More context for clarity: "worthless".. to build a new "greatest compositing" app. On Dec 18, 2014 6:01 PM, "Luc-Eric Rousseau" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I see what you did there, but that quote was about the 14-bit > compositing code that was last developed in 1996, which I used 5 years > later. > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Andi Farhall <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Personally I think all of this old source code base is now worthless." > > > > I would agree, and I would include Maya. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > > Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:22:00 +0100 > > Subject: Re: Lets Hope Autodesk Buys the Foundry! > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > " I think people just want the existing, production-proven ones they are > > used to," > > > > Well this goes also for Softimage for a lot of artist out there but > doesn't > > meant a thing later when it was chopped down > > > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Does anybody want a new compositor? I don't think they do. I think > people > > just want the existing, production-proven ones they are used to, cheaper. > > What people have in their hands is pretty great already. > > > > btw autodesk doesn't own eddie/illusion/matador/ER, just the source code > of > > the fxtree, which doesn't really have any eddie in it and not that much > of > > the other ones. Personally I think all of this old source code base is > now > > worthless. > > > > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Paul Griswold > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Doesn't ADSK own Toxik, Composite, Smoke, Flame, FX Tree (Eddie, Media > > Illusion, Matador), as well as Elastic Reality (inside the FX Tree)? On > top > > of that they have a fantastic vector paint program called Sketchbook > > Designer (not Sketchbook Pro, though that's pretty spiffy too). > > > > It seems like they already own enough technology to create the greatest > > compositor the world has ever seen. I wonder what the problem is? > > Leadership? Nah.... > > > > -PG > > >
