Gideon, sounds quite ensuring, since I, too, am having an eye on Modo for my 'path to the future'. Questions: Does this 'Nexus' framework still allow for procedural modeling? Would it still be possible to establish a construction history? Would even a Modo version of Fabric Engine Splice be doable? Any plans even? (in case Paul Doyle is reading this...) Wouldn't that automatically add proceduralism, by tapping then into FE's (upcoming) node graph?
Thanks! Best regards, Eugen ------ Originalnachricht ------ Von: "Gideon Klindt" <[email protected]> An: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Gesendet: 05.03.2014 20:35:40 Betreff: Re: Luxology Modo 50% off for this mailing list
Octavian - a couple of things: MODO, as a public application, started with a modeling feature set, BUT, the frame work "Nexus" was made well before to be scalable since the idea all along was to create a full featured application. The reason that they started with modeling from what I can tell, then rendering, was because they needed to A) start somewhere they had expertise in and B) saw a niche that was not being met well by many other applications- namely a very good modeling tool set that would quickly have an intuitive rendering/shading system that was affordable. Otherwise they were going to come out with one large tool, that took 12years to make, that was a "maya wannabe"- and would be understandably panned. Why spend 3K on something that looks like Maya when Maya already works? Anyone who knows SI history gets how painful it can be to have a superior app bogged down by long dev time get over taken by something inferior because it fills the gap move quickly. AKA Maya vs. XSI during the SI dev gap. So this was a marketing/biz move as much as a functional one AFAIK- make a product for the niche of designer and viz folks as well as those who want a better modeling solution working in games and film (this is way before graphite etc.) that was intuitive and easy to use. Grow in that market, make a name that way, grow funds for further dev, and then start to reveal additional features based on the Nexus frame work as the user base and needs grew. The only thing I have to ask of you is to please stop referring to MODO as if it is Silo with some Max like bolting on happening. I'm not defending the software- it has short comings and is not going to replace SI in it's current state esp. if what you love most about SI came after the 7 cycle. It has a lot to love about it, but a fair share of things to be improved (thankfully they are), but it's not some ill conceived, mutant modeler on steroids either. I can see why you would think of it that way though, because from the outside that is what it has represented to many studios. I see it like how SI is now thought of as ICE. Yes...it's probably one of the top features of SI, but it lead a lot of people (no thanks to AD marketing) to think that's all SI was good for. Those of us using it before the 7 cycle know that much of SI and the general work flow kicked some serious ass before that. SI had short comings, but day do day work flow for the average user was IMHO a joy. Many of those things are harder to market other than by word of mouth. So now SI=ICE which is a shame since years of dev show it's so much more than that. If all SI is/was is ICE, then I think there would be fewer tears in this list and more people just saying F*it I'm going to use Houdini. So yes, to those outside for what ever reason MODO is "that modeling app thingy", but just like SI is more than ICE, MODO is more than modeling, even if that is what many people still find it does best. They biggest part I'd have to say that MODO and SI share in common is a desire to have the experience of using the software day to day be a good one- the over all work flow, vs. just slamming in features and bolting them on. I'm not saying this is a 1:1 match up, but it feels more so than say comparing Maya to SI, or even Houdini to SI.
--- Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus Schutz ist aktiv. http://www.avast.com
