This. Everything Andy said.
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Andy Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. >>>> >>> >> >
