Yep I can really imagine that you must have been thru a lot of convincing to finally get your foot in a place. Took you what ? 2 years ? I expect the same for Vodoo.. if they indeed succeed... it won't be before a couple of years.
I'm learning seriously Fabric now because I can't imagine myself just switching to Maya... even if it's probably going to be the case, I want at least to spice it up with something good. And with the SceneGraph 2.0, it sounds that it could be a first step before moving to 100% Fabric. On 12 March 2014 10:51, Paul Doyle <[email protected]> wrote: > Now we have a global site license with MPC it is a lot easier to cover > that kind of concern. It is certainly hard at first and you have to do a > lot of convincing - we'll be eternally grateful to the guys at Hybride for > jumping in and being the people that really went for it first. My view > though is that if everyone just waits then you can guarantee that there'll > be no change - we structure our deals in a way that gives people confidence > over the long-term. > > I'm going to talk about some stuff soon that relates to this same idea of > studios and individuals asserting more control over the destiny of their > tools. > > > On 12 March 2014 13:46, Jeremie Passerin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> My problem with R&H software (Vodoo) is, can we trust them to do support >> ? >> R&H is not in a good shape and they want to sell their software.. good.. >> but what if it fails and they decide to stop support after a year or two. >> They don't really have a foot in that buisness yet so it sounds risky. >> A lot of people thought or maybe still think the same of Fabric. It >> sounds risky to be the first user of a new software, you got no idea if it >> will actually be popular or not. >> Otherwise no doubt that it is an awesome software but quality isn't the >> only thing that drive the decision to adopt a package. >> >> Christopher if you haven't seen the demo video , it's right there : >> http://rhythm.com/labs/ >> >> >> On 12 March 2014 10:26, Christopher Crouzet < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 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> >>> >>> >> >
