What you say is true when you rule out
- Time needed to learn a second (or nth ) app.
- Time needed to maintain a second (or nth app (i.e. learn how to
work/code around bugs any app has)
- Non-waterproof data exchange between n apps.
I see this working for special purposes though, like doing dynamics in
Houdini, the rest in Soft, or Fluids in Naiad or Realflow, the rest in
Maya, or like Blur: everything Max except character Rigging and animation,
more or less at least. Spreading the butter too thin across many different
packages just causes a lot of overhead imho, so even while you _can_ use a
different app for every step of the way, chances are good you don't want
to once you start looking at total cost of operation.
Maybe it´s time to say goodbye to the one app does everything approach
and embrace
the possibilities of having to pick from the whole range of solutions
more.
The grain of salt is, it´s less effective to keep the exponentially
bigger amount
of options in mind and also invest the time to find a workflow that
actually works.
It´s like building a PC from scratch instead of getting a tested
workstation from a vendor.
It may be cheaper to roll your own but it´s more work to do all the
development and R&D yourself.
Therefor, the Autodesk suites should actually be cheaper than buying any
one of the 3d apps,
since it actually takes the whole suite to get something done you would
initially expect
to work straight out of one box...
Cheers,
tim
On 26.03.2013 04:04, Luc-Eric Rousseau wrote:
http://www.autodesk.com/products/autodesk-softimage/overview
--
-------------------------------------------
Stefan Kubicek
-------------------------------------------
keyvis digital imagery
Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3
A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien
Phone: +43/699/12614231
www.keyvis.at ste...@keyvis.at
-- This email and its attachments are --
--confidential and for the recipient only--
