Re: Autodesk webinar

[Andy Goehler]

Moving from Softimage|3D to XSI 1.0 felt exactly the same ;-)

Andy

On Mar 18, 2014, at 23:23, Jordi Bares  wrote:

> … instead they threw FCPX to the table clearly unfinished, from the ground up 
> amazing ideas but not finished and truly not to the standard of the industry.

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Serguei Kalentchouk]

I first saw this technique here, note the date:
http://blog.wolfire.com/2009/11/volumetric-heat-diffusion-skinning/

The Autodesk implementation has a better voxelization and weight
falloff solution though.

Having implemented this technique before, the most difficult part it to get
a reasonable performance out if it.


On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, Raffaele Fragapane 
wrote:

> http://www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mdelasa/voxelization/ <- proposal and video
> http://www.delasa.net/data/sca2013_voxelization.pdf <- actual paper
>
> It's not particularly hard conceptually, but personally I wouldn't do it
> in ICE. It'd likely be below acceptable performance for a large enough set
> of voxels, and you'd be in trouble to bring GPGPU performance into ICE
> nodes if you were willing to write one (I got really flaky results
> personally, but it's not impossible).
>
> It's not terribly hard to do in C++ nor to thread it decently in CUDA,
> there are some very obvious potential kernels to it, and plenty stuff you
> could start from for OCTrees structures, sorting, walking and so on already
> available to not re-invent the wheel.
>
> You are missing a (moderately) clever bit though as you need to find
> boundaries and geodesic distance, if you just walked outwards from a bone
> inclusive voxel indiscriminately you would be only marginally better off
> than if you simply used plain geometric distance methods, but it's not an
> order of magnitude more complex than what you'd think of by intuition.
>
> It's not really a hugely impressive feature, don't get me wrong, but it's
> not a day's worth of work to offer a proper generic implementation that
> will scale to respectable complexity.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Bk 
> 
> > wrote:
>
>> Unless there is some clever part that Im missing, It's not a hard thing
>> to implement. Fill a volume with voxels. Spread out( iterate) influence
>> from bones across the volume particle to particle by neighbours.
>> Get closest voxel to surface and find resulting influence for each bone.
>> Normalise and write to envelope .
>> I'd be bold enough to suggest it could be done in ICE in a day.
>>
>>
>> On 19 Mar 2014, at 02:35, Eric Thivierge 
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately have to agree with Luc-Eric on this point. Blender probably
>> has a heat map algo or something. I haven't seen the geodesic anywhere but
>> the AD research vid from around last Siggraph.
>>
>> 
>> Eric Thivierge
>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau 
>> 
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paulo César Duarte
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>> > Agree, and the geodesic voxel binding skin algorithm, Blender already
>>> have
>>> > at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only
>>> > implementation of existing tools.
>>>
>>> Got a link to that?  Geodesic voxel binding is research by Autodesk.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>


-- 
Technical Director @ DreamWorks Animation

RE: Anyone in the SI list transitioning to MODO? -Please add your mail here

[Angel Negron]

hello, i am interested in learning modo and its tools sets. 

Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 20:33:41 -0400
From: d...@upbeatunique.com
To: activemotionpictu...@yahoo.com; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Anyone in the SI list transitioning to MODO? -Please add your  
mail here


  

  
  
The more videos I have been watching and exploring in the program,
the more I am liking it.

I am no where near doing what I can in Softimage but there are a lot
of nice things in there.

Some of the workflows are a different paradigm, but I can see myself
picking it up quickly.

Looking forward to 801... it is everywhere...



Dan



On 3/18/2014 8:30 PM, David Rivera
  wrote:



  
Hi Daniel Kim. We´re building up the list for the
benefit of sharing what´s it been to go to Modo.
We
are partially waiting for the MODO webinar to come. Then
you´ll see this thread (and their mails) move
a
little more regarding topics.
In
the mean time, I myself am watching every modo video I can
check out to get into The Foundry mentality-aspects-of-3D.

  


  
Cheers.

  
 
David Rivera

3D Compositor/Animator

  LinkedIN

Behance

VFX Reel
 

  

  

On Monday,
  March 17, 2014 3:17 PM, Daniel Kim
   wrote:

 
  

  
So, many people are adding their
  email for Modo here, and anyone know how to
  connect each other with those email?
  Is there going to be a mailing list like
Softimage?
  

  

  
  


---
  Daniel Kim
  Animation Director & Professional 3D
  Generalist
  http://www.danielkim3d.com
---
  

  

  

  





  

  

  



-- 
Dan Pejril
Upbeat Unique Entertainment
www.UpbeatUnique.com  

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Raffaele Fragapane]

http://www.dgp.toronto.edu/~mdelasa/voxelization/ <- proposal and video
http://www.delasa.net/data/sca2013_voxelization.pdf <- actual paper

It's not particularly hard conceptually, but personally I wouldn't do it in
ICE. It'd likely be below acceptable performance for a large enough set of
voxels, and you'd be in trouble to bring GPGPU performance into ICE nodes
if you were willing to write one (I got really flaky results personally,
but it's not impossible).

It's not terribly hard to do in C++ nor to thread it decently in CUDA,
there are some very obvious potential kernels to it, and plenty stuff you
could start from for OCTrees structures, sorting, walking and so on already
available to not re-invent the wheel.

You are missing a (moderately) clever bit though as you need to find
boundaries and geodesic distance, if you just walked outwards from a bone
inclusive voxel indiscriminately you would be only marginally better off
than if you simply used plain geometric distance methods, but it's not an
order of magnitude more complex than what you'd think of by intuition.

It's not really a hugely impressive feature, don't get me wrong, but it's
not a day's worth of work to offer a proper generic implementation that
will scale to respectable complexity.


On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Bk  wrote:

> Unless there is some clever part that Im missing, It's not a hard thing to
> implement. Fill a volume with voxels. Spread out( iterate) influence from
> bones across the volume particle to particle by neighbours.
> Get closest voxel to surface and find resulting influence for each bone.
> Normalise and write to envelope .
> I'd be bold enough to suggest it could be done in ICE in a day.
>
>
> On 19 Mar 2014, at 02:35, Eric Thivierge  wrote:
>
> Unfortunately have to agree with Luc-Eric on this point. Blender probably
> has a heat map algo or something. I haven't seen the geodesic anywhere but
> the AD research vid from around last Siggraph.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau 
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paulo César Duarte
>>  wrote:
>> > Agree, and the geodesic voxel binding skin algorithm, Blender already
>> have
>> > at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only
>> > implementation of existing tools.
>>
>> Got a link to that?  Geodesic voxel binding is research by Autodesk.
>>
>>
>


-- 
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful

[Tenshi Sama]

Nice! All in Softimage?


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Francisco Criado wrote:

> Excelent work, so nice!
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel 
> wrote:
>
>> https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397
>>
>> Kudos to Digital Golem !
>>
>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Eric Thivierge]

Have at it sir. :)


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:43 PM, Bk  wrote:

> Unless there is some clever part that Im missing, It's not a hard thing to
> implement. Fill a volume with voxels. Spread out( iterate) influence from
> bones across the volume particle to particle by neighbours.
> Get closest voxel to surface and find resulting influence for each bone.
> Normalise and write to envelope .
> I'd be bold enough to suggest it could be done in ICE in a day.
>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Bk]

Unless there is some clever part that Im missing, It's not a hard thing to 
implement. Fill a volume with voxels. Spread out( iterate) influence from bones 
across the volume particle to particle by neighbours.
Get closest voxel to surface and find resulting influence for each bone. 
Normalise and write to envelope .
I'd be bold enough to suggest it could be done in ICE in a day.


On 19 Mar 2014, at 02:35, Eric Thivierge  wrote:

> Unfortunately have to agree with Luc-Eric on this point. Blender probably has 
> a heat map algo or something. I haven't seen the geodesic anywhere but the AD 
> research vid from around last Siggraph.
> 
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau  
> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paulo César Duarte
>  wrote:
> > Agree, and the geodesic voxel binding skin algorithm, Blender already have
> > at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only
> > implementation of existing tools.
> 
> Got a link to that?  Geodesic voxel binding is research by Autodesk.
> 
> 

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Eric Thivierge]

Unfortunately have to agree with Luc-Eric on this point. Blender probably
has a heat map algo or something. I haven't seen the geodesic anywhere but
the AD research vid from around last Siggraph.


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:31 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paulo César Duarte
>  wrote:
> > Agree, and the geodesic voxel binding skin algorithm, Blender already
> have
> > at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only
> > implementation of existing tools.
>
> Got a link to that?  Geodesic voxel binding is research by Autodesk.
>
>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Luc-Eric Rousseau]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Paulo César Duarte
 wrote:
> Agree, and the geodesic voxel binding skin algorithm, Blender already have
> at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only
> implementation of existing tools.

Got a link to that?  Geodesic voxel binding is research by Autodesk.

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[Raffaele Fragapane]

In my book that it's an external module is good for a very extensive number
of reasons, and it has a good team behind it.

The  approach to the dev and release cycle though I find both questionable
and insufficient to place it anywhere significant on the map any some than
two to three years, and that leaves a massive gap for those coming from
soft and incapable or unwilling to adopt or develop competing solutions.

Given autodesk propensity to rushed and whimsical decisions it also makes
me unwilling to roll the dice on it at all since it might be a great thing
that might still get canned if it doesn't  instantaneously produce results,
results I question it can produce at all any time soon.
On 19 Mar 2014 04:48, "Arvid Björn"  wrote:

> I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and then
> even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good thing. Here's
> the mental image I got during that demo:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy wrote:
>
>>   Its probably like this..
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful

[Francisco Criado]

Excelent work, so nice!

On Tuesday, March 18, 2014, olivier jeannel  wrote:

> https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397
>
> Kudos to Digital Golem !
>

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[Sebastien Sterling]

Yeah, but are you reeeaaallly surprised Arvid ? reeeaaallly ? :P


On 18 March 2014 17:48, Arvid Björn  wrote:

> I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and then
> even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good thing. Here's
> the mental image I got during that demo:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy wrote:
>
>>   Its probably like this..
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Sebastien Sterling]

I see it now in the video! yes it looks like it's been standardized as well
I stand corrected, only took 10 years, the dissolution of a much better
application, and someone else technology but i'll be damned if it isn't
their i tip my hat to you sir.


On 19 March 2014 00:37, Luc-Eric Rousseau  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Sebastien Sterling
>  wrote:
> > "The NEX smart selection highlight and symmetry now has been integrated
> in
> > the standard maya
> > tools in Maya 2015"
> >
> > Well no actually you haven't, you have just added an extra shelf with NEX
> > specific tools.
>
> I don't know what you mean, the preselection highlight is either there
> or it's not, and it's definitely there in the default tool wi.  Do you
> have Maya 2015?
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Luc-Eric Rousseau]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Sebastien Sterling
 wrote:
> "The NEX smart selection highlight and symmetry now has been integrated in
> the standard maya
> tools in Maya 2015"
>
> Well no actually you haven't, you have just added an extra shelf with NEX
> specific tools.

I don't know what you mean, the preselection highlight is either there
or it's not, and it's definitely there in the default tool wi.  Do you
have Maya 2015?

Re: Anyone in the SI list transitioning to MODO? -Please add your mail here

[Dan Pejril]

The more videos I have been watching and exploring in the program, the 
more I am liking it.
I am no where near doing what I can in Softimage but there are a lot of 
nice things in there.
Some of the workflows are a different paradigm, but I can see myself 
picking it up quickly.

Looking forward to 801... it is everywhere...

Dan

On 3/18/2014 8:30 PM, David Rivera wrote:
Hi Daniel Kim. We´re building up the list for the benefit of sharing 
what´s it been to go to Modo.
We are partially waiting for the MODO webinar to come. Then you´ll see 
this thread (and their mails) move

a little more regarding topics.
In the mean time, I myself am watching every modo video I can check 
out to get into The Foundry mentality-aspects-of-3D.


Cheers.
*David Rivera*
/3D Compositor/Animator/
LinkedIN 
Behance 
VFX Reel 


On Monday, March 17, 2014 3:17 PM, Daniel Kim  
wrote:
So, many people are adding their email for Modo here, and anyone know 
how to connect each other with those email?

Is there going to be a mailing list like Softimage?


---
Daniel Kim
Animation Director & Professional 3D Generalist
http://www.danielkim3d.com 
---





--
Dan Pejril
Upbeat Unique Entertainment
www.UpbeatUnique.com

Re: Anyone in the SI list transitioning to MODO? -Please add your mail here

[David Rivera]

Hi Daniel Kim. We´re building up the list for the benefit of sharing what´s it 
been to go to Modo.
We are partially waiting for the MODO webinar to come. Then you´ll see this 
thread (and their mails) move
a little more regarding topics.
In the mean time, I myself am watching every modo video I can check out to get 
into The Foundry mentality-aspects-of-3D.


Cheers.

 
David Rivera
3D Compositor/Animator
LinkedIN
Behance
VFX Reel



On Monday, March 17, 2014 3:17 PM, Daniel Kim  wrote:
 
So, many people are adding their email for Modo here, and anyone know how to 
connect each other with those email?
Is there going to be a mailing list like Softimage?




---
Daniel Kim
Animation Director & Professional 3D Generalist
http://www.danielkim3d.com
---

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Sebastien Sterling]

"which selection tool is taking all of this screen real-estate?"


Tool Settings, it's the tool settings panel, where they keep the soft
selection options. which also doubles up as the settings bar for spesific
functions like adding loops etc...that and the attribute Panel open and it
like working in SD. add to that the Explorer or heavens forbid  NOT the
Hypershade !!!

"The NEX smart selection highlight and symmetry now has been integrated in
the standard maya
tools in Maya 2015"

Well no actually you haven't, you have just added an extra shelf with NEX
specific tools.
meaning we now have two parralel modeling kits neither one with the full
functionality of the other, forcing you to hit the NEX tab every time you
need to go back into that specific workflow, when every other legacy tool
takes you back to the conventional maya tools and display.

"NEX first showed up in 2014 EXT 6 month ago."

Actually its been around as an option since 2008. good to know that by 2015
their still isn't a harmonised and fully integrated modelling workflow in
Maya, maybe by 2018 "ETX" we might actually get the edge creasing as part
of the NEX tools. Still i can't complain too much looks like we finaly got
a standardized Axial manipulator, so baby steps.




On 18 March 2014 18:15, Luc-Eric Rousseau  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Sebastien Sterling
>  wrote:
> > I would care to know if anything is going to be done about the disgusting
> > maya UI, its so bloated and unwieldy everywhere i go, people actually
> need 2
> > screens to work, and i don't just mean, one screen for animation curves,
> you
> > need a second screen simply to display the bloody selection tools, less
> your
> > single view port shrink to the size of a postage stamp.
>
> which selection tool is taking all of this screen real-estate?
>
> > I'm seeing a lot of new features and very few elegant means to access
> them. why is NEX still
> > some kind of ill integrated appendage? why aren't it's ui smart element
> > selection highlights a standard ? this leaves us with 2 different ill
> > matched workflows. they're are several manipulation that will
> accidentally
> > take you out off NEX
>
> NEX first showed up in 2014 EXT 6 month ago.  The NEX smart selection
> highlight and symmetry now has been integrated in the standard maya
> tools in Maya 2015
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Morten Bartholdy]

+1

Morten



Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 23:42 skrev Adam Sale :

> Maurice, thanks for the reply, I can imagine how long your days must be
> corresponding with people who are having a tough time understanding this
> decision. Even after the initial emotion of the announcement has died down,
> I think most people are still at a loss, even after all the explanations of
> WHY?
> 
> Yes, innovation does have a high failure rate, which is why you don't chuck
> out the ONE proven technology in this area you are trying to innovate in
> the HOPES that it takes hold and is a success. At the very least, you don't
> throw it out UNTIL the new tech is proven.
> That IS putting all your eggs in one basket.
> You keep mentioning this idea of eggs in a basket, can't you see this is
> exactly what you guys are doing?
> It's mind blowing the short sightedness in this whole debacle.
> I have been delving into Maya this last while since the announcement, and
> its staggering how long in the tooth it is. Absolutely staggering.
> All this talk is just going in circles, endlessly.
> Eventually this fever pitch will die down, and AD will be left with a lot
> of pissed off, disgruntled, mistrusting customers, and an as of yet
> unproven next gen tech.
> That's not the way to conduct business, if you have the intention of
> keeping and growing a client base.
> Even some of my most die hard Maya friends at big and small studios are
> starting to SEE the big picture, and the image they report to me isn't
> pretty.
> This has been an absolute PR nightmare right from the get go.
> On another note, I was sitting at YVR last year waiting for a flight to
> Vegas for AU, and chatted with another guy next to me who happened to be
> one of the lead devs for iRay. As we talked, I brought up that I was
> presenting on Softimage ICE and if they ever had plans to implement iRay in
> Soft. His attitude changed suddenly and he muttered that Softimage would be
> dead within 2 years. According to him, he had been in high level talks with
> people at AD and this was a certainty. I laughed it off, with a nervous
> sort of chuckle, but his words sat with me. The disdain with which he spoke
> of Soft was palpable. I think the perception of Soft as this annoying
> little program that could,  has been exacerbated in the years since the
> takeover by the lack of openness and accountability from AD and the
> products complete lack of visibility. The fact it was shoved into a dark
> corner like Jennifer Grey in Dirty Dancing, guaranteed that there would be
> little to no development from the majority of third party vendors.
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Andre De Angelis <
> andre.deange...@gmail.com  > wrote:
> > "Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in
> > general"
> > So do AD acquisitions it seems.
> > 
> > > On 19 Mar 2014, at 6:14 am, Maurice Patel < maurice.pa...@autodesk.com
> >  > wrote:
> > >
> > > Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in
> > general

RE: EDU Versions

[Angus Davidson]

Hi Jon

I do feel very aggrieved that we got a very bad deal. If your on subscription 
(even the EDU one) your still able (as far as I know ) to be able to download 
and install from the subscription center. Also licenses you have installed will 
continue to work.

We moved onto the ARC licenses which will not allow us to get the New Softimage.

The point for us however is pretty much moot as no student in their right mind 
is going to spend money to learn an EOL software. We have asked , past, present 
and future students and its overwhelmingly the same answer. Even our current 
Softimage students are very concerned.

This is one of the places where it became very obvious that AD had not thought 
this through properly at all. As soon as the EOL announcement was made. 
Softimage was no longer an option for us.

Kind regards

Angus





From: Jon Hunt [jonathan.m.h...@gmail.com]
Sent: 19 March 2014 01:35 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: EDU Versions

Hi Maurice.
I mailed you directly with the same question a short while ago. Thank you for 
your response (the same as you have just given)

Angus,
Pending Maurice s response, I have expressed my concerns that the education 
community have not been given the same time scale as industry to migrate i.e. 
one month
Retirement has effected everyone in different ways but one month is not 
feasible.

I presume that our institutions ultimate entertainment suite will have the 2015 
version of Soft?
If its the students that aren't eligible for their free downloadable version, 
this also isnt a fair time scale.

I was going to contact my reseller but perhaps Maurice can answer.

We have the Entertainment suite that contains all 3 soft/max/maya
We have a games course that uses max and maya.
when we migrate are we only eligible for 2 of the 3?
We still need all 3 as we need to continue supporting students who are midway 
through their studies using Soft.


Kind regards,

Jon





On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
Hi Angus,
I believe so but let me check and confirm
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Angus Davidson
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 5:43 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: EDU Versions

Hi Maurice

Will the edu versions (ie the ones downloadable from the ARC website)  be 
available when the others are released next month ? That only gives us a month 
and a bit before our course starts to change the course from Softimage to Maya.

Kind regards

Angus
This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If 
you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and 
destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this 
communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised 
signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University 
and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be 
legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and 
opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The 
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the 
University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University 
agrees in writing to the contrary.







This communication is 
intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original 
message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the 
permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to 
enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus 
advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the 
University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which 
are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the 
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and 
outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in 
writing to the contrary. 

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Morten Bartholdy]

So true Paul.

Morten



Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 21:27 skrev Bk :

> > 
> > I don't "find it hard to believe".
> > 
> > > Autodesk have shown clear as crystal that they don't care, at least not
> > > humanly care. They "care" in a managed collateral damage kind of way, but
> > > it all comes back to what can you get away with that will have minimal
> > > negative impact on your company.
> > > If autodesk had any shred of decency, they would bend over backwards to
> > > help the customers who's lives they have turned upside down, not enforce
> > > time limits and restrict ability to get new seats etc.
> > > You have done as a company one of the worse things you could have done for
> > > Softimage users by EOL ing the software we have spent our careers
> > > mastering, but that is no the half of it.The part that really stings is
> > > the
> > > adding of insult to injury through blatant  manipulative strong arm
> > > tactics.
> > >  It's a modern equivalent of Europe storming the Americas and we are the
> > > natives. The Europeans justified it to themselves that they were bringing
> > > civilisation to the savages. You no doubt think believe that you are
> > > offering us something of value too and we just cant see it, but that shows
> > > utter disregard for a viewpoint other than your(AD's) own.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel <
> > > maurice.pa...@autodesk.com  <
> > > mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com  >>
> > > wrote:
> > > Hi Paul, Adam
> > > We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This
> > > is something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might
> > > find
> > > it hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources
> > > maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products
> > > don't radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take
> > > unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track
> > > record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look at
> > > AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued
> > > to be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product
> > > acquisitions.
> > > 
> > > We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and
> > > to innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could
> > > continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech
> > > company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate
> > > even if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
> > > 
> > > I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging
> > > decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally
> > > agree
> > > with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can
> > > be
> > > risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking
> > > outside of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out
> > > there). Giants fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either.
> > > Personally, I do not think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will
> > > ever make any explicit guarantees about the future. All I can say is make
> > > your software decisions based on what you see today - anything else would
> > > be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation, especially the farther
> > > out you look.
> > > 
> > > maurice
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Maurice Patel
> > > Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
> > > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> > >  <
> > > mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> > >  >
> > > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<
> > > mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> > >  >] On Behalf Of Paul
> > > Griswold
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
> > > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> > >  <
> > > mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> > >  >
> > > Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
> > > In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY,
> > > not
> > > 2 years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but right
> > > NOW.
> > > 
> > > Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around
> > > Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready
> > > that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits
> > > the end?  We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline
> > > was a failure?
> > > 
> > > These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!
> > > We feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Soft

Re: Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful

[Sebastien Sterling]

Bravo, charming clean and powerful :)


On 18 March 2014 21:12, olivier jeannel  wrote:

> https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397
>
> Kudos to Digital Golem !
>

RE: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Morten Bartholdy]

I think the fact that Bifröst is a standalone is testament to the fact that
it would never become an ICE follow-up if integrated into Maya. They can
develop Bifröst without Maya holding it back, and when Maya eventually
EOL's Bifröst can plug in to something else.

Morten




Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 20:32 skrev Maurice Patel
:

> Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very little
risk.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
> And how long do you believe it will take?
>
>
>
> -- Originalnachricht --
> Von: "Maurice Patel"
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>
> An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
> Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
> Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> I want to be clear – my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we
want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure.
If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not
mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet
everything on it. This is true of any company small or large. The further
out there you want to be, the greater the risk.
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From:
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc..autodesk.com]
On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
> To:
softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the
view port... sigh
>
> Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought
>
> Here is the problem
>
> The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a
99 percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford
to fail nearly that much.
>
> I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...
>
> and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some
ICE wiz to make some of that for us :)
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman
mailto:alan.fregt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding
skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point
release.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall
mailto:xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com>>
wrote:
> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>
>
>
> 
> 
[http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png]
>
>
> Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast!
Antivirus Schutz ist aktiv.
>
>

Re: EDU Versions

[Jon Hunt]

Hi Maurice.
I mailed you directly with the same question a short while ago. Thank you
for your response (the same as you have just given)

Angus,
Pending Maurice s response, I have expressed my concerns that the education
community have not been given the same time scale as industry to migrate
i.e. one month
Retirement has effected everyone in different ways but one month is not
feasible.

I presume that our institutions ultimate entertainment suite will have the
2015 version of Soft?
If its the students that aren't eligible for their free downloadable
version, this also isnt a fair time scale.

I was going to contact my reseller but perhaps Maurice can answer.

We have the Entertainment suite that contains all 3 soft/max/maya
We have a games course that uses max and maya.
when we migrate are we only eligible for 2 of the 3?
We still need all 3 as we need to continue supporting students who are
midway through their studies using Soft.


Kind regards,

Jon





On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> Hi Angus,
> I believe so but let me check and confirm
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Angus Davidson
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 5:43 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: EDU Versions
>
> Hi Maurice
>
> Will the edu versions (ie the ones downloadable from the ARC website)  be
> available when the others are released next month ? That only gives us a
> month and a bit before our course starts to change the course from
> Softimage to Maya.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Angus
> This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential.
> If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
> immediately and destroy the original message. You may not copy or
> disseminate this communication without the permission of the University.
> Only authorised signatories are competent to enter into agreements on
> behalf of the University and recipients are thus advised that the content
> of this message may not be legally binding on the University and may
> contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which are not
> necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand,
> Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and outsiders are
> subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in writing to the
> contrary.
>
>
>
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Morten Bartholdy]

Paul , that is an excellent summary of recent events and results!

My recommendation to our management will be to make sure not to rely on
Autodesk products for the future, since the company:

1. can generally not be trusted - proven by recent events and trackrecord
for product management and not least insufficient level of customer
information

2. has a very unsatisfactory development plan for one product (Maya) they
have failed to improve to a tolerable level through the past 6 years I have
followed its development

3. and this is to be the only alternative to our preferred platform,
considering they admitted to have a 99% failure rate for innovative
development (which is no surprise given the way they manage their products
and aquisitions)

We are one of the small shops that depend on Softimage for managing
projects otherwise above our level in a harsh competitive market.
Retrograding to Maya (as Peter Beykens so eloquently put it) will mean we
loose a significant profit margin, as we will have to hire expensive
freelance TD's to help us do what I can do now with Softimage. Subsequently
we will be less competitive and nothing in Autodesks development and
marketing plans looks like it will alleviate this serious problem.

I think I am beginning to understand why Autodesk chose to EOL Softimage,
but I still find it very ill advised. I simply cannot understand how
Autodesk can think they can build a future on the ageing platform of Maya
(I leave Max out as it is even older and worse). From the stream of
information coming from Autodesk these days (which is a quite new level of
interaction and openness with the userbase) I understand that we should not
count on Autodesk to rewrite a do-it-all DCC platform for the future, as it
is not what they think the market needs. Maybe the large part of their
userbase does not need this, but we as a small shop with few hands do, also
in the future.

So they kill the one platform that suits our needs and don't plan to
replace it with something we can use. It is definately time to look
elsewhere for our future software tools.


Morten Bartholdy






Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 19:34 skrev Paul Griswold
:

> Thanks Maurice,
> 
> So the information I have today is - most of my work is done with Softimage
> and there is 0% chance it will be continued.
> 
> Autodesk has a 99% failure rate internally with creating innovative
> products. (your words)
> 
> Autodesk wants me to move to Maya, an old, outdated package that cannot do
> what I need now, requires significant work (scripts, plugins, etc.) to make
> usable, is not conducive to small shops or freelancers, and there is no
> promise that it will ever be able to do what Softimage can do right now.
> Making that move not only moves me back to the junior level, but reduces my
> pay, lowers the quality of my work, and significantly hampers my ability to
> compete.
> 
> Bifrost is being developed at a company with a 99% failure rate with
> creating innovative products.  Bifrost is not an ICE replacement and may
> never be one.
> 
> And, apparently in this industry you should not have all your eggs in one
> basket.  Unfortunately Autodesk bought the goose laying the golden eggs and
> wrung it's neck.  Now there's no more eggs.  I also find it ironic that
> someone from ADSK just said we shouldn't have all our eggs in one basket,
> yet they want everyone to buy suites and are trying to emulate the Adobe
> model  Or was that just something you say because there's really no
> answer for what Autodesk has done?
> 
> Yes, I think I can make a decision based on that information.
> 
> 
> -Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel <
> maurice.pa...@autodesk.com  > wrote:
> > We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This
> > is something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might find
> > it hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources
> > maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products
> > don't radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take
> > unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track
> > record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look at
> > AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued
> > to be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product acquisitions.
> > 
> > We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and
> > to innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could
> > continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech
> > company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate
> > even if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
> > 
> > I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging
> > decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would 

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Sebastien Sterling]

A yes, like the way you striped greese pencil out of Maya LT despite it
having been a free external plug-in for years.


On 18 March 2014 21:54, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> Hi Nicolas
> Maya LT is meant to be a low cost alternative for low-budget indie game
> developers. Maya and 3ds Max are still meant to be the solutions for Games
> overall - whether for AAA or for mobile devices.
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Nicolas Esposito
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 5:43 PM
> To: amu...@xnet.hr; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> Based on what I'm seeing they're leaning more towards game industries (
> for 3DS ) and pushing Maya to be the replacement for Soft with Bifrost, and
> the features for both 3ds and Maya are quite good easy to achieve ( already
> made plugins instead of coding ), which for me is a good thing.
> I feel like they want Maya and 3DS to be a tool where you can preview in
> realtime all the assets that you'r going to import into your game engine,
> hence the ShaderFx, Maya viewport with multiple features, and so on...
>
> What I'm wondering is if they're building some kind of engine ala Houdini
> which allows to get basically the same preview/setup from Maya/3DS to
> Unity/UDK, that would be really great...
>
> Strange thing also is that this release of 3DS has lots of gaming features
> that Maya have...I don't get it, didn't they want to push MayaLT for
> gaming? this is so confusing!
>
> 2014-03-18 22:22 GMT+01:00 Alen mailto:amu...@xnet.hr>>:
> mud is more oriented to maya as i see (couple, pardon 3, of new thing
> oriented to maya only)...cool thing is organizing the layers...but that is
> it..yes rest is extension things...pfff
>
>
> On 18.3.2014. 22:13, Octavian Ureche wrote:
> Have no idea...i was being ironical...
>
> BTW. looking over at the mudbox 2015 features, i have to say, those are
> the exact same features that existed in the 2014 extension. So my question
> is, what exactly is new in this point release, apart from nothing?
> Oh wait...it's just autodesk.
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Ognjen Vukovic  > wrote:
> Does it have hidden line removal mode and texture decal?
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Octavian Ureche  okt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
> So at least they got the viewport rightyay!
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche  > wrote:
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that
> listaquired 3rd party plugin
>
> All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top of
> their software.
> Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of
> that. The experience is one of constant confusion,
> running around feeling like things do not belong there, always struggling
> to do stuff, going about like your going from one country to another.
> Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made it a
> pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent because
> most of its "new tech"
> are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly
> inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right,
> someday.
> The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't get
> it right today...which is what matters to us.
> Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount of
> overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
> Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
> I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to
> bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to
> bifrost?
> Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics when
> nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere, at
> snail pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what
> is this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do something
> with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's just keep
> it around and see what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just
> integrate that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some time
> ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just keep that in there as
> well.
> So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that do
> not send data back and forth between them?
> Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel  >

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Adam Sale]

+ 1 on your last sentence Adam



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Adam Seeley  wrote:

> Hi Maurice,
>
> Yes, sure, things can change very fast indeed.
>
> It's just not a very reassuring corporate stance for customers who need to
> make a long term investment in people, time and cash.  That kind of
> statement leaves little reassurance that anyone can invest confidently in
> any of your products for the long term, especially the ones that might
> compete with one another.
>
> "Maya LT is meant to be a low cost alternative for low-budget indie game
> developers. Maya and 3ds Max are still meant to be the solutions for Games
> overall"
>
> I would imagine a 3ds max user would be concerned that  Maya & Maya LT
> would be bridged to become a full game developer tool, although Maya is
> actually supposed to be the Film/VFX solution. Beginning to sound like one
> fat egg being hatched.
>
>
> Also, do I read correctly, 1.5 years ago:
>
> "Autodesk plans to continue to develop all of products mentioned"
>*and*
> "At that time, although Softimage was not an area we were planning on
> investing more in, there was no plan to discontinue it."
>
> If you stop investment in a  product that needs its cutting edge regularly
> sharpened, it will be discontinued sooner or later, no question.
> It's all very mixed messages...
>
>
> As for eggs in baskets, that may apply to companies that can spread talent
> over a number of software solutions (possibly not very efficient mind you).
> But for individuals filling those seats, there's a generally a software
> commitment that has to be made.
> We expected our lovely (and still profitable) egg  to be safe in the hands
> of your rather large and well filled basket.
>
> Anyway, hopefully Soft will scale up with hardware improvements enough for
> the next few years.
> I would say the field is wide open for a new generation of software.
>
> Respect is due for remaining here and taking the brunt of our
> dissatisfaction, but there is little chance you will convince anybody that
> this is a wise decision.
>
> Adam.
> _
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/adamseeleyuk
> https://vimeo.com/adamseeley
>
>
>   --
>  *From:* Maurice Patel 
> *To:* "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 18 March 2014, 15:21
> *Subject:* RE: Autodesk webinar
>
> Hi Perry,
> At that time, although Softimage was not an area we were planning on
> investing more in, there was no plan to discontinue it. That decision was
> only made at the end of last year. Last year was a watershed one for the
> industry for many different reasons resulting in many significant changes
> to our strategy. At the time this statement was made we did not even have
> any plans for MayaLT. Unfortunately things can change very fast.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:12 AM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> Maurice, I know things change, but this statement from Marc was only a
> year and a half ago:
>
> "Autodesk plans to continue to develop all of products mentioned [in this
> story]. These are all solutions that serve many different customer needs
> across multiple industries and in many different types of workflows.
> We are not discontinuing development on any of the products you mentioned
> but we will increase focus in specific areas where individual products are
> strong."
>
>
>
>
>

Re: "Top List of ICE Nodes That Cover 80% of What You Do With The Toolset"

[Adam Sale]

Chris, lets err on the side of caution and implement them all, as they will
all be needed at one time or another. The cool thing about ICE is that one
never knows what kind of cool tools another user would dream up. Having all
of the nodes gives us all the ability to create that which doesn't even
exist yet.

Innovative approaches to ICE was why I fell in love with it.

I remember Felix Gebhardts forest vs man sim back in 2008, and remembered
thinking that this new paradigm in working gave us the potential for
limitless innovation.

Then Paul Smith went in and remade space invaders... for fun in ICE. Not
what the devs originally had in mind I am guessing.

There are so many neat little ways people have leveraged ICE power in
unexpected ways, this is why people are so upset, and our community is up
in arms. It feels like our maximum creative potential is being stripped
away.

So, if we're forced to biFrost, which I'm hoping like hell is all it's
cracked up to be, then port the nodes and compounds over, and let's start
anew.

Nuff said

Adam


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Enoch Ihde  wrote:

> @chris:
> i use pretty much all of the generic & general nodes, as i think any user
> of ice does.
> whether or not people use syflex stuff will depend on if they're doing
> syflex specific cloth work.
> you understand that this question of "which of this list of datatypes do
> you use?" is a bit ridiculous?
> i suppose you're trying to prioritize what to implement and when, but
> you're basically saying "do you use floats, ints, for loops, arrays, data
> comparisons, and logic operations, and which ones do you use the most?"
> a very odd question, don't you think?
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Chris Vienneau <
> chris.vienn...@autodesk.com> wrote:
>
>> The topic was bringing over ICE graphs into Bifrost. We will not show the
>> Bifrost graph in the first version but if you click here (
>> https://www.fxguide.com/featured/bifrost-the-return-of-the-naiad-team-with-a-bridge-to-ice/)
>> you can see what we showed at Siggraph last year in terms of the graph.
>>
>>
>>
>> Let me ask a very open question to Paul Doyle. Paul when people say the
>> creators of ICE work at Fabric do you agree? Many on the Bifrost team would
>> argue they were just as much a part of it than the hard working guys at
>> Fabric. I think it is great that there are two companies following this
>> path and that will only mean competition which is a good thing but I do
>> believe there are many people who came together and not just 1-2 who drove
>> the whole thing.
>>
>>
>>
>> ICE is a set of base function nodes built into higher order operations
>> (compounds) with a super slick visual programming language and strong ways
>> of querying scene data. Given we have the source code of ICE we can put in
>> nodes that match 1 for 1 the code instead of reverse engineering it which
>> is usually where things fall apart in terms of migration tools.
>>
>>
>>
>> We can even open this up to the fabric guys who are here so of these node
>> types which do you use the most on a daily basis and which do not use or
>> find need work:
>>
>>
>>
>> Array<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Array.htm
>> >
>>
>>   *   Color<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Color.htm
>> >
>>   *   Constant<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Constant.htm
>> >
>>   *   Conversion<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Conversion.htm
>> >
>>   *   Data Access<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_DataAccess.htm
>> >
>>   *   Debugging<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Debugging.htm
>> >
>>   *   Execution<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Execution.htm
>> >
>>   *   Geometry Queries<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_GeometryQueries.htm
>> >
>>   *   Math Basic<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathBasic.htm
>> >
>>   *   Math Comparison<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathComparison.htm
>> >
>>   *   Math Logic<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathLogic.htm
>> >
>>   *   Math Matrix<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathMatrix.htm
>> >
>>   *   Math Statistics<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathStatistics.htm
>> >
>>   *   Math Trigonometry<
>> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_M

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Adam Seeley]

Hi Maurice,


Yes, sure, things can change very fast indeed.

It's just not a very reassuring corporate stance for customers who need to make 
a long term investment in people, time and cash.  That kind of statement leaves 
little reassurance that anyone can invest confidently in any of your products 
for the long term, especially the ones that might compete with one another.

"Maya LT is meant to be a low cost alternative for low-budget indie game 
developers. Maya and 3ds Max are still meant to be the solutions for 
Games overall" 

I would imagine a 3ds max user would be concerned that  Maya & Maya LT would be 
bridged to become a full game developer tool, although Maya is actually 
supposed to be the Film/VFX solution. Beginning to sound like one fat egg being 
hatched.



Also, do I read correctly, 1.5 years ago:
"Autodesk plans to continue to develop all of products mentioned"
   *and*
"At that time, although Softimage was not an area we were planning on investing 
more in, there was no plan to discontinue it."

If you stop investment in a  product that needs its cutting edge regularly 
sharpened, it will be discontinued sooner or later, no question.

It's all very mixed messages... 


As for eggs in baskets, that may apply to companies that can spread talent over 
a number of software solutions (possibly not very efficient mind you). 

But for individuals filling those seats, there's a generally a software 
commitment that has to be made.

We expected our lovely (and still profitable) egg  to be safe in the hands of 
your rather large and well filled basket.


Anyway, hopefully Soft will scale up with hardware improvements enough for the 
next few years.
I would say the field is wide open for a new generation of software.


Respect is due for remaining here and taking the brunt of our dissatisfaction, 
but there is little chance you will convince anybody that this is a wise 
decision.


Adam. 

_
http://www.linkedin.com/in/adamseeleyuk
https://vimeo.com/adamseeley




>
> From: Maurice Patel 
>To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"  
>Sent: Tuesday, 18 March 2014, 15:21
>Subject: RE: Autodesk webinar
> 
>
>Hi Perry,
>At that time, although Softimage was not an area we were planning on investing 
>more in, there was no plan to discontinue it. That decision was only made at 
>the end of last year. Last year was a watershed one for the industry for many 
>different reasons resulting in many significant changes to our strategy. At 
>the time this statement was made we did not even have any plans for MayaLT. 
>Unfortunately things can change very fast.
>maurice
>
>Maurice Patel
>Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
>
>From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
>[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
>Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:12 AM
>To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
>Maurice, I know things change, but this statement from Marc was only a year 
>and a half ago:
>
>"Autodesk plans to continue to develop all of products mentioned [in this 
>story]. These are all solutions that serve many different customer needs 
>across multiple industries and in many different types of workflows.
>We are not discontinuing development on any of the products you mentioned but 
>we will increase focus in specific areas where individual products are strong."
>
>
>
>
>

Re: "Top List of ICE Nodes That Cover 80% of What You Do With The Toolset"

[Enoch Ihde]

@chris:
i use pretty much all of the generic & general nodes, as i think any user
of ice does.
whether or not people use syflex stuff will depend on if they're doing
syflex specific cloth work.
you understand that this question of "which of this list of datatypes do
you use?" is a bit ridiculous?
i suppose you're trying to prioritize what to implement and when, but
you're basically saying "do you use floats, ints, for loops, arrays, data
comparisons, and logic operations, and which ones do you use the most?"
a very odd question, don't you think?


On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Chris Vienneau <
chris.vienn...@autodesk.com> wrote:

> The topic was bringing over ICE graphs into Bifrost. We will not show the
> Bifrost graph in the first version but if you click here (
> https://www.fxguide.com/featured/bifrost-the-return-of-the-naiad-team-with-a-bridge-to-ice/)
> you can see what we showed at Siggraph last year in terms of the graph.
>
>
>
> Let me ask a very open question to Paul Doyle. Paul when people say the
> creators of ICE work at Fabric do you agree? Many on the Bifrost team would
> argue they were just as much a part of it than the hard working guys at
> Fabric. I think it is great that there are two companies following this
> path and that will only mean competition which is a good thing but I do
> believe there are many people who came together and not just 1-2 who drove
> the whole thing.
>
>
>
> ICE is a set of base function nodes built into higher order operations
> (compounds) with a super slick visual programming language and strong ways
> of querying scene data. Given we have the source code of ICE we can put in
> nodes that match 1 for 1 the code instead of reverse engineering it which
> is usually where things fall apart in terms of migration tools.
>
>
>
> We can even open this up to the fabric guys who are here so of these node
> types which do you use the most on a daily basis and which do not use or
> find need work:
>
>
>
> Array<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Array.htm
> >
>
>   *   Color<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Color.htm
> >
>   *   Constant<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Constant.htm
> >
>   *   Conversion<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Conversion.htm
> >
>   *   Data Access<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_DataAccess.htm
> >
>   *   Debugging<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Debugging.htm
> >
>   *   Execution<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Execution.htm
> >
>   *   Geometry Queries<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_GeometryQueries.htm
> >
>   *   Math Basic<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathBasic.htm
> >
>   *   Math Comparison<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathComparison.htm
> >
>   *   Math Logic<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathLogic.htm
> >
>   *   Math Matrix<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathMatrix.htm
> >
>   *   Math Statistics<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathStatistics.htm
> >
>   *   Math Trigonometry<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathTrigonometry.htm
> >
>   *   Math Vector<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_MathVector.htm
> >
>   *   Point Cloud<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_PointCloud.htm
> >
>   *   Rotation<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/GUID-DCAC50A6-C3FD-47D0-8F5A-6A161EBD3E68.htm
> >
>   *   Simulation<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/icenode_ref_Simulation.htm
> >
>   *   String<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/iceref_nodes_String.htm
> >
>   *   Topology<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/GUID-FBD0D4AB-F90F-4C2C-A3D5-2EA677678349.htm
> >
>   *   Crowds<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/GUID-1D883E93-17DD-4CB2-AA3D-C50A33E2F7FF.htm
> >
>   *   Syflex Simul<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us/userguide/files/GUID-96B37421-0112-41FE-8255-B8D7EE37AE63.htm
> >
>   *   Syflex Force<
> http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2014/en_us

EDU Versions

[Angus Davidson]

Hi Maurice

Will the edu versions (ie the ones downloadable from the ARC website)  be 
available when the others are released next month ? That only gives us a month 
and a bit before our course starts to change the course from Softimage to Maya.

Kind regards

Angus



This communication is 
intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If you have received this 
communication in error, please notify us immediately and destroy the original 
message. You may not copy or disseminate this communication without the 
permission of the University. Only authorised signatories are competent to 
enter into agreements on behalf of the University and recipients are thus 
advised that the content of this message may not be legally binding on the 
University and may contain the personal views and opinions of the author, which 
are not necessarily the views and opinions of The University of the 
Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the University and 
outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University agrees in 
writing to the contrary. 

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Nicolas Esposito]

Based on what I'm seeing they're leaning more towards game industries ( for
3DS ) and pushing Maya to be the replacement for Soft with Bifrost, and the
features for both 3ds and Maya are quite good easy to achieve ( already
made plugins instead of coding ), which for me is a good thing.
I feel like they want Maya and 3DS to be a tool where you can preview in
realtime all the assets that you'r going to import into your game engine,
hence the ShaderFx, Maya viewport with multiple features, and so on...

What I'm wondering is if they're building some kind of engine ala Houdini
which allows to get basically the same preview/setup from Maya/3DS to
Unity/UDK, that would be really great...

Strange thing also is that this release of 3DS has lots of gaming features
that Maya have...I don't get it, didn't they want to push MayaLT for
gaming? this is so confusing!


2014-03-18 22:22 GMT+01:00 Alen :

>  mud is more oriented to maya as i see (couple, pardon 3, of new thing
> oriented to maya only)...cool thing is organizing the layers...but that is
> it..yes rest is extension things...pfff
>
>
> On 18.3.2014. 22:13, Octavian Ureche wrote:
>
> Have no idea...i was being ironical...
>
>  BTW. looking over at the mudbox 2015 features, i have to say, those are
> the exact same features that existed in the 2014 extension. So my question
> is, what exactly is new in this point release, apart from nothing?
> Oh wait...it's just autodesk.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Ognjen Vukovic wrote:
>
>> Does it have hidden line removal mode and texture decal?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Octavian Ureche wrote:
>>
>>> Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
>>> So at least they got the viewport rightyay!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche wrote:
>>>
  Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
 XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
 Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
 OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

  Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that
 listaquired 3rd party plugin

  All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top
 of their software.
 Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of
 that. The experience is one of constant confusion,
 running around feeling like things do not belong there, always
 struggling to do stuff, going about like your going from one country to
 another.
  Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made
 it a pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent
 because most of its "new tech"
  are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly
 inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right,
 someday.
 The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't
 get it right today...which is what matters to us.
 Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount
 of overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
  Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
 I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to
 bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to
 bifrost?
 Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics
 when nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere,
 at snail pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey,
 what is this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do
 something with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's
 just keep it around and see what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's
 just integrate that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some
 time ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just keep that in
 there as well.
 So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that
 do not send data back and forth between them?
  Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...




 On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel <
 maurice.pa...@autodesk.com> wrote:

> Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very
> little risk.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134 <514%20954-7134>
>
>  From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
> becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
> And how long do you believe it will ta

Re: emitt grid on surface

[Matt Morris]

Should be able to get locations on the surface via the raycast and create
the points needed from them, rather than building all of them and deleting
those not intersecting?




On 18 March 2014 22:39, Jason S  wrote:

>  Actually refreshing to see a bit of "normal" content =)
>
>
> On 03/18/14 17:28, Simon van de Lagemaat wrote:
>
> There's nothing the matter with it.  Right now I'm just aligning the
> points to the surface and deleting the points that are not hitting the
> surface.  In fact it's working a little better than I thought it would.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:09 PM, olivier jeannel 
> wrote:
>
>> In order to better help (It's so noisy these days) Can you post a screen
>> grab of what you want ? What's the matter with deleting particles ?
>>
>>
>> Le 18/03/2014 20:06, Simon van de Lagemaat a écrit :
>>
>>  Hey guys,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to do something simple, just emitting a flat grid on a uneven
>>> surface that can have it's heading changed.  Currently I'm just creating a
>>> grid in a point cloud and raycasting it down on to my surface but I'm
>>> having to kill off the particles outside the surface which is a pita.
>>>
>>> Is there a simple way to emit a rotatable grid from the surface directly
>>> rather than raycasting?  Even being able to kill off the particles that
>>> aren't raycasting on to the surface would suffice.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
www.matinai.com

Re: Autodesk webinar

[John Richard Sanchez]

+1


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 6:42 PM, Adam Sale  wrote:

> Maurice, thanks for the reply, I can imagine how long your days must be
> corresponding with people who are having a tough time understanding this
> decision. Even after the initial emotion of the announcement has died down,
> I think most people are still at a loss, even after all the explanations of
> WHY?
>
> Yes, innovation does have a high failure rate, which is why you don't
> chuck out the ONE proven technology in this area you are trying to innovate
> in the HOPES that it takes hold and is a success. At the very least, you
> don't throw it out UNTIL the new tech is proven.
>
> That IS putting all your eggs in one basket.
>
> You keep mentioning this idea of eggs in a basket, can't you see this is
> exactly what you guys are doing?
>
> It's mind blowing the short sightedness in this whole debacle.
>
> I have been delving into Maya this last while since the announcement, and
> its staggering how long in the tooth it is. Absolutely staggering.
>
> All this talk is just going in circles, endlessly.
> Eventually this fever pitch will die down, and AD will be left with a lot
> of pissed off, disgruntled, mistrusting customers, and an as of yet
> unproven next gen tech.
> That's not the way to conduct business, if you have the intention of
> keeping and growing a client base.
>
> Even some of my most die hard Maya friends at big and small studios are
> starting to SEE the big picture, and the image they report to me isn't
> pretty.
>
> This has been an absolute PR nightmare right from the get go.
>
> On another note, I was sitting at YVR last year waiting for a flight to
> Vegas for AU, and chatted with another guy next to me who happened to be
> one of the lead devs for iRay. As we talked, I brought up that I was
> presenting on Softimage ICE and if they ever had plans to implement iRay in
> Soft. His attitude changed suddenly and he muttered that Softimage would be
> dead within 2 years. According to him, he had been in high level talks with
> people at AD and this was a certainty. I laughed it off, with a nervous
> sort of chuckle, but his words sat with me. The disdain with which he spoke
> of Soft was palpable. I think the perception of Soft as this annoying
> little program that could,  has been exacerbated in the years since the
> takeover by the lack of openness and accountability from AD and the
> products complete lack of visibility. The fact it was shoved into a dark
> corner like Jennifer Grey in Dirty Dancing, guaranteed that there would be
> little to no development from the majority of third party vendors.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Andre De Angelis <
> andre.deange...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in
>> general"
>>
>> So do AD acquisitions it seems.
>>
>> > On 19 Mar 2014, at 6:14 am, Maurice Patel 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in
>> general
>>
>>
>


-- 
www.johnrichardsanchez.com

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Adam Sale]

Maurice, thanks for the reply, I can imagine how long your days must be
corresponding with people who are having a tough time understanding this
decision. Even after the initial emotion of the announcement has died down,
I think most people are still at a loss, even after all the explanations of
WHY?

Yes, innovation does have a high failure rate, which is why you don't chuck
out the ONE proven technology in this area you are trying to innovate in
the HOPES that it takes hold and is a success. At the very least, you don't
throw it out UNTIL the new tech is proven.

That IS putting all your eggs in one basket.

You keep mentioning this idea of eggs in a basket, can't you see this is
exactly what you guys are doing?

It's mind blowing the short sightedness in this whole debacle.

I have been delving into Maya this last while since the announcement, and
its staggering how long in the tooth it is. Absolutely staggering.

All this talk is just going in circles, endlessly.
Eventually this fever pitch will die down, and AD will be left with a lot
of pissed off, disgruntled, mistrusting customers, and an as of yet
unproven next gen tech.
That's not the way to conduct business, if you have the intention of
keeping and growing a client base.

Even some of my most die hard Maya friends at big and small studios are
starting to SEE the big picture, and the image they report to me isn't
pretty.

This has been an absolute PR nightmare right from the get go.

On another note, I was sitting at YVR last year waiting for a flight to
Vegas for AU, and chatted with another guy next to me who happened to be
one of the lead devs for iRay. As we talked, I brought up that I was
presenting on Softimage ICE and if they ever had plans to implement iRay in
Soft. His attitude changed suddenly and he muttered that Softimage would be
dead within 2 years. According to him, he had been in high level talks with
people at AD and this was a certainty. I laughed it off, with a nervous
sort of chuckle, but his words sat with me. The disdain with which he spoke
of Soft was palpable. I think the perception of Soft as this annoying
little program that could,  has been exacerbated in the years since the
takeover by the lack of openness and accountability from AD and the
products complete lack of visibility. The fact it was shoved into a dark
corner like Jennifer Grey in Dirty Dancing, guaranteed that there would be
little to no development from the majority of third party vendors.

Adam






On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Andre De Angelis  wrote:

> "Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in
> general"
>
> So do AD acquisitions it seems.
>
> > On 19 Mar 2014, at 6:14 am, Maurice Patel 
> wrote:
> >
> > Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in
> general
>
>

Re: emitt grid on surface

[Jason S]

Actually refreshing to see a bit of "normal" content =)

On 03/18/14 17:28, Simon van de Lagemaat wrote:

  There's nothing the matter with it.  Right now I'm
just aligning the points to the surface and deleting the points that
are not hitting the surface.  In fact it's working a little better than
I thought it would.
  
  
  On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:09 PM, olivier
jeannel 
wrote:
  In
order to better help (It's so noisy these days) Can you post a screen
grab of what you want ? What's the matter with deleting particles ?


Le 18/03/2014 20:06, Simon van de Lagemaat a écrit :



Hey guys,
  
I'm trying to do something simple, just emitting a flat grid on a
uneven surface that can have it's heading changed.  Currently I'm just
creating a grid in a point cloud and raycasting it down on to my
surface but I'm having to kill off the particles outside the surface
which is a pita.
  
Is there a simple way to emit a rotatable grid from the surface
directly rather than raycasting?  Even being able to kill off the
particles that aren't raycasting on to the surface would suffice.




  
  
  
  

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Jason S]

Hi, sorry, I didn't know that was the purpose of LT
thx

On 03/18/14 17:54, Maurice Patel wrote:

Hi Nicolas
Maya LT is meant to be a low cost alternative for low-budget indie game 
developers. Maya and 3ds Max are still meant to be the solutions for Games 
overall - whether for AAA or for mobile devices.
Maurice
   

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Jordi Bares]

Don't agree, Apple ignored their customers when they insisted in buying the old 
FCP, instead they threw FCPX to the table clearly unfinished, from the ground 
up amazing ideas but not finished and truly not to the standard of the 
industry. You could not even have a professional monitor out, nor open/save 
EDLs which regardless how crappy they are still are the industry standard.

In this new world where we are so interconnected you better listen to your 
customers and better be very honest because they will catch you every time like 
we have seen with AD.

Let's see where this lead us

Jordi Bares
jordiba...@gmail.com

On 18 Mar 2014, at 16:57, Marc-Andre Carbonneau 
 wrote:

> This example has more to do with the history of Sumatra’s launch… its 
> reported release date, a lot of users had moved on already…
>  
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]On Behalf Of Jordi Bares
> Sent: 18 mars 2014 12:37
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>  
> Exactly what Apple did with Final Cut Pro, and guess what happened? the whole 
> industry moved to Avid and Adobe Premiere.
>  
> Jordi Bares
> jordiba...@gmail.com
>  
> On 18 Mar 2014, at 16:33,  wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes, absolutely!!
>  
> Its one thing deciding to shut down Softimage – however stupid that decision 
> is,
> but to not allow purchases of new seats, except for existing customers. 
> That’s just mean minded and bullying. Its like they are trying their hardest 
> to make enemies.
>  
> From: olivier jeannel
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:29 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>  
> I think the opposite.
> AD should make it available to buy seats.
> 
> Why AD is refusing ? they will earn money for nothing. That I don't 
> understand.
> 
> Le 18/03/2014 17:21, Mirko Jankovic a écrit :
> People... do you REALLY think that there is anything at all left to be said?
>  
> I saw screw AD, screw PR and all marketing from each nd every copany.
> Only thing important is use tool that works for you.
> Right now if it is Softimage, keep using it as long as it serves you and gets 
> food on your table.
> In the next couple years if there is something better go for it if not.. keep 
> using SI fro another 10 years if needed.
>  
> In any case it doesn't make any sense at all to go through PR firewall of AD.
>  
> It was clear from day one back in 2008 that AD will kill Softimage, and every 
> single year after that was step in that direction.
> It is pure business war that AD won offer SI and SI is casualty... nothing we 
> can do there nor they will ever change their mind.
>  
> Use what works for you and stop waisting time on this PR crap..
>  
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Morten Bartholdy  
> wrote:
> Yes please share Paul.
> Morten
> 
> Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 17:09 skrev Marc-Andre Carbonneau 
> :
> 
> > Hi Paul, 
> > 
> > If your company allows it, could you share the document/presentation you 
> > wrote highlighting your comparisons and choices to convince them? 
> > Very appreciated, 
> > MAC 
> > 
> > -Original Message- 
> > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of 
> > p...@bustykelp.com 
> > Sent: 18 mars 2014 11:59 
> > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 
> > Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar 
> > 
> > "Last year was a watershed one for the industry for many different reasons 
> > resulting in many significant changes to our strategy" 
> > 
> > Yes, the industry is changing. Budgets are getting smaller and work needs 
> > to be done faster. 
> > 
> > So surely, the wise thing to do would be to invest in the tool with the 
> > fastest workflow. I have spent the last 3 years demonstrating to my studio 
> > why Softimage needs to be what we are using to make our projects feasible, 
> > and despite the fact, I'm the only Softimage person there. I have managed 
> > to persuade them through demonstration and now we are setting up production 
> > with it. 
> > By making tools that perform complex tasks quickly ( Softimage and ICE 
> > combo ), There is a huge market to be explored doing movie quality work on 
> > television that would have been unfeasible a few years ago. 
> > 
> > How do you think it feels after all that effort, RIGHT before the project 
> > is about to start, to hear this news? Its utterly short sighted and I 
> > imagine it will be rather embarrassing when we reveal how we managed to 
> > pull this off , as its going to be a testament to the clear advantage given 
> > by Softimage over any other solution and I will take every opportunity I 
> > can to say that. 
> > 
> > There is no way I'm going to change tracks back to a tool I had to spend 
> > all that time proving Softimage was far superior to. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message- 
> > From: Maurice Patel 
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:21 PM 
> > To: soft

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Jordi Bares]

I love my mac but will never buy another professional product from apple.

Jordi Bares
jordiba...@gmail.com

On 18 Mar 2014, at 16:46, Angus Davidson  wrote:

> Unfortunately people seldom learn from history. The parallels are uncanny. 5 
> or so updates later FCP X is a decent system compared to launch.  The problem 
> is most people have moved on. They didnt listen to what their users needed 
> and they delayed their new gen Mac pro to long. Budgets have to be spent and 
> most of them were on non apple machines and Avid and Adobe software. As some 
> folks know I am a big Apple fan but that left me shaking my head and 
> wondering what the hell they were smoking.
> 
> 
> From: Jordi Bares [jordiba...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 18 March 2014 06:36 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
> 
> Exactly what Apple did with Final Cut Pro, and guess what happened? the whole 
> industry moved to Avid and Adobe Premiere.
> 
> Jordi Bares
> jordiba...@gmail.com
> 
> On 18 Mar 2014, at 16:33,  wrote:
> 
>> Yes, absolutely!!
>>  
>> Its one thing deciding to shut down Softimage – however stupid that decision 
>> is,
>> but to not allow purchases of new seats, except for existing customers. 
>> That’s just mean minded and bullying. Its like they are trying their hardest 
>> to make enemies.
>>  
>> From: olivier jeannel
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:29 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>>  
>> I think the opposite.
>> AD should make it available to buy seats.
>> 
>> Why AD is refusing ? they will earn money for nothing. That I don't 
>> understand.
>> 
>> Le 18/03/2014 17:21, Mirko Jankovic a écrit :
>>> People... do you REALLY think that there is anything at all left to be said?
>>>  
>>> I saw screw AD, screw PR and all marketing from each nd every copany.
>>> Only thing important is use tool that works for you.
>>> Right now if it is Softimage, keep using it as long as it serves you and 
>>> gets food on your table.
>>> In the next couple years if there is something better go for it if not.. 
>>> keep using SI fro another 10 years if needed.
>>>  
>>> In any case it doesn't make any sense at all to go through PR firewall of 
>>> AD.
>>>  
>>> It was clear from day one back in 2008 that AD will kill Softimage, and 
>>> every single year after that was step in that direction.
>>> It is pure business war that AD won offer SI and SI is casualty... nothing 
>>> we can do there nor they will ever change their mind.
>>>  
>>> Use what works for you and stop waisting time on this PR crap..
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Morten Bartholdy  
>>> wrote:
>>> Yes please share Paul.
>>> Morten
>>> 
>>> Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 17:09 skrev Marc-Andre Carbonneau 
>>> : 
>>> 
>>> > Hi Paul, 
>>> > 
>>> > If your company allows it, could you share the document/presentation you 
>>> > wrote highlighting your comparisons and choices to convince them? 
>>> > Very appreciated, 
>>> > MAC 
>>> > 
>>> > -Original Message- 
>>> > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
>>> > [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf 
>>> > ofp...@bustykelp.com 
>>> > Sent: 18 mars 2014 11:59 
>>> > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 
>>> > Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar 
>>> > 
>>> > "Last year was a watershed one for the industry for many different 
>>> > reasons resulting in many significant changes to our strategy" 
>>> > 
>>> > Yes, the industry is changing. Budgets are getting smaller and work needs 
>>> > to be done faster. 
>>> > 
>>> > So surely, the wise thing to do would be to invest in the tool with the 
>>> > fastest workflow. I have spent the last 3 years demonstrating to my 
>>> > studio why Softimage needs to be what we are using to make our projects 
>>> > feasible, and despite the fact, I'm the only Softimage person there. I 
>>> > have managed to persuade them through demonstration and now we are 
>>> > setting up production with it. 
>>> > By making tools that perform complex tasks quickly ( Softimage and ICE 
>>> > combo ), There is a huge market to be explored doing movie quality work 
>>> > on television that would have been unfeasible a few years ago. 
>>> > 
>>> > How do you think it feels after all that effort, RIGHT before the project 
>>> > is about to start, to hear this news? Its utterly short sighted and I 
>>> > imagine it will be rather embarrassing when we reveal how we managed to 
>>> > pull this off , as its going to be a testament to the clear advantage 
>>> > given by Softimage over any other solution and I will take every 
>>> > opportunity I can to say that. 
>>> > 
>>> > There is no way I'm going to change tracks back to a tool I had to spend 
>>> > all that time proving Softimage was far superior to. 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > 
>>> > -Original Message- 
>>> > From: Maurice Patel 
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:21 PM 
>>> > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 
>>> > Subject: RE: Autode

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Andre De Angelis]

"Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in general"

So do AD acquisitions it seems.

> On 19 Mar 2014, at 6:14 am, Maurice Patel  wrote:
> 
> Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in general

RE: EDU Versions

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Angus,
I believe so but let me check and confirm
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Angus Davidson
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 5:43 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: EDU Versions

Hi Maurice

Will the edu versions (ie the ones downloadable from the ARC website)  be 
available when the others are released next month ? That only gives us a month 
and a bit before our course starts to change the course from Softimage to Maya.

Kind regards

Angus
This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If 
you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and 
destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this 
communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised 
signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the University 
and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message may not be 
legally binding on the University and may contain the personal views and 
opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and opinions of The 
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements between the 
University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless the University 
agrees in writing to the contrary.



<>

RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Nicolas
Maya LT is meant to be a low cost alternative for low-budget indie game 
developers. Maya and 3ds Max are still meant to be the solutions for Games 
overall - whether for AAA or for mobile devices.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Nicolas Esposito
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 5:43 PM
To: amu...@xnet.hr; softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

Based on what I'm seeing they're leaning more towards game industries ( for 3DS 
) and pushing Maya to be the replacement for Soft with Bifrost, and the 
features for both 3ds and Maya are quite good easy to achieve ( already made 
plugins instead of coding ), which for me is a good thing.
I feel like they want Maya and 3DS to be a tool where you can preview in 
realtime all the assets that you'r going to import into your game engine, hence 
the ShaderFx, Maya viewport with multiple features, and so on...

What I'm wondering is if they're building some kind of engine ala Houdini which 
allows to get basically the same preview/setup from Maya/3DS to Unity/UDK, that 
would be really great...

Strange thing also is that this release of 3DS has lots of gaming features that 
Maya have...I don't get it, didn't they want to push MayaLT for gaming? this is 
so confusing!

2014-03-18 22:22 GMT+01:00 Alen mailto:amu...@xnet.hr>>:
mud is more oriented to maya as i see (couple, pardon 3, of new thing oriented 
to maya only)...cool thing is organizing the layers...but that is it..yes rest 
is extension things...pfff


On 18.3.2014. 22:13, Octavian Ureche wrote:
Have no idea...i was being ironical...

BTW. looking over at the mudbox 2015 features, i have to say, those are the 
exact same features that existed in the 2014 extension. So my question is, what 
exactly is new in this point release, apart from nothing?
Oh wait...it's just autodesk.

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Ognjen Vukovic 
mailto:ognj...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Does it have hidden line removal mode and texture decal?

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Octavian Ureche 
mailto:okt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
So at least they got the viewport rightyay!

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche 
mailto:okt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that listaquired 3rd 
party plugin

All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top of their 
software.
Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of that. 
The experience is one of constant confusion,
running around feeling like things do not belong there, always struggling to do 
stuff, going about like your going from one country to another.
Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made it a 
pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent because most of 
its "new tech"
are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly inconsistent 
and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right, someday.
The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't get it 
right today...which is what matters to us.
Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount of 
overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to bullet 
or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to bifrost?
Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics when 
nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere, at snail 
pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what is this 
new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do something with it. Oh 
wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's just keep it around and see 
what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just integrate that as well. 
Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some time ago...we've bragged about it 
for a while...let's just keep that in there as well.
So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that do not 
send data back and forth between them?
Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very little risk.
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Alen]

mud is more oriented to maya as i see (couple, pardon 3, of new thing 
oriented to maya only)...cool thing is organizing the layers...but that 
is it..yes rest is extension things...pfff


On 18.3.2014. 22:13, Octavian Ureche wrote:

Have no idea...i was being ironical...

BTW. looking over at the mudbox 2015 features, i have to say, those 
are the exact same features that existed in the 2014 extension. So my 
question is, what exactly is new in this point release, apart from 
nothing?

Oh wait...it's just autodesk.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Ognjen Vukovic > wrote:


Does it have hidden line removal mode and texture decal?


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Octavian Ureche mailto:okt...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
So at least they got the viewport rightyay!


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche
mailto:okt...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to
that listaquired 3rd party plugin

All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap
it on top of their software.
Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk,
exactly because of that. The experience is one of constant
confusion,
running around feeling like things do not belong there,
always struggling to do stuff, going about like your going
from one country to another.
Softimage was always consistent in its user experience,
and that made it a pleasure to work with. Maya right now
is extremely inconsistent because most of its "new tech"
are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an
incredibly inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe
they will get it right, someday.
The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and
they didn't get it right today...which is what matters to us.
Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts
at the amount of overlapping tech going on inside maya
right now.
Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up
your mind.
I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair,
does it talk to bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to
bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to bifrost?
Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's
dynamics when nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was
apparently going somewhere, at snail pace, but hey at
least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what is
this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and
do something with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus.
Uhmm, well, let's just keep it around and see what
happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just integrate
that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some
time ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just
keep that in there as well.
So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks
inside maya, that do not send data back and forth between
them?
Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:

Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that
there is very little risk.
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com

[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
] On
Behalf Of Eugen Sares
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com

Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D
product updates.

How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst
succeeding - meaning becoming a widely accepted, fully
capable ICE equivalent?
And how long do you believe it will take?



-- Originalnachricht --
Von: "Maurice Patel" mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>

Re: emitt grid on surface

[Simon van de Lagemaat]

There's nothing the matter with it.  Right now I'm just aligning the points
to the surface and deleting the points that are not hitting the surface.
 In fact it's working a little better than I thought it would.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:09 PM, olivier jeannel wrote:

> In order to better help (It's so noisy these days) Can you post a screen
> grab of what you want ? What's the matter with deleting particles ?
>
>
> Le 18/03/2014 20:06, Simon van de Lagemaat a écrit :
>
>  Hey guys,
>>
>> I'm trying to do something simple, just emitting a flat grid on a uneven
>> surface that can have it's heading changed.  Currently I'm just creating a
>> grid in a point cloud and raycasting it down on to my surface but I'm
>> having to kill off the particles outside the surface which is a pita.
>>
>> Is there a simple way to emit a rotatable grid from the surface directly
>> rather than raycasting?  Even being able to kill off the particles that
>> aren't raycasting on to the surface would suffice.
>>
>
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Jason S]

Hi,
Sorry, I'm sure it's been a long day.
But some of the continuing responses (some to be honest
being rather full of fluff) 
just begs to be addressed.


On 03/18/14 11:11, Perry Harovas wrote:

Maurice, I know things change, but this statement from Marc was
only a year and a half ago:
“Autodesk
plans
to continue to develop all of products mentioned [in this story].
These are all solutions that serve many different customer needs across
multiple industries and in many different types of workflows. 
We
are
not discontinuing development on any of the products you mentioned
but we will increase focus in specific areas where individual products
are strong."

Maurice Patel wrote:

Hi Perry,
At that time, although Softimage was not an area we were planning on investing more in, there was no plan to discontinue it. That decision was only made at the end of last year. Last year was a watershed one for the industry for many different reasons resulting in many significant changes to our strategy. 
At the time this statement was made we did not even have any plans for MayaLT. 


The thing is, from the very beginning, the question on everyone's
mind was.. 
< what about the "overlap"? >  (and the widely held
suspicions around just that), 
or.. how can 3 competing products be (or continue to be)
under the same roof? 

And now (at the very end) when reading the various
stories about the demise,
 *also mentioned in yesterdays webinar*, 
the stated reasons for the demise was all around.. yep..  "overlap"  
and the redundancy of having all these competing products under the
same roof.
(while also mentionning how long ago it was decided) ,

Plus of course, considering the goals of the acquisition
(technology & skilled personnel "sharing"),
the absence of marketing, all the dowgrading...

.. saying that this wasn't in the cards till just lately, is hard to
-not- see as quite stretch. 




And the latest vow of confidence was at the somewhat recent 2014 launch.
While perhaps that was from all the pressure from people (including
me) saying ;
"don't you dare pull the rug.. tell us you're not going to pull that
rug, cause you promised you wouldn't do that!" 
(said mostly from all the suspicion due to all these competing
products being under the same roof, the slow dev, the shufflings, the
abscence, etc..)

Nevertheless, by then it must have been super-obvious what people
wanted .
(or absolutely did -not- want)

So if the decision was recent, how can that decision be made despite
the overwhelming feedback of what people wanted (or absolutely
didn't want) if the company is all about what customers
need/want (?)

If the proposed package was actually on par on the most needed
aspects,
it -could- (perhaps) have been more easily
understood.
(Maya 2017? with Bifrost 3.0, Passes, and reviewed workflows?)

But as things are now, and until things change (more
substantially), we want Softimage, 
and we would switch to Maya when it would become better for us,
because if we would switch, it would be because it would be better for
us. 
And not because the company regrets to inform us that the rug has been
pulled.

The company got it's technology and the human resources, 
so why not let us stay until we feel good and ready to move. (?)


PS; 
On 03/18/14 11:21, Maurice Patel wrote:

At the time this statement was made we did not even have any plans for MayaLT.

Speaking of MayaLT.. it reminded me of this post from late 2012;


  Here is a quote
from Graphics Speak on December 17, 2012
__
  ...
For years the M&E division
has been focused on the high-end of the market. 
  
  It is time for
us to
  democratize the market for creative media products the way 
Autodesk
changed the CAD industry 30 years ago.
   Our new goal
at M&E is to
continue to serve the top market, but also to expand.
…
_
  

.. so if you
consider the
following  ( quotes from Modo
forum )



_
  Maya is powerful
and deep, but
since in it’s history, 
  it was aimed
towards big production
teams 
  


  Developed
openness and
programmability, 
so that studios could integrate their
proprietary code, 
end up with a base for their pipelines, 
and
build-up tools for "rapid productivity" of their own.
  
-
- - - - - - - - - - -
>From T4D
  
  the thing I
find silly, is
smaller studio's using Maya.
  YES Maya is
used in feature
films and by the big legends of the 3d industry,
BUT those same
people DON'T USE STANDARD MAYA.
  
Here we had a few Maya
gurus at the start, and we ran Maya as prime tool for a while,
and there was alot of custom
tools even for simple stuff made by those guys,.
  
  But we are
small, and when
they moved on,
  the rest of us
just used SI
more and more.
  It ( IMO ) is
easier to
work-out how it all works and get it done
( and that's without ICE )
  
  -
- - - - - - - - - -
  
Google
ANY discussion anywhere, talking about Maya & Softimage
and you would find that people
having extensively or even slightly worked on both,
CONSIS

Re: emitt grid on surface

[Cristobal Infante]

Instead of emitting from the grid, could you not create a weightmap on the
uneven surface based on your grids raycast?

Then emit directly on the uneven surface with a filter by weightmap..

I think.

On Tuesday, 18 March 2014, olivier jeannel  wrote:

> In order to better help (It's so noisy these days) Can you post a screen
> grab of what you want ? What's the matter with deleting particles ?
>
>
> Le 18/03/2014 20:06, Simon van de Lagemaat a écrit :
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I'm trying to do something simple, just emitting a flat grid on a uneven
>> surface that can have it's heading changed.  Currently I'm just creating a
>> grid in a point cloud and raycasting it down on to my surface but I'm
>> having to kill off the particles outside the surface which is a pita.
>>
>> Is there a simple way to emit a rotatable grid from the surface directly
>> rather than raycasting?  Even being able to kill off the particles that
>> aren't raycasting on to the surface would suffice.
>>
>
>

Re: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Octavian Ureche]

Have no idea...i was being ironical...

BTW. looking over at the mudbox 2015 features, i have to say, those are the
exact same features that existed in the 2014 extension. So my question is,
what exactly is new in this point release, apart from nothing?
Oh wait...it's just autodesk.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Ognjen Vukovic  wrote:

> Does it have hidden line removal mode and texture decal?
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Octavian Ureche  wrote:
>
>> Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
>> So at least they got the viewport rightyay!
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche wrote:
>>
>>> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
>>> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
>>> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
>>> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>>>
>>> Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that
>>> listaquired 3rd party plugin
>>>
>>> All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top of
>>> their software.
>>> Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of
>>> that. The experience is one of constant confusion,
>>> running around feeling like things do not belong there, always
>>> struggling to do stuff, going about like your going from one country to
>>> another.
>>> Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made it
>>> a pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent because
>>> most of its "new tech"
>>> are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly
>>> inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right,
>>> someday.
>>> The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't get
>>> it right today...which is what matters to us.
>>> Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount
>>> of overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
>>> Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
>>> I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to
>>> bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to
>>> bifrost?
>>> Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics when
>>> nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere, at
>>> snail pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what
>>> is this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do something
>>> with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's just keep
>>> it around and see what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just
>>> integrate that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some time
>>> ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just keep that in there as
>>> well.
>>> So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that
>>> do not send data back and forth between them?
>>> Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel <
>>> maurice.pa...@autodesk.com> wrote:
>>>
 Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very
 little risk.
 maurice

 Maurice Patel
 Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

 From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
 softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
 Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
 Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

 How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
 becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
 And how long do you believe it will take?



 -- Originalnachricht --
 Von: "Maurice Patel" >>> maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>
 An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" >>> >
 Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
 Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

 I want to be clear - my meaning was that innovation involves risk and
 we want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99%
 failure. If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that
 does not mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you should
 bet everything on it. This is true of any company small or large. The
 further out there you want to be, the greater the risk.
 Maurice

 Maurice Patel
 Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

 From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> [mailto:
 softimage-boun...@listproc..autodesk.com>>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
 Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
 To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>> softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
 Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

 And shader e

Digital Golem : Brillant and beautiful

[olivier jeannel]

https://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/89426397

Kudos to Digital Golem !

Re: emitt grid on surface

[olivier jeannel]

In order to better help (It's so noisy these days) Can you post a screen 
grab of what you want ? What's the matter with deleting particles ?



Le 18/03/2014 20:06, Simon van de Lagemaat a écrit :

Hey guys,

I'm trying to do something simple, just emitting a flat grid on a 
uneven surface that can have it's heading changed.  Currently I'm just 
creating a grid in a point cloud and raycasting it down on to my 
surface but I'm having to kill off the particles outside the surface 
which is a pita.


Is there a simple way to emit a rotatable grid from the surface 
directly rather than raycasting?  Even being able to kill off the 
particles that aren't raycasting on to the surface would suffice.

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[olivier jeannel]

This I don't want to hear :(
If Ben want to step in...


Le 18/03/2014 20:08, phil harbath a écrit :
I get the felling that Momentum is EOL as well.  perhaps a bit 
prematurely.

*From:* olivier jeannel 
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:06 PM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 


*Subject:* Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
Well, at least Exocortex, Eric Mootz, and all the others have heavy 
schedule to make xsi keep-up :D


Le 18/03/2014 19:59, Alan Fregtman a écrit :

The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the /geodesic voxel 
binding/ skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a 
service pack / point release.



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall 
> wrote:


http://area.autodesk.com/march18

Re: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Ognjen Vukovic]

Does it have hidden line removal mode and texture decal?


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Octavian Ureche  wrote:

> Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
> So at least they got the viewport rightyay!
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche wrote:
>
>> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
>> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
>> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
>> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>>
>> Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that
>> listaquired 3rd party plugin
>>
>> All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top of
>> their software.
>> Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of
>> that. The experience is one of constant confusion,
>> running around feeling like things do not belong there, always struggling
>> to do stuff, going about like your going from one country to another.
>> Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made it
>> a pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent because
>> most of its "new tech"
>> are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly
>> inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right,
>> someday.
>> The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't get
>> it right today...which is what matters to us.
>> Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount of
>> overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
>> Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
>> I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to
>> bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to
>> bifrost?
>> Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics when
>> nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere, at
>> snail pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what
>> is this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do something
>> with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's just keep
>> it around and see what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just
>> integrate that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some time
>> ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just keep that in there as
>> well.
>> So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that
>> do not send data back and forth between them?
>> Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel <
>> maurice.pa...@autodesk.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very little
>>> risk.
>>> maurice
>>>
>>> Maurice Patel
>>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>>
>>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
>>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>> Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>>>
>>> How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
>>> becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
>>> And how long do you believe it will take?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Originalnachricht --
>>> Von: "Maurice Patel" >> maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>
>>> An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" >> >
>>> Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
>>> Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>>>
>>> I want to be clear - my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we
>>> want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure.
>>> If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not
>>> mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet
>>> everything on it. This is true of any company small or large. The further
>>> out there you want to be, the greater the risk.
>>> Maurice
>>>
>>> Maurice Patel
>>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>>
>>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> [mailto:
>>> softimage-boun...@listproc..autodesk.com>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
>>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>> softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>>>
>>> And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the
>>> view port... sigh
>>>
>>> Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought
>>>
>>> Here is the problem
>>>
>>> The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a
>>> 99 percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford
>>> to fail nearly that much.
>>>
>>> I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...
>>>
>>> and geodeskic bi

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Bk]

> "All I can say is make your software decisions based on what you see today - 
> anything else would be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation, 
> especially the farther out you look."

We did do that. We were assured by your guys on a few occasions that AD was 
committed to continuing developing Softimage and look how that turned out. 

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Rob Chapman]

quoting Raf here from cgtalk forum last night. was going to tweet but
too long, wish I had listened to this kind of advice in 2008

"If you are an AD M&E client, be it Maya, Max, MoBu, Mudbox or
anything else that isn't Soft, and this hasn't alarmed you in the
least, you are a shortsighted fool."

are all Autodesk M&E customers short sighted fools?  they sure as hell
treat us that way

On 18 March 2014 20:27, Bk  wrote:
>
> I don't "find it hard to believe".
>
>
> Autodesk have shown clear as crystal that they don't care, at least not
> humanly care. They "care" in a managed collateral damage kind of way, but it
> all comes back to what can you get away with that will have minimal negative
> impact on your company.
>
> If autodesk had any shred of decency, they would bend over backwards to help
> the customers who's lives they have turned upside down, not enforce time
> limits and restrict ability to get new seats etc.
> You have done as a company one of the worse things you could have done for
> Softimage users by EOL ing the software we have spent our careers mastering,
> but that is no the half of it.The part that really stings is the adding of
> insult to injury through blatant manipulative strong arm tactics.
>  It's a modern equivalent of Europe storming the Americas and we are the
> natives. The Europeans justified it to themselves that they were bringing
> civilisation to the savages. You no doubt think believe that you are
> offering us something of value too and we just cant see it, but that shows
> utter disregard for a viewpoint other than your(AD's) own.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel
> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
> Hi Paul, Adam
> We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This
> is something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might find
> it hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources
> maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products
> don't radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take
> unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track
> record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look at
> AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued to
> be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product acquisitions.
>
> We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and to
> innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could
> continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech
> company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate even
> if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
>
> I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging
> decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree
> with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be
> risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking
> outside of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out
> there). Giants fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either.
> Personally, I do not think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will
> ever make any explicit guarantees about the future. All I can say is make
> your software decisions based on what you see today - anything else would
> be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation, especially the farther
> out you look.
>
> maurice
>
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
> From:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
> On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
> In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY, not
> 2 years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but right
> NOW.
>
> Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around
> Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready
> that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits
> the end?  We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline was
> a failure?
>
> These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!
> We feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Softimage and
> now we have to hope that somehow Bifrost is not in the 99% failure, but 1%
> innovation?
>
> Do you seriously want us to bet our future on that?  Would you go home and
> tell your significant other that rather than focusing on a tool that works
> for you, makes money for you right now, you're betting everything on a
> promise from Autodesk??
>
> Who on earth does business like that?

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Bk]

> 
> I don't "find it hard to believe".

> Autodesk have shown clear as crystal that they don't care, at least not 
> humanly care. They "care" in a managed collateral damage kind of way, but it 
> all comes back to what can you get away with that will have minimal negative 
> impact on your company.
If autodesk had any shred of decency, they would bend over backwards to help 
the customers who's lives they have turned upside down, not enforce time limits 
and restrict ability to get new seats etc.
You have done as a company one of the worse things you could have done for 
Softimage users by EOL ing the software we have spent our careers mastering, 
but that is no the half of it.The part that really stings is the adding of 
insult to injury through blatant manipulative strong arm tactics.
 It's a modern equivalent of Europe storming the Americas and we are the 
natives. The Europeans justified it to themselves that they were bringing 
civilisation to the savages. You no doubt think believe that you are offering 
us something of value too and we just cant see it, but that shows utter 
disregard for a viewpoint other than your(AD's) own. 


> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel 
> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
> Hi Paul, Adam
> We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This is 
> something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might find it 
> hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources 
> maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products don't 
> radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take 
> unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track 
> record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look at 
> AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued to 
> be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product acquisitions.
> 
> We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and to 
> innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could 
> continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech 
> company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate even 
> if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
> 
> I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging 
> decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree 
> with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be 
> risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking outside 
> of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out there). Giants 
> fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either. Personally, I do not 
> think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will ever make any explicit 
> guarantees about the future. All I can say is make your software decisions 
> based on what you see today - anything else would be, to a certain extent, 
> vaporware and speculation, especially the farther out you look.
> 
> maurice
> 
> 
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
> From: 
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
>  
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
>  On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
> In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY, not 2 
> years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but right NOW.
> 
> Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around 
> Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready 
> that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits the 
> end?  We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline was a 
> failure?
> 
> These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!  We 
> feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Softimage and now we 
> have to hope that somehow Bifrost is not in the 99% failure, but 1% 
> innovation?
> 
> Do you seriously want us to bet our future on that?  Would you go home and 
> tell your significant other that rather than focusing on a tool that works 
> for you, makes money for you right now, you're betting everything on a 
> promise from Autodesk??
> 
> Who on earth does business like that??  Is Autodesk going to pay our 
> mortgages or feed our families when Bifrost falls apart?  Because unless 
> that's the plan, I can't think of a single sane person who would go along 
> with this Maya-only plan.
> 
> This is absolutely a terrible way to do business and everyone at Autodesk 
> knows it.  They've just dug in their heels to avoid looking like they've made 
> a colossal mistake

Re: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Octavian Ureche]

Except viewport 2.0. I'll admit...that's pretty good.
So at least they got the viewport rightyay!


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Octavian Ureche  wrote:

> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that
> listaquired 3rd party plugin
>
> All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top of
> their software.
> Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of
> that. The experience is one of constant confusion,
> running around feeling like things do not belong there, always struggling
> to do stuff, going about like your going from one country to another.
> Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made it a
> pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent because
> most of its "new tech"
> are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly
> inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right,
> someday.
> The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't get
> it right today...which is what matters to us.
> Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount of
> overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
> Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
> I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to
> bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to
> bifrost?
> Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics when
> nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere, at
> snail pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what
> is this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do something
> with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's just keep
> it around and see what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just
> integrate that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some time
> ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just keep that in there as
> well.
> So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that do
> not send data back and forth between them?
> Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel  > wrote:
>
>> Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very little
>> risk.
>> maurice
>>
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>>
>> How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
>> becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
>> And how long do you believe it will take?
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Originalnachricht --
>> Von: "Maurice Patel" > maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>
>> An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" > >
>> Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
>> Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>>
>> I want to be clear - my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we
>> want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure.
>> If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not
>> mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet
>> everything on it. This is true of any company small or large. The further
>> out there you want to be, the greater the risk.
>> Maurice
>>
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc..autodesk.com> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com> softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
>> Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>>
>> And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the
>> view port... sigh
>>
>> Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought
>>
>> Here is the problem
>>
>> The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a
>> 99 percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford
>> to fail nearly that much.
>>
>> I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...
>>
>> and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some
>> ICE wiz to make some of that for us :)
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman > > wrote:
>> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>>
>> Bifros

Re: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Octavian Ureche]

Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

Allow me to add NEX (aka the maya modeling toolkit) to that listaquired
3rd party plugin

All that autodesk ever does, is aquire tech and then slap it on top of
their software.
Right now, maya feels like a bloated piece of junk, exactly because of
that. The experience is one of constant confusion,
running around feeling like things do not belong there, always struggling
to do stuff, going about like your going from one country to another.
Softimage was always consistent in its user experience, and that made it a
pleasure to work with. Maya right now is extremely inconsistent because
most of its "new tech"
are in fact solutions developed by 3rd parties. It's an incredibly
inconsistent and frustrating experience. Maybe they will get it right,
someday.
The problem is, they never got it right in the past, and they didn't get it
right today...which is what matters to us.
Right now it feels like a mess. Plus my brain just hurts at the amount of
overlapping tech going on inside maya right now.
Even bifrost vs Nfluids. What the heck is that. Make up your mind.
I'm also curious, does bifrost talk to ncloth or nhair, does it talk to
bullet or physx, does ncloth talk to bullet or xgen, does xgen talk to
bifrost?
Remember those discussions years ago about unifying maya's dynamics when
nucleus came out at version 8.5. That was apparently going somewhere, at
snail pace, but hey at least it felt like it was moving until ...hey, what
is this new stuff called naiad... let's just snatch that and do something
with it. Oh wait, what do we do with nucleus. Uhmm, well, let's just keep
it around and see what happens. Bullet...hey, it's free, let's just
integrate that as well. Physx, oh wait, we've "integrated" that some time
ago...we've bragged about it for a while...let's just keep that in there as
well.
So now, you tell me, you have 4 simulation frameworks inside maya, that do
not send data back and forth between them?
Correct me if i am wrong...because i so wish i was wrong...




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 9:32 PM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very little
> risk.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
> becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
> And how long do you believe it will take?
>
>
>
> -- Originalnachricht --
> Von: "Maurice Patel"  maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>
> An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"  >
> Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
> Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> I want to be clear - my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we
> want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure.
> If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not
> mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet
> everything on it. This is true of any company small or large. The further
> out there you want to be, the greater the risk.
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc..autodesk.com softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>] On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >
> Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the
> view port... sigh
>
> Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought
>
> Here is the problem
>
> The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a
> 99 percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford
> to fail nearly that much.
>
> I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...
>
> and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some
> ICE wiz to make some of that for us :)
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman  > wrote:
> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding
> skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing 

RE: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Maurice Patel]

Very high. Productization occurs when we gauge that there is very little risk.
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Eugen Sares
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:24 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning becoming 
a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
And how long do you believe it will take?



-- Originalnachricht --
Von: "Maurice Patel" 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>>
An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>>
Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

I want to be clear – my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we want 
to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure. If uou 
have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not mean you 
should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet everything on it. 
This is true of any company small or large. The further out there you want to 
be, the greater the risk.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc..autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the view 
port... sigh

Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought

Here is the problem

The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a 99 
percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford to fail 
nearly that much.

I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...

and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some ICE wiz 
to make some of that for us :)

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman 
mailto:alan.fregt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:

Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding skin 
algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point release.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall 
mailto:xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com>> 
wrote:
http://area.autodesk.com/march18




[http://static.avast.com/emails/avast-mail-stamp.png]


Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! 
Antivirus Schutz ist aktiv.


<>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Joe Bask]

True,..

they keep adding ' new features' to Maya which has fragile core
architecture. It's just like a ticking bomb..



On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Perry Harovas wrote:

> My God, it is just more of the same:
>
> Buy technology innovation, bolt it onto Maya, stand back in case it
> collapses under its own weight, look for something else to buy to start the
> cycle over again.
>
> The reality is that Autodesk is ALWAYS looking for the new stuff, the
> shiny bling, if you will.
>
> They don't hone their tools over time, they don't make them work
> perfectly, they just look to replace them (because hey, if it is new, it
> MUST be better, right?).
>
> How many hair solutions does Maya have now, huh?
>
> 1) Fur
> 2) Paint FX
> 3) nHair
> 4 XGen
>
> Did I miss any???
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Alan Fregtman wrote:
>
>> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>>
>> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
>> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
>> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
>> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>>
>> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the *geodesic voxel binding*skin 
>> algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point
>> release.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall <
>> xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com 
>
>

Re[2]: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Eugen Sares]

How high then to you estimate the risk of Bifröst succeeding - meaning
becoming a widely accepted, fully capable ICE equivalent?
And how long do you believe it will take?



-- Originalnachricht --
Von: "Maurice Patel" 
An: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com" 
Gesendet: 18.03.2014 20:20:00
Betreff: RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.


I want to be clear – my meaning was that innovation involves risk and
we want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99%
failure. If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X
that does not mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you
should bet everything on it. This is true of any company small or
large. The further out there you want to be, the greater the risk.

Maurice



Maurice Patel

Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134



From:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Punchatz
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
To:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.



And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the
view port... sigh



Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought



Here is the problem



The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept
a 99 percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant
afford to fail nearly that much.

I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...



and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some
ICE wiz to make some of that for us :)



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman
 wrote:

The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:



Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...

XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...

Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...

OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...



The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding
skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack /
point release.





On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall
 wrote:

http://area.autodesk.com/march18







---
Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus Schutz 
ist aktiv.
http://www.avast.com

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Paul Griswold]

So did Autodesk really try with Softimage?

I see no evidence.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> I want to be clear - my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we
> want to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure.
> If uou have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not
> mean you should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet
> everything on it. This is true of any company small or large. The further
> out there you want to be, the greater the risk.
> Maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.
>
> And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the
> view port... sigh
>
> Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought
>
> Here is the problem
>
> The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a
> 99 percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford
> to fail nearly that much.
>
> I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...
>
> and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some
> ICE wiz to make some of that for us :)
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman  > wrote:
> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding
> skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point
> release.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall <
> xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com>
> wrote:
> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>
>
>

RE: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Maurice Patel]

I want to be clear - my meaning was that innovation involves risk and we want 
to take that risk for certain projects. We do  NOT accept 99% failure. If uou 
have a chance of 1 in 100 of succeeding on project X that does not mean you 
should not try it. But it also does not mean you should bet everything on it. 
This is true of any company small or large. The further out there you want to 
be, the greater the risk.
Maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Greg Punchatz
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:13 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the view 
port... sigh

Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought

Here is the problem

The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a 99 
percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford to fail 
nearly that much.

I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...

and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some ICE wiz 
to make some of that for us :)

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman 
mailto:alan.fregt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:

Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding skin 
algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point release.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall 
mailto:xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com>> 
wrote:
http://area.autodesk.com/march18


<>

RE: Autodesk webinar

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Paul
Just to put my words in context: innovation has a high failure rate in general 
- no matter who you are or what industry you are in. You will have a high 
probability of failure if you try to do innovative things. So this statement 
was a generalization. Autodesk's success rate is much higher than 1%.
Maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 2:34 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

Thanks Maurice,

So the information I have today is - most of my work is done with Softimage and 
there is 0% chance it will be continued.

Autodesk has a 99% failure rate internally with creating innovative products. 
(your words)

Autodesk wants me to move to Maya, an old, outdated package that cannot do what 
I need now, requires significant work (scripts, plugins, etc.) to make usable, 
is not conducive to small shops or freelancers, and there is no promise that it 
will ever be able to do what Softimage can do right now.  Making that move not 
only moves me back to the junior level, but reduces my pay, lowers the quality 
of my work, and significantly hampers my ability to compete.

Bifrost is being developed at a company with a 99% failure rate with creating 
innovative products.  Bifrost is not an ICE replacement and may never be one.

And, apparently in this industry you should not have all your eggs in one 
basket.  Unfortunately Autodesk bought the goose laying the golden eggs and 
wrung it's neck.  Now there's no more eggs.  I also find it ironic that someone 
from ADSK just said we shouldn't have all our eggs in one basket, yet they want 
everyone to buy suites and are trying to emulate the Adobe model  Or was 
that just something you say because there's really no answer for what Autodesk 
has done?

Yes, I think I can make a decision based on that information.


-Paul



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
Hi Paul, Adam
We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This is 
something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might find it 
hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources 
maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products don't 
radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take unnecessary 
risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track record  of 
developing software for the long term - one can just look at AutoCAD and 3ds 
Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued to be extensively 
developed at Autodesk as have other product acquisitions.

We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and to 
innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could continue 
to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech company so it 
wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate even if the risks are 
high. That does not mean that is all we do.

I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging 
decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree 
with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be 
risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking outside 
of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out there). Giants 
fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either. Personally, I do not 
think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will ever make any explicit 
guarantees about the future. All I can say is make your software decisions 
based on what you see today - anything else would be, to a certain extent, 
vaporware and speculation, especially the farther out you look.

maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com]
 On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY, not 2 
years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but right NOW.

Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around 
Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready that 
will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits the end?  
We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline was a failure?

These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!  We 
feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Softimage and now we 
have to hope that somehow Bifrost is not in t

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[phil harbath]

I get the felling that Momentum is EOL as well.  perhaps a bit prematurely.

From: olivier jeannel 
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:06 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 
Subject: Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

Well, at least Exocortex, Eric Mootz, and all the others have heavy schedule to 
make xsi keep-up :D

Le 18/03/2014 19:59, Alan Fregtman a écrit :

  The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:


  Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
  XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
  Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
  OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

  The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the geodesic voxel binding skin 
algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point release.




  On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall 
 wrote:

http://area.autodesk.com/march18

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Greg Punchatz]

And shader effects are 3rd party I believe...and it only works for the view
port... sigh

Same with the modeling tools...just upgraded what they bought

Here is the problem

The folks in charge don't know that they have a problem... They accept a 99
percent failure rate as reasonable...smaller dev companies cant afford to
fail nearly that much.

I will say I am looking forward to that viewport...

and geodeskic binding is uber cool. I wonder how long it will take some ICE
wiz to make some of that for us :)


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alan Fregtman wrote:

> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the *geodesic voxel binding*skin 
> algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point
> release.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall <
> xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com> wrote:
>
>> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>>
>
>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Perry Harovas]

My God, it is just more of the same:

Buy technology innovation, bolt it onto Maya, stand back in case it
collapses under its own weight, look for something else to buy to start the
cycle over again.

The reality is that Autodesk is ALWAYS looking for the new stuff, the shiny
bling, if you will.

They don't hone their tools over time, they don't make them work perfectly,
they just look to replace them (because hey, if it is new, it MUST be
better, right?).

How many hair solutions does Maya have now, huh?

1) Fur
2) Paint FX
3) nHair
4 XGen

Did I miss any???







On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Alan Fregtman wrote:

> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the *geodesic voxel binding*skin 
> algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point
> release.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall <
> xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com> wrote:
>
>> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>>
>
>


-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[olivier jeannel]

Well, at least Exocortex, Eric Mootz, and all the others have heavy 
schedule to make xsi keep-up :D


Le 18/03/2014 19:59, Alan Fregtman a écrit :

The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:

Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the /geodesic voxel 
binding/ skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a 
service pack / point release.




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall 
> wrote:


http://area.autodesk.com/march18

emitt grid on surface

[Simon van de Lagemaat]

Hey guys,

I'm trying to do something simple, just emitting a flat grid on a uneven
surface that can have it's heading changed.  Currently I'm just creating a
grid in a point cloud and raycasting it down on to my surface but I'm
having to kill off the particles outside the surface which is a pita.

Is there a simple way to emit a rotatable grid from the surface directly
rather than raycasting?  Even being able to kill off the particles that
aren't raycasting on to the surface would suffice.

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Paulo César Duarte]

Agree, and the *geodesic voxel binding* skin algorithm, Blender already
have at least 1 year ago or more. In other words, no innovation, only
implementation of existing tools.


2014-03-18 15:59 GMT-03:00 Alan Fregtman :

> The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:
>
> Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
> XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
> Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
> OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...
>
> The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the *geodesic voxel binding*skin 
> algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service pack / point
> release.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall <
> xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com> wrote:
>
>> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>>
>
>


-- 
www.pauloduarte.ws

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Alan Fregtman]

The Maya release feels like a list of plugins to me:

Bifrost... former 3rd-party sw (Naiiad), acquired...
XGen... 3rd-party Disney plugin, licensed...
Bullet Physics... free 3rd-party library...
OpenSubDiv... free 3rd-party library...

The only thing I see that's kind of cool is the *geodesic voxel
binding*skin algorithm, but I'd expect that kind of thing in a service
pack / point
release.



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Ben Rogall <
xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com> wrote:

> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Andres Stephens]

Ressistence? I feel the same way How? Do and share SI vs. Maya vs. Max 
comparisons and business history/AD conspiracy revelations and truth to their 
business tactics within 3Dmax and Maya forums and communities to cause unrest 
till the WHOLE user base Autodesk tries to re-consider and starts to get uneasy 
and demands better transparency and business development - even supporting SI 
from the Max and Maya community? 

(seriously, why limit options giving into the competition?! Are they really 
that secure they are or will be ahead of the competition always - even if they 
just bought, killed and abused millions of lines of code fully capable for 
years and years to come??!?)

We just want Autodesk to look after those it produces products for, giving us 
strong OPTIONS, not limiting us... not empty promises. 

I think knowledge, sharing this knowledge, and all.. is power, and will sway 
masses, and markets, and the future of the industry and it’s capability - and 
security. 



-Draise






From: David Gallagher
Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎March‎ ‎18‎, ‎2014 ‎13‎:‎51‎ ‎
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com



I'm starting to realize there isn't some new Autodesk software that's going to 
fill this spot, and Maya isn't going to do it even after a few years of 
releases.

I'm so angry with Autodesk for this absurd move.

Where do I sign up for the resistance?
Dave G

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Enoch Ihde]

as to maya taking up ridiculous screen real estate with oversized windows,
you need look no farther than the outliner vs the explorer, in terms of
functionality vs screen real estate.
or the attribute editor vs a ppg.  to tear of an attribute editor, you end
up with some ginormous window, try having 3 of those open and still be able
to work...


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:50 AM, David Gallagher <
davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I'm starting to realize there isn't some new Autodesk software that's
> going to fill this spot, and Maya isn't going to do it even after a few
> years of releases.
>
> I'm so angry with Autodesk for this absurd move.
>
> Where do I sign up for the resistance?
> Dave G
>
>
> On 3/18/2014 12:34 PM, Paul Griswold wrote:
>
>  Thanks Maurice,
>
>  So the information I have today is - most of my work is done with
> Softimage and there is 0% chance it will be continued.
>
>  Autodesk has a 99% failure rate internally with creating innovative
> products. (your words)
>
>  Autodesk wants me to move to Maya, an old, outdated package that cannot
> do what I need now, requires significant work (scripts, plugins, etc.) to
> make usable, is not conducive to small shops or freelancers, and there is
> no promise that it will ever be able to do what Softimage can do right now.
>  Making that move not only moves me back to the junior level, but reduces
> my pay, lowers the quality of my work, and significantly hampers my ability
> to compete.
>
>  Bifrost is being developed at a company with a 99% failure rate with
> creating innovative products.  Bifrost is not an ICE replacement and may
> never be one.
>
>  And, apparently in this industry you should not have all your eggs in
> one basket.  Unfortunately Autodesk bought the goose laying the golden eggs
> and wrung it's neck.  Now there's no more eggs.  I also find it ironic that
> someone from ADSK just said we shouldn't have all our eggs in one basket,
> yet they want everyone to buy suites and are trying to emulate the Adobe
> model  Or was that just something you say because there's really no
> answer for what Autodesk has done?
>
>  Yes, I think I can make a decision based on that information.
>
>
>  -Paul
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul, Adam
>> We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software.
>> This is something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might
>> find it hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant
>> resources maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our
>> products don't radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not
>> to take unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long
>> track record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look
>> at AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have
>> continued to be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product
>> acquisitions.
>>
>> We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and
>> to innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could
>> continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech
>> company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate
>> even if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
>>
>> I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging
>> decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree
>> with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be
>> risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking
>> outside of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out
>> there). Giants fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either.
>> Personally, I do not think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will
>> ever make any explicit guarantees about the future. All I can say is make
>> your software decisions based on what you see today - anything else would
>> be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation, especially the farther
>> out you look.
>>
>> maurice
>>
>>
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>
>>  From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>>
>>  In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY,
>> not 2 years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but
>> right NOW.
>>
>> Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around
>> Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready
>> that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits
>> the end?  We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline
>> was a failure?
>>
>> These aren't a bun

Re: Autodesk webinar

[David Gallagher]

I'm starting to realize there isn't some new Autodesk software that's 
going to fill this spot, and Maya isn't going to do it even after a few 
years of releases.


I'm so angry with Autodesk for this absurd move.

Where do I sign up for the resistance?
Dave G

On 3/18/2014 12:34 PM, Paul Griswold wrote:

Thanks Maurice,

So the information I have today is - most of my work is done with 
Softimage and there is 0% chance it will be continued.


Autodesk has a 99% failure rate internally with creating innovative 
products. (your words)


Autodesk wants me to move to Maya, an old, outdated package that 
cannot do what I need now, requires significant work (scripts, 
plugins, etc.) to make usable, is not conducive to small shops or 
freelancers, and there is no promise that it will ever be able to do 
what Softimage can do right now.  Making that move not only moves me 
back to the junior level, but reduces my pay, lowers the quality of my 
work, and significantly hampers my ability to compete.


Bifrost is being developed at a company with a 99% failure rate with 
creating innovative products.  Bifrost is not an ICE replacement and 
may never be one.


And, apparently in this industry you should not have all your eggs in 
one basket.  Unfortunately Autodesk bought the goose laying the golden 
eggs and wrung it's neck.  Now there's no more eggs.  I also find it 
ironic that someone from ADSK just said we shouldn't have all our eggs 
in one basket, yet they want everyone to buy suites and are trying to 
emulate the Adobe model  Or was that just something you say 
because there's really no answer for what Autodesk has done?


Yes, I think I can make a decision based on that information.


-Paul




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:


Hi Paul, Adam
We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our
software. This is something we take seriously, although (with good
reason)  you might find it hard to believe right now. Every year
we spend significant resources maintaining legacy code so that the
new features we add to our products don't radically disrupt
customers workflows. We really do try not to take unnecessary
risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track
record  of developing software for the long term - one can just
look at AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya
have continued to be extensively developed at Autodesk as have
other product acquisitions.

We have stated and are committed both to developing our core
products and to innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and
Maya was so we could continue to do both adequately (not one or
the other). We are a high tech company so it wouldn't be realistic
to expect us not to try to innovate even if the risks are high.
That does not mean that is all we do.

I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some
challenging decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I
would personally agree with them, that in this industry - as in
any high-tech industry - it can be risky to have all your eggs in
one basket, even if that means looking outside of Autodesk (and
there are some very interesting solutions out there). Giants fall
(look at SGI). We are not immune to that either. Personally, I do
not think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will ever make
any explicit guarantees about the future. All I can say is make
your software decisions based on what you see today - anything
else would be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation,
especially the farther out you look.

maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél: 514 954-7134 

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com

[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
] On Behalf Of
Paul Griswold
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com

Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works
TODAY, not 2 years from today, not in a dream of a product called
Bifrost, but right NOW.

Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business
around Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully
functioning tool ready that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do
TODAY by the time Softimage hits the end?  We should believe that
after you've just admitted that Skyline was a failure?

These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our
businesses!  We feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive
based on Softimage and now we have to hope that somehow Bifrost is
not in the 99% failure, but 1% innovation?

Do you seriously want us to bet our future on

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Cristobal Infante]

We also now know that Autodesk has no problem killing their software and
they will want to unify all development in one application.

So if you carry on using their 3d software (Maya or 3DsMax) you have a
50/50 chance this will happen to you again sometime in the future.



On 18 March 2014 18:34, Paul Griswold <
pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com> wrote:

> Thanks Maurice,
>
> So the information I have today is - most of my work is done with
> Softimage and there is 0% chance it will be continued.
>
> Autodesk has a 99% failure rate internally with creating innovative
> products. (your words)
>
> Autodesk wants me to move to Maya, an old, outdated package that cannot do
> what I need now, requires significant work (scripts, plugins, etc.) to make
> usable, is not conducive to small shops or freelancers, and there is no
> promise that it will ever be able to do what Softimage can do right now.
>  Making that move not only moves me back to the junior level, but reduces
> my pay, lowers the quality of my work, and significantly hampers my ability
> to compete.
>
> Bifrost is being developed at a company with a 99% failure rate with
> creating innovative products.  Bifrost is not an ICE replacement and may
> never be one.
>
> And, apparently in this industry you should not have all your eggs in one
> basket.  Unfortunately Autodesk bought the goose laying the golden eggs and
> wrung it's neck.  Now there's no more eggs.  I also find it ironic that
> someone from ADSK just said we shouldn't have all our eggs in one basket,
> yet they want everyone to buy suites and are trying to emulate the Adobe
> model  Or was that just something you say because there's really no
> answer for what Autodesk has done?
>
> Yes, I think I can make a decision based on that information.
>
>
> -Paul
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul, Adam
>> We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software.
>> This is something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might
>> find it hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant
>> resources maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our
>> products don't radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not
>> to take unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long
>> track record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look
>> at AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have
>> continued to be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product
>> acquisitions.
>>
>> We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and
>> to innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could
>> continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech
>> company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate
>> even if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
>>
>> I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging
>> decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree
>> with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be
>> risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking
>> outside of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out
>> there). Giants fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either.
>> Personally, I do not think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will
>> ever make any explicit guarantees about the future. All I can say is make
>> your software decisions based on what you see today - anything else would
>> be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation, especially the farther
>> out you look.
>>
>> maurice
>>
>>
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>>
>> In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY,
>> not 2 years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but
>> right NOW.
>>
>> Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around
>> Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready
>> that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits
>> the end?  We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline
>> was a failure?
>>
>> These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!
>>  We feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Softimage and
>> now we have to hope that somehow Bifrost is not in the 99% failure, but 1%
>> innovation?
>>
>> Do you seriously want us to bet our future on that?  Would you go home
>> and tell your significant other that rather than focusing on a tool that
>> works for you, makes money f

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Mirko Jankovic]

this looks to me like having wedding for 2 kids in front of the house,
while at the same time funeral is behind the house for 3rd youngest kid...
and his friends hear music and party form wedding in front


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Perry Harovas wrote:

> Not if everyone has moved on to other software, and not if it is built (as
> seems to be the case) on the tangled mess that is Maya,
> and not if the interface remains filled with obscure icons.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Francois Lord wrote:
>
>>  If you think of it, it's pretty much exactly what we want.
>> If they spend the next three years adding "new features" that we already
>> have in Softimage, eventually we'll be happy.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 18-Mar-14 14:13, Andres Stephens wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Other than the viewport and some modeling features, I feel SI had a lot
>> of these features or abilities already, maybe not optimized, but it has had
>> them already I feel like they are playing "catch -up"... with some
>> fancy viewport features. =/
>>  -Draise
>>
>>  *From:* Ben Rogall
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32
>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>
>> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com 
>
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Paul Griswold]

Thanks Maurice,

So the information I have today is - most of my work is done with Softimage
and there is 0% chance it will be continued.

Autodesk has a 99% failure rate internally with creating innovative
products. (your words)

Autodesk wants me to move to Maya, an old, outdated package that cannot do
what I need now, requires significant work (scripts, plugins, etc.) to make
usable, is not conducive to small shops or freelancers, and there is no
promise that it will ever be able to do what Softimage can do right now.
 Making that move not only moves me back to the junior level, but reduces
my pay, lowers the quality of my work, and significantly hampers my ability
to compete.

Bifrost is being developed at a company with a 99% failure rate with
creating innovative products.  Bifrost is not an ICE replacement and may
never be one.

And, apparently in this industry you should not have all your eggs in one
basket.  Unfortunately Autodesk bought the goose laying the golden eggs and
wrung it's neck.  Now there's no more eggs.  I also find it ironic that
someone from ADSK just said we shouldn't have all our eggs in one basket,
yet they want everyone to buy suites and are trying to emulate the Adobe
model  Or was that just something you say because there's really no
answer for what Autodesk has done?

Yes, I think I can make a decision based on that information.


-Paul




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Maurice Patel
wrote:

> Hi Paul, Adam
> We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This
> is something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might find
> it hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources
> maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products
> don't radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take
> unnecessary risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track
> record  of developing software for the long term - one can just look at
> AutoCAD and 3ds Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued
> to be extensively developed at Autodesk as have other product acquisitions.
>
> We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and
> to innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could
> continue to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech
> company so it wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate
> even if the risks are high. That does not mean that is all we do.
>
> I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging
> decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree
> with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be
> risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking
> outside of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out
> there). Giants fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either.
> Personally, I do not think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will
> ever make any explicit guarantees about the future. All I can say is make
> your software decisions based on what you see today - anything else would
> be, to a certain extent, vaporware and speculation, especially the farther
> out you look.
>
> maurice
>
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY,
> not 2 years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but
> right NOW.
>
> Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around
> Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready
> that will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits
> the end?  We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline
> was a failure?
>
> These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!
>  We feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Softimage and
> now we have to hope that somehow Bifrost is not in the 99% failure, but 1%
> innovation?
>
> Do you seriously want us to bet our future on that?  Would you go home and
> tell your significant other that rather than focusing on a tool that works
> for you, makes money for you right now, you're betting everything on a
> promise from Autodesk??
>
> Who on earth does business like that??  Is Autodesk going to pay our
> mortgages or feed our families when Bifrost falls apart?  Because unless
> that's the plan, I can't think of a single sane person who would go along
> with this Maya-only plan.
>
> This is absolutely a terrible way to do business and everyone at Autodesk
> knows it.  They've just dug in their heels to avoid looking like they've
> made a co

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Arvid Björn]

It's because the features that went into Soft2015 are actually pretty good
stuff. Can't have people watching how good Softimage is now can we. There
would be questions asked.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Mirko Jankovic
wrote:

> They don't even gives Softimage one last presentation, honorable farewell
> or anything...
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Andres Stephens wrote:
>
>>
>> Other than the viewport and some modeling features, I feel SI had a lot
>> of these features or abilities already, maybe not optimized, but it has had
>> them already I feel like they are playing "catch -up"... with some
>> fancy viewport features. =/
>> -Draise
>>
>> *From:* Ben Rogall
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32
>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>
>> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>>
>
>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Perry Harovas]

Not if everyone has moved on to other software, and not if it is built (as
seems to be the case) on the tangled mess that is Maya,
and not if the interface remains filled with obscure icons.






On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Francois Lord  wrote:

>  If you think of it, it's pretty much exactly what we want.
> If they spend the next three years adding "new features" that we already
> have in Softimage, eventually we'll be happy.
>
>
>
> On 18-Mar-14 14:13, Andres Stephens wrote:
>
>
>  Other than the viewport and some modeling features, I feel SI had a lot
> of these features or abilities already, maybe not optimized, but it has had
> them already I feel like they are playing "catch -up"... with some
> fancy viewport features. =/
>  -Draise
>
>  *From:* Ben Rogall
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32 
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>
>
>


-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

Re: "Top List of ICE Nodes That Cover 80% of What You Do With The Toolset"

[Eric Thivierge]

Just giving this a little bump so Chris V. doesn't forget. Hopefully 
Andy's subsequent questions also get some answers...


Thanks,
Eric T.

On 3/16/2014 6:42 PM, Eric Thivierge wrote:

Hey Chris,

A few questions:
1. How do you respond to the people who have been long time die hard 
Softimage users who have also been exposed to other DCC's, maya 
specifically, who have little to no faith in AD being innovative or 
responsive to their user base as history has shown. I can give you a 
specific example. Skin painting. How many years has it been that it 
has been in its current form, and your user base asking for it's 
interaction model and tool set cleaned up and extended. Yet here we 
are just prior to the 2015 release and it's gotten no attention. It's 
been years people have been asking for this. Yet nothing from AD. Same 
with the blend shape tools. No attention. Take a look at the various 
threads on this list and 3D Pro where Maya veterans say that the use 
of 3rd Party tools is a must! We need a developer that actually 
listens and turns around results quickly. Not taking 5+ years to not 
even address it.


2. What is a generalist UI?

3. So the first release of a tool built with your node graph will be 
released in Bifrost. How long do we have to wait until the node graph 
is accessible? (Granted I know you can't tell us, it just has to be 
asked). It's known that with Maya releases and new features that the 
first version is never production ready. You could say that for most 
new features in all software, but when we think about it, if we 
hypothetically say the node graph is another year off, that first 
release won't be usable and so that puts us to the next year's 
release, 2017. At that time most studios will need to have had to 
transitioned off of Softimage and onto another platform, such as Maya. 
So at that point we have more or less zero time to get acquainted with 
the new system and integrate it into the pipeline and build tools 
around it. That's all with the wishful thinking everything goes to plan.


4. Let's not kid ourselves. AD is a company who for the majority of 
their major new features lately, acquires technology and integrates 
it. NEX is the most recent to come to mind. In a larger scale sort of 
way that is exactly what you did with Softimage. Bought it for the 
devs and are now trying to integrate the technology. How is this 
supposed to bring confidence to users who need to use Maya? It's just 
a bunch of plug-ins that were bought and slapped together. There 
doesn't seem to be a unified workflow thought out of how these all 
need to play together and thus gives you a very fragmented workflow. 
Not to mention, what happens when there is a year where you don't 
acquire a software? Does Maya not get a new feature that release?


5. Lastly, who are these other key people who remained at AD that 
worked on ICE? It may give us reassurance to know what good hands 
we've been left in. (Not really expecting an answer here because it'd 
be dangerous for AD to list their employees, but it's more the point 
that we don't know who these other key people are and thus, have no 
reason to be confident in them.)


Thanks,


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com


On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Chris Vienneau 
mailto:chris.vienn...@autodesk.com>> wrote:


Fair enough. I have had this conversation with a few people face
to face and it is obviously easier than a mailing list. Thanks for
the thought as it is consistent with what other people have said.



cv/

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Francois Lord]

If you think of it, it's pretty much exactly what we want.
If they spend the next three years adding "new features" that we already 
have in Softimage, eventually we'll be happy.



On 18-Mar-14 14:13, Andres Stephens wrote:
Other than the viewport and some modeling features, I feel SI had a 
lot of these features or abilities already, maybe not optimized, but 
it has had them already I feel like they are playing “catch 
-up”... with some fancy viewport features. =/

-Draise
*From:* Ben Rogall
*Sent:* ‎Tuesday‎, ‎March‎ ‎18‎, ‎2014 ‎12‎:‎32‎ ‎
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
http://area.autodesk.com/march18

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Mirko Jankovic]

They don't even gives Softimage one last presentation, honorable farewell
or anything...


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Andres Stephens wrote:

>
> Other than the viewport and some modeling features, I feel SI had a lot of
> these features or abilities already, maybe not optimized, but it has had
> them already I feel like they are playing "catch -up"... with some
> fancy viewport features. =/
> -Draise
>
> *From:* Ben Rogall
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:32 
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Luc-Eric Rousseau]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Sebastien Sterling
 wrote:
> I would care to know if anything is going to be done about the disgusting
> maya UI, its so bloated and unwieldy everywhere i go, people actually need 2
> screens to work, and i don't just mean, one screen for animation curves, you
> need a second screen simply to display the bloody selection tools, less your
> single view port shrink to the size of a postage stamp.

which selection tool is taking all of this screen real-estate?

> I'm seeing a lot of new features and very few elegant means to access them. 
> why is NEX still
> some kind of ill integrated appendage? why aren't it's ui smart element
> selection highlights a standard ? this leaves us with 2 different ill
> matched workflows. they're are several manipulation that will accidentally
> take you out off NEX

NEX first showed up in 2014 EXT 6 month ago.  The NEX smart selection
highlight and symmetry now has been integrated in the standard maya
tools in Maya 2015

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Andres Stephens]

Other than the viewport and some modeling features, I feel SI had a lot of 
these features or abilities already, maybe not optimized, but it has had them 
already I feel like they are playing “catch -up”... with some fancy 
viewport features. =/ 


-Draise



From: Ben Rogall
Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎March‎ ‎18‎, ‎2014 ‎12‎:‎32‎ ‎
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com


http://area.autodesk.com/march18

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[Arvid Björn]

Sorry, it kept bouncing, I don't know which ones made it through ;-)


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:03 PM, olivier jeannel wrote:

>  That's the hole mailing list you have here :)
>
> Le 18/03/2014 18:56, Alan Fregtman a écrit :
>
>

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[olivier jeannel]

That's the hole mailing list you have here :)

Le 18/03/2014 18:56, Alan Fregtman a écrit :

/Always look on the bright side of life.../
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2Wx230gYJw


[**spoiler alert** if you've never seen Monty Python's 35-year-old 
classic "/Life Of Brian/".]




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Arvid Björn > wrote:


I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and
then even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good
thing. Here's the mental image I got during that demo:

http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy
mailto:x...@colorshopvfx.dk>> wrote:

Its probably like this..

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[Morten Bartholdy]

He


Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 18:48 skrev "Arvid Björn" :

> I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and then
> even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good thing. Here's
> the mental image I got during that demo:
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy < x...@colorshopvfx.dk
>  > wrote:
> > Its probably like this..
> > 
> > 

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[Alan Fregtman]

*Always look on the bright side of life...*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2Wx230gYJw


[**spoiler alert** if you've never seen Monty Python's 35-year-old
classic "*Life
Of Brian*".]



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Arvid Björn  wrote:

> I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and then
> even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good thing. Here's
> the mental image I got during that demo:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy wrote:
>
>>   Its probably like this..
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Rob Wuijster]

Looking at the What's new, I'm more impressed with the 3dsmax stuff tbh.
It basically already has the FX stuff Maya wants, and stuff got 
added/improved.


And Bifrost/XGen is no replacement for ICE

Rob

\/-\/\/

On 18-3-2014 18:32, Ben Rogall wrote:

http://area.autodesk.com/march18


-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4336 / Virus Database: 3722/7211 - Release Date: 03/18/14

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[olivier jeannel]

LOL
Le 18/03/2014 18:48, Arvid Björn a écrit :
I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and 
then even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good thing. 
Here's the mental image I got during that demo:


http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy > wrote:


Its probably like this..

Re: trying to looking on the bright side......

[Arvid Björn]

I was really surprised that Bifrost was some external process, and then
even more surprised that they tried to tout this as a good thing. Here's
the mental image I got during that demo:

http://i.imgur.com/OUhV4wj.jpg


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Morten Bartholdy wrote:

>   Its probably like this..
>
>
>

RE: Autodesk webinar

[Maurice Patel]

Hi Paul, Adam
We do understand that people build their livelihoods on our software. This is 
something we take seriously, although (with good reason)  you might find it 
hard to believe right now. Every year we spend significant resources 
maintaining legacy code so that the new features we add to our products don't 
radically disrupt customers workflows. We really do try not to take unnecessary 
risks with our software. And we have an incredibly long track record  of 
developing software for the long term - one can just look at AutoCAD and 3ds 
Max. Even acquisitions like Flame and Maya have continued to be extensively 
developed at Autodesk as have other product acquisitions.

We have stated and are committed both to developing our core products and to 
innovating. Our decision to focus on 3ds max and Maya was so we could continue 
to do both adequately (not one or the other). We are a high tech company so it 
wouldn't be realistic to expect us not to try to innovate even if the risks are 
high. That does not mean that is all we do.

I am not denying that Softimage customers are now facing some challenging 
decisions. But several have said on the forum, and I would personally agree 
with them, that in this industry - as in any high-tech industry - it can be 
risky to have all your eggs in one basket, even if that means looking outside 
of Autodesk (and there are some very interesting solutions out there). Giants 
fall (look at SGI). We are not immune to that either. Personally, I do not 
think that will happen, but no one at Autodesk will ever make any explicit 
guarantees about the future. All I can say is make your software decisions 
based on what you see today - anything else would be, to a certain extent, 
vaporware and speculation, especially the farther out you look.

maurice


Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Paul Griswold
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 12:15 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

In Softimage we have a production-proven, solid tool.  ICE works TODAY, not 2 
years from today, not in a dream of a product called Bifrost, but right NOW.

Are you telling everyone here who has based their ENTIRE business around 
Softimage, we should trust Autodesk to have a fully functioning tool ready that 
will do EVERYTHING Softimage can do TODAY by the time Softimage hits the end?  
We should believe that after you've just admitted that Skyline was a failure?

These aren't a bunch of ideas or concepts here, these are our businesses!  We 
feed our families, we pay our bills, we survive based on Softimage and now we 
have to hope that somehow Bifrost is not in the 99% failure, but 1% innovation?

Do you seriously want us to bet our future on that?  Would you go home and tell 
your significant other that rather than focusing on a tool that works for you, 
makes money for you right now, you're betting everything on a promise from 
Autodesk??

Who on earth does business like that??  Is Autodesk going to pay our mortgages 
or feed our families when Bifrost falls apart?  Because unless that's the plan, 
I can't think of a single sane person who would go along with this Maya-only 
plan.

This is absolutely a terrible way to do business and everyone at Autodesk knows 
it.  They've just dug in their heels to avoid looking like they've made a 
colossal mistake.

-Paul





On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Adam Sale 
mailto:adamfs...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Maurice, in all of this talk the one glaring omission is this. You guys are 
always trying to innovate. You have said success is often 99 percent failure to 
one percent success. Well, in the event bifrost falls by the wayside like 
skyline did, all of a sudden autodesk will have zero node based solutions to do 
the type of ice work we expect of a dcc product. How is that a wise move as a 
company? Its like throwing out the baby with the bath water and seems 
incredibly short sighted. So as we move to bifrost to begin our transition away 
from ICE, we may be in this same mess a couple years down the road if it doesnt 
pan out. Imagine the fallout then.. people will go absolutely nuclear on AD.

Adam

<>

Re: [OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Enoch Ihde]

looks like they forgot that they're releasing softimage 2015, too.  i know
softimage is getting EOLd and all, but not putting it on their 2015 product
updates page?


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Ben Rogall <
xsi_l...@shaders.moederogall.com> wrote:

> http://area.autodesk.com/march18
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[John Richard Sanchez]

I don't know about everyone else but this is what I am going to do.
http://youtu.be/MWWtrW0oI1E


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Ed Manning  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, adrian wyer <
> adrian.w...@fluid-pictures.com> wrote:
>
>> i would be VERY surprised to learn that more than 10% of your subscription
>> payment was actually spent on softimage
>>
>> i would imagine 50% on new tech (revit, bifrost etc) and the rest in the
>> shareholders pockets every time it's dividend o'clock!
>>
>>
> ADSK hasn't paid a dividend since 2005
>



-- 
www.johnrichardsanchez.com

[OT] Autodesk announces 2015 3D product updates.

[Ben Rogall]

http://area.autodesk.com/march18

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Ed Manning]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, adrian wyer  wrote:

> i would be VERY surprised to learn that more than 10% of your subscription
> payment was actually spent on softimage
>
> i would imagine 50% on new tech (revit, bifrost etc) and the rest in the
> shareholders pockets every time it's dividend o'clock!
>
>
ADSK hasn't paid a dividend since 2005

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Perry Harovas]

You might not even have to wait two years, because unfortunately Autodesk
has made it clear that this is the end of life of this
product, and while WE all know that using Softimage for a few years won't
impact our ability to deliver amazing products,
our clients won't always know, or believe, that. That could end up hurting
a lot of us, just from the stigma associated with using an EOL product.

The tool isn't what makes us do great work, but sadly, the clients often
think it is.

This will hurt us all even in the short term.





On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, adrian wyer  wrote:

> i would be VERY surprised to learn that more than 10% of your subscription
> payment was actually spent on softimage
>
> i would imagine 50% on new tech (revit, bifrost etc) and the rest in the
> shareholders pockets every time it's dividend o'clock!
>
> a
>
> -Original Message-
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of
> pete...@skynet.be
> Sent: 18 March 2014 17:10
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> How much of the subscription money is going into those 99% failures?
>
> I know it's nasty to put it like that - but people paying subscription are
> doing so believing (hoping) they are funding the very future and survival
> of
>
> the software they are paying for. Right now, it's: continue to pay
> subscription, in order to get upgraded, eh no, downgraded, eh no
> retro-graded to another DCC app.
>
> It's a losing proposition, any which way you look at it.
> A few years (2, 3?) of subscription is enough to buy that other app - so
> anyone who wanted to have it, could and would have done so already.
> So what happened to the subscription money of the past few years - seeing
> it
>
> wasn't used to keep Softimage from the slaughtering block? Was it not
> enough
>
> for the survival of the software? Was it used to help fund the future of
> another software? Or was it to fund research? At a 99% failure rate? Does
> the competition have that same 99% failure rate?
> Or do I misunderstand it again?
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Maurice Patel
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:54 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: RE: Autodesk webinar
>
> Hi Peter,
> That is not what I am saying. We will continue to build new technologies
> and
>
> we will continue to do research into new areas. And new projects have and
> will continue to be kicked off. Innovation is 99% failure 1% success. Does
> not mean we will not keep trying to do new and different things but our
> approaches will change and adapt. Bifrost  and Recap are two examples or
> recent projects - time will tell how successful they are - but we have not
> stopped trying.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of
> pete...@skynet.be
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:40 AM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> "...We had plans to build a next generation technology, starting with
> games - we called it project skyline. The industry was in a growth period.
> Everyone was optimistic. And if we had succeeded we probably would not be
> having this conversation."
>
> so - no next generation 3D authoring from Autodesk then - that's official
> and final ?
> As that's all the info needed to move forward really.
>
> Sad how the death of one exciting technology (Naiad) leads to the death of
> another (SI / ICE ) and it all ends up zombified in Maya.
> Assimilate or die.
>
>
>
> From: Perry Harovas
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:55 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> I would imagine he means Project Skyline.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Chris Marshall
> mailto:chrismarshal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Which bit failed?
>
> On 18 March 2014 14:51, Maurice Patel
> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
> "sometimes we have to fall back on our positions when our attempts fail"
> Maurice
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com
>
>
>
>


-- 





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

RE: Autodesk webinar

[adrian wyer]

i would be VERY surprised to learn that more than 10% of your subscription
payment was actually spent on softimage

i would imagine 50% on new tech (revit, bifrost etc) and the rest in the
shareholders pockets every time it's dividend o'clock!

a

-Original Message-
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of
pete...@skynet.be
Sent: 18 March 2014 17:10
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

How much of the subscription money is going into those 99% failures?

I know it's nasty to put it like that - but people paying subscription are 
doing so believing (hoping) they are funding the very future and survival of

the software they are paying for. Right now, it's: continue to pay 
subscription, in order to get upgraded, eh no, downgraded, eh no 
retro-graded to another DCC app.

It's a losing proposition, any which way you look at it.
A few years (2, 3?) of subscription is enough to buy that other app - so 
anyone who wanted to have it, could and would have done so already.
So what happened to the subscription money of the past few years - seeing it

wasn’t used to keep Softimage from the slaughtering block? Was it not enough

for the survival of the software? Was it used to help fund the future of 
another software? Or was it to fund research? At a 99% failure rate? Does 
the competition have that same 99% failure rate?
Or do I misunderstand it again?


-Original Message- 
From: Maurice Patel
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:54 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: Autodesk webinar

Hi Peter,
That is not what I am saying. We will continue to build new technologies and

we will continue to do research into new areas. And new projects have and 
will continue to be kicked off. Innovation is 99% failure 1% success. Does 
not mean we will not keep trying to do new and different things but our 
approaches will change and adapt. Bifrost  and Recap are two examples or 
recent projects – time will tell how successful they are – but we have not 
stopped trying.
maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of 
pete...@skynet.be
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:40 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

“...We had plans to build a next generation technology, starting with 
games - we called it project skyline. The industry was in a growth period. 
Everyone was optimistic. And if we had succeeded we probably would not be 
having this conversation.”

so – no next generation 3D authoring from Autodesk then – that’s official 
and final ?
As that’s all the info needed to move forward really.

Sad how the death of one exciting technology (Naiad) leads to the death of 
another (SI / ICE ) and it all ends up zombified in Maya.
Assimilate or die.



From: Perry Harovas
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:55 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

I would imagine he means Project Skyline.




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Chris Marshall 
mailto:chrismarshal...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Which bit failed?

On 18 March 2014 14:51, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
"sometimes we have to fall back on our positions when our attempts fail"
Maurice





--





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Morten Bartholdy]

+1

Morten



Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 18:09 skrev pete...@skynet.be:

> How much of the subscription money is going into those 99% failures?
>
> I know it's nasty to put it like that - but people paying subscription
are
> doing so believing (hoping) they are funding the very future and survival
of
> the software they are paying for. Right now, it's: continue to pay
> subscription, in order to get upgraded, eh no, downgraded, eh no
> retro-graded to another DCC app.
>
> It's a losing proposition, any which way you look at it.
> A few years (2, 3?) of subscription is enough to buy that other app - so
> anyone who wanted to have it, could and would have done so already.
> So what happened to the subscription money of the past few years - seeing
it
> wasn’t used to keep Softimage from the slaughtering block? Was it not
enough
> for the survival of the software? Was it used to help fund the future of
> another software? Or was it to fund research? At a 99% failure rate? Does
> the competition have that same 99% failure rate?
> Or do I misunderstand it again?
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Maurice Patel
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:54 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: RE: Autodesk webinar
>
> Hi Peter,
> That is not what I am saying. We will continue to build new technologies
and
> we will continue to do research into new areas. And new projects have and
> will continue to be kicked off. Innovation is 99% failure 1% success.
Does
> not mean we will not keep trying to do new and different things but our
> approaches will change and adapt. Bifrost  and Recap are two examples or
> recent projects – time will tell how successful they are – but we have
not
> stopped trying.
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of
> pete...@skynet.be
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:40 AM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> “...We had plans to build a next generation technology, starting with
> games - we called it project skyline. The industry was in a growth
period.
> Everyone was optimistic. And if we had succeeded we probably would not be
> having this conversation.”
>
> so – no next generation 3D authoring from Autodesk then – that’s official
> and final ?
> As that’s all the info needed to move forward really.
>
> Sad how the death of one exciting technology (Naiad) leads to the death
of
> another (SI / ICE ) and it all ends up zombified in Maya.
> Assimilate or die.
>
>
>
> From: Perry Harovas
> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:55 PM
> To:
softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
>
> I would imagine he means Project Skyline.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Chris Marshall
> mailto:chrismarshal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Which bit failed?
>
> On 18 March 2014 14:51, Maurice Patel
> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
> "sometimes we have to fall back on our positions when our attempts fail"
> Maurice
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Perry Harovas
> Animation and Visual Effects
>
> http://www.TheAfterImage.com
>

Re: Movies, games, commercials or what?

[Stephen Davidson]

Great point, Arvid. I hadn't even thought about how this will effect my
bidding process.

Over the years I have refined that process (guesswork)  so that I could
reliably not
lose billable time on a project. My un-billable time was kept to a minimum
because
I knew the process so well, and it was reliable. In the past (before
Softimage) my estimates
were often shredded because of some unknown "hitch" in a untried process.
Some render bug
that has me totally redoing scenes a different way. Or worse... something
doesn't work as advertised.

I will have to keep this in mind while figuring out what to do, in two
years.


On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Arvid Björn  wrote:

> Short-term projects, usually stretching from days up to a month or two,
> mostly visual effects work and packshot-type projects. Softimage just
> scales so incredibly well between our most advanced and our tiniest
> projects. There's literally no job to big or too small for it. It all comes
> down to it being easy to use while not compromising on how powerful it is.
> Anything that needs a lot of pipeline tools to run isn't as suitable for
> the tiny projects, which is why Modo becomes interesting for that, and
> Houdini becomes interesting for solving some of the more advanced problems
> that we've been able to work out in ICE so far.
>
> The edge we'd be gaining with Bifrost is very small, since everyone will
> have access to the technology, and it's frankly not something we need to do
> very often, ie. fluid simulation. The edge we'll be* losing *is the
> ability to reliably estimate jobs when forced to use tools that are much
> less familiar to us, and often more difficult, or less powerful at doing
> what we do the most, which is render wrangling and ICE magic. If XSI didn't
> have great modelling, it wouldn't be a super-big problem, but not having
> ICE will be. It has transformed a lot of small shops everywhere to
> powerhouses of efficiency. Should a company of our size really have to
> employ specialized technical directors and riggers just to get through an
> average project? It looks like it, and appearently I've been living in a
> dream.
>
> Such a beautiful workflow down the drain.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 6:42 PM, Paul Griswold <
> pgrisw...@fusiondigitalproductions.com> wrote:
>
>> Mentioned in another thread.  Not everyone works in movies or games.
>>  What area do you work in and why is Softimage the best choice for what you
>> do?
>>
>> I'm in commercials & occasionally VFX for films.
>>
>> I am always working on tight deadlines & it's almost always a mix of
>> people using After Effects, Modo, Nuke, Fusion, and Softimage.  Softimage
>> is the Swiss Army Knife of 3D and it allows me to switch gears quickly and
>> efficiently.
>>
>> There is nothing Autodesk offers that can replace it currently and I do
>> not have faith that in 2 years they will have anything better.  I intend on
>> moving away from Autodesk products.
>>
>>
>> -Paul
>>
>>
>


-- 

Best Regards,
*  Stephen P. Davidson*

*(954) 552-7956*sdavid...@3danimationmagic.com

*Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic*


 - Arthur C. Clarke

Re: Autodesk webinar

[Morten Bartholdy]

This sounds like a very accurate account. And so Softimage was OEL'ed
because it didn't run on Mac OS and Maya did, so it didn't fit into
Autodesks plans for a Game platform...?

Maurice, if I read this correctly Skyline was primarily targeting the game
industry, and was never intended to be a new gen platform for those who use
Maya and Softimage now!? This would then mean that trying to build on Maya
and adding Bifröst is a fall back plan in attempt to offer at least
something new and advanced to the Movie VFX userbase.

I think it becomes more and more clear that Autodesk doesn't care at all
about the TVC market as it is too small compared to Movie VFX and Games, so
they have focused their development plans on the DCC's that have the
largest userbase rather than the best technical content. You could have had
a Houdini competitor!!

I have lost all trust in Autodesk at this point, but you can still turn a
big PR disaster into something good if you bite the bullet and do a U-turn
here:

1. Best solution: Get Softimage back in development and sales, put ICE
development on afterburner and market it huge. Personally I don't believe
in this one happening, but it would be ideal for us and for Autodesk.

2. Keep selling Softimage licenses and focus development on bugfixing and
opening up the SDK so 3rd party developers can do the advanced development
for Softimage. This one would not be so expensive, but would keep Autodesk
in the game with a technologically advanced DCC when Max and Maya
eventually fail due to old age.

3. Just keep selling Softimage and fix critical bugs along the way. The
least attractive solution to the users, but a lot better than killing it
totally.


My 2 cents, and keeping fingers crossed.

Morten Bartholdy






Den 18. marts 2014 kl. 17:28 skrev Dan Pejril :

> Hi Maurice,
>
> I truly appreciate you coming here and setting the record straight
> finally. However it is spun, Softimage was purchased in mind to gut its
> code and to reassign the intellectual backbone to other packages.
> Granted there was supposed to be a Next-Gen App that would replace them
> all. But at the end of the day, Softimage has been ignored by AD over
> the years and now killed. In addition, there is no Softimage, no
> Next-Gen App, no current replacement for Softimage now, nor in the near
> future. There is only a software package most of us have initially left
> to go to Softimage in the first place.
>
> What truly boggles my mind is how disastrous AD's public relations are.
> For the size AD is, I would think they would have a better way of
> relating with the public. I can't help but to feel that information
> regarding Softimage has been misrepresented and I now find it hard to
> believe AD has any credibility left. I hope AD can get its act together
> and figure how to relate to the community and somehow patch the ill will
> created. Until then, I will be looking for solutions outside the AD
> umbrella.
>
> Thank you for the straight talk. So long, and thanks for all the fish.
>
>
> On 3/18/2014 11:21 AM, Maurice Patel wrote:
> > Hi Perry,
> > At that time, although Softimage was not an area we were planning on
investing more in, there was no plan to discontinue it. That decision was
only made at the end of last year. Last year was a watershed one for the
industry for many different reasons resulting in many significant changes
to our strategy. At the time this statement was made we did not even have
any plans for MayaLT. Unfortunately things can change very fast.
> > maurice
> >
> > Maurice Patel
> > Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
> >
> > From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Perry Harovas
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:12 AM
> > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> > Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar
> >
> > Maurice, I know things change, but this statement from Marc was only a
year and a half ago:
> >
> > "Autodesk plans to continue to develop all of products mentioned [in
this story]. These are all solutions that serve many different customer
needs across multiple industries and in many different types of workflows.
> > We are not discontinuing development on any of the products you
mentioned but we will increase focus in specific areas where individual
products are strong."
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Autodesk webinar

[peter_b]

How much of the subscription money is going into those 99% failures?

I know it's nasty to put it like that - but people paying subscription are 
doing so believing (hoping) they are funding the very future and survival of 
the software they are paying for. Right now, it's: continue to pay 
subscription, in order to get upgraded, eh no, downgraded, eh no 
retro-graded to another DCC app.


It's a losing proposition, any which way you look at it.
A few years (2, 3?) of subscription is enough to buy that other app - so 
anyone who wanted to have it, could and would have done so already.
So what happened to the subscription money of the past few years - seeing it 
wasn’t used to keep Softimage from the slaughtering block? Was it not enough 
for the survival of the software? Was it used to help fund the future of 
another software? Or was it to fund research? At a 99% failure rate? Does 
the competition have that same 99% failure rate?

Or do I misunderstand it again?


-Original Message- 
From: Maurice Patel

Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4:54 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: Autodesk webinar

Hi Peter,
That is not what I am saying. We will continue to build new technologies and 
we will continue to do research into new areas. And new projects have and 
will continue to be kicked off. Innovation is 99% failure 1% success. Does 
not mean we will not keep trying to do new and different things but our 
approaches will change and adapt. Bifrost  and Recap are two examples or 
recent projects – time will tell how successful they are – but we have not 
stopped trying.

maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of 
pete...@skynet.be

Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 11:40 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

“...We had plans to build a next generation technology, starting with 
games - we called it project skyline. The industry was in a growth period. 
Everyone was optimistic. And if we had succeeded we probably would not be 
having this conversation.”


so – no next generation 3D authoring from Autodesk then – that’s official 
and final ?

As that’s all the info needed to move forward really.

Sad how the death of one exciting technology (Naiad) leads to the death of 
another (SI / ICE ) and it all ends up zombified in Maya.

Assimilate or die.



From: Perry Harovas
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:55 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Autodesk webinar

I would imagine he means Project Skyline.




On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Chris Marshall 
mailto:chrismarshal...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Which bit failed?

On 18 March 2014 14:51, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:

"sometimes we have to fall back on our positions when our attempts fail"
Maurice





--





Perry Harovas
Animation and Visual Effects

http://www.TheAfterImage.com 

Re: Open letter to Autodesk

[olivier jeannel]

http://www.woodblock.tv/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/PLND_FMX_2014_flyer_v002_900w.jpg

That logo, for me it's the new black Softie flag !

Le 18/03/2014 10:38, Ivan Vasiljevic a écrit :

Guess they are busy working ;).
They sure sad lot with their new facebook cover photo.
https://www.facebook.com/Polynoid


On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 8:24 PM, olivier jeannel 
mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr>> wrote:


Where are Polynoids ?
Possibly I missed their voice with all the traffic on the list
these days

They are with (Tim Borgmann, and Oscar Gonzalez Diez, and others)
my mind master... Did they say something ?




--
Ivan Vasiljevic
-
Lighting TD
Founder, Digital Asset Tailors
-
reel: https://vimeo.com/72183649
web:www.ivasiljevic.com 
email: i...@digitalassettailors.com 
ivan_vasilje...@hotmail.com