Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Andy Goehler]

> On 24.11.2015, at 11:19, Gerbrand Nel  wrote:
> 
> …
> They then see me leave... every day... at 5pm, …
> G

I leave at 4pm :-)

Andy

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Rob Wuijster]

Maya is the 'VHS of 3D'.

It's not that it was the best application for the job, but the fact is 
was just everywhere.

Than it became the 'standard'.

After 3 weeks of doing a project in Maya, I'm ready (again) to throw 
myself in front of a bus.
My last experiences were with Maya 7/8 and most, if not all annoyances, 
gotchas and bugs are still there.


Rendering is still a confusing mess, but luckily we don't have to touch MR.
Unless you have to use XGen, and you find out it needs to be installed 
for XGen to work. Guess what? It's not in the default Maya installer 
anymore...


etc. etc. etc.

It will need at least 3-4 big updates to get it working more user 
friendly, or to not blow up in your face.
We already had a ton of issues with reference files and non rendering 
scenes.

And this wasn't even a complex project.

Oh. Always save the scene in .ma format. So at least you can open 
them up to fix some issues.


And there's always a script... somewhere

Yup... long day... ;-)

Rob

\/-\/\/

On 24-11-2015 11:26, Mirko Jankovic wrote:

well taht was / IS strongest point of Softimage for me as well.
With Maya I felt always on glass legs waiting when whole thing will go 
down crumbling and breaking.
With SI I sometimes even do dirty fast work get things done more then 
half way then tweak and polish all the way back without much problems.
With low budget and low time at hand it is hard to get things properly 
so going dirty fast way then polishing as much as time and budget 
allows works perfectly.




On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Gerbrand Nel > wrote:


+1 on what Matt said
I spent a year in maya, and a year in houdini.
For me it personally comes down to the following.
Almost all things will initially happen quicker in maya,. and
then you start praying!
You pray the client doesn't change anything!
You pray you didn't forget anything in step 4 of your 15 step
pipeline.
AND ABOVE ALL YOU PRAY THE BASTARD DOESN'T BREAK.

In Houdini on the other hand, I feel relaxed. I know I can
probably change anything at any time without destroying anything,
or re-doing too much work.
This is the most important aspect of houdini most people overlook
when they try it.
I've seen a few people leave houdini after a few days, because
they feel they can get the same thing done quicker in maya..
They then see me leave... every day... at 5pm, cause my client
changes took 2 hours while theirs will take the whole night.
I know you said you mostly do animation and gaming. Houdini is not
famous for animation, but to be honest with you, this is probably
because most people who use houdini overlook the awesomeness of chops.
Just look at this for a quick intro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiaNyYnzEQM

G



On 24/11/2015 02:14, Matt Lind wrote:

This really depends on how you fit into the game development
side of the equation.

I've worked on games in most genres and formats.  In my
experience, game assets are typically very iteration heavy
because they must remain live at all times (compare to
Film/video assets which are mostly locked down once images
have been rendered because you can't continually re-render the
entire film).  It takes people time to make those revisions,
which is the most valuable resource and also the most mismanaged.

I steer towards iteration friendly workflows as iteration
tends to be the #1 time/money loss in game development art
pipelines.
It's almost a guarantee any game asset will be revised, and
revised many times - especially if the engine and other
underlying components of the game are not settled.  Iteration
is often overlooked as a factor when evaluating software and
making schedules. Too often people focus on trivial details
such as number of mouse clicks or creating asset version 1,
when instead they should be focused on the 500+ revisions that
come later.  If iteration is heavy in your pipeline, consider
Houdini.  What you give up in playback speed or other things
you take for granted, you can earn back on the reduced
iteration factor.

Don't worry too much about who has plugins for getting stuff
into an engine as all the major players have that capability. 
And even so, many studios opt to write their own exporters

because they need support for features not included in the
plugins.  Instead, focus on reliability over the life of the
product, not just the current version being demo'd by the
sales guy. Remember, you'll have to update your DCC at some
point.  If it must rely on multiple service packs every
release to get right (or merely usable), what 

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Daniel Kim]

Thank you Steven
That's also what I felt from it. :)





On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:18 AM, Steven Caron  wrote:

> Doing previs stuff now in maya 2015 sp5... doing lots of things, not just
> animation.
>
> I find it hard to animate in, I miss my color coded animation divot. Being
> able to open an animation editor from a right click, default shortcut key
> for deleting a keyframe at the current frame? Copying and pasting animation
> is actually confusing. The preference editor is horrible, the few guys here
> that know maya never know where anything is. The default tangent weighting
> options mean more key frames to get the same trajectory. Particle caching
> is horrible blackbox that doesn't make any sense to me. The tools for
> caching particles and fluids have all the same names and behavior but they
> are located in different menus and don't work for each other. Sure they are
> in different menus but come on! The wannabe animation mixer is a bit tricky
> but works most the time. Duplicating objects and hierarchies is super
> frustrating and I rarely get what I want. Multi mother effing edit of
> property/attribute panels. And no I will NOT use a spreadsheet! Isolate
> selection is annoying.
>
> A lot of these things are getting iterated on right now and many are
> improved in 2016.
>
> Is there a better option for the long run? Probably not...
>
> *written with my thumbs
> On Nov 23, 2015 7:42 AM, "Eric Thivierge"  wrote:
>
>> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
>> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>>
>> Eric T.
>>
>> 
>> Eric Thivierge
>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
>> mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
>>> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
>>> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
>>> anyway I will shut up now :)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)

 From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working
 to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
 animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
 with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
 have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
 folks I know.

 Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long
 as you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools
 won't be available for Softimage moving forward.

 Best,
 Eric T.

 
 Eric Thivierge
 http://www.ethivierge.com

 On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
 mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> wrote:

> heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years
> to come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim 
> wrote:
>
>> Hey guys.
>>
>> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
>> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What
>> I am doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or
>> simulation stuff.
>>
>> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I
>> also like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short
>> comment what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Daniel
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Daniel Kim]

Hey Eric~! :D

Hope you are having awesome time in Hybrid mate :)
Yeah, I am trying Maya 2016 now. It seems fine, but still taking so long
time for shading and rendering setup. Also I still see that glitch
disturbed me when we were in Sheridan college :P They never improve
animation tools like graph editor and trax editor...
Only I see good things from Maya is kinda industry standard and improved a
lot between 2015 and 2016, but still slow to do something else : / That
darn old interface kills me every single time.
Cinema 4D is definitely motion graphic stuff. Since I am not really
interested in motion graphic one, I am digging into MODO, but still I am
not sure I choose a right one or not. Maya or MODO... make me always
confused : /

Daniel





On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge 
wrote:

> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>
> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to
> push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
> folks I know.
>
> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as
> you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't
> be available for Softimage moving forward.
>
> Best,
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Mirko Jankovic  > wrote:
>
>> heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years to
>> come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey guys.
>>>
>>> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
>>> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I
>>> am doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or
>>> simulation stuff.
>>>
>>> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
>>> like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
>>> what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Martin Yara]

Not that I know, but I haven't look.

The process is very simple.

lets say we have a skinned object called objA

1 - duplicate objA
now you have a duplicated without skin and history, lets call it objB

2 - edit objB topology as you want

3 - skin objB to the same bones as objA (or different bones but with the
same names)

4 - select objA, then objB and use Copy Skin Weights:
Animation > Skin > Edit Smooth Skin > Copy Skin Weights
You have a few options if you press the square button (like copy through UV
Space, etc)

5 - Delete objA, and rename objB if necessary.

You could script this in a two step process.
Something I'm planning to do someday.

Now, if you have already edited your topology on objA without duplicating
it, the weights in objA will be broken on the new vertices, and I said you
would be screwed in my previous email, but you may still have a chance if
you haven't done big topology changes.
Just duplicate your edited objA and repeat the process from step 3.

You won't ever have the versatility you have in Softimage, but still,
better than nothing. Way better than older Maya versions where you were
just screwed.

Martin



On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Eugene Flormata 
wrote:

> is there a youtube video on this process? I'm transitioning to maya 2016
> at the moment.
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Martin  wrote:
>
>> No you can't change the topology without messing up the weights. But
>> nowadays, you can duplicate it, work on the duplicate and then, apply skin
>> and copy weights from the original one.
>>
>> In older Maya's copy weights wasn't very reliable and you would have to
>> use some slow scripts to copy through xyz coordinates. But I haven't had
>> any problem with newer versions.
>>
>> If you forget to duplicate and change the topology, you're screwed.
>>
>> Martin
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Gerbrand Nel]

+1 on what Matt said
I spent a year in maya, and a year in houdini.
For me it personally comes down to the following.
Almost all things will initially happen quicker in maya,. and then 
you start praying!

You pray the client doesn't change anything!
You pray you didn't forget anything in step 4 of your 15 step pipeline.
AND ABOVE ALL YOU PRAY THE BASTARD DOESN'T BREAK.

In Houdini on the other hand, I feel relaxed. I know I can probably 
change anything at any time without destroying anything, or re-doing too 
much work.
This is the most important aspect of houdini most people overlook when 
they try it.
I've seen a few people leave houdini after a few days, because they feel 
they can get the same thing done quicker in maya..
They then see me leave... every day... at 5pm, cause my client changes 
took 2 hours while theirs will take the whole night.
I know you said you mostly do animation and gaming. Houdini is not 
famous for animation, but to be honest with you, this is probably 
because most people who use houdini overlook the awesomeness of chops.

Just look at this for a quick intro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiaNyYnzEQM

G


On 24/11/2015 02:14, Matt Lind wrote:
This really depends on how you fit into the game development side of 
the equation.


I've worked on games in most genres and formats.  In my experience, 
game assets are typically very iteration heavy because they must 
remain live at all times (compare to Film/video assets which are 
mostly locked down once images have been rendered because you can't 
continually re-render the entire film).  It takes people time to make 
those revisions, which is the most valuable resource and also the most 
mismanaged.


I steer towards iteration friendly workflows as iteration tends to be 
the #1 time/money loss in game development art pipelines.
It's almost a guarantee any game asset will be revised, and revised 
many times - especially if the engine and other underlying components 
of the game are not settled.  Iteration is often overlooked as a 
factor when evaluating software and making schedules.  Too often 
people focus on trivial details such as number of mouse clicks or 
creating asset version 1, when instead they should be focused on the 
500+ revisions that come later.  If iteration is heavy in your 
pipeline, consider Houdini.  What you give up in playback speed or 
other things you take for granted, you can earn back on the reduced 
iteration factor.


Don't worry too much about who has plugins for getting stuff into an 
engine as all the major players have that capability.  And even so, 
many studios opt to write their own exporters because they need 
support for features not included in the plugins.  Instead, focus on 
reliability over the life of the product, not just the current version 
being demo'd by the sales guy. Remember, you'll have to update your 
DCC at some point.  If it must rely on multiple service packs every 
release to get right (or merely usable), what message does that send?  
Think about how that affects production during crunch time.  Also 
think about the opposite - do you have the option of riding a 
particular version without being forced to update?  It would really 
suck to be forced to update into a regression of an important feature.



Matt






Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 13:31:20 +0100
From: Daniel Kim 
Subject: Have a question an alternative tool
To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"

Hey guys.

I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I am
doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or 
simulation

stuff.

So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
what is good about that software, that will be thankful.

Cheers
Daniel

.

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Daniel Kim]

Hi Derek

LOL good point with that 'Innovation' :)
Yes that's what I am also seeing from application from those you post. I
don't use those two other application anymore, but still confused of
choosing Maya or something else.


<http://www.danielkim3d.com>


On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
> Photoshop, industry standard.
> Renderman, industry standard.
> Maya, industry standard.
>
> --
> From: ethivie...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
> anyway I will shut up now :)
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>
> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to
> push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
> folks I know.
>
> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as
> you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't
> be available for Softimage moving forward.
>
> Best,
> Eric T.
>
>
>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Mirko Jankovic]

well taht was / IS strongest point of Softimage for me as well.
With Maya I felt always on glass legs waiting when whole thing will go down
crumbling and breaking.
With SI I sometimes even do dirty fast work get things done more then half
way then tweak and polish all the way back without much problems.
With low budget and low time at hand it is hard to get things properly so
going dirty fast way then polishing as much as time and budget allows works
perfectly.



On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Gerbrand Nel  wrote:

> +1 on what Matt said
> I spent a year in maya, and a year in houdini.
> For me it personally comes down to the following.
> Almost all things will initially happen quicker in maya,. and then you
> start praying!
> You pray the client doesn't change anything!
> You pray you didn't forget anything in step 4 of your 15 step pipeline.
> AND ABOVE ALL YOU PRAY THE BASTARD DOESN'T BREAK.
>
> In Houdini on the other hand, I feel relaxed. I know I can probably change
> anything at any time without destroying anything, or re-doing too much work.
> This is the most important aspect of houdini most people overlook when
> they try it.
> I've seen a few people leave houdini after a few days, because they feel
> they can get the same thing done quicker in maya..
> They then see me leave... every day... at 5pm, cause my client changes
> took 2 hours while theirs will take the whole night.
> I know you said you mostly do animation and gaming. Houdini is not famous
> for animation, but to be honest with you, this is probably because most
> people who use houdini overlook the awesomeness of chops.
> Just look at this for a quick intro
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiaNyYnzEQM
>
> G
>
>
>
> On 24/11/2015 02:14, Matt Lind wrote:
>
>> This really depends on how you fit into the game development side of the
>> equation.
>>
>> I've worked on games in most genres and formats.  In my experience, game
>> assets are typically very iteration heavy because they must remain live at
>> all times (compare to Film/video assets which are mostly locked down once
>> images have been rendered because you can't continually re-render the
>> entire film).  It takes people time to make those revisions, which is the
>> most valuable resource and also the most mismanaged.
>>
>> I steer towards iteration friendly workflows as iteration tends to be the
>> #1 time/money loss in game development art pipelines.
>> It's almost a guarantee any game asset will be revised, and revised many
>> times - especially if the engine and other underlying components of the
>> game are not settled.  Iteration is often overlooked as a factor when
>> evaluating software and making schedules.  Too often people focus on
>> trivial details such as number of mouse clicks or creating asset version 1,
>> when instead they should be focused on the 500+ revisions that come later.
>> If iteration is heavy in your pipeline, consider Houdini.  What you give up
>> in playback speed or other things you take for granted, you can earn back
>> on the reduced iteration factor.
>>
>> Don't worry too much about who has plugins for getting stuff into an
>> engine as all the major players have that capability.  And even so, many
>> studios opt to write their own exporters because they need support for
>> features not included in the plugins.  Instead, focus on reliability over
>> the life of the product, not just the current version being demo'd by the
>> sales guy. Remember, you'll have to update your DCC at some point.  If it
>> must rely on multiple service packs every release to get right (or merely
>> usable), what message does that send?  Think about how that affects
>> production during crunch time.  Also think about the opposite - do you have
>> the option of riding a particular version without being forced to update?
>> It would really suck to be forced to update into a regression of an
>> important feature.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 13:31:20 +0100
>> From: Daniel Kim 
>> Subject: Have a question an alternative tool
>> To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"
>>
>> Hey guys.
>>
>> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
>> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I am
>> doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or simulation
>> stuff.
>>
>> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
>> like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
>> what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Daniel
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Olivier Jeannel]

I do that Sin combination almost every day within ice...

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Eugene Flormata 
wrote:

> Ah.. I'll have to try that thanks..
>
> I assume you can also add new bones in step 3?
> step 4 - copy weights is by name or by distance? you mentioned UV, I guess
> I can check the help file but sometimes even with that it's complex.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Martin Yara  wrote:
>
>> Not that I know, but I haven't look.
>>
>> The process is very simple.
>>
>> lets say we have a skinned object called objA
>>
>> 1 - duplicate objA
>> now you have a duplicated without skin and history, lets call it objB
>>
>> 2 - edit objB topology as you want
>>
>> 3 - skin objB to the same bones as objA (or different bones but with the
>> same names)
>>
>> 4 - select objA, then objB and use Copy Skin Weights:
>> Animation > Skin > Edit Smooth Skin > Copy Skin Weights
>> You have a few options if you press the square button (like copy through
>> UV Space, etc)
>>
>> 5 - Delete objA, and rename objB if necessary.
>>
>> You could script this in a two step process.
>> Something I'm planning to do someday.
>>
>> Now, if you have already edited your topology on objA without duplicating
>> it, the weights in objA will be broken on the new vertices, and I said you
>> would be screwed in my previous email, but you may still have a chance if
>> you haven't done big topology changes.
>> Just duplicate your edited objA and repeat the process from step 3.
>>
>> You won't ever have the versatility you have in Softimage, but still,
>> better than nothing. Way better than older Maya versions where you were
>> just screwed.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Eugene Flormata 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> is there a youtube video on this process? I'm transitioning to maya 2016
>>> at the moment.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Martin  wrote:
>>>
 No you can't change the topology without messing up the weights. But
 nowadays, you can duplicate it, work on the duplicate and then, apply skin
 and copy weights from the original one.

 In older Maya's copy weights wasn't very reliable and you would have to
 use some slow scripts to copy through xyz coordinates. But I haven't had
 any problem with newer versions.

 If you forget to duplicate and change the topology, you're screwed.

 Martin
 Sent from my iPhone

>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Eugene Flormata]

Ah.. I'll have to try that thanks..

I assume you can also add new bones in step 3?
step 4 - copy weights is by name or by distance? you mentioned UV, I guess
I can check the help file but sometimes even with that it's complex.

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Martin Yara  wrote:

> Not that I know, but I haven't look.
>
> The process is very simple.
>
> lets say we have a skinned object called objA
>
> 1 - duplicate objA
> now you have a duplicated without skin and history, lets call it objB
>
> 2 - edit objB topology as you want
>
> 3 - skin objB to the same bones as objA (or different bones but with the
> same names)
>
> 4 - select objA, then objB and use Copy Skin Weights:
> Animation > Skin > Edit Smooth Skin > Copy Skin Weights
> You have a few options if you press the square button (like copy through
> UV Space, etc)
>
> 5 - Delete objA, and rename objB if necessary.
>
> You could script this in a two step process.
> Something I'm planning to do someday.
>
> Now, if you have already edited your topology on objA without duplicating
> it, the weights in objA will be broken on the new vertices, and I said you
> would be screwed in my previous email, but you may still have a chance if
> you haven't done big topology changes.
> Just duplicate your edited objA and repeat the process from step 3.
>
> You won't ever have the versatility you have in Softimage, but still,
> better than nothing. Way better than older Maya versions where you were
> just screwed.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Eugene Flormata 
> wrote:
>
>> is there a youtube video on this process? I'm transitioning to maya 2016
>> at the moment.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Martin  wrote:
>>
>>> No you can't change the topology without messing up the weights. But
>>> nowadays, you can duplicate it, work on the duplicate and then, apply skin
>>> and copy weights from the original one.
>>>
>>> In older Maya's copy weights wasn't very reliable and you would have to
>>> use some slow scripts to copy through xyz coordinates. But I haven't had
>>> any problem with newer versions.
>>>
>>> If you forget to duplicate and change the topology, you're screwed.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Martin Yara]

Yes you can add new bones in step 3, they shouldn't affect or be considered
in the copy weights operation.

I don't usually do that, but I do copy weights from different characters to
copy the base bones weights, just like with Gator, with the difference that
the Copy weights operator doesn't remain alive like Gator.

You can also have multiple sources in copy weights. I use this when I need
to merge my objects and the parts are already skinned. (I need to
automatize this too !)

You have a few options in copy weights for surface association (closest
point, uv, raycast) and influence(  by name, label, closest joint, etc).
Some options are so similar that I always forget what they do.

Martin



On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Eugene Flormata 
wrote:

> Ah.. I'll have to try that thanks..
>
> I assume you can also add new bones in step 3?
> step 4 - copy weights is by name or by distance? you mentioned UV, I guess
> I can check the help file but sometimes even with that it's complex.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Martin Yara  wrote:
>
>> Not that I know, but I haven't look.
>>
>> The process is very simple.
>>
>> lets say we have a skinned object called objA
>>
>> 1 - duplicate objA
>> now you have a duplicated without skin and history, lets call it objB
>>
>> 2 - edit objB topology as you want
>>
>> 3 - skin objB to the same bones as objA (or different bones but with the
>> same names)
>>
>> 4 - select objA, then objB and use Copy Skin Weights:
>> Animation > Skin > Edit Smooth Skin > Copy Skin Weights
>> You have a few options if you press the square button (like copy through
>> UV Space, etc)
>>
>> 5 - Delete objA, and rename objB if necessary.
>>
>> You could script this in a two step process.
>> Something I'm planning to do someday.
>>
>> Now, if you have already edited your topology on objA without duplicating
>> it, the weights in objA will be broken on the new vertices, and I said you
>> would be screwed in my previous email, but you may still have a chance if
>> you haven't done big topology changes.
>> Just duplicate your edited objA and repeat the process from step 3.
>>
>> You won't ever have the versatility you have in Softimage, but still,
>> better than nothing. Way better than older Maya versions where you were
>> just screwed.
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Eugene Flormata 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> is there a youtube video on this process? I'm transitioning to maya 2016
>>> at the moment.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Martin  wrote:
>>>
 No you can't change the topology without messing up the weights. But
 nowadays, you can duplicate it, work on the duplicate and then, apply skin
 and copy weights from the original one.

 In older Maya's copy weights wasn't very reliable and you would have to
 use some slow scripts to copy through xyz coordinates. But I haven't had
 any problem with newer versions.

 If you forget to duplicate and change the topology, you're screwed.

 Martin
 Sent from my iPhone

>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Mirko Jankovic]

heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years to
come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim  wrote:

> Hey guys.
>
> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I am
> doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or simulation
> stuff.
>
> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
> like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
> what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
> 
>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Eric Thivierge]

Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)

>From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to
push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
folks I know.

Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as
you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't
be available for Softimage moving forward.

Best,
Eric T.


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Mirko Jankovic 
wrote:

> heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years to
> come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim  wrote:
>
>> Hey guys.
>>
>> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
>> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I am
>> doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or simulation
>> stuff.
>>
>> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
>> like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
>> what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Daniel
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Ognjen Vukovic]

No problem, i had to get it in there. :), sorry for the noise.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Sorry Ognjen, we were specifically talking about animation. Rendering is
> definitely an area where it needs work.
>
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Ognjen Vukovic <ognj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something
>> that took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>>
>> -Setting up render passes.
>> -Getting maya ipr to render correct camera :D
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Andres Stephens <drais...@outlook.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would say so. They are similar now though.  SI's animation clip editor
>>> is still more feature packed than Mayas (well by comparing the
>>> documentation). Both have animation layers, keysets, dynamic fcurves,
>>> dopesheet, editable keyframes on a timeline? (Softimage only?).. I would
>>> say softimage animation actually has an upper edge over Maya, mainly
>>> because of nondestructive keyable operators and attributes.. But they are
>>> similar. Which came first, I would say XSI.. If I recall, Alias Maya
>>> incorporated Softimage animation tools after being bought..?
>>>
>>> Could be wrong, but interesting thought. Softimage being innovative when
>>> it comes to animation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: 23/11/2015 11:53 (GMT-05:00)
>>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>>>
>>> Then I ask you, what was different between the Softimage animation tools
>>> and Maya animation tools? Could you say that Softimage was innovating in
>>> that area?
>>>
>>> Eric T.
>>>
>>> 
>>> Eric Thivierge
>>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a
>>> decade.
>>> Photoshop, industry standard.
>>> Renderman, industry standard.
>>> Maya, industry standard.
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: ethivie...@gmail.com
>>> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
>>> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>>
>>> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something
>>> that took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>>>
>>> Eric T.
>>>
>>> 
>>> Eric Thivierge
>>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
>>> mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
>>> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
>>> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
>>> anyway I will shut up now :)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>>>
>>> >From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working
>>> to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
>>> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
>>> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
>>> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
>>> folks I know.
>>>
>>> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long
>>> as you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools
>>> won't be available for Softimage moving forward.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Eric T.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Eric Thivierge]

Sorry Ognjen, we were specifically talking about animation. Rendering is
definitely an area where it needs work.

Eric T.


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Ognjen Vukovic <ognj...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>
> -Setting up render passes.
> -Getting maya ipr to render correct camera :D
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Andres Stephens <drais...@outlook.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I would say so. They are similar now though.  SI's animation clip editor
>> is still more feature packed than Mayas (well by comparing the
>> documentation). Both have animation layers, keysets, dynamic fcurves,
>> dopesheet, editable keyframes on a timeline? (Softimage only?).. I would
>> say softimage animation actually has an upper edge over Maya, mainly
>> because of nondestructive keyable operators and attributes.. But they are
>> similar. Which came first, I would say XSI.. If I recall, Alias Maya
>> incorporated Softimage animation tools after being bought..?
>>
>> Could be wrong, but interesting thought. Softimage being innovative when
>> it comes to animation.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  Original message ----
>> From: Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
>> Date: 23/11/2015 11:53 (GMT-05:00)
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>>
>> Then I ask you, what was different between the Softimage animation tools
>> and Maya animation tools? Could you say that Softimage was innovating in
>> that area?
>>
>> Eric T.
>>
>> 
>> Eric Thivierge
>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
>> Photoshop, industry standard.
>> Renderman, industry standard.
>> Maya, industry standard.
>>
>> --
>> From: ethivie...@gmail.com
>> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>>
>> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
>> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>>
>> Eric T.
>>
>> 
>> Eric Thivierge
>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
>> mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
>> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
>> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
>> anyway I will shut up now :)
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>>
>> >From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working
>> to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
>> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
>> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
>> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
>> folks I know.
>>
>> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long
>> as you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools
>> won't be available for Softimage moving forward.
>>
>> Best,
>> Eric T.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Steven Caron]

Doing previs stuff now in maya 2015 sp5... doing lots of things, not just
animation.

I find it hard to animate in, I miss my color coded animation divot. Being
able to open an animation editor from a right click, default shortcut key
for deleting a keyframe at the current frame? Copying and pasting animation
is actually confusing. The preference editor is horrible, the few guys here
that know maya never know where anything is. The default tangent weighting
options mean more key frames to get the same trajectory. Particle caching
is horrible blackbox that doesn't make any sense to me. The tools for
caching particles and fluids have all the same names and behavior but they
are located in different menus and don't work for each other. Sure they are
in different menus but come on! The wannabe animation mixer is a bit tricky
but works most the time. Duplicating objects and hierarchies is super
frustrating and I rarely get what I want. Multi mother effing edit of
property/attribute panels. And no I will NOT use a spreadsheet! Isolate
selection is annoying.

A lot of these things are getting iterated on right now and many are
improved in 2016.

Is there a better option for the long run? Probably not...

*written with my thumbs
On Nov 23, 2015 7:42 AM, "Eric Thivierge"  wrote:

> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic  > wrote:
>
>> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
>> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
>> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
>> anyway I will shut up now :)
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>>>
>>> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working
>>> to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
>>> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
>>> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
>>> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
>>> folks I know.
>>>
>>> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long
>>> as you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools
>>> won't be available for Softimage moving forward.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Eric T.
>>>
>>> 
>>> Eric Thivierge
>>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
>>> mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years
 to come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)

 On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim 
 wrote:

> Hey guys.
>
> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I
> am doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or
> simulation stuff.
>
> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I
> also like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short
> comment what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>
> Cheers
> Daniel
>
> 
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Ognjen Vukovic]

>I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)

-Setting up render passes.
-Getting maya ipr to render correct camera :D

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Andres Stephens <drais...@outlook.com>
wrote:

> I would say so. They are similar now though.  SI's animation clip editor
> is still more feature packed than Mayas (well by comparing the
> documentation). Both have animation layers, keysets, dynamic fcurves,
> dopesheet, editable keyframes on a timeline? (Softimage only?).. I would
> say softimage animation actually has an upper edge over Maya, mainly
> because of nondestructive keyable operators and attributes.. But they are
> similar. Which came first, I would say XSI.. If I recall, Alias Maya
> incorporated Softimage animation tools after being bought..?
>
> Could be wrong, but interesting thought. Softimage being innovative when
> it comes to animation.
>
>
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
> Date: 23/11/2015 11:53 (GMT-05:00)
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>
> Then I ask you, what was different between the Softimage animation tools
> and Maya animation tools? Could you say that Softimage was innovating in
> that area?
>
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
> Photoshop, industry standard.
> Renderman, industry standard.
> Maya, industry standard.
>
> --
> From: ethivie...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
> anyway I will shut up now :)
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>
> >From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working
> to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
> folks I know.
>
> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as
> you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't
> be available for Softimage moving forward.
>
> Best,
> Eric T.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Matt Lind]

This really depends on how you fit into the game development side of the 
equation.


I've worked on games in most genres and formats.  In my experience, game 
assets are typically very iteration heavy because they must remain live at 
all times (compare to Film/video assets which are mostly locked down once 
images have been rendered because you can't continually re-render the entire 
film).  It takes people time to make those revisions, which is the most 
valuable resource and also the most mismanaged.


I steer towards iteration friendly workflows as iteration tends to be the #1 
time/money loss in game development art pipelines.
It's almost a guarantee any game asset will be revised, and revised many 
times - especially if the engine and other underlying components of the game 
are not settled.  Iteration is often overlooked as a factor when evaluating 
software and making schedules.  Too often people focus on trivial details 
such as number of mouse clicks or creating asset version 1, when instead 
they should be focused on the 500+ revisions that come later.  If iteration 
is heavy in your pipeline, consider Houdini.  What you give up in playback 
speed or other things you take for granted, you can earn back on the reduced 
iteration factor.


Don't worry too much about who has plugins for getting stuff into an engine 
as all the major players have that capability.  And even so, many studios 
opt to write their own exporters because they need support for features not 
included in the plugins.  Instead, focus on reliability over the life of the 
product, not just the current version being demo'd by the sales guy. 
Remember, you'll have to update your DCC at some point.  If it must rely on 
multiple service packs every release to get right (or merely usable), what 
message does that send?  Think about how that affects production during 
crunch time.  Also think about the opposite - do you have the option of 
riding a particular version without being forced to update?  It would really 
suck to be forced to update into a regression of an important feature.



Matt






Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 13:31:20 +0100
From: Daniel Kim 
Subject: Have a question an alternative tool
To: "softimage@listproc.autodesk.com"

Hey guys.

I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I am
doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or simulation
stuff.

So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
what is good about that software, that will be thankful.

Cheers
Daniel

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Martin]

No you can't change the topology without messing up the weights. But nowadays, 
you can duplicate it, work on the duplicate and then, apply skin and copy 
weights from the original one.

In older Maya's copy weights wasn't very reliable and you would have to use 
some slow scripts to copy through xyz coordinates. But I haven't had any 
problem with newer versions.

If you forget to duplicate and change the topology, you're screwed.

Martin
Sent from my iPhone

> On 2015/11/ 24, at 2:14, phil harbath <phil.harb...@jamination.com> wrote:
> 
> is Maya as good as softimage,  what I like about softimage is
> - ability to make changes to topology while after I have weighted (using 
> gator is pretty painless)
> - mixer is very  nice too.
>  
> looking at most products character animation is not a priority,  Softimage 
> got it right early and did not do much after.  After all this time, no 
> product seems to have surpassed it.  Modo appears to be working on it 
> however, I can’t say I have tried that part of it,  and I am reluctant to try 
> as for me Softimage is working great in that department,  although I am 
> looking or least listening to what others are saying.
>  
> From: Eric Thivierge
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 11:52 AM
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>  
> Then I ask you, what was different between the Softimage animation tools and 
> Maya animation tools? Could you say that Softimage was innovating in that 
> area?
>  
> Eric T.
>  
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>  
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
>> Photoshop, industry standard.
>> Renderman, industry standard.
>> Maya, industry standard.
>> 
>> From: ethivie...@gmail.com
>> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
>> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
>> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> 
>> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that 
>> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>>  
>> Eric T.
>>  
>> 
>> Eric Thivierge
>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>  
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in 
>> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you 
>> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
>> anyway I will shut up now :)
>>  
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>> 
>> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to 
>> push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their animation 
>> tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience with any 
>> other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to have a lot 
>> of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics folks I know.
>> 
>> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as 
>> you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't 
>> be available for Softimage moving forward.
>>  
>> Best,
>> Eric T.
> 
>  

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Mirko Jankovic]

agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
need 3 more guys and double or more time...
anyway I will shut up now :)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge 
wrote:

> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>
> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to
> push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
> folks I know.
>
> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as
> you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't
> be available for Softimage moving forward.
>
> Best,
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Mirko Jankovic  > wrote:
>
>> heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years to
>> come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey guys.
>>>
>>> I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
>>> I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I
>>> am doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or
>>> simulation stuff.
>>>
>>> So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
>>> like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
>>> what is good about that software, that will be thankful.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Eric Thivierge]

I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)

Eric T.


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic 
wrote:

> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
> anyway I will shut up now :)
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge 
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>>
>> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working
>> to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
>> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
>> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
>> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
>> folks I know.
>>
>> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long
>> as you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools
>> won't be available for Softimage moving forward.
>>
>> Best,
>> Eric T.
>>
>> 
>> Eric Thivierge
>> http://www.ethivierge.com
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Mirko Jankovic <
>> mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> heh Softimage man Softimage... nothing will replace it fully in years to
>>> come so instead of wasting time do some real work ;)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Daniel Kim 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hey guys.

 I just like to ask if you guys found 3D software as alternative tool.
 I am also looking for a software, but it is hard to decide one. What I
 am doing is mostly animation and game works, not motion graphic or
 simulation stuff.

 So far MODO seems nice, but many colleagues suggest me Cinema4D. I also
 like to know what you guys chose. If you guys also can put short comment
 what is good about that software, that will be thankful.

 Cheers
 Daniel

 


>>>
>>
>

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[Eric Thivierge]

Then I ask you, what was different between the Softimage animation tools
and Maya animation tools? Could you say that Softimage was innovating in
that area?

Eric T.


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
> Photoshop, industry standard.
> Renderman, industry standard.
> Maya, industry standard.
>
> --
> From: ethivie...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
> Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>
> I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that
> took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
>
> Eric T.
>
> 
> Eric Thivierge
> http://www.ethivierge.com
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in
> softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you
> need 3 more guys and double or more time...
> anyway I will shut up now :)
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)
>
> From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to
> push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their
> animation tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience
> with any other DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to
> have a lot of tools / options from what I saw from the motion graphics
> folks I know.
>
> Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as
> you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't
> be available for Softimage moving forward.
>
> Best,
> Eric T.
>
>
>
>

RE: Have a question an alternative tool

[Derek Jenson]

To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
Photoshop, industry standard.
Renderman, industry standard.
Maya, industry standard.

From: ethivie...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com

I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that took 
significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :)
Eric T.
Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> 
wrote:
agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in softimage 
you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you need 3 more 
guys and double or more time...anyway I will shut up now :)
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)

>From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working to 
>push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their animation 
>tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience with any other 
>DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to have a lot of tools 
>/ options from what I saw from the motion graphics folks I know.

Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long as 
you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't be 
available for Softimage moving forward.
Best,
Eric T.




  

Re: Have a question an alternative tool

[phil harbath]

is Maya as good as softimage,  what I like about softimage is
- ability to make changes to topology while after I have weighted (using gator 
is pretty painless)
- mixer is very nice too.

looking at most products character animation is not a priority,  Softimage got 
it right early and did not do much after.  After all this time, no product 
seems to have surpassed it.  Modo appears to be working on it however, I can’t 
say I have tried that part of it,  and I am reluctant to try as for me 
Softimage is working great in that department,  although I am looking or least 
listening to what others are saying.

From: Eric Thivierge 
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 11:52 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com 
Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool

Then I ask you, what was different between the Softimage animation tools and 
Maya animation tools? Could you say that Softimage was innovating in that area? 

Eric T.


Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Derek Jenson <derekjen...@hotmail.com> wrote:

  To me, the words "industry standard" means no innovation in over a decade.
  Photoshop, industry standard.
  Renderman, industry standard.
  Maya, industry standard.



--
  From: ethivie...@gmail.com
  Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 10:42:12 -0500
  Subject: Re: Have a question an alternative tool
  To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com


  I'd like to know a concrete example of where you had to do something that 
took significantly more time and more people for every day tasks. :) 

  Eric T.

  
  Eric Thivierge
  http://www.ethivierge.com

  On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

agree about moving on but for the time being if for the same task in 
softimage you can do alone and in 4 days and in maya or anything else  you need 
3 more guys and double or more time... 
anyway I will shut up now :)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@gmail.com> 
wrote:

  Hey Dan! Long time no see! :)

  From my point of view Maya still seems the best choice. They're working 
to push the Game pipeline / integration stuff more and more and their animation 
tools are the industry standard. I don't really have experience with any other 
DCC's so I can't give an opinion on those. C4D did seem to have a lot of tools 
/ options from what I saw from the motion graphics folks I know.

  Sticking with Softimage for the time being is OK in my opinion, as long 
as you're training up on another Software as new technologies and tools won't 
be available for Softimage moving forward. 

  Best,
  Eric T.