In fairness the architecture is admirable, i don't think anyone ever made a fully nodal DCC after maya, to bad so little of it reaches its full potential.
On 22 May 2014 17:15, Luc-Eric Rousseau <luceri...@gmail.com> wrote: > 20 years.. 4/5 years late..adjusted for inflation I guess ;) > > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Maya was ahead of its time 20 years ago, the novel architecture and a > long list of historical events and mismanagement from Softimage (owned by > Microsoft at the time) meant XSI arrived at least 4/5 years late to the > party, which was a death sentence and big facilities by then did the full > switch (not all but the majority). > > > > The genius side (and the part I don't like) was the viral nature of Maya > in which you have to write stuff for pretty much everything which meant > everybody was building tons of software (and complex ones too) on top of > Maya so by the time XSI was starting to pick up pace it was an impossible > fight. > > > > Was maya great for character animation? Yes, It has always been very > good at that because the animation editor and dope sheet were very nice, > also very fast with multiple characters and some versions very robust. > Manipulators made life a pleasure (remember XSI introduced them late) so it > was not a myth, but today it XSI is imho way superior for animation, shame > the envelop deformers were never looked after properly. > > > > Jordi Bares > > jordiba...@gmail.com > > > > On 22 May 2014, at 14:25, "Leendert A. Hartog" <hirazib...@live.nl> > wrote: > > > >> Okay, a more specific question. Back in the day I always heard that > Maya was the most useful tool for Character Animation (discounting > Softimage from the equation). Was this just myth or is it just outdated > info? > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Leendert A. Hartog AKA Hirazi Blue > >> Administrator NOT the owner of si-community.com > >> > > > > > >
