It's not an issue about creating art, Steven. The issue is about retaining the rank and standard of living in the work force.
There is a very real argument if somebody takes Softimage away our net worth goes down considerably because our skills are specialized that we can't just plug into another work environment without considerable retraining. It's primarily the employer's perception/opinion that knowledge is not fully portable, and therefore whatever applicable knowledge you have doesn't compare with somebody who is already well versed in the applications they already use. I don't agree with it as I feel my 20 years of production knowledge and experience with Softimage is more valuable and applicable than some college kid who only took a few semesters of Maya, but that's the way it is. Heck, even within my own studio walls I fight this perception as I'm labeled a Softimage expert, but if a topic of discussion comes up that is not directly softimage related, my opinions aren't given the weight even when I know more about the subject than the other people in the room. They don't consider my computer science background or that I was formerly an animator (traditional cel and 3D). Perception is a powerful force. Matt From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven Caron Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 6:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: In case you missed it.. do you know about andy goldsworthy? http://www.ucblueash.edu/artcomm/web/w2005_2006/maria_Goldsworthy/TEST/index.html i think your example doesn't hold up very, are you saying that if someone takes softimage away from you tomorrow you will cease to create? s On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Eric Turman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: The "its just a tool" argument. If that were true, we would still all be using sticks and rocks. On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 7:44 PM, Eric Thivierge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: You'll be a better more versatile 3D artist for knowing both. I've used both back and forth over the years, more Softimage than Maya but am coming to the realization its about doing 3D not applications. General knowledge of your profession executed with the tools each package offers. Though I'm never going to touch Max. Even with a 10 foot pole. -------------------------------------------- Eric Thivierge http://www.ethivierge.com On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Kiril Aronofski <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: This discussion has been led repeatedly over the past several years and, frankly, nothing indicates it will ever change. The outlook of Softimage has even deteriorated quite a lot... I am one of the students who made the leap of faith a few years ago and jumped into Softimage on account of being very impressed with its animation capabilities and general enthusiasm surrounding ICE. While the learning has been nothing but a pleasantry, I am sad to say, I can only see it as a huge mistake now. Prior to this, I have, rather unwisely, not contacted studios in my area - or tried in any other way - to find out which software they require the knowledge of. Now, getting closer to graduation, I have kept an eye out for the past few months and the situation is depressingly bleak. Job offerings that involve XSI in any way come so rarely, I have already started retraining myself for Maya (which I have some previous experience with). Don't mean to come off as some kind of a whiner, but I'll make a point that saying AD is trying to get Softimage needed exposure by getting more studios on the suites is naive and fundamentally wrong because this is actually the ONLY way they are exposing it. While Max and Maya are getting into peoples hands left and right, Softimage is limited to an odd mention on the side and even than just to let you know you can fly some particles around in ICE. I cannot possibly see how demoting a full-fledged package to a simple helper tool can encourage any one individual, let alone a studio, to base their long term plans on it. ... I thought about what Serguei Kalentchouk said and I would trust someone from DreamWorks to know what he's talking about. My question is, is XSI now worse than Maya was 6, 8, 10 years ago when these studios started building their pipelines? I have no illusions soft will not be radically changing a decade old institution, but does it mean that can't stand on the same footing when offered fresh and off the shelf? Kiril On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:25 AM, Simon Reeves <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Pete's point about about having more licences knocking around because of the suite has already come to light in the small studio I'm working at... They Had a good offer to upgrade to the suites, useful to have a licence of maya and xsi for the odd thing ...and I think they're tired of max, some not so great experience with maya, and me in the corner yapping on about soft. They're used to vray so that's a bonus, interested in Arnold, and whatever ICE may be. That AD image is mostly funny because of how max hangs on in the middle, never mind where soft is.. And maybe it's good it has a separate role, not being one of the two apps that do the same job (according to the image) On 10 Sep 2012, at 23:55, Steven Caron <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: indeed, API wise i will always admit Maya's is more open and in that way better. i have no delusions about my choice being anything more than 'personal preference'. s On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Serguei Kalentchouk <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I know we all like XSI on this list but I always feel in these discussions that the the perceived benefit of XSI over Maya is greatly exaggerated due to personal preference. -- -=T=-
