Yes it was Brad, but he doesn't know anything more than what he said in his post. From what I read on the Voodoo webpage it seems like they're trying to make it work for Prana first.
I'm guessing here, but I suppose if that goes well then much of the work to make Voodoo more generic would be done and it would be closer to a commercial product. It could be quite awesome to have a new DCC on the scene - Voodoo looks amazing. On 12 March 2014 12:40, Christopher Crouzet <[email protected]>wrote: > Sweet, thanks Paul! > > > > On 12 March 2014 11:36, Paul Doyle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I just pinged Brad to ask him - I'll let you know if he gets back to me >> (or he may contact you directly) >> >> >> On 12 March 2014 12:33, Christopher Crouzet < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 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> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Christopher Crouzet > *http://christophercrouzet.com* <http://christophercrouzet.com> > >
