I started my 3d career in Max.. just as kinetix took over, so I know I
don't want to go back there again.
I just wonder if we can predict what crazy announcement AD will make next.
I would love to leave AD far behind me, but I own 2 Arnold licenses, and
I've grown very attached to them :)
Right now Maya seems like the only good Arnold alternative.
I know we have more than 2 years to decide, but already my clients are
asking me if we should start new projects in Maya.
I also don't want to make the transition under pressure, but rather ease
myself into the painful future that lies ahead.
I would love to just focus my spare time into learning houdini, but as a
freelancer I need to jump onto whatever bandwagon my clients and
freelancers around me jump on.
I just get the feeling we assume too much when it comes to AD's plans
for our future
Remember how "bright" it was just a few months ago
G
On 2014/03/17 12:57 PM, Nicolas Esposito wrote:
The main problem is that who own a license need to decide whether or
not switch to Max/Maya or just keep your Soft license and go somewhere
else.
Max is a dead horse, but regarding archviz project and CAD is still
one of the most used around, even if the alternatives are quite
good.....also in the gaming industries I see that is quite used and
lots of studios build their own custom tools in order to speed up the
workflow ( remember the Ubisoft article about the custom "gator-like"
tool they developed for Far Cry 3? )
Max wont die in the next 5-8 years, but maybe it'll become just an
archviz addon, just like they treated Softimage as a VFX addon, and
they keep pushing Maya as the "definitive tool" that'll be the
strongest of them all.
If I'll switch I'll probably go with Maya or Houdini, Max is not even
an option and yes, its so fuggin clunky and damn slow!
Also, don't forget, you need 3000 plugins in order to make it a
powerfull tool, out of the box its quite crappy.
2014-03-17 11:01 GMT+01:00 Angus Davidson <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
I think the difference is now there is a potential for a lot of
projects to be funded which wasn't really there before. If they
close ranks then its a big shame, if they don't they have the
potential to do great things. Like the other software vendors it
has been given a small window of opportunity to make a difference
in their market share. Whether they use it is up to them.
From: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday 17 March 2014 at 11:45 AM
To: "[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: Are we being blind choosing Maya over MAX?
It's simple for me. I investigated Blender whole-heartedly on
several occasions, and in my opinion, after some months of
research/tutorials and customization attempts, it's a jumbled
mess, and the developers would rather stuff cotton in their ears
than address these realities. The biggest problem is facing
hoardes of passionate users (who don't know Softimage like we all
know it, or even Max or Maya) who swear they know better than your
own 18+ year professionally trained experience and won't listen to
a word of what you have to say, it's simply not worth the hassle.
I also greatly suspect the underlying source code and architecture
of Blender is outrageously complicated and not worth forking or
putting up with in any way. That said, there are no other great
open source 3D alternatives that are commercially viable. That's
your answer, I've tried talking with Blender devs and their user
community in the past, no thank you sir, you can keep it all to
yourself. I'd be better off taking my rudimentary programming
skills and coding my own tools from scratch than putting up with
that scene, it's quite frankly a much less ridiculous notion.
This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is
confidential. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately and destroy the original message. You
may not copy or disseminate this communication without the
permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are
competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University and
recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may
not be legally binding on the University and may contain the
personal views and opinions of the author, which are not
necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University
and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the
University agrees in writing to the contrary.
