Fabian. I remembered this here for nature stuff (I have no experience with it but that might give you some ideas on large/nature scenes) http://thenatureacademy.blenderguru.com/sp/7612-the-nature-academy-live-now
Also, less nature specific, but creating/editing curves in blender isn't great atm, it works but it's not great ( you start with a default s curve and have to edit it, no drawing points ). Animating along a path I think works fine. However, extruding/lofting along a curve in Blender is a complete mess, just fyi. I finally got it to work months back when I was learning, it's implemented really weirdly. I don't like how it works at all, it's just odd and cumbersome and seems like something they just haven't gotten around to updating in a long while. There maybe be separate modeling add-ons that do a better job for lofting/extruding along a curve. It's not a feature that I use all of the time, but it's annoying when-ever it comes up. On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:25 PM, skuby <sku...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dude, Nicolas. Thank you so much! > > Fabian. Honestly, I have no idea I would just be guessing. Feel free to > send me a scene in .fbx and I will try it and see if I can come to any > opinion on the performance. > > On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Nicolas Esposito <3dv...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I can answer some of the Maya LT related questions: >> Trax absence is a minus, but overall I'm used to the graph editor, so no >> big deal. >> - Some of the deformers are missing, one of them is the cage deformer who >> I use extensively in Soft and in Maya LT I really miss it...also the delta >> mush is missing, which is quite a nice addition, but I also notice that in >> "standard" Maya its kinda broken, not sure if its only a problem that I >> have or the model I'm currently working is broken, but it works whenever it >> feels...strange... >> I'm currently using Apex Cloth plugin, and it works pretty well...I've >> used it for both cloth simulation ( takes 5 minutes to setup ) and for hair >> simulation with good results. >> >> Gator is why I currently switch back and forth to Softimage in order to >> get things done quickly, and the transfering attributes in Maya is a bit >> annoying, but its there ( not as good as Gator however ). >> >> Big problem which currently Maya LT have is the lack of python scripting, >> which kills the UE4 plugin called ART ( autorigger ) which I use a lot >> currently and its pretty good. >> You can of course build or use other rigs, but overall with UE4 I found >> very easy and quick the rigging process. >> >> Cheers >> >> 2015-05-05 16:37 GMT+02:00 skuby <sku...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Hey yall, long time no see. Thought I would give you guys an over-view >>> of my Softimage transition to Blender, 1 year in. (Been with Softimage for >>> almost 9 years trained at VFS, > Before that I was all Maya 6+ dedicated >>> years, then off and on use, before that I was 3DSMax/just starting out). >>> >>> If there is any interest, I can suggest some >>> options/settings/tips/tricks for Blender to help anyone trying to get into >>> it from a Softimage background, just ask, I'm happy to oblige. >>> -------------------- >>> I also I have some questions about Maya LT 2016 owners at the very end. >>> -------------------- >>> TLDR: I'm seriously pursuing an independent project in UE4 in my >>> free-time > Blender has been pretty awesome, it has shortcomings, has >>> promise, has some stuff that is better than anything out there, it's a >>> mixed bag overall. >>> >>> -Probably going to have to get a Maya LT 2016 subscription very soon >>> (because of the sad state of Blender FBX and reading a litany of eerily >>> similar FBX issues in Houdini which would have been my first choice before >>> Maya), > literally going to use Maya as a glorified exporter, otherwise >>> mostly quite happy in Blender!. >>> --------------------- >>> >>> Blender FBX/Normals (grade D-) : Current biggest problems with Blender >>> for game dev, is it's pretty horrible custom FBX solution and it's >>> lackluster support (and only recently) for direct control over normals, >>> tangents, bi-normals, etc.. It does have solid SMD export for Valve >>> workshop stuff, but if your focus is on Unity/UE4, expect difficulties >>> frustrations that I suspect will last until late into the year if not much >>> longer. >>> >>> Poly-modeling (B+): A few settings you need to know about, and >>> whalakazam, you get something that is nearly as good as Softimage poly >>> modeling. It even does a few things far better than Softimage ever did, I >>> find it to be far superior to Maya in this category. It has become, and >>> will remain my full-time go to modeling application. (I have fully >>> abandoned Softimage for better or worse) >>> >>> UI/Customizability (A-): It's fully open to customize or extend, and the >>> Blender hot-key system once you learn it, is quite good > the default >>> hotkeys aren't even half-bad but they aren't perfect either. There are a >>> plethora of very well done free and paid add-ons. UI seems quirky at >>> first, but once you learn it, you realize it's hiding a lot of power under >>> the hood. UI and Customize-ability is one of Blender's best features *but >>> it's not immediately apparent, and takes reasonable dedication to fully >>> appreciate. It's better than Softimage and Maya on this front (for >>> indie/small studio), however nothing to this day matches Softimages >>> perfected defaults and standard hot-key set and it's near perfect >>> consistency through-out different sections of the system, out of the box, >>> -but surprisingly, Blender is by far, the closest of all to Softimage's >>> elegance even though that is a tall order to fill. >>> >>> Documentation/Tutorials (A+): Mostly Free and a few good paid tutorials, >>> out the wazzzooo. The only software out there that I have used with equal >>> tutorial/community support is Unreal Engine 4. >>> >>> UV's: (C-): Do-able, and the automatic stuff just works a lot better >>> than Maya 2015's when I last tried it. Some fine tune editing works quite >>> well, while a few things related to fine tuning after automatic results, >>> are frustratingly/maddening and time consuming, and that's what drops the >>> entire grade (it would be very difficult to explain in text). I found >>> Softimage to have B+/A- UV features once you mastered it. >>> >>> Sculpting (B+/A-): For raw poly power, it's no ZBrush/Mudbox (Mudbox >>> being my favorite of the two, aka. I hate the ZBrush UI) However, if you >>> follow some specific workflow guidelines, Blender has quite an amazing >>> sculpting tool-set and so far it is my favorite sculpting package overall >>> because of the ability to go back and forth between low-res base mesh >>> poly-modeling and right back to sculpting detail and or proto-typing. Two >>> types of sculpting, traditional for normal map/displacement/finished work >>> and another type for rapid proto-typing, that allows you to create/collapse >>> geometry on the fly, so you can proto-sculpt infinitely without caring 1 >>> bit about the underlying mesh as it will create or delete geo as needed. >>> Has all your standard base brush needs, can make most any brush, some >>> limitations but minor and I only have 1 single sculpting add-on for Boolean >>> cuts which works nicely, I've seen many, quite nice looking sculpting >>> add-ons that I haven't yet explored, it's deep and it's being actively >>> developed. >>> >>> Texture Painting (B+/A- to use > but quirky to learn): First time setup >>> is a bit to learn, but once you figure it out, you get VERY nice easy to >>> work with multi-layered texture painting, full pressure sensitive painting >>> support / basic but reasonable default brush library and good brush >>> settings available for each, can paint into any map slot you like with >>> multiple layers. >>> >>> Animation/Rigging/Blend Shapes(D-/A- great in it's own right but needs >>> FBX/etc. to play nice with others that is why large grade gap): I haven't >>> gone too deep here, but the basics all work nicely without issue for me. >>> If FBX was fixed, it's an easy passable to high grade. >>> >>> Materials/Render (D-/B+): Has 2 systems. Old stack based and new node >>> based. Neither are perfect but both can and do work well, they are also >>> barely compatible with each other. I don't render much, my focus is >>> Games/Realtime. That said, I do a lot of material/texture work. I'd say >>> Blender is quirky in this department at best (I suspect no one here will >>> appreciate it), but when you get it all worked out at it's best, it's at >>> least passable. -No where near as good as Softimage (Soft material nodes >>> were the best, EVER, anywhere.), also not as powerful as Maya overall but >>> the node interface is as good/slightly better than Maya last time I checked >>> - (I thought Maya's new node system was very clunky/awkward to use in >>> practice (too many exposed pins, etc, >Blender's node system is way, way >>> more friendly/workable. I think most Softimage users will find Blenders >>> older stack system completely foreign, although I've grown to like it for >>> some odd reason). The new cycles rendering, for the very little I played >>> with it, is quite powerful and more up to date than age-ing mental ray but >>> one will probably need to delve into the paid tutorial realm and some >>> months of study for professional results. >>> >>> Baking (D-/C-): It's a quirky system. Can work well enough at times. >>> When it does work well it's never 100% perfect, usually needs slight >>> touch-ups in paint. When it starts giving you cyclical dependency errors, >>> you'll be pulling your hair out, there's no good reason for it but it's a >>> persistent bug that is sometimes fixed and sometimes re-appears, the work >>> arounds are awful. Softimage in it's prime makes Blender's baking >>> interface look and feel like utter crap. I use it for transferring maps >>> after I re-do UV's or for baking Normals/etc. but at first sign of it going >>> into bug mode, I switch to XNormal, which is of coarse, a hassle and time >>> waster. >>> >>> Extra Features: Blender has pretty decent and quite use-able nodal >>> based composting system and a dedicated video editing system built in. >>> I've also been pretty happy with the regular updates of new features and >>> improvements and the software's recent focus on making itself more >>> accessible/UI friendly. The large crowd of independent and young 3D >>> artists out there using Blender today, are quite rapidly producing >>> impressive results, it's quite promising. There are a wealth of add-ons, >>> both paid and free for Blender, I haven't gone too deep into them yet, but >>> I have found a few great ones. >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Maya LT 2016 questions: I'm about ready to pull the trigger on this >>> purchase. Going to start a demo soon, to test a few things but I'm >>> confident it will suit my needs where Blender fails hard. General >>> question: how have Maya LT > UE4 users been finding the 2016 LT experience, >>> any complaints, or is it all good? Has anyone used Maya LT with NVidia's >>> Apex physics add-ons? I currently use Apex stand-alone and it's a pain in >>> the ass, I figured the Maya add-on would be a lot better, is it working? >>> >>> If anyone has any Maya modeling tutorials / system settings / plug-ins / >>> free downloads that bring it into line with what Softimage was capable of, >>> I'm at the very least curious. You know what I mean, hotkeys, speed/ease >>> of use/comfort/power at the ready. I am happy in blender, but curious what >>> you guys might have discovered over the last year. >>> >>> My main question/concerns regards custom normals, bi-normals, tangents. >>> I will be able to see what LT has to offer when I demo it soon, but from >>> the comparison list, there is a chart between LT and full Maya that lists >>> missing features in these categories (namely: normal constraints / tangent >>> constraints). Any info related to normals, tangents and bi-normal / >>> editing in Maya LT appreciated. (not as important, there were a few other >>> features between full Maya and LT, that I found weird that they left them >>> out, like transfer maps?, any idea why? that would have been nice since >>> Softimage's transfer maps always worked quite well) Viewport 2.0 missing, >>> seems odd? The list I have is here >, is this accurate/up to date? >>> >>> >>> http://www.autodesk.com/products/maya/compare/compare-products >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >> >> >
