On a brighter note, you won't need the NVidia Apex clothing plugins to
set up cloth in UE4 anymore, at least if I get their claims right for
version 4.18
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unrealengine.com_en-2DUS_blog_unreal-2Dengine-2D4-2D18-2Dreleased&d=DwIDaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=Y-_x9ysHpEaSR2MwBxa5Zvg1aTg0bdU7vHZYSJP419w&s=5oft3grrpxXSV3m9GVvIyMq1RSF7BLYKTo5ImUDgn24&e=
(You will need to scroll down to approx. 30% of the page). Says also
that the old APEX plugin workflow is still supported.
S
On 28/10/2017 20:22, skuby wrote:
Jordi
Thanks for the input, your 'point list' is very well thought out. I
think I'm covered (UE4 side for realtime and Houdini for composited
works).
I'd give a point for serious Cross-Platform support (OSX, Linux). I
think I might even give more than 1 point to open standards support
(in theory) but it's not always viable, I wish it were. Walled off
FBX is dominating, especially in games, for transporting rigged
characters and animation to and from UE4 or the other needed devils
like NVidia's game tools for generating clothing simulation files.
It's worth a point on your list at the very least but for me it's
unfortunately make or break.
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 10:35 PM, Andres Stephens
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Seems like open source is the best 3D software model to make
something float indefinitely regardless of market trends. Hope FE
does that…. Unless they got bought out or something.
-Draise
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of
Jordi Bares <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*Sent:* Saturday, October 28, 2017 9:41:04 AM
*To:* Official Softimage Users Mailing List.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__groups.google.com_forum_-23-21forum_xsi-5Flist&d=DwIDaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=Y-_x9ysHpEaSR2MwBxa5Zvg1aTg0bdU7vHZYSJP419w&s=HTlI9AfkhNO92R4OaUsj7jZzcklDH8grpxfcGIjL3JA&e=
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__groups.google.com_forum_-23-21forum_xsi-5Flist&d=DwMFaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=DLI3Guoj0XY__tyeCFqGoxUoGb6xtuaZ2eu9uFpWbwg&s=WvL8ovWFwnGh75oQ0VmNxnu96tuCK6FgXlAW295C_rw&e=>
*Subject:* Re: Softimage - not going away...
Although I understand where you are coming from the minimising
risk side, it is also true that you end up investing a lot more in
both, the software and glue to communicate various software
applications with a myriad of file formats and what not, therefore
I advocate for a hybrid approach in which;
- You define your FX and render backbone (one single application
always) and everything else feeds it.
- No plugins if possible unless you have a solid environment
resolution system in place and are willing to maintain it.
- No strategic dependencies with one manufacturer with a proven
record of discontinuing software (Apple and Autodesk are specially
bad)
- And make sure you build as much as possible in open standards
like Alembic, OpenColorIO, OpenImageIO, USD, VDB, etc...
With that in my head, I go and evaluate the next things to define
what should be my backbone.
> Software companies with a fair price and licensing structure
have 1 point.
> Software companies that support and adopt open standards have an
extra point.
> Software companies with strong R&D also have another extra point.
> Software companies that maintain their code have another extra
point.
> Software companies that top support have another extra point.
> Software companies that understand what we do have another extra
point.
> Software companies that keep refining their UX have another
extra point.
> Software companies that keep refining their core have an extra
point.
> Software companies that listen to their customers in a prompt
and agile way have another extra point.
You make the choice of course for your particular scenarios but
this is my view of how to choose your backbone.
Hope this makes sense.
jb
On 28 Oct 2017, at 14:20, skuby <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Investing your time into mastering the totality of one major
software is risky.
The specific example that I want to test in the coming months
doesn't seem unreasonable for one person (and you could swap the
parts out to suit your tastes/budget/needs/prior experience) (but
please critique the idea. I value your experience Mirko and I've
lurked around enough to pick up a lot from you, so feel free to
tear the idea apart):
Modeling (Blender +Plug-ins & Marvelous Deisgner). Sculpting
(Mudbox). Retopo for baking/animation (ZBrush & Blender). UV's
(semi-automated via Houdini). Baking/Painting (Mudbox &
Substance). Rigging+Animation (Houdini or possibly Akeytsu).
Everything else i.e. Shading/Lighting/Hair/Dynamics/FX/etc.
(Houdini or Unreal Engine 4). Then pick your favorite compositor.
With the above, I already know Blender and the plug-ins I need
for modeling/Marvelous Designer/Mudbox/ZBrush (and a decent bit
of UE4) for the tasks I want to accomplish. The rest of it is a
work in progress/I'm still deciding.
The cost isn't even too bad. Blender = free. Marvelous Designer
= $50 a month as needed. Mudbox $10 a month. ZBrush one time
$800. Substance $20 a month or as needed. Houdini Indie $200 a
year (OR if you needed it Houdini FX $2,495 a year after the
first ($4,495) year). Akeytsu (Haven't tested it yet, but it's
cheap at $200 and it looks powerful). Unreal Engine Free up front
+ 0% to 5% depending on the project.
I cannot see myself mastering every single one of those (or even
ever mastering just Houdini on it's own), but I can see myself
using each one to great effect for a very very specific task and
leveraging that tool's specific strengths to improve the final
quality (and perhaps in spots even winning back some lost time).
For me the options are stay with Softimage and eventually be
completely limited, try to pick a major software to master again
to replace Softimage (aka. Houdini / Blender / Maya) which seems
very risky/foolish. Or go the above route, changing things on an
as needed basis.
On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Mirko Jankovic
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
How replacing 1 tool with 5 or more, and work that could be
done by 1 man now requires 5 or more as well can be advantage?
ᐧ
------
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> with
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
------
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> with
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
------
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> with
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
------
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] with
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
------
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] with
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
