We're just a small group of individuals (http://www.keller.io/) But we're
maintaining our own pipeline and are definitely interested.


2014-03-04 22:52 GMT+01:00 Andy Jones <[email protected]>:

> Many studios having the same problems at the same time is a HUGE
> opportunity if we leverage it properly.
>
> I completely agree about the collaboration that will be necessary from
> users.  However, for studios' part, I know a lot of places are interested
> in Fabric already, even if they haven't actually bought licenses yet.  So
> if part of the incentive was some kind of agreement for the FE guys to help
> nurture a scene assembly tool to life quickly, it might help tip the scale
> for whatever cost/benefit analysis places are doing.  The devs working on
> Fabric are truly some of the best in the world (and from what I understand,
> a big part of the reason AD bought Softimage to begin with).  They are a
> big part of the equation for what will happen in the future, even if they
> don't end up wanting to build a scene assembler as a supported "product" in
> itself (or who knows -- maybe they will?).
>
> It would be great to get a little (or big?) list of studios that are
> interested in this sort of project (or other ones) and possibly have some
> kind of summit with the FE guys about what it would take to fast-track FE
> into certain critical areas of production, assuming a certain number of
> licenses were purchased.  No commitments at this point -- just a list of
> interested parties who might be curious enough to be part of the
> conversation, pending whatever other conversations need to be had with
> superiors.  I.e., it's understood that nobody is speaking for their
> companies at this point.  Just indicating that they think their company
> *might* be interested.
>
> I'll start:
>
> Psyop
> Massmarket
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Felix Geremus <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
>> You are probably right. But these times are a little bit different and
>> maybe that's exactly the one chance inside all this mess. We're all sitting
>> in the same boat at the same time. I know a lot of studios who entirely
>> rely on Softimage for lighting. All of these will have to spend time and
>> thus money to move on to another pipeline during the next two years anyway.
>> So why not invest at least parts of this time into the same thing?
>> Individuals are great, and the community should absolutely try. But it's so
>> hard to put something like this together in your spare time. A few studios
>> supporting and profiting from this effort would accelerate the whole
>> process immensely. And about showing potential: wasn't Stage, and all the
>> other fabric applications build for exactly this reason? To show the
>> potential of such a project?
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-03-04 21:55 GMT+01:00 Steven Caron <[email protected]>:
>>
>> it is a bit harder for visual effects vendors/studios, in an already
>>> difficult market, spending money on software development (not their core
>>> business) is a hard sell. seeing a product or product in development on the
>>> other hand drums up interest which leads to real investment and
>>> collaboration. they need to see if their ideas are aligned with others on
>>> the project. don't take my comment as discouragement, it is just how i see
>>> it... for now it will be on individuals to come together on a project which
>>> shows potential. i hope we, the remaining softimage community, can do that
>>> together. again, not discouragement to any studio which wants to partner to
>>> make something happen...
>>>
>>> steven
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Felix Geremus <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So now that Softimage will be gone, isn't there room or even need for
>>>> collaboration here? Before everybody tries to build something themselves,
>>>> shouldn't people try to bundle forces? And I'm not only talking about
>>>> individuals here. I'm talking about small to medium size companies who
>>>> couldn't afford to build something like this alone.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to