I didn't manage to contact the author yet to check if it was a HOAX or not but check out the comment #2 by Brad Hielbert: "[...] Since their bankruptcy, the new owners are going to be taking R&Hs in house software and making it availbe to the public. IT is brilliant software that FAR out paces the capabilities of Maya or Max. [...]"
Maybe there's hope? Someone here knows the guy to check if he's the actual author of that comment? On 7 March 2014 17:30, Christopher Crouzet <[email protected]>wrote: > Hey Stefan! > > A quickie before I bail on week-end. > > I think that there has been a misunderstanding. I didn't mean to say that, > I was referring to Autodesk not wanting to maintain Softimage because it's > being costly and they'd rather focus on Maya to the detriment of each > Softimage user. I've updated the line to reflect this, let me know if it's > beter. > > I totally agree with you when you say that all-rounded packages are not > necessarily a bad thing for the smaller shops and the individuals. > > Got to go now, cheers and thank for the comments! > > > > On 7 March 2014 17:09, Stefan Kubicek <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Christopher, >> >> cice blog post. I can't entirely agree on the allround >> software inevitably being shut down sooner or later because it's hard to >> maintain part though. >> I too feel like it's worth investing into proprietary software to >> minimize the risk of exposure to third party technology, but there are so >> many people >> that do not write code, hence their own tools, either because they can't >> for time or monetary reasons, or simply because they don't know how to. >> These are mainly the single user shows and small shops. They deserve a >> cost-effective solution to their production problems too, and that is >> usually catered for by big, all-in-one CG applications like Max, Maya, >> Softimage, C4D. Yes, there are special-purpose applications like Marvelous >> Designer, RealFlow, SpeedTree,etc, but they cover rarely-encountered niche >> cases, compared to the vast amount of other stuff that is produced >> everywhere every day. Imagine you'd have to use one app for modeling, >> another for animation, another for simulation, one for hair & fur, etc..on >> a daily basis and concurrently. And each one had a different interface and >> required a different way of thinking. >> If you were working in a department and working with one of those, that >> would be a different thing, but constantly jumping between those apps, and >> having to transfer data between them, would soon drive you crazy. It's for >> this reason everybody I have ever met in this industry was searching for >> the one tool to rule them all. Even Lightwave, that consists of only two >> parts (modeler and layout), can drive you nuts. >> Modern software is modular, I think it's well possible to maintain and >> improve it, even change the paradigms it's built on, it just needs a bit of >> forward thinking and the will to do it. I remember stories about whole >> parts of Soft having been rewritten when the old one turned out to be >> insufficiently designed (the animation mixer in particular), I'm not sure >> in how far this is really true, or if it was only marketing blurb. >> >> What I can imagine is a Fabric-based host application which others can >> interface with to form a consistent application as demand arises, >> the hard part will be to draw the line between Fabric Engine, this base >> application (done by somebody else?), and the actual modules, yet done by >> others, and agreeing on a standard that those developers are willing to >> agree on and don't feel hindered by, as it's frequently the case with >> complex APIs that are lacking the one but crucial feature X for which you >> have to wait a full year until the next release to have it implemented >> after kindly asking the developers several times. I'm not saying it's not >> doable, just not entirely easy. I'm not saying small standalone apps are >> not desirable either, I just think they make more sense for special >> purposes rather than for standard stuff, unless the standard stuff they do >> is done in a true, outstandingly nice new way. >> >> >> >> Your 2 cents will worth a few bitcoins quickly Christopher. I'm in. >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Christopher Crouzet < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> My 2 cents on this: >>> http://christophercrouzet.com/blog/post/2014/03/07/Softimage-Has-Been-Killed%2C-the-Future-of-CG-Softwares-Is-Now-in-TD-s-Hands >>> >>> I'm looking forward to the future, how about you? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Christopher Crouzet >>> *http://christophercrouzet.com* <http://christophercrouzet.com> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------- >> Stefan Kubicek >> ------------------------------------------- >> keyvis digital imagery >> Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3 >> A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien >> Phone: +43/699/12614231 >> www.keyvis.at [email protected] >> -- This email and its attachments are -- >> --confidential and for the recipient only-- >> > > > > -- > Christopher Crouzet > *http://christophercrouzet.com* <http://christophercrouzet.com> > > -- Christopher Crouzet *http://christophercrouzet.com* <http://christophercrouzet.com>
