FX work, that is obviously of high importance, but I don't have enough time with it to say for sure. C4D is really quite good at a LOT of stuff, though. Stuff we struggle with usually, that we just accept as hard or we have accepted as something that just takes a long time. In C4D, many of these things are not only fast, look good, but EASY. How often does THAT happen? I am in the same boat as others here. I am evaluating C4D, Modo, Houdini They all have their strengths, and one major weakness (they aren't Softimage). On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Ed Harriss ed.harr...@sas.com wrote: I don’t know what we’ll go to when Softimage is eventually phased out of our pipeline. (more than one app, that's for sure) But we’ve been evaluating C4D and its far better than I thought it was going to be. (Based on its perception in the industry) There is some really cool stuff in there. I’m looking forward to testing it a bit more once my current project is wrapped up. Ed *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Mirko Jankovic *Sent:* Thursday, May 01, 2014 9:06 AM *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com *Subject:* Re: Torn Or stay with softimage till there is actualy something like it.. maybe next. Couple years On May 1, 2014 3:02 PM, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and some houdini too) Read that message and obey. Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol -- Perry Harovas Animation and Visual Effects http://www.TheAfterImage.com http://www.theafterimage.com/ -25 Years Experience -Member of the Visual Effects Society (VES) -- Chris Marshall Mint Motion Limited 029 20 37 27 57 07730 533 115 www.mintmotion.co.uk
Re: Torn
This is quite true. Depending on what you actually intend to achieve, it may affect your decision. Even though I lean a lot more towards the technical side of things, I needed a software package that would be able to do pretty much everything. I jumped on Modo several months ago, and I've been quite comfortable with it. I've actually started duplicating in Modo some ICE compounds and nodes I used often. I think I'm pretty much set with Modo at this point. I also do some stuff in Houdini, and will eventually get into Blender and see what I can do with it. Looks like this would be the solution for me. I do expect tighter integration between Modo and the rest of The Foundry's portfolio to make things nicer in the future. I've also heard great things about C4D. I guess downloading the demos for all the apps that interest you and doing some tutorials will give you a better idea of how they feel. After all, you've still got two years to figure out where to go. Good luck! Sergio Muciño. Sent from my iPad. On May 1, 2014, at 7:54 AM, Mirko Jankovic mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com wrote: the question is what is your area of expretese what do you wanna do, are you cahracter animator, effects guy, simulations cloth, lighting rendering.. al full generalist and wanna deliver final product from modeling to final rendering. that can help out choosing On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Chris Marshall chrismarshal...@gmail.com wrote: I'm still struggling. There's a lot to take on board.
RE: Torn
I addition to what Perry listed, I found a few very small things in C4D that are nice. (Keep in mind, I have limited experience with C4D) A preference that changes icons in the interface from pictures to text. ☺ An “increment and save” option. You can have more than one scene open at a time. You can also copy/paste between them. When moving things, you get a line that shows you where the object is moving from. If you use After Effects, it’s integration looks fantastic.
Re: Torn
Torn is the right word I think! I am sticking to SI till it no-longer has any juice left for the industry, like a dried up squeezed lemon. I still see that it is quite future proof in many areas, even without it’s advanced “viewport” so even after 2 years of updates and bugfixes, it should still do well afterwards a couple years - minus sculpting or realtime previz. GPU rendering and CPU rendering will still be ahead of the league with third party render-engines, you know the ones I’m talking about. It will remain future-proof for some time yet. But personally I am delving more into Blender, with it’s GPU+CPU render engine included, node based modeling addons (free) and soon node based strands and particles (in development) and other features that are progressively being developed - not to mention it’s 20 year old mature well rounded toolset - developed outside of commitees and corporation, even investment…. *Warning* My explanation is extensive and written below, needed to get it out there! Read at your own risk! Out of principle I see Blender as a powerful tool, not to mention video editing and Nuke like compositing all in the same package…. free… and open to development personally or as a community. If you’d invest cash into a software, with Blender, it is directly with a developer or into the foundation, or into a project to “test” and push and develop the software, like the Gooseberry Project. Out of conviction for future proof development in a software I’d invest hours (if not the majority of my life) of knowledge into it…. makes me want to stick to Blender. (because it’s guaranteed development by the demand of the artist, by investment directly into a developer, by open knowledge of what is being developed; and anyone has voice as to where it will go, how it will go) I see hair, bullet physics, particles, great modeling toolset (with many awesome plugins), a grease pencil, NLA animation systems, dopesheet, keyframed animation systems, shape and morph animation with corrective blendshapes optional, full body IK and FK, node based shader system for Cycles, multi-scene management within the same session, sculpting, dynamic topology in sculpting, multires mesh sculpting, advanced UV editor and unwrap with texture painting directly into it, integrated game engine with game logic (also node based in some ways), and a VERY customizable interface with few icons, etc etc.. yes, it is not optimized in many areas… but it runs on a mac, on Linux, on pc…. And it’s trying to push systems for node based manipulation, aka, ICE a la Blender. And it’s free… With a Blender pipeline, I wouldn’t need to purchase any Adobe Suite or any other software to compliment editing or post-fx, sculpting software, not even purchase 2D software (can be replaced with Krita, Gimp or Inkscape) or for anything else for that matter… just time and education for using such a software in the team… but here in Colombia (to my opinion) it’s much more popular than C4D or Houdini.. concerning compatibility with students/other studios without having to turn to Max or Maya. As a generalist studio, it would be the best bet, considering the startup and the cost of a multi-software pipeline, which we simply can’t afford every time something gets upgraded or outdated. That “feature” of being free and built by the people/foundation saves my studio thousands of dollar per seat every time we need to upgrade or expand. And unlike the death of my old pal trueSpace, my first love; and now SI, my second love… I might place my chips in a software that doesn’t depend on the economics of a business nor corporation, but of the very artists/developers/studios that use it. What happens if Autodesk goes bankrupt, or sells the entire ME division? What if it purchases C4D, it’s competition? What happens if The Foundry turns into a cash and user base hungry Autodesk like system from huge success in the future? What if SideFX decides to retire for “personal” reasons? What if management for development in Modo suddenly changes and it’s artist friendly solutions develop to something we no-longer want or need? Concerning the “dreaded” interface, I have used Gimp and Inkscape some time, and well it’s just a “Linux” kind of mentality to the interface - just different, with it’s own logic, but not any less efficient than most other interfaces (not considering the genius easter-eggs in SI UI dominating most others, of course). I found it hard to learn, yes, but just as easy as learning Z-brush or Maya from scratch… which I tried briefly. Concerning community and tutorials, there is no short to help you out with such a thing as learning it, you won’t ever be stuck learning how to use it with it’s huge arsenal of tutorials or an experienced community. Concerning development, I do think it’s still catching up, but in other areas (even compared to AE or Premiere, or to other major 3D packages)
RE: Torn
Sorry if i put this straight: Your bottom line is that free/opensource software is the way to go? That's terrifying. We still have the problem of discount prices in the industry. Companies gone bancrupt because of this and the situation should really concern us. Not the US/VFX sector alone. Artists around the world working 10-16 hours sometimes to give profit to a job or their companies working for. 3D-Animation is ridiculous cheap these days and making the software available for free would be the worst. Hardware is already cheap and become cheaper each day. Software is also cheaper today compared to ten years ago. Just take a look what comes out in the end: High quality work, thats good. But achived by monkeys often doing work barely for free! Just because it's so cool to do 3D? The problem is, everything becomes cheaper every day. Even daily rates. But it's a business and thinking of it as a 'ideal world' where everything should become cheaper or even free scares the hell out of me. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Andres Stephens Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:14 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Torn Torn is the right word I think! I am sticking to SI till it no-longer has any juice left for the industry, like a dried up squeezed lemon. I still see that it is quite future proof in many areas, even without it’s advanced “viewport” so even after 2 years of updates and bugfixes, it should still do well afterwards a couple years - minus sculpting or realtime previz. GPU rendering and CPU rendering will still be ahead of the league with third party render-engines, you know the ones I’m talking about. It will remain future-proof for some time yet. But personally I am delving more into Blender, with it’s GPU+CPU render engine included, node based modeling addons (free) and soon node based strands and particles (in development) and other features that are progressively being developed - not to mention it’s 20 year old mature well rounded toolset - developed outside of commitees and corporation, even investment…. *Warning* My explanation is extensive and written below, needed to get it out there! Read at your own risk! Out of principle I see Blender as a powerful tool, not to mention video editing and Nuke like compositing all in the same package…. free… and open to development personally or as a community. If you’d invest cash into a software, with Blender, it is directly with a developer or into the foundation, or into a project to “test” and push and develop the software, like the Gooseberry Project. Out of conviction for future proof development in a software I’d invest hours (if not the majority of my life) of knowledge into it…. makes me want to stick to Blender. (because it’s guaranteed development by the demand of the artist, by investment directly into a developer, by open knowledge of what is being developed; and anyone has voice as to where it will go, how it will go) I see hair, bullet physics, particles, great modeling toolset (with many awesome plugins), a grease pencil, NLA animation systems, dopesheet, keyframed animation systems, shape and morph animation with corrective blendshapes optional, full body IK and FK, node based shader system for Cycles, multi-scene management within the same session, sculpting, dynamic topology in sculpting, multires mesh sculpting, advanced UV editor and unwrap with texture painting directly into it, integrated game engine with game logic (also node based in some ways), and a VERY customizable interface with few icons, etc etc.. yes, it is not optimized in many areas… but it runs on a mac, on Linux, on pc…. And it’s trying to push systems for node based manipulation, aka, ICE a la Blender. And it’s free… With a Blender pipeline, I wouldn’t need to purchase any Adobe Suite or any other software to compliment editing or post-fx, sculpting software, not even purchase 2D software (can be replaced with Krita, Gimp or Inkscape) or for anything else for that matter… just time and education for using such a software in the team… but here in Colombia (to my opinion) it’s much more popular than C4D or Houdini.. concerning compatibility with students/other studios without having to turn to Max or Maya. As a generalist studio, it would be the best bet, considering the startup and the cost of a multi-software pipeline, which we simply can’t afford every time something gets upgraded or outdated. That “feature” of being free and built by the people/foundation saves my studio thousands of dollar per seat every time we need to upgrade or expand. And unlike the death of my old pal trueSpace, my first love; and now SI, my second love… I might place my chips in a software that doesn’t depend on the economics of a business nor corporation, but of the very artists/developers/studios
Re: Torn
Its a tough one for sure, Modo looks very nice, I really really like the UI. Great hand on tools... some very quick and slick (but non-liniar) modeling tools.. Painting and sculpting... Nodes that look like they are getting more powerful by the day.. very nice default render engine. Consistency seems to be a theme in the design. Cons- I am concerned about the speed and depth of its character animation tool set as well as the lack of relational modeling. I wish they would partner with FE to leverage its speed for moving characters.. to me the one who cracks character speed AND great deforms with out sacrificing workflow will come out on top. Not sure how pipeline friendly it is at this point when it comes to scripting, referencing and render scalability. not much in the way of 3rd party render engines the add ons and plug ins seem gimicky and poser like.. and its user base is small. Houdini - if we get bigger again it would make sense to have a few cuts of this and a few power operators. But as it stand its too heavy handed for almost everything we do, from what I can tell. And its view-port speed makes me cry... not a tool that I would like I don't think.. C4d- Very popular in the Advertising world, AE interaction is crazy good. Some very solid and unique tools (raybrush) unbeatable motion graphic tools. Giant user base. Cons- I never got its way of thinking while using body paint for years.. Trying to customize the interaction is nuts.. too many navigation commands that should be the same thing. Default render engine has pros - but serious cons (MB) never used thier advanced render engine. Character tools up to snuff?? I never looked too deep. Maya- Strongest of the non softimage packages for characters...Biggest user base, lots semi easy and unique tools such as paint effects, oceans, and a host of others. Robust poly and Nurbs toolset, Amazing viewport, GL caching, Cloth, Hair options and like soft I know that it has the years of battle ridden code, while dated can get any job done, and its easier the get the folks to do it. Character speed is second to none. Great 3rd party renderers. Very customizable. Did I say huge and talented user base? Cons- there are a lot.. but the first one is that the interface is a mess, too many different node editors that behave completely and none of them do what ICE does (yet). It needs a BIG clean up, look at Modo interface, seems very clean in comparison. I will need an extra TD on every job at least, causing us to raise our prices and making us less competitive. I have no confinence in the AD culture... they DO have a great team, but they need to revert to the culture of Discreet logic, Softimage and Alias. They need to be independent from the mother ships rules... Take a cue from The Foundry, not adobe... Softimage- Awesome all all rounder, best pass system, fast, great 3rd party renderers... and then there is ICE. Most flexible character tools for for working non linear. Did I say ICE?? Cons- its going awayuser base.. tied too deeply to windows The more I think about it the more I want to build an Alembic/Arnold/Redshift/ Nuke pipeline and use all of the above. Ween off the Softimage tit slowly... trying the milk the others have to offer a bit at a time. See what time offers us. Unlike some of you guys I wont rule Maya out because there are to many good people that can drive that boat... even if AD pissed me off. Greg On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Andres Stephens drais...@outlook.comwrote: Torn is the right word I think! I am sticking to SI till it no-longer has any juice left for the industry, like a dried up squeezed lemon. I still see that it is quite future proof in many areas, even without it’s advanced “viewport” so even after 2 years of updates and bugfixes, it should still do well afterwards a couple years - minus sculpting or realtime previz. GPU rendering and CPU rendering will still be ahead of the league with third party render-engines, you know the ones I’m talking about. It will remain future-proof for some time yet. But personally I am delving more into Blender, with it’s GPU+CPU render engine included, node based modeling addons (free) and soon node based strands and particles (in development) and other features that are progressively being developed - not to mention it’s 20 year old mature well rounded toolset - developed outside of commitees and corporation, even investment…. *Warning* *My explanation is extensive and written below, needed to get it out there! Read at your own risk! * Out of principle I see Blender as a powerful tool, not to mention video editing and Nuke like compositing all in the same package…. free… and open to development personally or as a community. If you’d invest cash into a software, with Blender, it is directly with a developer or into the foundation, or into a project to “test” and push and develop the software, like the Gooseberry Project. Out of
RE: Torn
I’ve been looking around at alternatives to Softimage and not having any luck. Modo have some great features, but the interface is just crap. There are way too many different layouts for things that should mostly be done in one or maybe 2 different layouts. Things like snapping rotations (or snapping in general) seem to require you to click checkboxes or be enabled in other menus where in Softimage, you can just hold down a modifier key to enable most of those functions without dropping your current tool. Modo seems full of tons of one use tools, whereas in Softimage I have a few tools that I use most of the time that cover 99% of what I need to do. I was looking up rigging in Modo the other day and it’s a mess. After you draw out you bones you have to go in manually and correct all your individual joint rotations so they work correctly. In the amount of time the guy built a basic spine I could have had the entire character skeleton done in Softimage with working IK. After massing with Modo for a short time I usually give up in frustration at the terribly slow and clunky interface. Sure I could probably get used to it in time and be productive, but why should I have to settle for such and inferior and slow UI and workflow. The whole layer based approach to modeling makes me want to punch kittens. I also tried Blender which seems to get a lot of praise because it is free and has all these gee-whiz features, but again, the interface on that program is horrid. Sure it’s better than the old one, but it’s still terrible. Also, all the development seems to be on these qee-whiz features and some things like beveling are mostly useless. This is one of the problems with open source programs, no one wants to write the simple mundane features, they would rather write the big flashy features so they can brag about them and the simple tools get left unfinished, on never even added. When I initially switched from lightwave to Softimage, everything was just amazing. The workflow was amazing, the documentation and tutorials were some of the best I’d ever seen at the time (these have both declined since Autodesk took over). Being able to get help with a tool by hitting F1 while in the tool and having the help open to the information for that tool was just amazing. Being able to crate basic tools or automat repetitive tasks by just copying from the history to the script editor was great and allowed me to do things I could never have done with my meager scripting abilities. All the things that make Softimage a great tool have been in there for years most of them since V4 or 5 which was the time I started using it. It’s just mind boggling that there really isn’t another program out there that even comes close to workflow and ease of use that Softimage has had for years. Where I work I do 3d animation part time, sometimes not using Softimage for weeks, and it’s great that Softimage has such a great interface where I can still find even the most rarely used tool without spending tons of time searching for it. With Modo I have trouble finding tools I used 5 minutes ago. So I’m probably going to be sticking with Softimage for quite some time. On a side note, it looks like Autodesk is putting even less effort into developing Mudbox than it is with Softimage, so I gave 3- Coat another try and I’m really impressed with it. I hated it when I used it several years ago, but now it blows Mudbox out of the water and is much, much more user friendly that the mess that is called Zbrush. I did some retopo work with 3d-coat recently and I like it much, much more than Topogun. I absolutely love the Voxel sculpting tools. So, it looks like Autodesk is going to be missing out on any future money from me. From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 6:06 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Torn Or stay with softimage till there is actualy something like it.. maybe next. Couple years On May 1, 2014 3:02 PM, olivier jeannel olivier.jean...@noos.fr wrote: You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and some houdini too) Read that message and obey. Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is included. So software of choice in this scenario.Softimage. Obvious alternative choice of software.None As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way to go. Nuffsed yo! ;-) lol
