Graham totally missed the point to begin with.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Andy Nicholas <[email protected]>wrote: > That's a great post Jason, and I think it sums up the differences between > Maya > and Soft incredibly well. > > > I'm sorry Graham, but I'm with Alastair on this. > > > A > > > > > On 19 March 2014 at 19:54 Jason S <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 19 March 2014 15:26, Alastair Hearsum > > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >wrote: > > > Graham > > > > > > Would I be wrong in rephrasing your sentence to be: > > > ".....Maya's UI and workflow is crap but not totally" > > > Alastair ___________ > > > > > > > Here is a notable (& comprehensive) post on rigging from David > Gallagher > > > > in response to the super long and (seemingly purposefully) diluted > > > > article comparing SI / Maya rigging (concerning rigging workflow > -alone-) > > > > weighing pro & cons, while overweighing pros, underweighing cons, > and > > > > identifying things like the ability to use "locators" as rig > components > > > > as a "con" So how long will it take to get there? > > > > > > David Gallagher > > > > > > > > > Jan 8 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I rigged on quite a few characters in Maya at Blue Sky Studios > and now > > > (Softimage) AnimSchool. > > > We offer the well-known "Malcolm" rig for free. > > > > > > There is no comparison to rigging in Softimage and Maya--not the > kind > > > of rigging I do. > > > > > > I often assume by now they have better workflows in Maya, > > > but I'm often surprised to find how convoluted and limiting the > > > workflows are to this day. > > > > > > Most Maya people must not know there are better ways of working > > > or aren't doing the kinds of things I am, because the difference > is > > > profound. > > > > > > - At any point in the rigging process, you can make edits in the > model > > > stack to change the shape and topology of the model. > > > > > > After experimenting, you can freeze that part of the stack and > continue > > > on with that new shape, > > > retaining almost every bit of work you've done. > > > > > > YOU CAN CHANGE THE TOPOLOGY. YOU CAN CHANGE THE SHAPE FREELY. > > > > > > This difference is huge. You can work toward completion without > fear of > > > losing work. > > > > > > You can experiment freely--knowing it's fine if you want to make a > > > major change. > > > > > > I'm never afraid of losing blendshape work. > > > > > > And if the changes are really significant, you can always Gator > your > > > way out of a jam. > > > > > > - You can do blendshape edits directly on the geometry, > modelessly, > > > instead of on a separate blendshape object. > > > > > > - There is no comparison with corrective blendshapes. > > > In Softimage, you go to Secondary Shape mode and drag a few > points. > > > In Maya, I wish you luck. You can install one of several plug-ins > and > > > scripts and HOPE that it works. > > > If the scenario is simple enough, it might. > > > > > > > > > Several people here tried to help a student make a single > corrective > > > blendshape on an elbow > > > -- and we're all experienced Maya riggers--, after hours of > > > attempting, we threw up our hands. > > > > > > There was something in that object's history that was making the > > > blendshape plug-in fail. > > > The answer is what it often is: just start over. > > > > > > - EDITING corrective blendshapes. > > > In Maya, heaven help you if you want to edit that blendshape > later. > > > Start the process again and make a new one. > > > In Softimage, drag a few points and you're done in seconds. > > > > > > - For facial work, being able to make face shapes in conjunction > with > > > the mixer, > > > working directly on the main geo. > > > > > > To see other shapes muted, soloed as you're working. > > > > > > This allows you to craft shapes that work for different > scenarios, with > > > just the right falloff. > > > > > > You can make correctives for shape combinations quickly. > > > > > > In face work, it's all about how the functions combine to make the > > > range of expressive results. > > > > > > - The envelope weighting is far superior. > > > > > > The smoothing is just better, and more reliable. > > > > > > Negative weight painting actually works. > > > > > > Being able to make sophisticated weighting allows you to make > lighter > > > rigs, > > > because fewer nodes and calculations are needed. > > > > > > I can't believe someone actually compared Maya's Component Editor > to > > > Softimage's Weight Editor. I'm stunned. > > > > > > Sometimes, demoing Maya's envelope weighting, > > > it just stops working for no reason -- I have no idea why. > > > (Mind you, I've been rigging in Maya since 1999.) > > > > > > - You can envelope/skin null objects, not just joints. > > > (Yes, Maya will let you add other objects as deformers but it is > > > limiting and causes problems.) > > > > > > - The tweak tool. > > > You can grab anywhere and it will just get the nearest > point/edge/poly > > > and transform it precisely. > > > (1 baby step now solved in Maya) > > > > > > Add the proportional editing and it's very sculptural without > giving up > > > precise transform control. > > > I far prefer this workflow to the Zbrush approach geared toward > > > paintstrokes. > > > > > > - In Softimage, you can change the wireframe on shaded opacity. > > > You can change the point sizes. These mean I can visualize and > work > > > with the shape, > > > not get visually stuck on the tech clutter like in Maya. > > > > > > - LinkWithOrientation. Does Maya have anything built-in yet? > > > I know there are pose readers out there, but they are slow and 3rd > > > party. > > > > > > - The "smooth preview" Geometry Approximation is better, faster, > and > > > more stable in Softimage. > > > > > > - Even with the army of tools and plug-ins we had at Blue Sky > Studios, > > > I would still much rather use off-the-shelf Softimage. > > > > > > - You can select controls without selecting (and highlighting) > all its > > > children. > > > This makes it easier to animate the rig -- just drag selecting > will get > > > you the selectable controls. > > > > > > In Maya, drag-selecting gets a mixture of hierarchy parts. > > > > > > All this means that I can focus on the ART, the shaping of the > rig, not > > > jump through hoops all day. > > > As a result, our characters are more flexible and expressive. > > > > > > > > > .. how long will it take (??) > > > -- www.johnrichardsanchez.com
