Hey Siew, thanks for tip. Transfer attributes didn't worked. I took the mesh UV it in Softimage and back to Maya due to Maya's crappy UV tools.
I took a look at the Diamond Tools. Nice add on for Maya just to get modeling, and UV unfolding kind of Softimage "old technology" out of the box behavior.... for an additional $200 bucks... And Mirko just touch the main point here. Luc-Eric what happened in that transition when you guys were ripped off from Softimage? Seems like you suffered a brain wash. I don't care about the name of the software. But at this point I would expect a 3d software from Autodesk with the beauty of Softimage and the developer, progamming capability of Maya. But sadly that is not the case. Instead we have from Autodesk a Frankenstein and a dying king locked in a tower. 2014-02-14 11:25 GMT-06:00 Mirko Jankovic <[email protected]>: > well from what I can see and also understand from Luc-Eric Maya is > great... for developers and programmers but crap for artist. > SI on the other hand is love at first sight for Artist but not so for > developers. > Soooo... should 3d art application be for programmers and developers or to > make life easy for artist? > > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Emilio Hernandez <[email protected]>wrote: > >> It is really a shame that Autodesk when bought Softimage, instead of >> starting the migration from the COM/OLE platform, just took the guts outs >> of Softimage. The Dev team. To insert it in Maya, which, IMHO is sitll >> basically the same from those days. I have not seen any "super >> development" of Maya as it would be expected by such corporate strategy... >> If by now, Maya had the functionality, beauty, elegance, design, and >> workflow of Softimage, the story would be different. >> >> I am married to Softimage until "death tear us appart". >> >> Maybe it is not Softimage's days the only ones that are counted... >> >> Autodesk has been loosing market lately, and has been unsuccesful of >> driving the "small" but solid Softimage user base to Maya. And when the >> time comes, my perception is that the mayority of us, at least in the >> film/vfx industry is looking to other platforms rather than Maya. They >> betted to the wrong horse, again imho. Maybe I am wrong. But only time >> will tell. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 2014-02-14 10:15 GMT-06:00 Angus Davidson <[email protected]>: >> >> >>> For historical perspective, you need to know that we were owned by >>> Microsoft in 1998, and there was no indication that SGI or the Mac >>> would come back from the dead. The company began to consider the Film >>> industry as "legacy" and that games would be the future. The product >>> was named after the name of the game exchange format to subtly suggest >>> that. Max also had taken the Windows NT jump, with huge success. >>> >>> Well Microsoft hasnt gotten any better at predicting tech since. Smart >>> phones, tablets, pretty much anything internet based ;)= >>> <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="#999999"><span >>> 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> >>> >>> >>> >> >
