Hi Sam. I don't want to drag this out too much, and I believe Angus provided a really nice perspective on the problem. Modo is not SI, nor Maya is! nor Houdini, nor anything. You provide some valid points for things to be improved, for sure. But the reality is, moving to any other application will mean relearning part of the workflows were used to (I actually had to go through several weeks of frustration with SI when I moved over to it too), but that's just normal. In the end, if you don't like a given environment, there's fortunately options for everyone. That being said, I just wanted to add more info to some of the points you made.
* Snapping in 801 was completely redesigned, and can now handle multiple simultaneous snapping types. It's not yet perfect, but it's loads better. It just needs to have a couple of bugs fixed. * Yes, to snap rotations, you need to hold CTRL before rotating. Personally, it doesn't bother me too much, but I agree it would be nice to be able to do it mid-way during a transform. * The difference between the axis rotate and the rotate tool is that axis rotate, while restricted to a single axis of rotation, as you noted, is designed to work in conjunction with the work plane. This can make editing components extremely fast, since the user doesn't need to rely on Action. Centers as much to achieve similar results (which take mor clicking to set up). It's just an alternate workflow. * The difference between the standard Scale tool and the Uniform Scale tool is that the latter allows you to scale by dragging anywhere in the viewports, and the scaling is constrained to all three axis. No need to go grab the manipulator on screen. Something that might be useful or not. To each its own. * I do agree that the Modo spinners are sluggish, but I did try to replicate the problem you describe with bevel segments, and if you drag slowly (which I had to, given how many segments get created with the spinner), Modo does give you visual feedback during the drag. I do agree that the responsiveness can be vastly improved. * Views can be made independent from one another for viewport transforms. All you have to do is bring up the Drawing Controls for the view you want to disconnect, and select "Independent Center/Scale/Rotate". At first, I was disconcerted by the views behaving this way, but after a while, I found it terrific for modeling, since I can focus on small areas of my model, and all views will show that area. * The "perspective distortion" amount for the perspective view can be changed to taste in the Preferences dialog. There's a setting under OpenGL called "Flatness of Perspective". Just increase that to suit your needs. A value of 50% looked very comfortable to me. I'm not trying to convince you that Modo is great. It is for some, not for others. Just wanted to add the info so that you or anyone else is aware of what to expect from it. Have a nice weekend! Sergio Muciño. Sent from my iPad. > On May 3, 2014, at 2:35 AM, "Sam Bowling" <sbowl...@cox.net> wrote: > > RANT WARNING! This started out as a reply to Sergio about Modo, but quickly > turns into a rant as I keep running across absolutely moronic issues with > this stupid program. If you have no interest in Modo you probably should just > skip this whole post. > > Looks like my problem was that in Softimage I can start rotating an object > and hit SHIFT at any time to snap the rotations, but in Modo you have to > hold the CTRL key before you start rotating. > > F11 in Modo pops up a menu that allows you to enable one kind of snap (as far > as I can tell) where in SI I can enable multiple kinds of snapping at once > and I don’t even have to turn it on. If I’m modeling or animating and I > decide I want to snap to a vertice, or object or anything, I just have to > Hold down CTRL and snapping is turned on until I let go of CTRL. In Modo I > have to stop whatever I’m doing and move my mouse up and click on snapping to > turn it on and if it’s not set to the type of snap I want I then have to hit > F11 to open the snapping menu and chose what I wanted to snap to. Just a > terrible and disruptive workflow. On top of that the snapping in Modo seems > very weak. I didn’t even realize I had snapping on at first because if you > move the mouse sort of fast it’s not really noticeable. Maybe there’s a > setting to change it, but out of the box, it’s pretty terrible. > > I took a look at the Cadjunkie Zen layout and it’s an improvement in the > layout, but it really doesn’t fix the real problem I have with Modo, which is > the way that the tools work. Despite all my complaining about Modo, I really > want to like the program. The features look good (on paper at least) and I > owned an early copy of Modo before I switched to Softimage and I can get Modo > 801 for an extremely cheap upgrade price. Unfortunately all I see when I use > this program is a more advanced version of Lightwave with most of the issues > that eventually made me stop using Lightwave in the first place. It’s also > inconsistent, for example if you select an edge and chose bevel, it bevels > it, but if you select a polygon and chose bevel it does and extrude with an > inset… Completely different behavior. Then there are redundant tools like > scale and uniform scale, which seem to do the exact same thing. And rotate > and axis rotate, which seems to be pretty much the same thing, except the > axis rotate only work son one axis and rotates around wherever you click. Why > not just move your center and use the rotate tool? > > I also noticed while messing with bevels and rounded edges is that dragging > on the numeric entry arrows (you know, the little arrows you drag to increase > the numbers instead of typing them in), is terrible. There is ZERO feedback > on how many edges you have added until you let go. I did this on a model that > couldn’t have had more than 100 edges, but because there was no feedback on > the round level as I drug the little arrow thing around when I let go I had a > value of 80 for the round level and it completely locked the program up for > so long I finally had to kill it. On many of the tools, there is ZERO visual > feedback when using the number arrow things (on tools such as extrude) until > you hit apply. Select a polygon and hit extrude and when you drag on the > little arrow widget thing the numbers increase of decrease, but nothing moves > un the viewport until you hit apply! What is this 1990? Why can’t this > program display the changes that are happening when I adjust the numeric > values for the extrude? > > To make things even worse, when switching between quad view and a single view > of any of the viewports the framing changes. Frame up and object while in > quad view so it fills all the viewports and then switch any of them to a > single view (0 on the num pad) and you now have tons of room around the > objects. If you frame it up in a single view and switch to quad, the > everything that was near the edge of the viewport is now outside of the view. > It gets even worse though, because your zoom setting for all the iso views > are connected. Zoom in in the top and you are zooming in in the front and > side view.. Why? Oh, and I just noticed it does the same when panning in the > ISO views… WHY? This is terrible! > > While I’m talking about views, is it just me or is there way too much lens > distortion/fisheye in the perspective views compared to … pretty much every > other 3d program out there? Maybe It’s accurate for a camera, but it really > suck when you are trying to model something like a human head when the > perspective seems to change as you get closer to the model. I’ve never had an > issue with this in any other 3d programs, but I remember having issues with > it when I used the program years ago and I noticed it right away when using > 701 and it’s really bugging me again. > > I am seriously getting angry about this. This is one of the youngest 3d > programs out, these guys had the opportunity to look at all the existing > programs like XSI, Maya and MAX and what did they do? They made a slightly > better version of the Lightwave interface. They based this new Next-Gen 3d > program off of one of the WORST UI’s in the 3d industry and from what I can > see didn’t even bother looking at any of the other programs out there other > than maybe a feature list. Sure that have all these gee-whiz features, but > the part of the program you deal with to get anything done is just crap. I am > completely disgusted by how poorly thought out this program really is. It’s > really sickening. > > > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sergio Mucino > Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 6:58 AM > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > Subject: Re: Torn > > Hi Sam. In the spirit of fairness, I just wanted to add some info to your > observations regarding Modo. > You can snap your rotations by holding down the CTRL key. This should help > you achieve precise values. > Snaps are turned on and off using F11. No need to fool around with menus. You > can change the snap type from the snaps popup, but that's only required when > changing what you're snapping to. You can also map your favorite snaps to > hotkeys using commands. Granted, it's not as "out-of-the-box" as SI or Maya, > but it can be done. > I, for one, prefer the different layouts. It's nice for me to be able to > focus on different things and have the tools I need at hand. There's someone > who developed an alternate UI (google Cadjunkie Zen)... I have yet to try it, > but it looks extremely clean and focused. I'll give it a shot soon. > Regarding bones, I guess the main difference is that Modo doesn't use bones > (like SI)... It uses joints (like Maya). There are fundamental differences > between both, so proper joint orientation is paramount. The same has to be > done in Maya (actually, Michael Comet's tools come in really handy for these > tasks). > It's fine if you didn't agree with Modo. We all have our preferred way of > working (I didn't agree with Lightwave at the time I tried it, which was like > 18 years ago). I just wanted to add this info for the benefit of those > looking around at options and thinking of giving Modo a go. > I can't comment on Blender, since I have yet to get my hands dirty with it. > Cheers! > > Sergio Muciño. > Sent from my iPad. > > On May 2, 2014, at 1:24 AM, "Sam Bowling" <sbowl...@cox.net> wrote: > > I’ve been looking around at alternatives to Softimage and not having any > luck. Modo have some great features, but the interface is just crap. There > are way too many different layouts for things that should mostly be done in > one or maybe 2 different layouts. Things like snapping rotations (or snapping > in general) seem to require you to click checkboxes or be enabled in other > menus where in Softimage, you can just hold down a modifier key to enable > most of those functions without dropping your current tool. Modo seems full > of tons of one use tools, whereas in Softimage I have a few tools that I use > most of the time that cover 99% of what I need to do. I was looking up > rigging in Modo the other day and it’s a mess. After you draw out you bones > you have to go in manually and correct all your individual joint rotations so > they work correctly. In the amount of time the guy built a basic spine I > could have had the entire character skeleton done in Softimage with working > IK. After massing with Modo for a short time I usually give up in frustration > at the terribly slow and clunky interface. Sure I could probably get used to > it in time and be productive, but why should I have to settle for such and > inferior and slow UI and workflow. The whole layer based approach to modeling > makes me want to punch kittens. > > I also tried Blender which seems to get a lot of praise because it is free > and has all these gee-whiz features, but again, the interface on that program > is horrid. Sure it’s better than the old one, but it’s still terrible. Also, > all the development seems to be on these qee-whiz features and some things > like beveling are mostly useless. This is one of the problems with open > source programs, no one wants to write the simple mundane features, they > would rather write the big flashy features so they can brag about them and > the simple tools get left unfinished, on never even added. > > When I initially switched from lightwave to Softimage, everything was just > amazing. The workflow was amazing, the documentation and tutorials were some > of the best I’d ever seen at the time (these have both declined since > Autodesk took over). Being able to get help with a tool by hitting F1 while > in the tool and having the help open to the information for that tool was > just amazing. Being able to crate basic tools or automat repetitive tasks by > just copying from the history to the script editor was great and allowed me > to do things I could never have done with my meager scripting abilities. All > the things that make Softimage a great tool have been in there for years most > of them since V4 or 5 which was the time I started using it. It’s just mind > boggling that there really isn’t another program out there that even comes > close to workflow and ease of use that Softimage has had for years. Where I > work I do 3d animation part time, sometimes not using Softimage for weeks, > and it’s great that Softimage has such a great interface where I can still > find even the most rarely used tool without spending tons of time searching > for it. With Modo I have trouble finding tools I used 5 minutes ago. > > So I’m probably going to be sticking with Softimage for quite some time. > > On a side note, it looks like Autodesk is putting even less effort into > developing Mudbox than it is with Softimage, so I gave 3- Coat another try > and I’m really impressed with it. I hated it when I used it several years > ago, but now it blows Mudbox out of the water and is much, much more user > friendly that the mess that is called Zbrush. I did some retopo work with > 3d-coat recently and I like it much, much more than Topogun. I absolutely > love the Voxel sculpting tools. So, it looks like Autodesk is going to be > missing out on any future money from me. > > > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Mirko Jankovic > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 6:06 AM > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > Subject: Re: Torn > > Or stay with softimage till there is actualy something like it.. maybe next. > Couple years > > On May 1, 2014 3:02 PM, "olivier jeannel" <olivier.jean...@noos.fr> wrote: > You should go toward C4D since it's the one I'm planning to get into :) (and > some houdini too) > Read that message and obey. > > Le 01/05/2014 14:49, Chris Marshall a écrit : > Complete generalist, working in tv, corporate, architecture, medical, FX, > simulations etc etc. It's probably easier to say what I don't do, which is > any character stuff, though I've done a bit of that too. Everything else is > included. > So software of choice in this scenario.....Softimage. > Obvious alternative choice of software.....None > > As a small company with limited resources, we don't want to have to build a > 'pipeline' of software, just to do what Softimage already does in one hit. I > appreciate times are changing, but I'm not jumping until I'm sure which way > to go. > > Nuffsed yo! > > ;-) lol > > > >
