Career defining conversation if you ask me, everyone needs to look at their options now and figure out a long term plan.
I do like the idea of trying something new like Houdini, I am just not sure this is the option companies will choose based on the available talent out there. On 27 February 2014 12:21, Simon Reeves <[email protected]> wrote: > Interesting conversation for sure, I might finally have a good look into > workflows in houdini. > > Also this is the preview to the last email.. I wondered if it was going to > be solution to a lack of freelancers...[image: Inline images 1] > > > > Simon Reeves > London, UK > *[email protected] <[email protected]>* > *www.simonreeves.com <http://www.simonreeves.com>* > *www.analogstudio.co.uk <http://www.analogstudio.co.uk>* > > > On 27 February 2014 12:07, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Training an animator to use Houdini to animate is trivial >> Training a lighter to use Houdini is trivial >> Training a modeller to use Modo is pretty easy >> Training a modeller to texture in Modo is pretty easy >> >> What I want to say is that if you dive in the correct areas it is easy >> and in a week or two you have any of these positions up and running. The >> only secret is to have an expert at hand that can easy the pain and guide >> the team. >> >> Obviously a different thing is to get a Houdini FX guy, but we have >> plenty of these ;-) >> >> On the flip side, the less freelancer competition, the more you can >> charge... >> >> ;-) >> >> Jordi Bares >> [email protected] >> >> On 27 Feb 2014, at 09:59, Cristobal Infante <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> What about freelancers though? >> >> Surely you will want access to healthy freelance pool of people. So good >> luck finding a "Modo lighter" or a "Houdini Rigger". My guess is Maya is a >> more sensible option only for that looking from a production/managment >> perspective. >> >> >> On 27 February 2014 09:43, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> would you give more money to Autodesk after what they are doing to >>> pretty much *every package* ? >>> >>> Let's recap >>> >>> Image Modeller = dead >>> Stitcher = dead >>> Matchmover = dead >>> Combustion = dead >>> Toxik = dead >>> Naiad = dead until further notice >>> Softimage = still developed but tiny tiny increments >>> Motion builder = still developed but tiny tiny increments >>> Motion builder for mac = stopped development >>> FBX converter for mac = stopped development >>> Mudbox = still developed but tiny tiny increments >>> >>> The only good news is that Flame v2014 has been a major effort on their >>> side and gave me the confidence to give Autodesk one more year, lots of >>> people angry with the changes but at least there was some vision although >>> my fear is that they will enter now a marketing stage to help boost sales >>> and engage again and push sales after the debacle of their change in the >>> library which made pretty much every flame artist angry. >>> >>> >>> Now, what are the alternatives? >>> >>> Well, I leant something last year when Apple decision regarding Final >>> Cut Pro (I am sure nobody needs reminding)... and what I learnt is that >>> Apple's core market is not pro software, its market is hardware, specially >>> mobile hardware (laptops, phones, tablets...) >>> >>> If you apply the same thinking with Autodesk everything becomes clear... >>> Autodesk core market is not entertainment, it's architecture and >>> engineering and they don't really give a $@^$£% about us as the list above >>> demonstrates clearly. >>> >>> The new version of Softimage, Mudbox and Motion Builder will tell >>> exactly where they stand for third year in a row so eyes open... >>> >>> in the meantime I chose to focus on those companies that pro software is >>> their core business and have market share to gain, and these are the ones >>> >>> SideEffects (via Houdini) >>> Foundry (via Modo) >>> MassiveSoftware (via Massive) >>> >>> So my approach is simple, force myself to transition in an abrupt way >>> (nothing better than full inversion) and help these companies to polish >>> their software as much as possible by being in the beta process, report all >>> bugs, new ideas, pass them information of which things work from other >>> packages... Exactly what I did with XSI. >>> >>> And one more thing, after diving in Houdini I consider it *impossible* >>> for any software manufacturer to put the necessary resources to compete >>> with them (I will repeat it... IMPOSSIBLE), the architecture is so advanced >>> and so well designed it is a marvel of software engineering (and expensive >>> to build of course)... this is here to stay my friends. >>> >>> and its getting easier by the day. >>> >>> Jordi Bares >>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> On 27 Feb 2014, at 08:42, Nicolas Esposito <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Quick question regadring the switch to another software: >>> I saw that quite few people are considering Modo or Houdini as an >>> alternative to Softimage. This is due to the fact that you want to >>> completely leave Autodesk for good, or because an alternative like Maya >>> wont suite your needs? >>> I'm asking because I'm not familiar nor with Maya or Modo, so I was just >>> wondering what is the main reason >>> >>> >>> 2014-02-27 9:21 GMT+01:00 Sebastien Sterling < >>> [email protected]>: >>> >>>> It's a system that seems to favour massive company's that can afford to >>>> routinely upgrade their packages, and screws the individual user for any >>>> sort of brand fidelity they may attempt to maintain; if you know you are >>>> going to get a discount (where it even 10%) on your next upgrade as a token >>>> to your brand loyalty, you would feel incentivised to perches >>>> upgrades, its marketing 101 no different then a loyalty card at your >>>> supermarket. >>>> >>>> The only reason for doing this is to intentionally loose a demographic. >>>> In the short term maybe this will allow AD to save money, freelancers are >>>> "infrequent in their purchases". They actually require a stable and >>>> competent package out of the box, something big companies usually pays >>>> their own Devs and TDs to sort out. Unlike big companies they also have the >>>> gall to voice their contempt of an inferior service. >>>> >>>> So yea this kinda makes sense for them in the short term to stabilise >>>> their key demographic, to the detriment of others probably makes the share >>>> holders smile as well. of course this also kills any form of growth within >>>> the potential market, but only time will tell what kind of impact that >>>> could have. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 27 February 2014 08:16, Angus Davidson <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Modo I am really impressed with it. Some tools are not 100% where >>>>> I want them yet but overall finding it very powerful. Mesh fusion is >>>>> awesome and saving my pennies to buy myself a copy of it. Stuff like >>>>> rigging is handled differently so it takes a bit to wrap your head around >>>>> it. >>>>> >>>>> I really love things like being able to edit an animation curve in >>>>> the viewport or create a custom UI that allows me to key specific things >>>>> on each frame for the selected controller. Their curve editor just feels >>>>> more responsive to me. >>>>> >>>>> You can see these on the new learn modo videos the posted recently. >>>>> >>>>> That being said its not as polished as softimage yet but you also >>>>> have to bear in mind that things like decent particles and animation have >>>>> only been around a few years in Modo. If Softimage does go EOL it where I >>>>> am headed for my personal stuff. Whether we go that way for our students >>>>> depends on a few more things. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> *From:* Daniel Sweeney [[email protected]] >>>>> *Sent:* 26 February 2014 11:19 PM >>>>> >>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>> *Subject:* Re: new upgrade policy >>>>> >>>>> I am as quick as I can off the autodesk rollercoaster. A few things >>>>> have made my choice I will always love soft and use the tool when its >>>>> needed but I think I need to look for another avenue. Looking at modo? >>>>> Thoughts?? >>>>> >>>>> Autodesk bollocks. >>>>> On Feb 26, 2014 8:52 PM, "Kris Rivel" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I read it and couldn't help but say WTH?! >>>>>> >>>>>> Kris >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Emilio Hernandez >>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Seems they need to fill the vault... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2014-02-26 14:29 GMT-06:00 Kris Rivel <[email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So...what's everyone's take on this gem? So if I don't upgrade to >>>>>>>> latest version now...then when I want that version I have to pay full >>>>>>>> price? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/autocad/troubleshooting/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/Frequently-Asked-Questions-about-the-Autodesk-Upgrade-Policy.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kris >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >
<<inline: temp.png>>
