Lol Lu It's amazing for this, this, this.... it sucks :)
I believe qualoth has been discontinued. yes next person to offer a feature rich cloth solution will be a rich man/woman, may the Fabric enginz be with him. On 22 May 2014 18:18, Halim Negadi <[email protected]> wrote: > +6 Lu > > > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Meng-Yang Lu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I think the only failure of the node architecture was that it wasn't >> meant to be used by artists. Had they had that in consideration, we >> would've had something like ICE or close to it ages ago. There are still >> some cool thing you can do in the Hypershade today, but it's unwieldy >> compared to applications that knew nodes was going to be tinkered with by >> artists. >> >> Maya strengths are still it's quick interactive ability to build stuff >> and animate. Since this is an XSI list, we've all had a taste of what >> animation could be due to some really nice "quality of life" features. >> However, XSI never in the time I've done 3D ever caught up in terms of >> animation performance. It is still king of interactive performance at the >> cost of shoddy user experience. >> >> Before, Maya was the do-it-all tookit and still can be today. And a lot >> of the early technology that went into the Maya side were far better >> implemented than in any other package. The strength was indeed ubiquity, >> and it was attractive to plug-in developers alongside 3DS max. Shave had >> more functionality in Maya before it was integrated into XSI. Syflex had >> more functionality in Maya than the XSI integration too. nCloth is still >> used in both conventional and unconventional ways because every other out >> of box cloth solver just isn't good. We still rely on nCloth heavily and >> it's second only to something like Qualoft. nCloth is definitely a >> strength to leverage. >> >> Also, Maya + Window = new tech hotbed. Syflex, Shave, Comet Muscles, and >> now FE/Splice. Anything that seems promising usually begins it's early >> stages as a plug-in for Maya. No guarantees that these fledgling tools >> would be production worthy, but I'm the first to admit I've grabbed a >> plug-in and blindly marched into production many times. >> >> Maya's other strength is it's large user base. If you want a CG army >> that puts ancient Persia to shame, go with Maya. You are almost guaranteed >> you'll find someone to fill an empty seat if your shop is a Maya one. And >> though that pool may not be as experienced or agile as artists in other >> packages, you definitely have the advantage of choice and can cherry-pick >> to your hearts desire. To be fair, there are good Maya users out there >> with their own Maya knick-knacks that can still put up good work. And to >> that point, if you're a Maya user, you're almost never out of a job if >> you're smarter than the average bear. >> >> I still don't like it. >> >> -Lu >> >> >> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Sebastien Sterling < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> In fairness the architecture is admirable, i don't think anyone ever >>> made a fully nodal DCC after maya, to bad so little of it reaches its full >>> potential. >>> >>> >>> On 22 May 2014 17:15, Luc-Eric Rousseau <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> 20 years.. 4/5 years late..adjusted for inflation I guess ;) >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Maya was ahead of its time 20 years ago, the novel architecture and a >>>> long list of historical events and mismanagement from Softimage (owned by >>>> Microsoft at the time) meant XSI arrived at least 4/5 years late to the >>>> party, which was a death sentence and big facilities by then did the full >>>> switch (not all but the majority). >>>> > >>>> > The genius side (and the part I don't like) was the viral nature of >>>> Maya in which you have to write stuff for pretty much everything which >>>> meant everybody was building tons of software (and complex ones too) on top >>>> of Maya so by the time XSI was starting to pick up pace it was an >>>> impossible fight. >>>> > >>>> > Was maya great for character animation? Yes, It has always been very >>>> good at that because the animation editor and dope sheet were very nice, >>>> also very fast with multiple characters and some versions very robust. >>>> Manipulators made life a pleasure (remember XSI introduced them late) so it >>>> was not a myth, but today it XSI is imho way superior for animation, shame >>>> the envelop deformers were never looked after properly. >>>> > >>>> > Jordi Bares >>>> > [email protected] >>>> > >>>> > On 22 May 2014, at 14:25, "Leendert A. Hartog" <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Okay, a more specific question. Back in the day I always heard that >>>> Maya was the most useful tool for Character Animation (discounting >>>> Softimage from the equation). Was this just myth or is it just outdated >>>> info? >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> >>>> >> Leendert A. Hartog AKA Hirazi Blue >>>> >> Administrator NOT the owner of si-community.com >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
