totally agree with Martin and Peter. that's exactly what I'm also very much interested in. will BiFrost be as versatile as ICE? ;-)
Juan On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Peter Agg <peter....@googlemail.com> wrote: > "Future releases could encompass more types of solvers (rigid, cloth, > fluid, liquid, etc, all interacting). And from there, it would be amazing > to see more procedural geometry generation, destruction and stuff like > that." > > Just stepping away from solvers etc for a moment though: could I use > Bifrost to do something un-simulated and simple like (for argument's sake) > add the frame number onto the vertex y positions on an object if they're > inside the volume of a polygon sphere? > > I know personally I'm not worried about the big effects, it's the small > day-to-day 'simple' stuff which is where I'm concerned about not having > ICE. > > > On 21 March 2014 16:53, Adrian Graham <adrian.gra...@autodesk.com> wrote: > >> Ah, but may I respectfully point out that this was one of the problems >> with ICE, in that its complete and total integration into Softimage makes >> it difficult to engineer and manage, from a software and, unfortunately, a >> marketing point of view. >> >> Most modern software libraries are platform-agnostic, and this is what >> we're aiming for with Bifrost. The problem with ICE is that you had to use >> Softimage in order to gain access to it. Nothing against Softimage, just >> that you're limiting ICE's exposure to the industry at large. >> >> Would a renderer be more or less popular if it only worked with Maya, and >> not with Max or Houdini? No, it should be available on all applications, on >> all OSs if you want it to be successful. >> >> Adrian >> >> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto: >> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Chris Marshall >> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 6:52 AM >> To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com >> Subject: Re: ICE - When will we have todays functionality in Maya? >> >> I think we can see there's some reason to look into Bifrost, but I also >> have a nagging feeling it's simply never going to achieve the same level of >> functionality as ICE, for the very reason ICE is essentially being shut >> down. ICE does what it does and is so much more than a particle system, >> because it is built into the very core of Softimage. To attempt to make >> Bifrost 'future proof' they are deliberately *not* building it into the >> core of Maya, thus allowing for the potential for it to be standalone and / >> or plugged into other software / platforms at a later date. But by >> approaching it in this way, it'll only ever be a bolt on, that surely can >> never achieve that level of flexibility that we have with ICE at the heart >> of Softimage. It feels that the very thing that makes ICE such an amazing >> tool is actually causing it's downfall, and is the reason Bifrost can never >> replace it. And that totally sucks! >> >> >> >> On 21 March 2014 10:29, Juan Brockhaus <juanxsil...@gmail.com<mailto: >> juanxsil...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Hey Adrian, >> this is some great info here. and makes me suddenly feel spmehow better >> ;-) >> maybe in two/three years time, when Soft slowly falls back (just due to >> no further development) BiFrost will be in a state where it can take >> over...? (wishful thinking) >> If I read between the lines I feel there is hope that BiFrost is not >> 'just' a fluid simulation system and can be used for far more. >> >> Exactly what I personally (and many others) love about ICE. It is >> (contrary to past Autodesk-PR) NOT just a particle-simulation-system, but a >> swiss army tool which can manipulate almost every aspect of data in my >> scene/objects and build, create, deform, etc... >> ie at the moment I build shapes/objects made out of dominos. All >> procedurally build in ICE. I made different compounds to stack and pile >> dominoes in different ways and methods. And if the objects I have to create >> (and even the domino) change (as usual in commercials..) it is all >> instantly updated. >> Only right at the end I add a Sim node and the whole things collapses... >> (obviously controlled with nulls, forces, etc...) The Sim is basically the >> last 5% of what I use ICE for. >> If I can do stuff like this in BiFrost in the future I'm a happy camper. >> Right now the only other software capable of that would be Houdini... >> I'll keep an eye on BiFrost ;-) >> Cheers, >> Juan >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:09 AM, joshxsi <josh...@gmail.com<mailto: >> josh...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> Part of what made ICE so successful (in my mind) was the large amount of >> built in nodes and compounds that were included as part of the base system >> that were used in mostly non-simulated contexts (raycasting, geometry >> locations, etc). >> >> >From the sound of the development stages, the first two releases will be >> fluid focused, do you expect that the final release will include the non >> particle functionality that ICE became so useful for? >> >> It sounds like you're expecting the users to build a more generic set of >> functionality using the API? (mesh deforms, curve based flow tools, IK >> solvers etc) >> >> Thanks again for the information as well. >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM, David Gallagher < >> davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com<mailto:davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Yes, definitely giving them a chance! If they turn Maya/Bifrost into >> something great that can give me back what I just lost, believe me I will >> be one happy guy. >> >> >> On 3/20/2014 6:29 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote: >> The product will be released within the quarter. To be fair, that info if >> you were on beta has been consistent and available for quite a while now, >> so it's not some last minute stunt. >> >> Marcus, Adrian and the rest of the team are nice guys, give them a chance. >> >> On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:17 AM, David Gallagher < >> davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com<mailto:davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> This email was fascinating. I'm curious though; we've been told we can't >> hear roadmaps because they run afoul of SEC rules. And yet, here we get a >> somewhat detailed roadmap. >> >> Dave G >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> [http://mintmotion.co.uk/img/mint.png] >> Chris Marshall >> Mint Motion Limited >> 029 20 37 27 57 >> 07730 533 115 >> www.mintmotion.co.uk<http://www.mintmotion.co.uk> >> >> >
