Hopefully they'll announce something soon enough if they want to grab the attention of Softimage users before they jump onto another ship.
On 12 March 2014 12:20, Christopher Crouzet <[email protected]>wrote: > That would indeed be a great news! A software fine-tuned for years by its > own users on intense productions can only be welcomed. > I'm just wondering how they're planning to grab some market from Maya > though. Would their credibility be enough for some to make a transition > from Autodesk? > > > > On 12 March 2014 12:02, Paul Doyle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Christopher Crouzet > *http://christophercrouzet.com* <http://christophercrouzet.com> > > -- Christopher Crouzet *http://christophercrouzet.com* <http://christophercrouzet.com>
