Re: No -seriously, why don?t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

That's a management issue, not a technical issue. Matt Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:09:57 -0500 From: Pierre Schiller Subject: Re: No -seriously, why don?t we GUMROAD for Softimage? To: "Official Softimage Users Mailing List. Thank you for your reply Matt and very interesting details

Re: No -seriously, why don?t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

If it is code you are talking about, Git is the way to go. On Jan 25, 2017 11:10 PM, "Pierre Schiller" wrote: > Thank you for your reply Matt and very interesting details about the > insides of the SDK. > I still use mental ray for some things. So it´s all cool there :D > > Let´s tackle one ques

Re: No -seriously, why don?t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Thank you for your reply Matt and very interesting details about the insides of the SDK. I still use mental ray for some things. So it´s all cool there :D Let´s tackle one question at the time: How possible is it to integrate 3 guys working on separate locations of the planet to ally and work and

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

I get the analogy of SDK on blackbox. Having no support at all is horrible. But people who made the jump, has had this experience already on their own DCC applications by now. Sorry, plain truth. How frikken hard could it be to extrude vector graphics? Walk along in Blender and Modo, and you´ll s

Re: No -seriously, why don?t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

I am available for tool development if needed. I have extensive experience in most areas of the application as both a user and developer. I have experience with the SDK via scripting and C++, and have also written many mental ray shaders. Before you groan on mental ray, remember other tools

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Well modo did start as modeling tool alone, and lately trying to push in all in one DCC but will it get there.. hardly.. especially when there is no really reason for anyone to use it as all rounder with all the other tools there. ᐧ On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Jonathan Moore wrote: > I've b

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

I've been one of the Modo alpha/beta test team for a number of years now and can honestly say it's nowhere near being an XSI replacement. The good thing is that their new incremental development strategy has made Modo far less crashy but it has a long way to go in performance terms and the new proc

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Hey team, thanks to all for your honest review on this thread. To answer some of the questions : Yes, I've walked with modo for 2 years (701,901) it"just" got good because of 10.02 enhancements for game engines (too bad I am not working on the same place as 2 years ago, I got limited access to modo

RE: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

. Regards Angus From: Perry Harovas [perryharo...@gmail.com] Sent: 25 January 2017 04:05 PM To: Official Softimage Users Mailing List. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/xsi_list Subject: Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage? From my POV, I

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

I do believe that Fabric Engine could be leveraged to fill some gaps. It's never going to be ideal from a UX perspective and the biggest selling point for me of XSI has always been the UX; but some workable extensions could be implemented. All that being said, 80% of my time is spent in Houdini an

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Hi, I'm not a developer but I write some stuff we need from time to time. I wrote and released a weights tool some time ago because we are still working in Softimage and we will be using it, even if partially, for at least a few years so I'm trying to make our current pipeline as comfortable as

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Hi there, Going back to the original post, most of what you describe is not doable by individual developers working as freelancers (I'm assuming you are referring to integrating open source technologies like USD, OpenSubD, PTex and so on). These tasks are big and fairly involved, it's like asking

RE: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

com> Sent: 25 January 2017 08:18 To: Official Softimage Users Mailing List. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/xsi_list<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com> Subject: Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage? I have two views here. For personal work, I will continue t

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

It is NOT Maya. No way. I switched FROM Maya to XSI for good reason. Going backwards was not of any interest to me. I had used Maya for almost 10 years before switching to Softimage. I knew that was now the direction I wanted to go in. I certainly have to do some things in Maya still, but that was

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Cannot be Maya, he's loving his new choice of 3D app.. ;-P Rob \/-\/\/ On 25-1-2017 15:11, Softimage wrote: Hi Perry, Out of interest what did you move to? Cheers Lawrence On 25 Jan 2017, at 14:05, Perry Harovas > wrote: From

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Hi Perry, Out of interest what did you move to? Cheers Lawrence > On 25 Jan 2017, at 14:05, Perry Harovas wrote: > > From my POV, I moved on years ago (right when the EOL was announced, for the > most part) because the writing was on the wall. If I stuck with Softimage I > would be delayi

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

From my POV, I moved on years ago (right when the EOL was announced, for the most part) because the writing was on the wall. If I stuck with Softimage I would be delaying the inevitable, which is to say: having to learn a new app. It's going to happen that one day you will just not be able to do

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

I have two views here. For personal work, I will continue to use XSI as long as it functions with my operating system. But I could never advise a studio of 3 or more artists to base their business model on an XSI based pipeline for all the reasons that Jordi Bares mentioned in a similar thread jus

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Amen to that Marcus :) Everything that will give me news that SI and its community is still alive and doing "stuff" is GOOD. Le 25 janv. 2017 13:03, "Mirko Jankovic" a écrit : > Are you working directly for client creating animated and CG content? > Do they care what are you using to create it

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Are you working directly for client creating animated and CG content? Do they care what are you using to create it as long as it is done at quality level and on time? A lot of people will find them self in this situation and moving to anything any time soon would be probably killing for their bus

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Just to give a different POV I would be very happy to support and pay for features added to Softimage. I know that a lot ppl say its time to move on Softimage is dead etc. but not all of us are working in a big Studio or as Freelancers. So for us as a small studio Softimage is still and will

Re: No -seriously, why don´t we GUMROAD for Softimage?

Although I like what you're trying to do, it's not really a viable option imho. I know we're all (still) reluctant to move on, but at some point we have to admit Softimage is falling behind the curve. Despite it's great workflow and ease of use. Not to mention the rapid decline of Softimage re