Perry, if you're on subscription, you'll get a copy of Maya anyway. If the clients come in. Just "send to maya" and look busy.
On 19 Mar 2014, at 20:50, Perry Harovas <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Sven, > > I understand what you are saying, and there are aspects of it that I agree > with 100%. > For instance, you are totally correct with the statement that old tools can > still create great work. > > Of course they can, and the analogy you created was perfect. > > What I disagree with is that clients don't really know or care about the > software. > They actually know almost nothing, except the name "Maya". When you say > "Softimage" they do look skeptical, yes, > but if the work is good, they don't care that much. However, now that > Softimage is EOL, they will see that (many, many of them look up what > software is "standard" > and many also ask around to producer friends they know. When they mention > Softimage now, it will instill fear, not faith. They may know next to nothing > about the software, > but when they look into it (and they will), they will all of the sudden > become scared. > > The other thing is that the last sentence you wrote gave me pause. > 5 years in this business is an eternity. > > We will be lucky to get 2 years out of it with things starting to change > enough that it will become a problem much after that. > > No we don't NEED the newest updates, but often there are updates that make us > able to compete with others who would be using non-EOL software. > Things that will make it harder over time, not a long amount of time, to do > what we do. > > I say 2 - 3 years at the most. > > Really non of us knows for sure, of course. > All I know is that I won't be hanging all I have on Autodesk to find out. > > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Sven Constable <[email protected]> > wrote: > I'm angry as every Softimage user but maybe I can help to tamper your anger > down. My english is not so good to express my intentions in depth but maybe > it comes through somehow. > > > > CG and 3D animation in general is not different from other businesses. It's > all about perception. If a company produces clothes, they will not succeed by > using the newest machines to make the cloth. In fact they can produce on old > machines and child labour to produce a Levi's jeans. The market will see it > as high quality because of the name and the output they will create with any > machinery they use. > > Clients usually have no clue about 3D-Animation software in depth'and they > really don't care most of the times. I had conversations with clients and > they asked about the software I use. I told them I was using XSI (that was a > few years ago when we used that term). They didn't had any idea what 'that > XSI software' was all about and they seemed sceptical. Then I told them, it's > 'Softimage'. They instantly changed their minds, recogniced the name and they > were happy. :) Of course that will not work forever. > > > > What I really want to say is, that words do the damage to us. Words like > 'EOL'. It's a killer! Its like telling someone he has bad breath. We were > able to produce top notch 3D-animation four weeks ago. Now someone says a > software is EOL and that should be the reason no one can produce anything > with it? > > Lots of small studios, solo freelancers and even medium sized companys > producing their animations with software from several years ago. It's a > misconception, that we desperatly *need* every new fancy feature and the > newest version of a software. Surely it's different for the big companies, > but they have their own inhouse tools anyway. In fact even having those > inhouse tools like Vodoo (and that seems to be something that AD will not > remotly be able to develop in the next 10 years), it doesn't prevent them > from going bankrupt. > > Of course they're other reasons for the VFX business situation in the US than > that, but using newest software didn't help them. > > Somehow I think we are more concerned about a software than the actual work. > Do you need Bifröst do be in the business? Do you really need an > edge-loop-fancy-magnet function to do 3D-animation? > > There are so many workarounds, especially in Softimage so that we are not > have to rely on a specific software or version. At least not for the next > five years and thats a long time. > > > > sven > > > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Gallagher > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 8:11 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful > > > > > > Our pipeline is Softimage->Arnold->Nuke and despite all the turmoil I can > tell you I have no intention whatsoever to change that in the near future. > > It works, it works well, and nothing else right now can touch it. > > > > So Autodesk can shove their “innovation” right back up their collective arse > and choke on it -- as far as I’m concerned they’ve just killed a member of my > family. > > > Exactly right. > Trying to keep my anger tamped down. > > > > > > Cheers, > > Jean-Louis > > > > > > On 19 Mar 2014, at 04:39, Tenshi Sama <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Nice! All in Softimage? > > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Excelent work, so nice! > > > > On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel <[email protected]> wrote: > > https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397 > > Kudos to Digital Golem ! > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Perry Harovas > Animation and Visual Effects > > http://www.TheAfterImage.com >
