Re: A Good Read!

[Sergio Mucino]

I don't know how that will work out, but if you found ICE troublesome, Maya is 
going to kill you (or maybe not... Who knows!). I actually never had much 
problems with the Maya UI. I think the biggest issue people have is with the 
workflow behind it. I also got used to that. What I found very difficult to 
deal with is getting changes to work (once you get into complex stuff). For 
example, there are certain things that cannot be reordered unless you do it 
manually, and doing so is extremely tricky, given the relationships that exist 
within the DAG. To make matters worse, Maya has to have the most unintuitive 
and anti-user friendly node editor from all the ones I've tried, to the point 
where I preferred to work with the Hypergraph (I just got the hang of it a few 
months ago after fiddling with it a bit, and then it was ok, but a lot of thing 
are still not user friendly. It's basically a nicer-looking Hypergraph. Nothing 
else changed). 

Maya does need quite a bit of work in the usability area. Some things are easy 
once you're familiar with them, but getting to that point can be painful. 
Others are kinda ridiculous, actually (like its weights painting system. It's 
horrible).

Of course, it has nice things too. I like the rigging tools. Can't speak much 
for the rest of the applications, since I just rig. 

Sergio Muciño.
Sent from my iPad.

> On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:03 AM, Morten Bartholdy  wrote:
> 
> Like Sebastien wrote: " It's about enabling an individual's,  and giving them 
> peace of mind."
>  
> I understand the part about 3D having become immensely more complex throught 
> the pat decade, requiring more advanced tools and subsequently more skills 
> from the artist, but I really also think the software devs put way too little 
> effort into making these tools userfriendly and easily accessible, so the 
> artist can concentrate on the task at hand rather than how to stick it 
> together at all.
>  
> Maya is a great example here - lots of power but fairly poor UI makes it 
> difficult for a non technically inclined artist to do quite advanced stuff. 
> Softimage is much better in this respect, but also here there is a lot of 
> room for improvement. I have spent countless hours trying to figure out how 
> to make simple stuff work in ICE which ought to be really simple to do and 
> just get on with it. Context mismatches and lack of high level nodes for 
> everyday nuts and bolts stuff makes ICE hard at times for a guy like me. I do 
> like learning and think it is good since, as Olivier say, it empowers you 
> when you unlock more of the tech under the hood, but most of the time, I 
> can't find the time to do this - I just need to produce.
>  
> Don't get me wrong - I love ICE too, and use it on probably 80-90% of my 
> productions (mostly simple stuff and that which can be done with the 
> excellent tools by Mootzoid, Exocortex and others), but I would love to spend 
> much less time trying to figure out the how-to, so I can focus on making it 
> look great. Mind you, I am not asking for a Kais Power Tools for 3D, but 
> there is no reason why advanced stuff shouldn't be easier to do - it would 
> make a lot more people do great work, and thus boost the industry.
>  
> It will be interesting to see how far the Humanize Maya will go in this 
> respect. Given that the devs are on a path to provide as much functionality 
> as possible in a short timeframe I am afraid real UI improvements will not be 
> prioritized enough.
> 
> Morten
> 
> 
> Den 1. april 2014 kl. 20:55 skrev Angus Davidson : 
> 
> I think we have had this discussion before that things should have been 
> further along by now ;)  I just said that Softimage was very good at allowing 
> the very skilled and the very new to easily achieve great things. Having 
> taught Maya and Softimage to people new to 3D its very easy to see the 
> difference between an application that can do that well and one that cant. 
> When you are in education you see that learning curve being tackled over and 
> over again.
>  
> I think Sebastiens race car analogy and conclusions put it far better then I 
> did.
>  
> 
> From: Luc-Eric Rousseau [luceri...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: 01 April 2014 08:04 PM 
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 
> Subject: Re: A Good Read! 
>  
> it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything that 
> would suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit about 
> rigging having not evolved)...
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson < angus.david...@wits.ac.za > 
> wrote: 
> I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he expressed 
> it the way he wanted to. I can feel his fru

RE: A Good Read!

[Morten Bartholdy]

Like Sebastien wrote: " It's about enabling an individual's,  and giving
them peace of mind."

I understand the part about 3D having become immensely more complex
throught the pat decade, requiring more advanced tools and subsequently
more skills from the artist, but I really also think the software devs put
way too little effort into making these tools userfriendly and easily
accessible, so the artist can concentrate on the task at hand rather than
how to stick it together at all.

Maya is a great example here - lots of power but fairly poor UI makes it
difficult for a non technically inclined artist to do quite advanced stuff.
Softimage is much better in this respect, but also here there is a lot of
room for improvement. I have spent countless hours trying to figure out how
to make simple stuff work in ICE which ought to be really simple to do and
just get on with it. Context mismatches and lack of high level nodes for
everyday nuts and bolts stuff makes ICE hard at times for a guy like me. I
do like learning and think it is good since, as Olivier say, it empowers
you when you unlock more of the tech under the hood, but most of the time,
I can't find the time to do this - I just need to produce.

Don't get me wrong - I love ICE too, and use it on probably 80-90% of my
productions (mostly simple stuff and that which can be done with the
excellent tools by Mootzoid, Exocortex and others), but I would love to
spend much less time trying to figure out the how-to, so I can focus on
making it look great. Mind you, I am not asking for a Kais Power Tools for
3D, but there is no reason why advanced stuff shouldn't be easier to do -
it would make a lot more people do great work, and thus boost the industry.

It will be interesting to see how far the Humanize Maya will go in this
respect. Given that the devs are on a path to provide as much functionality
as possible in a short timeframe I am afraid real UI improvements will not
be prioritized enough.

Morten



Den 1. april 2014 kl. 20:55 skrev Angus Davidson
:

> I think we have had this discussion before that things should have been
> further along by now ;)  I just said that Softimage was very good at
> allowing the very skilled and the very new to easily achieve great things.
> Having taught Maya and Softimage to people new to 3D its very easy to see
> the difference between an application that can do that well and one that
> cant. When you are in education you see that learning curve being tackled
> over and over again.
> 
> I think Sebastiens race car analogy and conclusions put it far better then
> I did.
> 
> 
> 
> From: Luc-Eric Rousseau [luceri...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 01 April 2014 08:04 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
> 
> it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything that
> would suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit about
> rigging having not evolved)...
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson < angus.david...@wits.ac.za
> <mailto:angus.david...@wits.ac.za> > wrote:
> > I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he expressed
> > it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you think of where
> > we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be simpler?
> > 
> > Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill
> > battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their
> > unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it,
> > but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as
> > good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap
> > 
> > The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no
> > matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if
> > you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a
> > few monitors to get there.
> > 
> > Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It
> > enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the
> > box.
> > 
> > 

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: A Good Read!

[Jordi Bares]

I believe so too, both the animation tools and rigging tools are evolving 
extremely fast and is certainly something I am going to dive in once I finish 
the project I embarked.

Jordi Bares
jordiba...@gmail.com

On 2 Apr 2014, at 05:35, Sergio Mucino  wrote:

> Modo's rigging capabilities are fairly underrated, IMO. It's not yet at the 
> level of Soft or Maya, but it's pretty capable and I'm hopeful it'll get 
> better. I'm in the process of porting over to Modo some ICE nodes that I've 
> used quite a bit as Assemblies (Modo's version of an ICE Compound), and I'm 
> happy about having them back. Mostly math-related. Modo's schematic 
> environment will let you do the equivalent to ICE Kinematics, and it's 
> particle system is node-based too, but there's not way yet to access mesh 
> data, so don't expect to go as crazy as you can with ICE. Still, I've already 
> delivered a few rigs in Modo over to clients, and I'm happy about them. 
> 
> Looks like Modo + Houdini will keep me cozy and warm (and I do need to start 
> looking into Blender more seriously). 
> 
> Sergio Muciño.
> Sent from my iPad.
> 
> On Apr 1, 2014, at 10:49 PM, Eugene Flormata  wrote:
> 
>> wow I've never touched modo but that modo zen thing looks amazing. that 
>> mixed with non-linear weighting/rigging from XSI would be awesome in any 
>> program
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Maurice Patel  
>> wrote:
>> No I had not, thanks for sharing
>> 
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>> 
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
>> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien 
>> Sterling
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 3:56 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
>> 
>> Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your 
>> solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the 
>> option, doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that 
>> you can completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu, 
>> viewport. this would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot 
>> of good press. like it did for modo.
>> 
>> http://cadjunkie.com/zen
>> 
>> 
>> On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel 
>> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
>> That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my 
>> opinion only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the 
>> constant need  to be creative which means that as soon as you have perfected 
>> your formula 1 race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon, or to dive 
>> into the Marianas trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something else it the 
>> designers never imagined doing in the first place - whereas in racing, any 
>> given track is a pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed about 
>> optimization. This is also where M&E differs from many other production 
>> processes such as manufacturing. While it is feasible these days to program 
>> robots to build cars it is not even remotely possible to do the same thing 
>> for VFX. I also agree that usability is THE big barrier in 3D. My wife is a 
>> jewellery designer and metalsmith who just started her first foray into 
>> Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is the industry standard). I 
>> have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon might be :).
>> 
>> We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus on 
>> usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do, 
>> damned-if-you-don't problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the 
>> product and they are all doing different things, have different pipelines, 
>> different ways of working before you know it you have several ways of doing 
>> the same thing. And deep down people want more features - it is the only 
>> thing they really want to pay for. While everyone will argue that stability 
>> and usability are important they don't want to pay for it (and these things 
>> are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 2015 focused heavily on these 
>> aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key problem areas of UI such 
>> as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. And we know we have to 
>> do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, very real one for all 
>> 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has figured out a perfect 
>> solution for yet. The curve the author descri

Re: A Good Read!

[Sergio Mucino]

Modo's rigging capabilities are fairly underrated, IMO. It's not yet at the 
level of Soft or Maya, but it's pretty capable and I'm hopeful it'll get 
better. I'm in the process of porting over to Modo some ICE nodes that I've 
used quite a bit as Assemblies (Modo's version of an ICE Compound), and I'm 
happy about having them back. Mostly math-related. Modo's schematic environment 
will let you do the equivalent to ICE Kinematics, and it's particle system is 
node-based too, but there's not way yet to access mesh data, so don't expect to 
go as crazy as you can with ICE. Still, I've already delivered a few rigs in 
Modo over to clients, and I'm happy about them. 

Looks like Modo + Houdini will keep me cozy and warm (and I do need to start 
looking into Blender more seriously). 

Sergio Muciño.
Sent from my iPad.

> On Apr 1, 2014, at 10:49 PM, Eugene Flormata  wrote:
> 
> wow I've never touched modo but that modo zen thing looks amazing. that mixed 
> with non-linear weighting/rigging from XSI would be awesome in any program
> 
> 
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Maurice Patel  
>> wrote:
>> No I had not, thanks for sharing
>> 
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>> 
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
>> [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien 
>> Sterling
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 3:56 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
>> 
>> Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your 
>> solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the 
>> option, doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that 
>> you can completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu, 
>> viewport. this would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot 
>> of good press. like it did for modo.
>> 
>> http://cadjunkie.com/zen
>> 
>> 
>> On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel 
>> mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
>> That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my 
>> opinion only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the 
>> constant need  to be creative which means that as soon as you have perfected 
>> your formula 1 race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon, or to dive 
>> into the Marianas trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something else it the 
>> designers never imagined doing in the first place - whereas in racing, any 
>> given track is a pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed about 
>> optimization. This is also where M&E differs from many other production 
>> processes such as manufacturing. While it is feasible these days to program 
>> robots to build cars it is not even remotely possible to do the same thing 
>> for VFX. I also agree that usability is THE big barrier in 3D. My wife is a 
>> jewellery designer and metalsmith who just started her first foray into 
>> Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is the industry standard). I 
>> have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon might be :).
>> 
>> We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus on 
>> usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do, 
>> damned-if-you-don't problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the 
>> product and they are all doing different things, have different pipelines, 
>> different ways of working before you know it you have several ways of doing 
>> the same thing. And deep down people want more features - it is the only 
>> thing they really want to pay for. While everyone will argue that stability 
>> and usability are important they don't want to pay for it (and these things 
>> are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 2015 focused heavily on these 
>> aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key problem areas of UI such 
>> as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. And we know we have to 
>> do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, very real one for all 
>> 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has figured out a perfect 
>> solution for yet. The curve the author describes is pretty accurate. The 
>> problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that optimal point.
>> 
>> maurice
>> 
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>> 
>> From: 
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
>>  
>> [mailto:softim

Re: A Good Read!

[Eugene Flormata]

wow I've never touched modo but that modo zen thing looks amazing. that
mixed with non-linear weighting/rigging from XSI would be awesome in any
program


On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Maurice Patel wrote:

> No I had not, thanks for sharing
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 3:56 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
>
> Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your
> solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the
> option, doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that
> you can completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu,
> viewport. this would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot
> of good press. like it did for modo.
>
> http://cadjunkie.com/zen
>
>
> On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel  maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
> That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my
> opinion only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the
> constant need  to be creative which means that as soon as you have
> perfected your formula 1 race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon,
> or to dive into the Marianas trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something
> else it the designers never imagined doing in the first place - whereas in
> racing, any given track is a pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed
> about optimization. This is also where M&E differs from many other
> production processes such as manufacturing. While it is feasible these days
> to program robots to build cars it is not even remotely possible to do the
> same thing for VFX. I also agree that usability is THE big barrier in 3D.
> My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just started her first
> foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is the industry
> standard). I have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon might be
> :).
>
> We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus
> on usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do,
> damned-if-you-don't problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the
> product and they are all doing different things, have different pipelines,
> different ways of working before you know it you have several ways of doing
> the same thing. And deep down people want more features - it is the only
> thing they really want to pay for. While everyone will argue that stability
> and usability are important they don't want to pay for it (and these things
> are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 2015 focused heavily on these
> aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key problem areas of UI such
> as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. And we know we have to
> do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, very real one for
> all 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has figured out a
> perfect solution for yet. The curve the author describes is pretty
> accurate. The problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that optimal
> point.
>
> 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 Sebastien Sterling
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> >
> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
> Here is a better race related analogy
> You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your
> skills and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles,
> torque, speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
> you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
> When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is
> wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority,
> you just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that
> take care of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your
> machine can function as one and perform at your best.
> It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.
> Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the
> important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken
> up by "will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to
> the pit? are

RE: A Good Read!

[Maurice Patel]

No I had not, thanks for sharing

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 3:56 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: A Good Read!

Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your 
solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the option, 
doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that you can 
completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu, viewport. this 
would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot of good press. 
like it did for modo.

http://cadjunkie.com/zen


On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my opinion 
only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the constant need 
 to be creative which means that as soon as you have perfected your formula 1 
race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon, or to dive into the Marianas 
trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something else it the designers never 
imagined doing in the first place - whereas in racing, any given track is a 
pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed about optimization. This is also 
where M&E differs from many other production processes such as manufacturing. 
While it is feasible these days to program robots to build cars it is not even 
remotely possible to do the same thing for VFX. I also agree that usability is 
THE big barrier in 3D. My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just 
started her first foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is 
the industry standard). I have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon 
might be :).

We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus on 
usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't 
problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the product and they are all 
doing different things, have different pipelines, different ways of working 
before you know it you have several ways of doing the same thing. And deep down 
people want more features - it is the only thing they really want to pay for. 
While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important they don't 
want to pay for it (and these things are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 
2015 focused heavily on these aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key 
problem areas of UI such as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. 
And we know we have to do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, 
very real one for all 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has 
figured out a perfect solution for yet. The curve the author describes is 
pretty accurate. The problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that 
optimal point.

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 Sebastien Sterling
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
Subject: Re: A Good Read!
Here is a better race related analogy
You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your skills 
and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles, torque, 
speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is 
wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority, you 
just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that take care 
of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your machine can 
function as one and perform at your best.
It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.
Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the 
important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken up by 
"will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to the pit? 
are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound? will it crash, WILL IT 
CRASH?"
If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.

Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this industry 
artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look under the hood. 
However this should not be viewed as a fatality, but an incentive, to build the 
most reliable and program with the most fluid interface that allows your users 
to reach that special place that 1:1 ratio where there is no mo

Re: A Good Read!

[Sebastien Sterling]

Sorry for lashing out of control.


On 1 April 2014 21:51, Rob Chapman  wrote:

> Hey Seb and Andy, am fairly certain that Maurice here in this instance
> is not representing Autodesk and the really large IMO he started with
> means quite clearly 'in my opinion'  :)   I get what you are saying,
> but had enough AD bashing for now, 'fish in a barrel'... this thread
> was just getting interesting.
>
> I just wanted to add (to the thread) that there has to be a clear
> difference between a beginners interpretation of 'worlflow' and ease
> of use and an experts with a muscle memory developed over time.
>
> I agree yes Softimage is/was easy to pick up in specific areas but
> what was important for me or a 'eureka' moment is when you can do
> 'stuff' without thinking about which key is pressed or where the
> button is on a menu or what it is called.
>
> flow. timelessness. in the moment.  this is what an artist feels when
> they are painting, or I did when I used to, Softimage3D allowed me to
> experience that and so did XSI and is what am looking for next.  :)
>
> On 1 April 2014 21:26, Sebastien Sterling 
> wrote:
> > They did it for SI 2013, and apparently to some extent for max this year,
> > and people kicked up shit cause those releases where feature light, and
> they
> > where quite right to do so.
> >
> > The thing is Fixing bugs and workflow are things that should really be
> > addressed incrementally, not just left to build up over time, and clients
> > are entitled to a functioning product experience, it should,'t even be
> > flaunted as a feature, you don't plan your budget around whether you will
> > have the money this year to fix bugs, you just fix the bugs, it's not
> > something that you should have to weight for pros and cons.
> >
> > Do you see modo, zBrush, Houdini, featuring Bug fixes among there new
> > features?
> >
> >
> > On 1 April 2014 21:14, Andy Goehler 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Is that AD internal assumptions or have you ever approached your
> customers
> >> with the idea of a bug/usability fix upgrade? Honestly?
> >>
> >> Andy
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 01, 2014, at 21:39, Maurice Patel 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important
> they
> >> don't want to pay for it
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: A Good Read!

[Andy Goehler]

Hey Marcel, Sebastien and Rob,

it was sincere question, I didn’t intend to offend.
I guess it comes down to customer relation and communication, both of which 
have been talk about enough already.

That sentence I replied to just triggered a button.

Sorry,

Andy

On Apr 01, 2014, at 22:51, Rob Chapman  wrote:

> Hey Seb and Andy, am fairly certain that Maurice here in this instance
> is not representing Autodesk and the really large IMO he started with
> means quite clearly 'in my opinion'  :)   I get what you are saying,
> but had enough AD bashing for now, 'fish in a barrel'... this thread
> was just getting interesting.

Re: A Good Read!

[Rob Chapman]

Hey Seb and Andy, am fairly certain that Maurice here in this instance
is not representing Autodesk and the really large IMO he started with
means quite clearly 'in my opinion'  :)   I get what you are saying,
but had enough AD bashing for now, 'fish in a barrel'... this thread
was just getting interesting.

I just wanted to add (to the thread) that there has to be a clear
difference between a beginners interpretation of 'worlflow' and ease
of use and an experts with a muscle memory developed over time.

I agree yes Softimage is/was easy to pick up in specific areas but
what was important for me or a 'eureka' moment is when you can do
'stuff' without thinking about which key is pressed or where the
button is on a menu or what it is called.

flow. timelessness. in the moment.  this is what an artist feels when
they are painting, or I did when I used to, Softimage3D allowed me to
experience that and so did XSI and is what am looking for next.  :)

On 1 April 2014 21:26, Sebastien Sterling  wrote:
> They did it for SI 2013, and apparently to some extent for max this year,
> and people kicked up shit cause those releases where feature light, and they
> where quite right to do so.
>
> The thing is Fixing bugs and workflow are things that should really be
> addressed incrementally, not just left to build up over time, and clients
> are entitled to a functioning product experience, it should,'t even be
> flaunted as a feature, you don't plan your budget around whether you will
> have the money this year to fix bugs, you just fix the bugs, it's not
> something that you should have to weight for pros and cons.
>
> Do you see modo, zBrush, Houdini, featuring Bug fixes among there new
> features?
>
>
> On 1 April 2014 21:14, Andy Goehler  wrote:
>>
>> Is that AD internal assumptions or have you ever approached your customers
>> with the idea of a bug/usability fix upgrade? Honestly?
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> On Apr 01, 2014, at 21:39, Maurice Patel 
>> wrote:
>>
>> While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important they
>> don't want to pay for it
>>
>>
>

Re: A Good Read!

[Sebastien Sterling]

They did it for SI 2013, and apparently to some extent for max this year,
and people kicked up shit cause those releases where feature light, and
they where quite right to do so.

The thing is Fixing bugs and workflow are things that should really be
addressed incrementally, not just left to build up over time, and clients
are entitled to a functioning product experience, it should,'t even be
flaunted as a feature, you don't plan your budget around whether you will
have the money this year to fix bugs, you just fix the bugs, it's not
something that you should have to weight for pros and cons.

Do you see modo, zBrush, Houdini, featuring Bug fixes among there new
features?


On 1 April 2014 21:14, Andy Goehler  wrote:

> Is that AD internal assumptions or have you ever approached your customers
> with the idea of a bug/usability fix upgrade? Honestly?
>
> Andy
>
>
> On Apr 01, 2014, at 21:39, Maurice Patel 
> wrote:
>
> While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important they
> don't want to pay for it
>
>
>

Re: A Good Read!

[Andy Goehler]

Is that AD internal assumptions or have you ever approached your customers with 
the idea of a bug/usability fix upgrade? Honestly?

Andy

On Apr 01, 2014, at 21:39, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important they 
> don't want to pay for it

RE: A Good Read!

[Angus Davidson]

This would go a long way to allowing the user to put the curve where they need 
it to be.

Its one of the things I have on my todo list to look into for our new course.  
Our students for that course dont use a good 80% of the menus that exist. To be 
able to select a beginner layout would be a great start.





From: Sebastien Sterling [sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 April 2014 09:55 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: A Good Read!

Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your 
solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the option, 
doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that you can 
completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu, viewport. this 
would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot of good press. 
like it did for modo.

http://cadjunkie.com/zen




On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel 
mailto:maurice.pa...@autodesk.com>> wrote:
That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my opinion 
only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the constant need 
 to be creative which means that as soon as you have perfected your formula 1 
race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon, or to dive into the Marianas 
trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something else it the designers never 
imagined doing in the first place - whereas in racing, any given track is a 
pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed about optimization. This is also 
where M&E differs from many other production processes such as manufacturing. 
While it is feasible these days to program robots to build cars it is not even 
remotely possible to do the same thing for VFX. I also agree that usability is 
THE big barrier in 3D. My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just 
started her first foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is 
the industry standard). I have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon 
might be :).

We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus on 
usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't 
problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the product and they are all 
doing different things, have different pipelines, different ways of working 
before you know it you have several ways of doing the same thing. And deep down 
people want more features - it is the only thing they really want to pay for. 
While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important they don't 
want to pay for it (and these things are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 
2015 focused heavily on these aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key 
problem areas of UI such as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. 
And we know we have to do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, 
very real one for all 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has 
figured out a perfect solution for yet. The curve the author describes is 
pretty accurate. The problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that 
optimal point.

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 Sebastien Sterling
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
Subject: Re: A Good Read!

Here is a better race related analogy
You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your skills 
and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles, torque, 
speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is 
wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority, you 
just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that take care 
of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your machine can 
function as one and perform at your best.
It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.
Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the 
important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken up by 
"will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to the pit? 
are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound? will it crash, WILL IT 
CRASH?"
If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.

Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this industry 
artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look under the hood. 
However this should not be viewed

Re: A Good Read!

[John Richard Sanchez]

Hi Maurice
I have to say I did get up and running in Mudbox pretty quick and was able
to fix some textures on a character pretty quick after a few hours driving
it for the first time.




On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Sebastien Sterling <
sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your
> solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the
> option, doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that
> you can completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu,
> viewport. this would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot
> of good press. like it did for modo.
>
> http://cadjunkie.com/zen
>
>
>
>
> On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel  wrote:
>
>> That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my
>> opinion only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the
>> constant need  to be creative which means that as soon as you have
>> perfected your formula 1 race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon,
>> or to dive into the Marianas trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something
>> else it the designers never imagined doing in the first place - whereas in
>> racing, any given track is a pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed
>> about optimization. This is also where M&E differs from many other
>> production processes such as manufacturing. While it is feasible these days
>> to program robots to build cars it is not even remotely possible to do the
>> same thing for VFX. I also agree that usability is THE big barrier in 3D.
>> My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just started her first
>> foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is the industry
>> standard). I have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon might be
>> :).
>>
>> We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus
>> on usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do,
>> damned-if-you-don't problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the
>> product and they are all doing different things, have different pipelines,
>> different ways of working before you know it you have several ways of doing
>> the same thing. And deep down people want more features - it is the only
>> thing they really want to pay for. While everyone will argue that stability
>> and usability are important they don't want to pay for it (and these things
>> are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 2015 focused heavily on these
>> aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key problem areas of UI such
>> as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. And we know we have to
>> do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, very real one for
>> all 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has figured out a
>> perfect solution for yet. The curve the author describes is pretty
>> accurate. The problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that optimal
>> point.
>>
>> maurice
>>
>> Maurice Patel
>> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>>
>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
>>
>> Here is a better race related analogy
>> You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your
>> skills and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles,
>> torque, speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
>> you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
>> When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what
>> is wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority,
>> you just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that
>> take care of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your
>> machine can function as one and perform at your best.
>> It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.
>> Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on
>> the important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is
>> taken up by "will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head
>> down to the pit? are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound?
>> will it crash, WILL IT CRASH?"
>> If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.
>>
>> Now i know tha

Re: A Good Read!

[Doeke Wartena]

"My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just started her first
foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is the industry
standard)."

Can't she use softimage and then import the result in Rhino?

sorry i had to make that bad joke :) Btw, she might like grasshopper once
she has the skills in Rhino, depending on what kind of jewellery she makes
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/


2014-04-01 21:43 GMT+02:00 Sebastien Sterling 
:

> Ow shucks Angus, (blush) was just ma 2 cents ;)
>
> Ha! no Olivier i have not seen The Rush, lol looks like an Oscar bait, I
> don't really get your resolve, i'm not saying that an artist shouldn't ever
> interact with the motor, but there are millions of instances (not just in
> maya...) where he should not have to. As an artist, you should never have
> to go in there to "Fix" something, or compensate for an inexplicably
> missing feature; (show/hide polygons, in maya), It's cool when you do it to
> expand functionality or optimize your workflow which was cool with
> softimage cause, you pretty much stated of at +5:
>
> You got a good range of functionality, and it will take you a long way
> before you feel the need to optimize it. it covers all the basic needs, it
> might not have all the modeling functionality of 3ds Max or the one or two
> key features of maya (sculpt relax) but what is there has been polished to
> a mirror shine, it's tight responsive and intuitive.
>
> To use yet another race car analogy (i know you love them :P) it's not
> just about raw power, but maneuverability.
>
> Maya starts you off at -10 functionality:
>
> Want to hide a polygon selection ? doesn't exist, want to aline two
> objects per pivot ? gonna have to script it, want to relax per vertex loop
> ? doesn't exist. want to constrain to cluster, download the rivet script,
> rivet script doesn't work, recompile the rivet script,
>
> This is all before you even get to be functional, i spent half a day
> trying to script a per pivot aline tool in Mel, which is a very basic need,
> it should not be missing for a start and i shouldn't be wasting valuable
> time compensating for this lack.
>
>
> If you would like to discuss this further please feel free to PM me, as i
> feel i have overstated my welcome on this thread for now but I'd still like
> to grasp your perspective. ;)
>
>
>
>
> On 1 April 2014 19:55, Angus Davidson  wrote:
>
>>  I think we have had this discussion before that things should have been
>> further along by now ;)  I just said that Softimage was very good at
>> allowing the very skilled and the very new to easily achieve great things.
>> Having taught Maya and Softimage to people new to 3D its very easy to see
>> the difference between an application that can do that well and one that
>> cant. When you are in education you see that learning curve being tackled
>> over and over again.
>>
>>  I think Sebastiens race car analogy and conclusions put it far better
>> then I did.
>>
>>
>>  --
>> *From:* Luc-Eric Rousseau [luceri...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* 01 April 2014 08:04 PM
>>
>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> *Subject:* Re: A Good Read!
>>
>>   it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything
>> that would suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit
>> about rigging having not evolved)...
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson > > wrote:
>>
>>>  I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he
>>> expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you
>>> think of where we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be
>>> simpler?
>>>
>>>  Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an
>>> uphill battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs
>>> and their unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful
>>> results with it, but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could
>>> have done just as good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap
>>>
>>>  The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no
>>> matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if
>>> you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a
>>> few monitors to get there.
>>>
>>>  Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It
>>> enabled both he novice and the professional to do am

Re: A Good Read!

[Sebastien Sterling]

Maurice, did you see the CAD Junky Zen slim UI presentation ? that is your
solution right there. show people what it could be like, give them the
option, doesn't have to be compulsory, Maya has that one thing going, that
you can completely reshape the interface, every palette, role out menu,
viewport. this would not be an expensive endeavor. and would give you a lot
of good press. like it did for modo.

http://cadjunkie.com/zen




On 1 April 2014 20:39, Maurice Patel  wrote:

> That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my
> opinion only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the
> constant need  to be creative which means that as soon as you have
> perfected your formula 1 race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon,
> or to dive into the Marianas trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something
> else it the designers never imagined doing in the first place - whereas in
> racing, any given track is a pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed
> about optimization. This is also where M&E differs from many other
> production processes such as manufacturing. While it is feasible these days
> to program robots to build cars it is not even remotely possible to do the
> same thing for VFX. I also agree that usability is THE big barrier in 3D.
> My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just started her first
> foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is the industry
> standard). I have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon might be
> :).
>
> We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus
> on usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do,
> damned-if-you-don't problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the
> product and they are all doing different things, have different pipelines,
> different ways of working before you know it you have several ways of doing
> the same thing. And deep down people want more features - it is the only
> thing they really want to pay for. While everyone will argue that stability
> and usability are important they don't want to pay for it (and these things
> are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 2015 focused heavily on these
> aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key problem areas of UI such
> as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. And we know we have to
> do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, very real one for
> all 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has figured out a
> perfect solution for yet. The curve the author describes is pretty
> accurate. The problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that optimal
> point.
>
> maurice
>
> Maurice Patel
> Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134
>
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: A Good Read!
>
> Here is a better race related analogy
> You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your
> skills and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles,
> torque, speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
> you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
> When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is
> wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority,
> you just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that
> take care of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your
> machine can function as one and perform at your best.
> It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.
> Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the
> important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken
> up by "will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to
> the pit? are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound? will it
> crash, WILL IT CRASH?"
> If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.
>
> Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this industry
> artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look under the hood.
> However this should not be viewed as a fatality, but an incentive, to build
> the most reliable and program with the most fluid interface that allows
> your users to reach that special place that 1:1 ratio where there is no
> more keyboard or stylus there's just you and the data, and you doing what
> you where made to do, unimpeded free.
>
> This quality this lucidity, to my mind is more precious then all the
> bullshit and bells trotted out each release.
>
>

Re: A Good Read!

[Sebastien Sterling]

Ow shucks Angus, (blush) was just ma 2 cents ;)

Ha! no Olivier i have not seen The Rush, lol looks like an Oscar bait, I
don't really get your resolve, i'm not saying that an artist shouldn't ever
interact with the motor, but there are millions of instances (not just in
maya...) where he should not have to. As an artist, you should never have
to go in there to "Fix" something, or compensate for an inexplicably
missing feature; (show/hide polygons, in maya), It's cool when you do it to
expand functionality or optimize your workflow which was cool with
softimage cause, you pretty much stated of at +5:

You got a good range of functionality, and it will take you a long way
before you feel the need to optimize it. it covers all the basic needs, it
might not have all the modeling functionality of 3ds Max or the one or two
key features of maya (sculpt relax) but what is there has been polished to
a mirror shine, it's tight responsive and intuitive.

To use yet another race car analogy (i know you love them :P) it's not just
about raw power, but maneuverability.

Maya starts you off at -10 functionality:

Want to hide a polygon selection ? doesn't exist, want to aline two objects
per pivot ? gonna have to script it, want to relax per vertex loop ?
doesn't exist. want to constrain to cluster, download the rivet script,
rivet script doesn't work, recompile the rivet script,

This is all before you even get to be functional, i spent half a day trying
to script a per pivot aline tool in Mel, which is a very basic need, it
should not be missing for a start and i shouldn't be wasting valuable time
compensating for this lack.


If you would like to discuss this further please feel free to PM me, as i
feel i have overstated my welcome on this thread for now but I'd still like
to grasp your perspective. ;)




On 1 April 2014 19:55, Angus Davidson  wrote:

>  I think we have had this discussion before that things should have been
> further along by now ;)  I just said that Softimage was very good at
> allowing the very skilled and the very new to easily achieve great things.
> Having taught Maya and Softimage to people new to 3D its very easy to see
> the difference between an application that can do that well and one that
> cant. When you are in education you see that learning curve being tackled
> over and over again.
>
>  I think Sebastiens race car analogy and conclusions put it far better
> then I did.
>
>
>  --
> *From:* Luc-Eric Rousseau [luceri...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 01 April 2014 08:04 PM
>
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> *Subject:* Re: A Good Read!
>
>   it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything
> that would suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit
> about rigging having not evolved)...
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson 
> wrote:
>
>>  I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he
>> expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you
>> think of where we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be
>> simpler?
>>
>>  Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an
>> uphill battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs
>> and their unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful
>> results with it, but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could
>> have done just as good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap
>>
>>  The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no
>> matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if
>> you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a
>> few monitors to get there.
>>
>>  Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It
>> enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the
>> box.
>>
>>
>> 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: A Good Read!

[Maurice Patel]

That article was a very interesting read. IMO (and I stress that is my opinion 
only): the one big challenge in the entertainment industry is the constant need 
 to be creative which means that as soon as you have perfected your formula 1 
race car, someone now wants it to fly to the moon, or to dive into the Marianas 
trench or do the Paris-Dakar or do something else it the designers never 
imagined doing in the first place - whereas in racing, any given track is a 
pretty fixed entity and the skill is indeed about optimization. This is also 
where M&E differs from many other production processes such as manufacturing. 
While it is feasible these days to program robots to build cars it is not even 
remotely possible to do the same thing for VFX. I also agree that usability is 
THE big barrier in 3D. My wife is a jewellery designer and metalsmith who just 
started her first foray into Rhino and is not enjoying it (in her craft it is 
the industry standard). I have not had to replace any monitors yet but I soon 
might be :).

We often discuss this problem here. The Mudbox team went all out to focus on 
usability but there is this unfortunate damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't 
problem in our industry. Everyone wants more in the product and they are all 
doing different things, have different pipelines, different ways of working 
before you know it you have several ways of doing the same thing. And deep down 
people want more features - it is the only thing they really want to pay for. 
While everyone will argue that stability and usability are important they don't 
want to pay for it (and these things are complex and costly to solve). 3ds Max 
2015 focused heavily on these aspects - making five clicks two, cleaning up key 
problem areas of UI such as the scene navigator and we took a beating for it. 
And we know we have to do this for Maya too. The usability 'issue' is a very, 
very real one for all 3D applications and one that I don't think anyone has 
figured out a perfect solution for yet. The curve the author describes is 
pretty accurate. The problem is that you cannot easily keep things at that 
optimal point.

maurice

Maurice Patel
Autodesk : Tél:  514 954-7134

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Sebastien Sterling
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 2:25 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: A Good Read!

Here is a better race related analogy
You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your skills 
and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles, torque, 
speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.
When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is 
wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority, you 
just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that take care 
of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your machine can 
function as one and perform at your best.
It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.
Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the 
important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken up by 
"will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to the pit? 
are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound? will it crash, WILL IT 
CRASH?"
If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.

Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this industry 
artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look under the hood. 
However this should not be viewed as a fatality, but an incentive, to build the 
most reliable and program with the most fluid interface that allows your users 
to reach that special place that 1:1 ratio where there is no more keyboard or 
stylus there's just you and the data, and you doing what you where made to do, 
unimpeded free.

This quality this lucidity, to my mind is more precious then all the bullshit 
and bells trotted out each release.

<>

RE: A Good Read!

[Angus Davidson]

I think we have had this discussion before that things should have been further 
along by now ;)  I just said that Softimage was very good at allowing the very 
skilled and the very new to easily achieve great things. Having taught Maya and 
Softimage to people new to 3D its very easy to see the difference between an 
application that can do that well and one that cant. When you are in education 
you see that learning curve being tackled over and over again.

I think Sebastiens race car analogy and conclusions put it far better then I 
did.



From: Luc-Eric Rousseau [luceri...@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 April 2014 08:04 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: A Good Read!

it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything that would 
suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit about rigging 
having not evolved)...


On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson 
mailto:angus.david...@wits.ac.za>> wrote:
I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he expressed it 
the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you think of where we are 
and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be simpler?

Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill battle 
to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their unwrap 
interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it, but in the 
time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as good a job 
sticking to massaging a standard unwrap

The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no matter 
your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if you stick to 
using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a few monitors to 
get there.

Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It enabled 
both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the box.





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: A Good Read!

[olivier jeannel]

Sebastien I get your point, and that is just another arguing thread for 
me :) I have pleasure arguying for nothing :)
But, concerning the driver analogy I tend to disagree : Have you seen 
"The Rush" ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzNbGH1oZJc#aid=P-3SQ679EzI




Anyway,
Le 01/04/2014 20:24, Sebastien Sterling a écrit :

Here is a better race related analogy

You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing 
your skills and natural talent, you know instinctively how to 
calculate angles, torque, speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure

you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.

When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see 
what is wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main 
priority, you just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated 
team there that take care of these thing, that is their job to make 
sure you and your machine can function as one and perform at your best.


It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.

Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on 
the important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain 
is taken up by "will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i 
head down to the pit? are the wheels overheating?, what is making that 
sound? will it crash, WILL IT CRASH?"


If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.


Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this 
industry artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look 
under the hood. However this should not be viewed as a fatality, but 
an incentive, to build the most reliable and program with the most 
fluid interface that allows your users to reach that special place 
that 1:1 ratio where there is no more keyboard or stylus there's just 
you and the data, and you doing what you where made to do, unimpeded free.



This quality this lucidity, to my mind is more precious then all the 
bullshit and bells trotted out each release.



On 1 April 2014 18:10, Angus Davidson <mailto:angus.david...@wits.ac.za>> wrote:


I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he
expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If
you think of where we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't
things be simpler?

Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an
uphill battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful.
HeadUs and their unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get
beautiful results with it, but in the time it takes you figure
crap out, you could have done just as good a job sticking to
massaging a standard unwrap

The idea is that your software should enable you from the
beginning no matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get
highly skilled with it if you stick to using it , but you
shouldn't have to put your fist through a few monitors to get there.

Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage.
It enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing
things out the box.






*From:* Sebastien Sterling [sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com
<mailto:sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com>]
*Sent:* 01 April 2014 06:39 PM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
*Subject:* Re: A Good Read!

I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you
Olivier ?


On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr>> wrote:

... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those
complex 3d software, should just buy a pen...

Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in
the day.


Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :


This guy has a point.

MB


Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor
 <mailto:ndman...@gmail.com>:

" *When in a production environment, I don't care how the
tool works under the hood, I just want to get into the
driver's seat, strap in, and hit the gas* ." /Barry Zundel/
/
/
This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
Read the full article here:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html






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 agre

Re: A Good Read!

[Sebastien Sterling]

Here is a better race related analogy

You are a race car driver, you've spent a career diligently homing your
skills and natural talent, you know instinctively how to calculate angles,
torque, speed, drifting, terrain, weather, pressure
you can read other drivers movements and anticipate their decisions.

When you go down into the pit, you don't get out of the car to see what is
wrong, to remove the wheels or refuel, these are not your main priority,
you just want to get back out there. There is a dedicated team there that
take care of these thing, that is their job to make sure you and your
machine can function as one and perform at your best.

It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them peace of mind.

Imagine you are that same race car driver, only instead of focusing on the
important things (toque angles speed overtaking) half your brain is taken
up by "will it crash will it crash?, will it crash?, should i head down to
the pit? are the wheels overheating?, what is making that sound? will it
crash, WILL IT CRASH?"

If you can't trust your car to perform, how can you trust yourself.


Now i know that we live in an imperfect world, and that in this industry
artists are often obliged to get down on all fours and look under the hood.
However this should not be viewed as a fatality, but an incentive, to build
the most reliable and program with the most fluid interface that allows
your users to reach that special place that 1:1 ratio where there is no
more keyboard or stylus there's just you and the data, and you doing what
you where made to do, unimpeded free.


This quality this lucidity, to my mind is more precious then all the
bullshit and bells trotted out each release.


On 1 April 2014 18:10, Angus Davidson  wrote:

>  I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he
> expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you
> think of where we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be
> simpler?
>
>  Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill
> battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their
> unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it,
> but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as
> good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap
>
>  The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no
> matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if
> you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a
> few monitors to get there.
>
>  Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It
> enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the
> box.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  *From:* Sebastien Sterling [sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 01 April 2014 06:39 PM
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> *Subject:* Re: A Good Read!
>
>   I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you
> Olivier ?
>
>
> On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel  wrote:
>
>>  ... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
>> Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex 3d
>> software, should just buy a pen...
>>
>> Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the day.
>>
>>
>> Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :
>>
>> This guy has a point.
>>
>>
>>
>> MB
>>
>> Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor 
>> :
>>
>>
>>  " *When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool works
>> under the hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat, strap in, and
>> hit the gas* ."   *Barry Zundel*
>>
>>  This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
>>
>> Read the full article here:
>> http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>  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: A Good Read!

[Martin Yara]

I think the author point was that a lot of 3D programs doesn't give
usability enough attention as they should.

I totally agree with the ZBrush thing. It is a wonderful tool but the UI
and usability in general could be better. I remember It took me a while to
understand what are tools and scenes. Even now I'm not so sure I fully
understand Zbrush scenes.

One of the biggest reasons why we love Softimage and not so much Max, or
Maya, or Blender. Even if you can have the same final result, 9 out of 10
you could do it faster and easier in Softimage, and not because Softimage
technology is infinitely superior.

Jordy Bares' Blender link is a little related to this, how much Blender
sucks in usability from a Blender user POV. I've only watched part 1 but it
is interesting so far.

Selecting with right click. Yeah, I'm one of those who couldn't figure it
out from start, and when I did, I decided to quit.

Martin





On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:51 AM, olivier jeannel wrote:

>  Imho, things are simpler it's just there are *more* things. Every 3D
> "sector" got specialized.
> I think being generalist is quite a chalenge, much more than 20 years ago.
> Look at how modeling has "pushed" with Zbrush,  Texturing with mary.
> Before I was pressing buttons, now since Ice I know what a vector is, and
> I think I'm better since I know the math under the hood.
>
> Frankly, if you start to draw you're gonna throw a few papers to the
> trashcan, an if you're starting to sculpt you'll break some molds.
>
> Read Jordi Bare, I believe he's expanded his creative power since he broke
> into Houdini.
> Learning makes you learn more until you get old and die... no ?
>
>

Re: A Good Read!

[Luc-Eric Rousseau]

it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything that
would suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit about
rigging having not evolved)...


On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson wrote:

>  I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he
> expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you
> think of where we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be
> simpler?
>
>  Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill
> battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their
> unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it,
> but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as
> good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap
>
>  The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no
> matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if
> you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a
> few monitors to get there.
>
>  Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It
> enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the
> box.
>
>
>

Re: A Good Read!

[olivier jeannel]

Imho, things are simpler it's just there are _more_ things. Every 3D 
"sector" got specialized.
I think being generalist is quite a chalenge, much more than 20 years 
ago. Look at how modeling has "pushed" with Zbrush, Texturing with mary.
Before I was pressing buttons, now since Ice I know what a vector is, 
and I think I'm better since I know the math under the hood.


Frankly, if you start to draw you're gonna throw a few papers to the 
trashcan, an if you're starting to sculpt you'll break some molds.


Read Jordi Bare, I believe he's expanded his creative power since he 
broke into Houdini.

Learning makes you learn more until you get old and die... no ?


Le 01/04/2014 19:10, Angus Davidson a écrit :
I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he 
expressed it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you 
think of where we are and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things 
be simpler?


Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an 
uphill battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. 
HeadUs and their unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get 
beautiful results with it, but in the time it takes you figure crap 
out, you could have done just as good a job sticking to massaging a 
standard unwrap


The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no 
matter your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it 
if you stick to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist 
through a few monitors to get there.


Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It 
enabled both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out 
the box.







*From:* Sebastien Sterling [sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* 01 April 2014 06:39 PM
*To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
*Subject:* Re: A Good Read!

I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you Olivier ?


On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel <mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr>> wrote:


... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex
3d software, should just buy a pen...

Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the
day.


Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :


This guy has a point.

MB


Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor
 <mailto:ndman...@gmail.com>:

" *When in a production environment, I don't care how the
tool works under the hood, I just want to get into the
driver's seat, strap in, and hit the gas* ." /Barry Zundel/
/
/
This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
Read the full article here:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html






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: A Good Read!

[Angus Davidson]

I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he expressed it 
the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration.  If you think of where we are 
and  its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be simpler?

Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill battle 
to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their unwrap 
interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it, but in the 
time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as good a job 
sticking to massaging a standard unwrap

The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no matter 
your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if you stick to 
using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a few monitors to 
get there.

Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It enabled 
both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the box.






From: Sebastien Sterling [sebastien.sterl...@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 April 2014 06:39 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: A Good Read!

I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you Olivier ?


On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel 
mailto:olivier.jean...@noos.fr>> wrote:
... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex 3d software, 
should just buy a pen...

Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the day.


Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :

This guy has a point.



MB

Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor 
<mailto:ndman...@gmail.com>:

" When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool works under the 
hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat, strap in, and hit the gas ."   
Barry Zundel

This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!

Read the full article here:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html







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: A Good Read!

[olivier jeannel]

...And obviously he never drove a Ferrari.

Le 01/04/2014 18:55, olivier jeannel a écrit :
Well from my experience, you can't ignore what's under the hood and 
get into blablabla...

That would be a little too easy.
We're "technical artist", some are more techy, some are more arty. But 
nobody jumps into the driver seat.





Le 01/04/2014 18:39, Sebastien Sterling a écrit :
I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you 
Olivier ?



On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel > wrote:


... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those
complex 3d software, should just buy a pen...

Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in
the day.


Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :


This guy has a point.

MB


Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor
 :

" *When in a production environment, I don't care how the
tool works under the hood, I just want to get into the
driver's seat, strap in, and hit the gas* ." /Barry Zundel/
/
/
This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
Read the full article here:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html

Re: A Good Read!

[olivier jeannel]

Well from my experience, you can't ignore what's under the hood and get 
into blablabla...

That would be a little too easy.
We're "technical artist", some are more techy, some are more arty. But 
nobody jumps into the driver seat.





Le 01/04/2014 18:39, Sebastien Sterling a écrit :

I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you Olivier ?


On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel > wrote:


... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex
3d software, should just buy a pen...

Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the
day.


Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :


This guy has a point.

MB


Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor
 :

" *When in a production environment, I don't care how the
tool works under the hood, I just want to get into the
driver's seat, strap in, and hit the gas* ." /Barry Zundel/
/
/
This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
Read the full article here:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html

Re: A Good Read!

[Sebastien Sterling]

I think he is quite right in his assertion, what was hurting you Olivier ?


On 1 April 2014 16:29, olivier jeannel  wrote:

>  ... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
> Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex 3d
> software, should just buy a pen...
>
> Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the day.
>
>
> Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :
>
>  This guy has a point.
>
>
>
>  MB
>
> Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor 
> :
>
>
>   " *When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool works
> under the hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat, strap in, and
> hit the gas* ."*Barry Zundel*
>
>   This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
>
>  Read the full article here:
> http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: A Good Read!

[olivier jeannel]

... Red this very quickly, because it upsets me every 4 words.
Frankly, the guy who is way too smart or to arty for those complex 3d 
software, should just buy a pen...


Remember me some Texas Lightwave/NT communication from back in the day.


Le 01/04/2014 11:40, Morten Bartholdy a écrit :


This guy has a point.

MB


Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor :

" *When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool
works under the hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat,
strap in, and hit the gas* ." /Barry Zundel/
/
/
This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
Read the full article here:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html

Re: A Good Read!

[Morten Bartholdy]

This guy has a point.

MB


Den 31. marts 2014 kl. 16:17 skrev Saeed Kalhor :

> " When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool works under
> the hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat, strap in, and hit the
> gas ."   Barry Zundel
> 
> This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
> 
> Read the full article here:
> http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html
> 

Re: A Good Read!

[Saeed Kalhor]

This is good too:
http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2013/10/workflow-workflow-workflow-its-all.html


On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Saeed Kalhor  wrote:

> "*When in a production environment, I don't care how the tool works under
> the hood, I just want to get into the driver's seat, strap in, and hit the
> gas*."  *Barry Zundel*
>
> This is what Autodesk doesn't want us to do!
>
> Read the full article here:
> http://barryzundel.blogspot.de/2012/07/tool-productivity-curve.html
>