Also add that there a LOT of small to mid studios starts changing as well and using what big guys are using simply because.. well big guys are using it. Even tho they don;t have resources (read man power) to work around pipeline that requires a lot more specialized people then generalists that can tackle wider range of task
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Jason S <jasonsta...@gmail.com> wrote: > Perhaps also this lingering/remaining end-of-sales date (also pointless > and forceful) isnt' exactly helping... > > > On 02/20/15 10:38, Jason S wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Adrian Graham < > adrian.gra...@autodesk.com> wrote: > Wow, this thread went off the rails quickly. > > > Sorry, I guess I'm still perplexed, > On Si-Community, Mauricio commented about why shake went-on while really > not as much for soft, > saying that the difference was mostly around available jobs as there was > still many jobs for Shake after it's Eol > > Fair enough, and I agree. > > But that doesn't explain why if not users, why studios themselves decided > to "bend themselves in 4" > (Change adapt to entire new pipelines, ways of doing doings.. sometimes > employees, accept sometimes much longer turn-around times) > and migrate "before time". (or before a 3D equivalent of a "Foundry Nuke" > came) > ... What (the heck) was the pressure? > > At first glance, I would think that might have to do with how at the > beginning, all migration paths immediately led to Maya/Max, > while advising the largest studios in advance of that, thus perhaps making > them migrate first (before any backlash) > and while these biggest studios often heavily influence others. > > I don't know but it's pretty obvious that it isn't the Lack of artists > willing to work in Soft. > (not just from all the Maya bitching) > > Which I guess is my point. > > Hasn't been a year... :-/ > > > On 02/19/15 19:10, Steven Caron wrote: > > not uncommon but especially common when maya is involved... the bitterness > lingers :) > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Adrian Graham <adrian.gra...@autodesk.com > > wrote: > >> Wow, this thread went off the rails quickly. >> >> > >
