Those in most denial are loudest I guess ;)
Simon Reeves London, UK *[email protected]* *www.simonreeves.com* * * On 1 October 2013 15:18, Sergio Mucino <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, they do. I've seen some of the stuff done with C4D, and I now use > Modo for personal projects and freelance gigs after using 3ds Max for 18 > years, and I agree, both are great applications. However, most of the > alternatives I've tried (and I will exclude C4D here because I have not > used it) do not scale well to big projects and pipelines, that's why I say > that there are no current alternatives to Adesk's offerings (perhaps I > should have specified that this was strictly speaking about high-end DCC > production). For more localized departments, or smaller-scale users, the > alternatives are there, and delivering quite a punch (I'm personally > excited about what the partnership with The Foundry might bring for Modo... > we'll see). > Anyway, I wasn't bringing all this up to bring people down. We all like to > feel that what we do is great stuff (and from the people in this list, it > is clear that's the case), and in this industry, people tend to wear their > software shirts quite proudly (nothing wrong with that). I've had my share > of disappointment on what's been going on relative to Autodesk products > lately (for the record, I had no idea the Softimage users were also voicing > concerns over their product of choice until I joined this email list > recently. But I can tell you that the same has been going on on the 3ds Max > side, except maybe... louder :-) ). > Anyway, back to making movie magic... cheers everyone! > > *Sergio Mucino* > Lead Rigger > Modus FX > > On 01/10/2013 3:44 AM, Stefan Kubicek wrote: > > http://www.maxon.net/http://www.luxology.com/ > > Both do a lot of stuff really well. > > > http://www.sidefx.com <http://www.sidefx.com/> <http://www.sidefx.com/> :P > > > Le 30/09/2013 12:44 PM, Sergio Mucino a écrit : > > Ugh. Tough cookie. This is one of those very delicate topics that > usually end with rotten vegetables flying from camp to camp. It just > happens that some people take the tools they use quite personally. > I think it's all a matter of perspective, and personal preference. Of > course, we can all start arguing over technical aspects of each > product's architecture and data models, but that's just another rabbit > hole. Workflows... tools... aesthetics... all rabbit holes. > I've had to work with Maya, Max, Modo, and now Soft, and each app has > its strengths and weaknesses (granted, some have more of one than the > other), and depending what kind of job you have, and what kind of > stuff you have to deal with, your tool is either going to make it a > pleasant job, or your worst nightmare. > However, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head. Adesk is a > company who's primary objective is to make money, and we may like it > or not, but absolutely nothing on this planet (short of a complete > fail of the international money markets) will change that. And when it > comes to making money, Adesk will of course put all its money on the > horse that's winning the race. And we may like it or not, but that is > Maya (and by winning the race I mean purely making more money). > I don't want to start yet another discussion over the virtues or > defects of each product and their future. Just trying to keep in the > picture the fact that Adesk looks at this from a completely different > perspective than users (and it's not only about how much money it's > making, but also about how much it costs). So, let's just focus on the > facts... > > * Adesk has 3 completely redundant products on its product line (Max, > Maya, and Soft... they all are end-to-end DCC applications. They do > things differently, but they all produce quality results). > * There are 3 different development teams working on these products. > * Max and Maya compete for the most seats in different industries. > > So, as a purely software development-focused entity, you'd ask > yourself "Why do I need three? What if I had all my users only using > one?". It does make sense... less development costs for same revenue > (this is all "in theory" of course). And from that POV, it makes more > sense to try to move less users to a different product than more of > them... hence, Maya is their winning horse (whereas users decide to > leave their current tool of choice for Maya is still to be seen). > So, it doesn't really matter how great ICE is, or how more modern > Softs architecture is, or how friendly Max is. These are all things > that can eventually be implemented in another code base (technical > issues and business concerns aside). It's a matter of getting > favorable quarterly results. Period. > I think the real unfortunate aspect of this is that there is NO real > contender/alternative to an application of Maya/Soft's maturity and > capabilites. And Adesk knows it. Therefore, they can afford to play > different strategies withl little risk involved. > > And I think I've gone on long enough, and it's lunch time (and not to > mention, Monday...) > > *Sergio Mucino* > Lead Rigger > Modus FX > > On 30/09/2013 12:05 PM, John Richard Sanchez wrote: > > I agree. But numbers do count as most studios use maya and I need to > go where the work is. > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Andi Farhall > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>> wrote: > > I approached learning a bit as an occupational hazard. The job > needed ncloth for legacy reasons so i thought, ok, how bad can it > be. nCloth seemed to do the trick, and no doubt there are other > parts of maya that are good but good lord it's unpleasant to use. > As many of us suspect, it's simply a case of seat numbers and > nothing to do with how good a package is as to where AD pitch it. > If they seriously expect something like maya to be the future > they're all barking mad....... and as such I'm failry sure that > can't be the future. Fingers crossed..... > > just my 5 pence worth..... > > > ........................................................................... > http://www.hackneyeffects.com/ > https://vimeo.com/user4174293 > http://www.linkedin.com/pub/andi-farhall/b/496/b21 > > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/lord_hackney/ > http://spylon.tumblr.com/ > > This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are > intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is > addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of > the author and do not necessarily represent those of Hackney > Effects Ltd. > > If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must > neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show > it to anyone. > > Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this > email in error. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -------------------------- > To unsubscribe: mail [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > <[email protected]> with subject > "unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email. > > > > > --www.johnrichardsanchez.com <http://www.johnrichardsanchez.com> > <http://www.johnrichardsanchez.com> > > > -------------------------- > To unsubscribe: [email protected] with subject > "unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email. > > > -------------------------- > To unsubscribe: mail [email protected] with subject > "unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email. > > > -------------------------- > To unsubscribe: mail [email protected] with subject > "unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email. >
-------------------------- To unsubscribe: mail [email protected] with subject "unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email.
