I don't know how that will work out, but if you found ICE troublesome, Maya is going to kill you (or maybe not... Who knows!). I actually never had much problems with the Maya UI. I think the biggest issue people have is with the workflow behind it. I also got used to that. What I found very difficult to deal with is getting changes to work (once you get into complex stuff). For example, there are certain things that cannot be reordered unless you do it manually, and doing so is extremely tricky, given the relationships that exist within the DAG. To make matters worse, Maya has to have the most unintuitive and anti-user friendly node editor from all the ones I've tried, to the point where I preferred to work with the Hypergraph (I just got the hang of it a few months ago after fiddling with it a bit, and then it was ok, but a lot of thing are still not user friendly. It's basically a nicer-looking Hypergraph. Nothing else changed).
Maya does need quite a bit of work in the usability area. Some things are easy once you're familiar with them, but getting to that point can be painful. Others are kinda ridiculous, actually (like its weights painting system. It's horrible). Of course, it has nice things too. I like the rigging tools. Can't speak much for the rest of the applications, since I just rig. Sergio Muciño. Sent from my iPad. > On Apr 2, 2014, at 6:03 AM, Morten Bartholdy <x...@colorshopvfx.dk> wrote: > > Like Sebastien wrote: " It's about enabling an individual's, and giving them > peace of mind." > > I understand the part about 3D having become immensely more complex throught > the pat decade, requiring more advanced tools and subsequently more skills > from the artist, but I really also think the software devs put way too little > effort into making these tools userfriendly and easily accessible, so the > artist can concentrate on the task at hand rather than how to stick it > together at all. > > Maya is a great example here - lots of power but fairly poor UI makes it > difficult for a non technically inclined artist to do quite advanced stuff. > Softimage is much better in this respect, but also here there is a lot of > room for improvement. I have spent countless hours trying to figure out how > to make simple stuff work in ICE which ought to be really simple to do and > just get on with it. Context mismatches and lack of high level nodes for > everyday nuts and bolts stuff makes ICE hard at times for a guy like me. I do > like learning and think it is good since, as Olivier say, it empowers you > when you unlock more of the tech under the hood, but most of the time, I > can't find the time to do this - I just need to produce. > > Don't get me wrong - I love ICE too, and use it on probably 80-90% of my > productions (mostly simple stuff and that which can be done with the > excellent tools by Mootzoid, Exocortex and others), but I would love to spend > much less time trying to figure out the how-to, so I can focus on making it > look great. Mind you, I am not asking for a Kais Power Tools for 3D, but > there is no reason why advanced stuff shouldn't be easier to do - it would > make a lot more people do great work, and thus boost the industry. > > It will be interesting to see how far the Humanize Maya will go in this > respect. Given that the devs are on a path to provide as much functionality > as possible in a short timeframe I am afraid real UI improvements will not be > prioritized enough. > > Morten > > > Den 1. april 2014 kl. 20:55 skrev Angus Davidson <angus.david...@wits.ac.za>: > > I think we have had this discussion before that things should have been > further along by now ;) I just said that Softimage was very good at allowing > the very skilled and the very new to easily achieve great things. Having > taught Maya and Softimage to people new to 3D its very easy to see the > difference between an application that can do that well and one that cant. > When you are in education you see that learning curve being tackled over and > over again. > > I think Sebastiens race car analogy and conclusions put it far better then I > did. > > > From: Luc-Eric Rousseau [luceri...@gmail.com] > Sent: 01 April 2014 08:04 PM > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > Subject: Re: A Good Read! > > it's interesting blog but I don't think that guy is saying anything that > would suggest Softimage is doing any better... (if you read the bit about > rigging having not evolved)... > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Angus Davidson < angus.david...@wits.ac.za > > wrote: > I think the original author does have a point but I dont think he expressed > it the way he wanted to. I can feel his frustration. If you think of where > we are and its been 20 years or so, shouldn't things be simpler? > > Zbrush is a good example , immensely powerful program but such an uphill > battle to get used to the interface to do anything useful. HeadUs and their > unwrap interface is another one. yes you can get beautiful results with it, > but in the time it takes you figure crap out, you could have done just as > good a job sticking to massaging a standard unwrap > > The idea is that your software should enable you from the beginning no matter > your expertise with it. Yes you will get highly skilled with it if you stick > to using it , but you shouldn't have to put your fist through a few monitors > to get there. > > Its one of the things I will miss a lot about teaching Softimage. It enabled > both he novice and the professional to do amazing things out the box. > > > > > This communication is intended for the addressee only. It is confidential. If > you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately > and destroy the original message. You may not copy or disseminate this > communication without the permission of the University. Only authorised > signatories are competent to enter into agreements on behalf of the > University and recipients are thus advised that the content of this message > may not be legally binding on the University and may contain the personal > views and opinions of the author, which are not necessarily the views and > opinions of The University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. All agreements > between the University and outsiders are subject to South African Law unless > the University agrees in writing to the contrary.
