Hey, have you ever considered spending the Maya-licensing money in developing Blender instead? E.g. hire someone to make the fbx-exporter the way you want/need it , or stuff like that. I'm just curious if that would be a real option... cheers, Thomas
> skuby <[email protected]> hat am 5. Mai 2015 um 16:37 geschrieben: > > 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. >
