On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Adrian Graham <[email protected]> wrote: Sorry, I guess I'm still perplexed, On Si-Community, Mauricio commented about why shake went-on while really not as much for soft, saying that the difference was mostly around available jobs as there was still many jobs for Shake after it's Eol Fair enough, and I agree. But that doesn't explain why if not users, why studios themselves decided to "bend themselves in 4" (Change adapt to entire new pipelines, ways of doing doings.. sometimes employees, accept sometimes much longer turn-around times) and migrate "before time". (or before a 3D equivalent of a "Foundry Nuke" came) ... What (the heck) was the pressure? At first glance, I would think that might have to do with how at the beginning, all migration paths immediately led to Maya/Max, while advising the largest studios in advance of that, thus perhaps making them migrate first (before any backlash) and while these biggest studios often heavily influence others. I don't know but it's pretty obvious that it isn't the Lack of artists willing to work in Soft. (not just from all the Maya bitching) Which I guess is my point. Hasn't been a year... :-/ On 02/19/15 19:10, Steven Caron wrote:
|
- RE: OT Maya: ncache hell Adrian Graham
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Tim Leydecker
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Gerbrand Nel
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Cristobal Infante
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Rob Chapman
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Cristobal Infante
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Jason S
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Tim Leydecker
- RE: OT Maya: ncache hell Adrian Graham
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Steven Caron
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Jason S
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Jason S
- Re: OT Maya: ncache hell Mirko Jankovic
- Re: Syflex simulation for making paper with ICE forces Pierre Schiller

