Hi, > Why I can't stand Blender because it is the only software in the world > That pile so much features on top of another. There should be a mojor > redesign of the workflow and interface.
When you're familiar with its GUI, you can work with it very fast (the same is true for RS, of course). 3D software is always complex and there's no 3D application wich you can learn and master in just a view days. > I believe that company should not listen to their users (a little bit > only). > What should be or not be in a software, how the features should be working > is not a thing that should be taken into account buy the software > developer. > They should impose their vision. It seems that you've forgotten who'll use this software finaly. It's the end user. No commercial application will be done only to impose the developers visions. > If the user was smart enough, he would code his own 3D app. Sorry, but this is stupid. > Take a look at the industry : all those company are listening to the users > And see the result, every software look the same : radiosity, bones, > micropolygonsubdivision, etc. Of course they all look the same. Well, in fact they look similar. The reason is, that there're most wanted features, because the users have to work with their software day in, day out. Concerning payware (and most 3D applications are payware): finally it's the end user who decides wich feature will be implemented because he pays for it! When the developers don't listen to the end user, there software won't be sold. Its as simple as that. > While they should be creating new features never seen before, the 3D > software developer try to copy other feature of other software. That's ridiculously. You need some basic tools as well as new features, of course. But you cannot expect to develop only features "never seen before". A software developer is no magician. Most algorithms used in rendering software needs some previous and deep research. There's a good reason why a lot of universities have faculties dealing with those algorithms and the math behind it. > You (including me) all ask Vesa to put GI and Radiosity in Realsoft. > Vesa should not listen to you, instead he should go further. Go further? Go in what direction? I assume you have some very good, very secret ideas concerning new algorithms and new mathematical equations for perfect illumination in the shortest possible time. Or do you have some revolutionary ideas regarding modeling? C'mon, share your ideas! > Maybe he will find something better for illumination, something that has > never been done before if you just stop asking him for things that already > exist in other app and that never quiet work. Again: you cannot invent new technologies like to conjure a rabbit out of a hat. I think developing rendering applications is a process wich will take years and wich requires a lot of experience. And it's a matter of manpower. AFAIK the RS3D core development team consists of just two developers. On Blender there're a dozen of coders working on it, during the GSoC (Google Summer of Code) they were even more. Imagine: it just took a vew weeks to month to implement a fluid solver, a physics engine and a cloth simulation into Blender. Then there's a not to underestimate synergetic effect of open source software. For example there's an OSS project similar to ZBrush, and at the moment there're discussions on how to integrate those features into Blender. It would just be 'assimilated', in a friendly sense, of course. My prediction is that it'll be hard for smaller companies to keep pace with OSS development. > Note : I am not worthy of writing all this, I never saw the Blender > animation. Wait until 'Elephants Dream' will be released for download. But it would be even more valuable just to take a look at the way how Blender IK, rigging, bones etc. is working. http://www.blender.org/cms/Blender_2_40.598.0.html Regards, Andreas -- Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft für 0,- Euro*! "Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
