There's a big gap between that and the piecemeal path cinema 4D has taken :) QWERTY is also more used than the normal interaction model around here BTW. On 22 Jul 2013 19:43, "Martin" <furik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having official educational material oriented to new artists doesn't > necessarily imply that the technical level and quality as a platform will > have to decrease. > > You still need non technical average designers, artists, lots of them to > produce CG. From 10 SI users I know about 9 of them doesn't know or use ICE > regularly and 8 of them can't script at all. (most of my acquaintances are > modelers or animators). > > You don't necessarily need ICE, specially in games. I rarely use it at > work. SI without ICE is still a pretty solid platform for modeling and > animation. > > We have less SI users every year. Even in Japan where SI is supposed to be > slightly stronger than other countries, I don't know a single school that > is teaching SI. Last time I have met a just graduated SI user in Tokyo was > about 4 years ago and that school doesn't exist anymore. > > If you only focus your market in TDs and advanced users, you won't have > new seats and without new seats the software will eventually die. > > Educational texts for Maya users could help to convert them, or make our > lives easier when we need them to use SI from time to time. The QWERTY > keyboard mapping was an interesting move back then, but since both are > Autodesk products it just doesn't make sense now. > > Martin > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2013/07/22, at 10:48, Raffaele Fragapane <raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > > I wasn't imply you suggested Soft becomes C4D :) > I'm suggesting that if you drag in the MCD by its heels and it becomes the > majority of your user base, then the development will have to cater to > those and gradually lose the more technical userbase, in an infinite cycle > that leaves you with C4D and Lightwave and their userbases. > > At the opposite end of the spectrum in successful education shaping the > community into a self-feeding loop: Houdini, which bred a fiercely loyal > userbase that makes the software look a lot better than it really is. > > I like the balance in the middle that Soft caters to, I like its current > userbase and communities, and I'd like to see that extended and the app > continue with a certain philosophy that I doubt would remain healthy after > trying to pull in any and every artist who can't be bothered learning ICE > and would rather have an app with a million pre-canned effects and filters. > > Again, this isn't some mis-placed elitism, this is Softimage preserving > how it re-invented its identity since 7.0. > Its (partial) failings in market impact are not due to lack of dummy level > tutorials or other similar factors, not in the smallest measure comparable > to the damage done by uncertain marketing and shelf life and a middle > management in constant flux and conspicuous absence, at least. > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Andy Moorer <andymoo...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Whoa, hold on. I'm not suggesting Softimage try to become C4D... I'm just >> pointing out that they have done a great job of gaining new users by >> eliminating the fear of the learning curve and by putting effort into >> smoothing the barriers for new untechnical artists. >> >> But not hobbyists, artists, ones who are professionals, perhaps not >> technical directors but lets face it we as TDs are creating these people's >> visions, and many people who start out clueless with any tool of any kind >> of complexity end up doing amazing and sophisticated work in a few short >> years. >> >> I agree with you that in many ways C4D is a dead end when those people >> get to a point where their ideas outstrip its capabilities as a production >> tool. Heck, the discovery by small studios and creatives that C4d can't cut >> it past a certain point is where my most recent paychecks as a hired gun >> have originated. >> >> So why not pave the way for those same talented people to get into >> Softimage, not by diverting the development of the software itself but by >> putting significant effort into demonstrating via educational resources >> like tutorials how easy it is to do very impressive graphics work with >> minimal training, using Softimage? >> >> You don't have to dumb down the software to appeal to nontechnical >> people, you just have to recognize that many of these people are not >> natural self-trainers and give them guidance to get rolling. Those >> "nontechnical" people aren't dumb, and might just find themselves going >> further than they could have ever foreseen. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Jul 21, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Raffaele Fragapane < >> raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> In all honesty, if Soft was to go down the route C4D went in the last >> four years I'd move away from it in a hurry. >> This isn't some kind of mis-placed elitism, it's more that the appeal to >> the MCD of the app becomes more apparent each version, and while it's very >> fast and practical at doing many small things, it's growing sclerotically >> dysfunctional at the bigger picture and it's developed an extremely narrow >> sighted user-base. >> >> There's also a big Apple factor to its success in that field unrelated to >> the situation you outline that shouldn't be left out of the picture. >> >> C4D is more likely to still be a product in three years, for sure, but >> it's lost all chances to become a platform. >> >> ZBrush I don't believe should feature in the comparison and context at >> all, it's a singular, field defining blip in history that has little to >> nothing in common with the availability of education or its target, and it >> results from a singular and very left field vision to begin with. >> >> I can't say I have seen such complex work done in C4D by all these >> amazing artists either. I've seen a lot of small bits recombined any and >> every way, sure, but most of it is painfully obvious as a form of thinking >> particles kit bashing. Compared to the original FX work done in Soft, Maya >> or Houdini for commercials and titles (IE: G-Star Raw work by Glassworks) >> it's way below par. >> >> They've seriously pigeonholed themselves, but they have done so in a very >> profitable niche they have now almost cornered. More After Effects than 3D >> DCC. >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Andy Moorer <andymoo...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> I think Cinema4D is a great example of the effectiveness of >>> spoon-feeding newbies on basic techniques that give them results. C4D has >>> very capable artists flocking to it, these are people who are intimidated >>> by DCCs and yet who have a lot to offer... Designers and other creatives, >>> Zbrush artists and so on. >>> >>> They have a perception that C4D is easy to use (despite every 3d DCC >>> requiring effort to learn) and that perception is enough to get them to go >>> the next step, viewing easy to find tutorials, in which immediately useful >>> stuff is shown with emphasis on how easy it is. >>> >>> The result - a fast growing userbase of artists, and those >>> art-oriented-people drive a great many jobs. >>> >>> I see designers who do very complex work in C4D who are -still- afraid >>> to try other tools, because what they see are mid to high level workflows >>> straight off the bat. >>> >>> Which is more likely to still be a product in 3-5 years, C4D or >>> Softimage? Is this "cater to the newbies" strategy one worth adopting? It >>> seems very effective... >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> > > > -- > Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it > and let them flee like the dogs they are! > >
