Here is a better race related analogy You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your skills and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles, torque, speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority, you just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that take care of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your machine can function as one and perform at your best. It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind. Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken up by "will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to the pit? are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound? will it crash, WILL IT CRASH?" If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself. Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this industry artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look under the hood. However this should not be viewed as a fatality, but an incentive, to build the most reliable and program with the most fluid interface that allows your users to reach that special place that 1:1 ratio where there is no more keyboard or stylus there's just you and the data, and you doing what you where made to do, unimpeded free. This quality this lucidity, to my mind is more precious then all the bullshit and bells trotted out each release. On 1 April 2014 18:10, Angus Davidson <[email protected]> wrote: > I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he > expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration. If you > think of where we are and its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be > simpler? > > Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill > battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their > unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it, > but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as > good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap > > The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no > matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if > you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a > few monitors to get there. > > Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It > enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the > box. > > > > > > > *From:* Sebastien Sterling [[email protected]] > *Sent:* 01 April 2014 06:39 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: A Good Read! > > I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you > Olivier ? > > > On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words. >> Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex 3d >> software, should just buy a pen... >> >> Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the day. >> >> >> Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit : >> >> This guy has a point. >> >> >> >> MB >> >> Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor >> <[email protected]><[email protected]>: >> >> >> " *When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool works >> under the hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat, strap in, and >> hit the gas* ." *Barry Zundel* >> >> This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do! >> >> Read the full article here: >> http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html >> >> >> >> >> >> > 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. > >
