Re: Max question
Not sure there is a way? You can set the original structure path to anywhere via CustomizeConfigure user paths. However that will set up a folder structure. I find from my short time being in Max that users don't tend use that folder structure and tend to make up their own and save things a little willy nilly? But that could just be my co-workers. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All I was just wondering. Whats the best way to set a project in Max, without adding any additional default structure folders. like Maya set project. This help me navigate to my scene quickly, its a pain going through a big drive with loads of other jobs. Have I missed something. Cheers Ben
Re: Max question
you said willy? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrBj3u5dPgM - watch at your own risk :) On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Chris Johnson chr...@topixfx.com wrote: Not sure there is a way? You can set the original structure path to anywhere via CustomizeConfigure user paths. However that will set up a folder structure. I find from my short time being in Max that users don't tend use that folder structure and tend to make up their own and save things a little willy nilly? But that could just be my co-workers. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All I was just wondering. Whats the best way to set a project in Max, without adding any additional default structure folders. like Maya set project. This help me navigate to my scene quickly, its a pain going through a big drive with loads of other jobs. Have I missed something. Cheers Ben
Re: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox?
Thanks for the info.. About the paragraph... who wrote that s _ _t ? =/ Is not worth the effort? wtf... Argh, i just... argh! On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:53 AM, Stefan Kubicek s...@tidbit-images.com wrote: 1.) afaik there will be no Softimage 2016. 2.) The Send to functionality only works across applications of same version number, hence from one 2016 app to another, not from 2016 to one from 2015. 3.) Since the version of Softimage bundled with ECS Ultimate 2016 will be version 2015, Send to does not work and has been removed. Read: Our programmers would need to invest 5 minutes to adjust the Send To code in each application of the ECS (which we sell/sold to you for an enormous amount of money) to make it work across different versions of our applications (which we bought from all over the world in the first place, just because we could) and our fbx format (which our part-time interns have been working on for the last 10 years in an attempt to implement hard edge support and iron out the bugs from each respective previous intern). We hence decided it's not worth the effort, especially for an EOL software (for which we also took an inordinate amount of money from you).
The shadow over The Foundry
Not my experience Perry, AE was unusable in my opinion until the last couple of versions or so... I had a hate for that program that ran deep until recent releases, but improvements recently has made it palatable for me. The momentum of Adobe since the move to the subscription based model, seems to me, to have improved the way they are improving things for the long term. Premiere has almost completely taken back all of the Final Cut market by creating a stronger product line..and is eating into avid sales BIG TIME. I am not sure where all this Adobe hate comes from, but they have always been the lesser evil to me. My 2cents On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Stefan Kubicek s...@tidbit-images.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','s...@tidbit-images.com'); wrote: Well put Perry, exactly my thoughts! Speaking of Fusion: I had the pleasure of using the free version last week for 7 consecutive days in a a row, 10 hrs a day. It was blazingly fast (compared to AE anyway), did not crash once, and the look of the node tree was pleasing enough to not make my eyes bleed (as opposed to Nuke's). Even the pro version is a bargain for $1000 for what you get. +1 on all Totally agree. This news sickened me and if true, could mean great things for Fusion and nothing but bad news for the rest. I've seen the usability and stability of After Effects (AE) decline sharply over the timeframe that AE has been a rental product. Updates cause problems instead of fixing them and development has slowed (even further). Not so with Nuke. Adobe wants VFX to be accessible to the consumer, and while I don't discount the research they have done, some of which has been quite amazing, most of their focus has been on one button type of VFX solutions and not on stability and flexibility, which is what we need and what The Foundry supplies software that excels in. Rotobrush, PuppetTool, CameraTracker all designed to make as close to a one button solution as possible. These tools works great in certain situations, but when the shot gets tough, you quickly run out of options. Nuke is nothing but options, and is far more ICE-like than AE is. Having something as flexible as Nuke owned by a company that has a huge competitive market-dominating product like AE, should send chills up your spine as to how closely it matches the Autodesk Maya/Soft debacle. Sent from my iPhone Please excuse typos and brief replies. Thank you! On Apr 28, 2015, at 2:05 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','raffsxsil...@googlemail.com'); wrote: AD owned and produced a lot of stuff over the years. The various acquisitions you are thinking of in the ME group are a drop in the ocean that is their arch, viz, CAM/CAE budgets. Alias was bought for studio and the inlet in industrial CAM they missed at the time. Maya in and of itself is probably not scratching 3 or 4% of their revenue and I doubt Soft even made it to an integer number. Adobe is already a bigger company than AD for the record, and has MORE of a monopoly on its market segments than AD does. They beat AD in revenue and net by a factor of two most years. Again, I don't know what Adobe you guys are thinking of, but the one I know of is nothing to hope for. They make EA sports and AD ME look positively benign in the VFX geography. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Nicolas Esposito 3dv...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','3dv...@gmail.com'); wrote: If I remember correcty Autodesk, before the big buyout in recent yearsm had only Autocad and 3ds to carry on and make good money...when they start acquiring Alias and all the others they establish themself as the company to go, simply because they were the owners. For me Adobe could possibly be the next Autodesk, but I really hope I'm wrong. 2015-04-28 7:24 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','raffsxsil...@googlemail.com');: There must be another company named Adobe I'm not aware of... Adobe has had nothing but contempt for VFX for years, and people would actually get on board with this? If there is any truth to these incompetently written piece of news whatsoever, and that's pretty much 50/50 at best, be ready to rent. Windows and half arsed Mac ports only, of course. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Tenshi S. tenshu...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tenshu...@gmail.com'); wrote: Better Adobe than Autode$k. Is the less bad co. between both. -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are! -- --- Stefan Kubicek --- keyvis digital imagery Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3 A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien Phone: +43/699/12614231 www.keyvis.at ste...@keyvis.at javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ste...@keyvis.at'); -- This
RE: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox?
I never used that send to xyz. It was just too autodesk. I always wondered why to clutter a menue with somthing that’s basically not more than an export function. sven From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Tenshi S. Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 2:48 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox? Thanks for the info.. About the paragraph... who wrote that s _ _t ? =/ Is not worth the effort? wtf... Argh, i just... argh! On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:53 AM, Stefan Kubicek s...@tidbit-images.com wrote: 1.) afaik there will be no Softimage 2016. 2.) The Send to functionality only works across applications of same version number, hence from one 2016 app to another, not from 2016 to one from 2015. 3.) Since the version of Softimage bundled with ECS Ultimate 2016 will be version 2015, Send to does not work and has been removed. Read: Our programmers would need to invest 5 minutes to adjust the Send To code in each application of the ECS (which we sell/sold to you for an enormous amount of money) to make it work across different versions of our applications (which we bought from all over the world in the first place, just because we could) and our fbx format (which our part-time interns have been working on for the last 10 years in an attempt to implement hard edge support and iron out the bugs from each respective previous intern). We hence decided it's not worth the effort, especially for an EOL software (for which we also took an inordinate amount of money from you).
Re: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox?
right... one thing though, send to is just a wrapper that automates calling FBX import/export menu command. You just have to do it manually when the Sent To option is not available. Same result. On 28 April 2015 at 03:53, Stefan Kubicek s...@tidbit-images.com wrote: 1.) afaik there will be no Softimage 2016. 2.) The Send to functionality only works across applications of same version number, hence from one 2016 app to another, not from 2016 to one from 2015. 3.) Since the version of Softimage bundled with ECS Ultimate 2016 will be version 2015, Send to does not work and has been removed. Read: Our programmers would need to invest 5 minutes to adjust the Send To code in each application of the ECS (which we sell/sold to you for an enormous amount of money) to make it work across different versions of our applications (which we bought from all over the world in the first place, just because we could) and our fbx format (which our part-time interns have been working on for the last 10 years in an attempt to implement hard edge support and iron out the bugs from each respective previous intern). We hence decided it's not worth the effort, especially for an EOL software (for which we also took an inordinate amount of money from you).
Re: Scripting making geoapproximation local?
couldn't you just select all objects and add a geoapproximation property ? - Ronald On 4/27/2015 12:02, Morten Bartholdy wrote: I have load of objects to which I need to make the geoapproximation local and set it at various values, so I am trying to script it. However if I do one object manually and try running this: MakeLocal model*.polyblabla*.geomapprox, siDefaultPropagation - the geoapproximation appears to stay global. Is there something particular I need to do to make numerous geoappr properties local? Morten
RE: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox?
Same result --yeah, it doesn't work ;) couldn't resist a -Original Message- From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Luc-Eric Rousseau Sent: 28 April 2015 13:06 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox? right... one thing though, send to is just a wrapper that automates calling FBX import/export menu command. You just have to do it manually when the Sent To option is not available. Same result. On 28 April 2015 at 03:53, Stefan Kubicek s...@tidbit-images.com wrote: 1.) afaik there will be no Softimage 2016. 2.) The Send to functionality only works across applications of same version number, hence from one 2016 app to another, not from 2016 to one from 2015. 3.) Since the version of Softimage bundled with ECS Ultimate 2016 will be version 2015, Send to does not work and has been removed. Read: Our programmers would need to invest 5 minutes to adjust the Send To code in each application of the ECS (which we sell/sold to you for an enormous amount of money) to make it work across different versions of our applications (which we bought from all over the world in the first place, just because we could) and our fbx format (which our part-time interns have been working on for the last 10 years in an attempt to implement hard edge support and iron out the bugs from each respective previous intern). We hence decided it's not worth the effort, especially for an EOL software (for which we also took an inordinate amount of money from you).
Re: The shadow over The Foundry
Well put Perry, exactly my thoughts! Speaking of Fusion: I had the pleasure of using the free version last week for 7 consecutive days in a a row, 10 hrs a day. It was blazingly fast (compared to AE anyway), did not crash once, and the look of the node tree was pleasing enough to not make my eyes bleed (as opposed to Nuke's). Even the pro version is a bargain for $1000 for what you get. +1 on all Totally agree. This news sickened me and if true, could mean great things for Fusion and nothing but bad news for the rest. I've seen the usability and stability of After Effects (AE) decline sharply over the timeframe that AE has been a rental product. Updates cause problems instead of fixing them and development has slowed (even further). Not so with Nuke. Adobe wants VFX to be accessible to the consumer, and while I don't discount the research they have done, some of which has been quite amazing, most of their focus has been on one button type of VFX solutions and not on stability and flexibility, which is what we need and what The Foundry supplies software that excels in. Rotobrush, PuppetTool, CameraTracker all designed to make as close to a one button solution as possible. These tools works great in certain situations, but when the shot gets tough, you quickly run out of options. Nuke is nothing but options, and is far more ICE-like than AE is. Having something as flexible as Nuke owned by a company that has a huge competitive market-dominating product like AE, should send chills up your spine as to how closely it matches the Autodesk Maya/Soft debacle. Sent from my iPhone Please excuse typos and brief replies.Thank you! On Apr 28, 2015, at 2:05 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: AD owned and produced a lot of stuff over the years. The various acquisitions you are thinking of in the ME group are a drop in the ocean that is their arch, viz, CAM/CAE budgets. Alias was bought for studio and the inlet in industrial CAM they missed at the time. Maya in and of itself is probably not scratching 3 or 4% of their revenue and I doubt Soft even made it to an integer number. Adobe is already a bigger company than AD for the record, and has MORE of a monopoly on its market segments than AD does. They beat AD in revenue and net by a factor of two most years. Again, I don't know what Adobe you guys are thinking of, but the one I know of is nothing to hope for. They make EA sports and AD ME look positively benign in the VFX geography. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Nicolas Esposito 3dv...@gmail.com wrote: If I remember correcty Autodesk, before the big buyout in recent yearsm had only Autocad and 3ds to carry on and make good money...when they start acquiring Alias and all the others they establish themself as the company to go, simply because they were the owners. For me Adobe could possibly be the next Autodesk, but I really hope I'm wrong. 2015-04-28 7:24 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com: There must be another company named Adobe I'm not aware of... Adobe has had nothing but contempt for VFX for years, and people would actually get on board with this? If there is any truth to these incompetently written piece of news whatsoever, and that's pretty much 50/50 at best, be ready to rent. Windows and half arsed Mac ports only, of course. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Tenshi S. tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Better Adobe than Autode$k. Is the less bad co. between both. --Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are! -- --- Stefan Kubicek --- keyvis digital imagery Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3 A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien Phone: +43/699/12614231 www.keyvis.at ste...@keyvis.at -- This email and its attachments are -- --confidential and for the recipient only--
AW: The shadow over The Foundry
Uh….nope…not here at least. Von: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] Im Auftrag von Perryharovas Gesendet: Dienstag, 28. April 2015 12:29 An: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Betreff: Re: The shadow over The Foundry … I've seen the usability and stability of After Effects (AE) decline sharply over the timeframe that AE has been a rental product. Updates cause problems instead of fixing them and development has slowed (even further). Not so with Nuke.
Max question
Hi All I was just wondering. Whats the best way to set a project in Max, without adding any additional default structure folders. like Maya set project. This help me navigate to my scene quickly, its a pain going through a big drive with loads of other jobs. Have I missed something. Cheers Ben
Re: Scripting making geoapproximation local?
FYI, You can create groups and put GeoApprox properties on them. As long as all meshes don't have local geo approx, they will use the one in the group. May help make things easier / quicker? Eric T. On 4/28/2015 7:59 AM, Toonafish wrote: couldn't you just select all objects and add a geoapproximation property ? - Ronald
RE: The shadow over The Foundry
And if you have to install into a 3 x 30 seater labs behind a double proxy, hate turns to anger. I have heard a lot of what Perry is saying in our Freelance community. South Africa is AE heavy as for a long time it was the only comp package you could easily buy. A lot of what I am hearing is when some person upgrades and either the client or a team member doesnt. It also seems to cause a lot of issues with plugins that stop working as you go from version to version. Ive come in with Fusion a few times (my limited experience with it notwithstanding) and redone comps for folks. One of which has now drop kicked AE and is using fusion full time now. We will most likely use Fusion for our 3d course as its pretty intuitive and easily handles the demands our students have. It also renders a crap load faster on our hardware, which is a plus. From: Andy Goehler [lists.andy.goeh...@gmail.com] Sent: 29 April 2015 06:32 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: The shadow over The Foundry On Apr 29, 2015, at 04:35, Greg Punchatz g...@janimation.commailto:g...@janimation.com wrote: I am not sure where all this Adobe hate comes from,… It starts with the installer… Andy 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: The shadow over The Foundry
On Apr 29, 2015, at 04:35, Greg Punchatz g...@janimation.com wrote: I am not sure where all this Adobe hate comes from,… It starts with the installer… Andy
Re: multiple shaders on one cloud
I guess the stupid answer is to use instances and have them assigned to different shaders :-/ But would be cool to know how to do this with straight particles and no instancing! On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Kris Rivel krisri...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to carry some kind of point data over to the render tree so I can assign different shaders/materials to specific particles? I have a bunch of flying cubes...I want some to look like glass, some to look like metal, etc. I'm hoping to not have multiple clouds. To further complicate it...trying to do this with redshift. Any suggestions? Kris
Re: Max question
cheers On 28 April 2015 at 21:06, Vladimir Jankijevic v.jankije...@gmail.com wrote: you said willy? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrBj3u5dPgM - watch at your own risk :) On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Chris Johnson chr...@topixfx.com wrote: Not sure there is a way? You can set the original structure path to anywhere via CustomizeConfigure user paths. However that will set up a folder structure. I find from my short time being in Max that users don't tend use that folder structure and tend to make up their own and save things a little willy nilly? But that could just be my co-workers. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All I was just wondering. Whats the best way to set a project in Max, without adding any additional default structure folders. like Maya set project. This help me navigate to my scene quickly, its a pain going through a big drive with loads of other jobs. Have I missed something. Cheers Ben
multiple shaders on one cloud
Is it possible to carry some kind of point data over to the render tree so I can assign different shaders/materials to specific particles? I have a bunch of flying cubes...I want some to look like glass, some to look like metal, etc. I'm hoping to not have multiple clouds. To further complicate it...trying to do this with redshift. Any suggestions? Kris
Re: Max question
Max doesn't have a built in folder/project maker like XSI (as far as I know) , so a pre made folder structure which artists copy and rename per asset or per scene is one way. Blur dev have shared alot of their tools over the years, so this might help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nopB5NnLhqM On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: cheers On 28 April 2015 at 21:06, Vladimir Jankijevic v.jankije...@gmail.com wrote: you said willy? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrBj3u5dPgM - watch at your own risk :) On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Chris Johnson chr...@topixfx.com wrote: Not sure there is a way? You can set the original structure path to anywhere via CustomizeConfigure user paths. However that will set up a folder structure. I find from my short time being in Max that users don't tend use that folder structure and tend to make up their own and save things a little willy nilly? But that could just be my co-workers. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All I was just wondering. Whats the best way to set a project in Max, without adding any additional default structure folders. like Maya set project. This help me navigate to my scene quickly, its a pain going through a big drive with loads of other jobs. Have I missed something. Cheers Ben -- Max Crow Creative Supervisor NSC Creative National Space Centre, Exploration Drive, Leicester, LE4 5NS, UK http://www.NSCcreative.com http://www.nsccreative.com/
Re: Max question
On Tue, 28 Apr 2015, Max Crow wrote: Max doesn't have a built in folder/project maker like XSI (as far as I know) , so a pre made folder structure which artists copy and rename per asset or per scene is one way. Blur dev have shared alot of their tools over the years, so this might help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nopB5NnLhqM Are you possibly looking for Set Project Folder? http://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/3ds-max/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2015/ENU/3DSMax/files/GUID-D61846F5-1495-4E70-A928-9B6FE978095E-htm.html Or is your goal really to have all assets loose in one root directory (scenes, textures, etc all floating in a single folder)? On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: cheers On 28 April 2015 at 21:06, Vladimir Jankijevic v.jankije...@gmail.com wrote: you said willy? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrBj3u5dPgM - watch at your own risk :) On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Chris Johnson chr...@topixfx.com wrote: Not sure there is a way? You can set the original structure path to anywhere via CustomizeConfigure user paths. However that will set up a folder structure. I find from my short time being in Max that users don't tend use that folder structure and tend to make up their own and save things a little willy nilly? But that could just be my co-workers. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Ben Beckett nebbeck...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All I was just wondering. Whats the best way to set a project in Max, without adding any additional default structure folders. like Maya set project. This help me navigate to my scene quickly, its a pain going through a big drive with loads of other jobs. Have I missed something. Cheers Ben -- Max Crow Creative Supervisor NSC Creative National Space Centre, Exploration Drive, Leicester, LE4 5NS, UK http://www.NSCcreative.com http://www.nsccreative.com/ -- Joe Laffey The Stable Visual Effects http://TheStable.tv/?e37864M/
Re: multiple shaders on one cloud
Maybe you could set some custom integer info to different portions of the point cloud and use that to mix different shaders in the material? On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Kris Rivel krisri...@gmail.com wrote: I guess the stupid answer is to use instances and have them assigned to different shaders :-/ But would be cool to know how to do this with straight particles and no instancing! On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Kris Rivel krisri...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to carry some kind of point data over to the render tree so I can assign different shaders/materials to specific particles? I have a bunch of flying cubes...I want some to look like glass, some to look like metal, etc. I'm hoping to not have multiple clouds. To further complicate it...trying to do this with redshift. Any suggestions? Kris
Re: multiple shaders on one cloud
just set a custom attribute per particle and use it in the render tree http://41.media.tumblr.com/e3bfcc0d2df3f0f58f674d529c4bdceb/tumblr_nnjdncxeXe1r3czqwo1_1280.jpg On 28 April 2015 at 21:54, Kris Rivel krisri...@gmail.com wrote: Is it possible to carry some kind of point data over to the render tree so I can assign different shaders/materials to specific particles? I have a bunch of flying cubes...I want some to look like glass, some to look like metal, etc. I'm hoping to not have multiple clouds. To further complicate it...trying to do this with redshift. Any suggestions? Kris
Re: The shadow over The Foundry
There is a chance good things arise from The Foundry being put to the market. Personally, I´m not a fan of the recent year´s trends to put all sorts of flashy sugar coating on a bundle of applications, force support subscription down the throat along with swallowing the deal or now even trying to re-label everything as just a service instead of an ownership over a specific piece of software. These business models maximize milking the user, there are chances for a bargain but only for throwing away any type of long-time customer relationship to a specific piece of tool supplier and instead being willing to go for a shopping every time, for every project all over again, if only to be able to get better cards in hands. The looser is the artist, while a production may decide it´s cheaper to switch packages for a 5% gain and even the added hassle to find new artists may result in cheaper, frighened artists willing to jump at the new tools just to get that job or keep their job. Production not needing to commit means artist left in the cold, on call or not. No need for a booking confirmation or generally any type of manners at all when dealing with artists scratching at the door for a job, after being laid off with a few days notice (if at all). In the last twenty years, I didn´t see much change in the way production will budget jobs but I´ve seen more than enough of the effect of productions getting a job without knowing blip about the tools or workflows required to accomplish the task. Now add to that on-demand software services and it´s just a very small step to some idiot first calling out for on-demand artists and bitching about those unflexible freelancers not capable to adapt quickly enough to the professional demands production is setting up for them... You´ll end up getting to sit at a misc machine, some sort of software subscription package running on it, you may have to share the license with someone, producer won´t be able to tell you anything about filestructure except you should know and adhere to it and the deadline is tonight. Surprise. What does that have to do with the Foundry? Or Autodesk or Adobe? There is room for improvement and it´s going to be the artists that´ll jump ship first simply because they are feed up of that whole business BS and dealing with short-sighted, greedy cocker spaniels. Imho, Nuke is overpriced, Adobe´s Flash is a crashy security risk and Autodesk´s software as a service ideas will force me away. Cheers, tim Am 28.04.2015 um 08:43 schrieb pedro santos: Raffaele, the thing is nothing like Photoshop has risen yet, right? Little competition there unlike say, MAX. They certainly cemented their position with applications integration and the acquisition of Macromedia, which had some overlap with Fireworks and Freehand, even being web-oriented, in tune to the why of the whole acquisition. Corel vanished. They are also in a good spot in video due to Apple mess up. Avid and Final Cut where a reference and now there's... Premiere... My point being. Even though they are big, was it through wrong doing? I guess we can all point enduring pains in Photoshop, After Effects, etc, but the focus of their products is not VFX, but design, so I don't understand how you turn that in contempt. Plus of the package Nuke is the only VFX venue right? Modo is not quite there yet. And your point about Maya being 3-4% tells more about the value of this division to AD than the value to Adobe. Anyways, I agree with Cristobal Infante to some degree, strange piece of news... Sent you an email Raffaele.
Re: Softimage Icon Removed from Mudbox?
1.) afaik there will be no Softimage 2016. 2.) The Send to functionality only works across applications of same version number, hence from one 2016 app to another, not from 2016 to one from 2015. 3.) Since the version of Softimage bundled with ECS Ultimate 2016 will be version 2015, Send to does not work and has been removed. Read: Our programmers would need to invest 5 minutes to adjust the Send To code in each application of the ECS (which we sell/sold to you for an enormous amount of money) to make it work across different versions of our applications (which we bought from all over the world in the first place, just because we could) and our fbx format (which our part-time interns have been working on for the last 10 years in an attempt to implement hard edge support and iron out the bugs from each respective previous intern). We hence decided it's not worth the effort, especially for an EOL software (for which we also took an inordinate amount of money from you).
Re: The shadow over The Foundry
Affinity Photo is Mac only, so no threat to PS at all. If they went all platforms, than maybe they might make a little dent. Krita is starting to get really nice, expecially the 32 bit painting features are great. But no real threat either. And as long as they don't have 100% file compatibility in and out, it will be a slow path. What ever happens to TheFoundry, if they start doing subscriptions after the sale there will be a very angry mob of Modo users, that's for sure. I also think 901 will more or less define the future for Modo. And I agree on Nuke being too expensive. Especially now that Fusion Studio is less than a fourth of the price of a basic Nuke. And the difference in features doesn't really justify the price difference for most of us. Oh... and no maintenance fees. my € 0.02... Rob \/-\/\/ On 28-4-2015 9:41, Angus Davidson wrote: Well Affinity Photo is definitely already there and its still in Beta. Pretty much for a fraction of the cost. Similarly for their Affinity Designer product. Krita is also catching up very quickly . Adobes issues start at the end of next year when the first of their 3 year deals becomes due. Most of their revenue comes from theses negotiated deals. However they have locked people into them. The playing field will be very different in a years time. Strategically its makes sense for Adobe to make this purchase. They need to expand their offerings and the selling price for the Foundry bundles makes for a very good profit margin. Wether this was just a strategic leak from TF to improve the buying price still remains to be seen. I still hope its neither AD or Adobe that does buy them. On 28 Apr 2015, at 8:43 AM, pedro santos probi...@gmail.com mailto:probi...@gmail.com wrote: Raffaele, the thing is nothing like Photoshop has risen yet, right? Little competition there unlike say, MAX. They certainly cemented their position with applications integration and the acquisition of Macromedia, which had some overlap with Fireworks and Freehand, even being web-oriented, in tune to the why of the whole acquisition. Corel vanished. They are also in a good spot in video due to Apple mess up. Avid and Final Cut where a reference and now there's... Premiere... My point being. Even though they are big, was it through wrong doing? I guess we can all point enduring pains in Photoshop, After Effects, etc, but the focus of their products is not VFX, but design, so I don't understand how you turn that in contempt. Plus of the package Nuke is the only VFX venue right? Modo is not quite there yet. And your point about Maya being 3-4% tells more about the value of this division to AD than the value to Adobe. Anyways, I agree with Cristobal Infante to some degree, strange piece of news... Sent you an email Raffaele. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5863 / Virus Database: 4334/9645 - Release Date: 04/28/15 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: The shadow over The Foundry
AD owned and produced a lot of stuff over the years. The various acquisitions you are thinking of in the ME group are a drop in the ocean that is their arch, viz, CAM/CAE budgets. Alias was bought for studio and the inlet in industrial CAM they missed at the time. Maya in and of itself is probably not scratching 3 or 4% of their revenue and I doubt Soft even made it to an integer number. Adobe is already a bigger company than AD for the record, and has MORE of a monopoly on its market segments than AD does. They beat AD in revenue and net by a factor of two most years. Again, I don't know what Adobe you guys are thinking of, but the one I know of is nothing to hope for. They make EA sports and AD ME look positively benign in the VFX geography. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Nicolas Esposito 3dv...@gmail.com wrote: If I remember correcty Autodesk, before the big buyout in recent yearsm had only Autocad and 3ds to carry on and make good money...when they start acquiring Alias and all the others they establish themself as the company to go, simply because they were the owners. For me Adobe could possibly be the next Autodesk, but I really hope I'm wrong. 2015-04-28 7:24 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com : There must be another company named Adobe I'm not aware of... Adobe has had nothing but contempt for VFX for years, and people would actually get on board with this? If there is any truth to these incompetently written piece of news whatsoever, and that's pretty much 50/50 at best, be ready to rent. Windows and half arsed Mac ports only, of course. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Tenshi S. tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Better Adobe than Autode$k. Is the less bad co. between both. -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
Re: The shadow over The Foundry
Totally agree. This news sickened me and if true, could mean great things for Fusion and nothing but bad news for the rest. I've seen the usability and stability of After Effects (AE) decline sharply over the timeframe that AE has been a rental product. Updates cause problems instead of fixing them and development has slowed (even further). Not so with Nuke. Adobe wants VFX to be accessible to the consumer, and while I don't discount the research they have done, some of which has been quite amazing, most of their focus has been on one button type of VFX solutions and not on stability and flexibility, which is what we need and what The Foundry supplies software that excels in. Rotobrush, PuppetTool, CameraTracker all designed to make as close to a one button solution as possible. These tools works great in certain situations, but when the shot gets tough, you quickly run out of options. Nuke is nothing but options, and is far more ICE-like than AE is. Having something as flexible as Nuke owned by a company that has a huge competitive market-dominating product like AE, should send chills up your spine as to how closely it matches the Autodesk Maya/Soft debacle. Sent from my iPhone Please excuse typos and brief replies. Thank you! On Apr 28, 2015, at 2:05 AM, Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com wrote: AD owned and produced a lot of stuff over the years. The various acquisitions you are thinking of in the ME group are a drop in the ocean that is their arch, viz, CAM/CAE budgets. Alias was bought for studio and the inlet in industrial CAM they missed at the time. Maya in and of itself is probably not scratching 3 or 4% of their revenue and I doubt Soft even made it to an integer number. Adobe is already a bigger company than AD for the record, and has MORE of a monopoly on its market segments than AD does. They beat AD in revenue and net by a factor of two most years. Again, I don't know what Adobe you guys are thinking of, but the one I know of is nothing to hope for. They make EA sports and AD ME look positively benign in the VFX geography. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Nicolas Esposito 3dv...@gmail.com wrote: If I remember correcty Autodesk, before the big buyout in recent yearsm had only Autocad and 3ds to carry on and make good money...when they start acquiring Alias and all the others they establish themself as the company to go, simply because they were the owners. For me Adobe could possibly be the next Autodesk, but I really hope I'm wrong. 2015-04-28 7:24 GMT+02:00 Raffaele Fragapane raffsxsil...@googlemail.com: There must be another company named Adobe I'm not aware of... Adobe has had nothing but contempt for VFX for years, and people would actually get on board with this? If there is any truth to these incompetently written piece of news whatsoever, and that's pretty much 50/50 at best, be ready to rent. Windows and half arsed Mac ports only, of course. On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Tenshi S. tenshu...@gmail.com wrote: Better Adobe than Autode$k. Is the less bad co. between both. -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
Re: The shadow over The Foundry
Raffaele, the thing is nothing like Photoshop has risen yet, right? Little competition there unlike say, MAX. They certainly cemented their position with applications integration and the acquisition of Macromedia, which had some overlap with Fireworks and Freehand, even being web-oriented, in tune to the why of the whole acquisition. Corel vanished. They are also in a good spot in video due to Apple mess up. Avid and Final Cut where a reference and now there's... Premiere... My point being. Even though they are big, was it through wrong doing? I guess we can all point enduring pains in Photoshop, After Effects, etc, but the focus of their products is not VFX, but design, so I don't understand how you turn that in contempt. Plus of the package Nuke is the only VFX venue right? Modo is not quite there yet. And your point about Maya being 3-4% tells more about the value of this division to AD than the value to Adobe. Anyways, I agree with Cristobal Infante to some degree, strange piece of news... Sent you an email Raffaele.
Re: The shadow over The Foundry
Well Affinity Photo is definitely already there and its still in Beta. Pretty much for a fraction of the cost. Similarly for their Affinity Designer product. Krita is also catching up very quickly . Adobes issues start at the end of next year when the first of their 3 year deals becomes due. Most of their revenue comes from theses negotiated deals. However they have locked people into them. The playing field will be very different in a years time. Strategically its makes sense for Adobe to make this purchase. They need to expand their offerings and the selling price for the Foundry bundles makes for a very good profit margin. Wether this was just a strategic leak from TF to improve the buying price still remains to be seen. I still hope its neither AD or Adobe that does buy them. On 28 Apr 2015, at 8:43 AM, pedro santos probi...@gmail.commailto:probi...@gmail.com wrote: Raffaele, the thing is nothing like Photoshop has risen yet, right? Little competition there unlike say, MAX. They certainly cemented their position with applications integration and the acquisition of Macromedia, which had some overlap with Fireworks and Freehand, even being web-oriented, in tune to the why of the whole acquisition. Corel vanished. They are also in a good spot in video due to Apple mess up. Avid and Final Cut where a reference and now there's... Premiere... My point being. Even though they are big, was it through wrong doing? I guess we can all point enduring pains in Photoshop, After Effects, etc, but the focus of their products is not VFX, but design, so I don't understand how you turn that in contempt. Plus of the package Nuke is the only VFX venue right? Modo is not quite there yet. And your point about Maya being 3-4% tells more about the value of this division to AD than the value to Adobe. Anyways, I agree with Cristobal Infante to some degree, strange piece of news... Sent you an email Raffaele. 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
