Work flow wise, i guess from my limited exposure to ICE i can appreciate the node based interface, even if it is really more of a jenga tower
XGen just seems like a mess, i'm willing to concede that the power is there but the interface is hellish, you have to flip through so many windows so many parameters in a non linear fashion, worse if you forget some of the steps or to tick a box here or there, you might have to start from the beginning. it tries to give the impression of linear workflow with the wizard for the profile descriptions but its such a convoluted setup. I could see it working in a feature film environment, where you sometimes get a year to groom a character, but not in any other format. it looks like yet another horrible staple AD has introduced to the industry with zero scalability. Yes multi-scatter looks interesting, thanks Tim. Maybe someone can rework xGen's setup, i assume that "Dude its like so OPEN bro..." applies here too. More then anything i'm frustrated, when i started out in cg Hair/fur where fairly out of the grasp of the individual. i feel now that we have reached the point where this should no longer be the case. i always felt that ICE was expedient enough that all that was missing was a grooming interface to interact with guides. Why do these people not get that tools should be simple, the creative process is so all consuming. The last thing we need is to have to dick around for 3 hours before we even get to the grooming. hair and fur to this day is its own discipline, i don't think it should be, i think the tools are so shit that only the clinically insane few willing to abase them selves to jumping through those loops can thrive. So, "simple", and so far "simple" is the only goal i would risk conceding, because heaven forbid that they should make it FUN to use. The mentality is that it's not because you are good at grooming hair, but you are good at navigating the tool. we need to break from this, this is not good. Lord i hope the Fabric Guys can see this. Rant off. On 12 October 2014 10:00, Tim Leydecker <[email protected]> wrote: > I´m pretty excited about xgen. > > Not as a replacement for yeti fur, though. > > The thing about yeti isn´t just it´s grooming controls, > it has loads of tools for actually animating&simulating > fur and then caching things into somewhat reliable caches. > > That said, i still don´t have fully understood the whole yeti process > and find myself battling with it more than i would like to have to. > > Still, I haven´t seen anything from xgen that shows that level of > dynamic simulation&animation control you have with yeti. > > For me, xgen is starting to look more like an alternative to > http://www.multiscatter.com/ > > Multiscatter is for 3DSmax. > > It´s so easy to use, it makes me weep when I think about it while trying > to nicely > scatter or distribute *anything* in Maya... > > Cheers, > > > tim > > > > > > > On 11.10.2014 04:46, Sebastien Sterling wrote: > >> Hey there, would like to take an opportunity to survey people >> transitioners or old hands, about Hair/fur systems in Maya. >> >> I've already seen Yeti used to great effect, in and out of production. >> >> Has anyone used Xgen ? cause despite the hype, the implementation at the >> very least from the demo, looks convoluted as all hell. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15PJ4v_f-2I >> >> It seems to embrace all the tenants of Maya design philosophy, e.g: ... >> It's broken out of the box, no seriously the guy apologises like 4 times in >> the video before showing >> workarounds. >> >> Would love to hear if anyone has used it in production, and if it is >> actually useful, or if it is yet another Maya "Feature"... >> >> (Ps: yes i know Yeti is not commercially available in the US, but if we >> could restrict this to the technical ?.) >> >
