I believe that The Foundry and Luxology can create great combo and can bring it to the another level. Let's wait for 801 which is due shortly, last I heard.
Artur 2014-03-13 1:00 GMT+01:00 Bk <[email protected]>: > I'm certainly wouldn't say Im transitioning to Modo, but I totally believe > in their dedication and vision and Brad has to be one of if not THE most > communicative leaders and that counts for a lot in my book. They listen and > react properly and are forward thinking. > Modo currently lacks hugely compared to Softimage for the work I do, but I > was using it as a renderer before moving to Arnold. I enjoyed Modo > rendering, to be honest, but nothing could compete with Arnold directly in > Xsi. > I do feel like the time is coming when modo is going to get more > interesting to animators and riggers, but for me I think it's a way off. I > need ice too much. > Anyway. I'm upgrading my modo licence , if mainly so I can get mesh > fusion, but also because who knows? If they are going interesting places in > the future, I don't want to be completely rusty. > Oh and the renderer is better at interiors than Arnold and a lot cheaper > to run so I may reintroduce it for the odd job. > > > On 12 Mar 2014, at 23:18, Perryharovas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Seriously evaluating modo as all this evolves. > > Please add me: > > [email protected] > > Thank you! > > > > On Mar 12, 2014, at 5:55 PM, Mario Reitbauer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > add me in, gonna do the transition to modo and houdini. > > [email protected] > > > 2014-03-11 17:00 GMT+01:00 Ahmed Barakat <[email protected]> > : > >> I would sure like to take a look at it [email protected] >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Tim Crowson < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Yes the lack of non-rigging-related operator stack (not just history) >>> has been an issue for some people who really do like to model more >>> procedurally. In rigging, you'll find that deformers are stacked using >>> Order of Operations, similarly to the operator stack in Softimage, on a >>> per-deformer basis. But that's not the same thing as a construction >>> history, or procedural modeling, which every agrees would be awesome to >>> have. >>> -Tim >>> >>> >>> On 3/10/2014 3:05 AM, Szabolcs Matefy wrote: >>> >>> I am evaluating modo now as an alternative, and it looks really >>> promising, however, I miss the history. But since I worked with LW before >>> SI for four years, it's really fun to feel a somehow familiar feeling :D >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* [email protected] [ >>> mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] >>> *On Behalf Of *David Rivera >>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 08, 2014 9:23 PM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Anyone in the SI list transitioning to MODO? -Please add >>> your mail here >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, I was really touched by some of the in-depth opinions about leaving >>> SI. TD´s perspective, and other >>> >>> users who have dedicated their lives (literally) to build a rock-solid >>> pipeline for studios all around the world >>> >>> using softimage, have really made me think a lot into consideration. >>> >>> >>> >>> So, to cut a long story short, I´d like to know if there´s a thread in >>> the list that´s already being aligned into >>> >>> the Softimage/MODO transition? If not, I´d like to start it off with >>> this post. >>> >>> >>> >>> I´m going into MODO and here´s my email: >>> >>> >>> >>> [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> >>> *David Rivera* >>> *3D Compositor/Animator* >>> LinkedIN <http://ec.linkedin.com/in/3dcinetv> >>> Behance <https://www.behance.net/3dcinetv> >>> VFX Reel <https://vimeo.com/70551635> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >> >
