Yes, they do. I've seen some of the stuff done with C4D, and I now use Modo for personal projects and freelance gigs after using 3ds Max for 18 years, and I agree, both are great applications. However, most of the alternatives I've tried (and I will exclude C4D here because I have not used it) do not scale well to big projects and pipelines, that's why I say that there are no current alternatives to Adesk's offerings (perhaps I should have specified that this was strictly speaking about high-end DCC production). For more localized departments, or smaller-scale users, the alternatives are there, and delivering quite a punch (I'm personally excited about what the partnership with The Foundry might bring for Modo... we'll see). Anyway, I wasn't bringing all this up to bring people down. We all like to feel that what we do is great stuff (and from the people in this list, it is clear that's the case), and in this industry, people tend to wear their software shirts quite proudly (nothing wrong with that). I've had my share of disappointment on what's been going on relative to Autodesk products lately (for the record, I had no idea the Softimage users were also voicing concerns over their product of choice until I joined this email list recently. But I can tell you that the same has been going on on the 3ds Max side, except maybe... louder :-) ).
Anyway, back to making movie magic... cheers everyone!

*Sergio Mucino*
Lead Rigger
Modus FX

On 01/10/2013 3:44 AM, Stefan Kubicek wrote:
http://www.maxon.net/
http://www.luxology.com/

Both do a lot of stuff really well.

http://www.sidefx.com<http://www.sidefx.com/>  :P


Le 30/09/2013 12:44 PM, Sergio Mucino a écrit :
Ugh. Tough cookie. This is one of those very delicate topics that
usually end with rotten vegetables flying from camp to camp. It just
happens that some people take the tools they use quite personally.
I think it's all a matter of perspective, and personal preference. Of
course, we can all start arguing over technical aspects of each
product's architecture and data models, but that's just another rabbit
hole. Workflows... tools... aesthetics... all rabbit holes.
I've had to work with Maya, Max, Modo, and now Soft, and each app has
its strengths and weaknesses (granted, some have more of one than the
other), and depending what kind of job you have, and what kind of
stuff you have to deal with, your tool is either going to make it a
pleasant job, or your worst nightmare.
However, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head. Adesk is a
company who's primary objective is to make money, and we may like it
or not, but absolutely nothing on this planet (short of a complete
fail of the international money markets) will change that. And when it
comes to making money, Adesk will of course put all its money on the
horse that's winning the race. And we may like it or not, but that is
Maya (and by winning the race I mean purely making more money).
I don't want to start yet another discussion over the virtues or
defects of each product and their future. Just trying to keep in the
picture the fact that Adesk looks at this from a completely different
perspective than users (and it's not only about how much money it's
making, but also about how much it costs). So, let's just focus on the
facts...

* Adesk has 3 completely redundant products on its product line (Max,
Maya, and Soft... they all are end-to-end DCC applications. They do
things differently, but they all produce quality results).
* There are 3 different development teams working on these products.
* Max and Maya compete for the most seats in different industries.

So, as a purely software development-focused entity, you'd ask
yourself "Why do I need three? What if I had all my users only using
one?". It does make sense... less development costs for same revenue
(this is all "in theory" of course). And from that POV, it makes more
sense to try to move less users to a different product than more of
them... hence, Maya is their winning horse (whereas users decide to
leave their current tool of choice for Maya is still to be seen).
So, it doesn't really matter how great ICE is, or how more modern
Softs architecture is, or how friendly Max is. These are all things
that can eventually be implemented in another code base (technical
issues and business concerns aside). It's a matter of getting
favorable quarterly results. Period.
I think the real unfortunate aspect of this is that there is NO real
contender/alternative to an application of Maya/Soft's maturity and
capabilites. And Adesk knows it. Therefore, they can afford to play
different strategies withl little risk involved.

And I think I've gone on long enough, and it's lunch time (and not to
mention, Monday...)

*Sergio Mucino*
Lead Rigger
Modus FX

On 30/09/2013 12:05 PM, John Richard Sanchez wrote:
I agree. But numbers do count as most studios use maya and I need to
go where the work is.


On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Andi Farhall<hack...@outlook.com
<mailto:hack...@outlook.com>>  wrote:

     I approached learning a bit as an occupational hazard. The job
     needed ncloth for legacy reasons so i thought, ok, how bad can it
     be. nCloth seemed to do the trick, and no doubt there are other
     parts of maya that are good but good lord it's unpleasant to use.
     As many of us suspect, it's simply a case of seat numbers and
     nothing to do with how good a package is as to where AD pitch it.
     If they seriously expect something like maya to be the future
     they're all barking mad....... and as such I'm failry sure that
     can't be the future. Fingers crossed.....

     just my 5 pence worth.....

     ...........................................................................
     http://www.hackneyeffects.com/
     https://vimeo.com/user4174293
     http://www.linkedin.com/pub/andi-farhall/b/496/b21


     http://www.flickr.com/photos/lord_hackney/
     http://spylon.tumblr.com/

     This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are
     intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
     addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of
     the author and do not necessarily represent those of Hackney
     Effects Ltd.

     If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must
     neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show
     it to anyone.

     Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this
     email in error.

     ------------------------------------------------------------

     --------------------------
     To unsubscribe: mail softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com
     <mailto:softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com>  with subject
     "unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email.




--
www.johnrichardsanchez.com<http://www.johnrichardsanchez.com>


--------------------------
To unsubscribe: mailsoftimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com  with subject 
"unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email.

--------------------------
To unsubscribe: mail softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with subject 
"unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email.


--------------------------
To unsubscribe: mail softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with subject 
"unsubscribe" and reply to the confirmation email.

Reply via email to