Seems like open source is the best 3D software model to make something float indefinitely regardless of market trends. Hope FE does that…. Unless they got bought out or something.
-Draise ________________________________ From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com <softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com> on behalf of Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 9:41:04 AM To: Official Softimage Users Mailing List. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__groups.google.com_forum_-23-21forum_xsi-5Flist&d=DwIGaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=wOx6c6PpXXej-OS2OE4X72A_OaZ_8Mi6rLQg93Jusjg&s=lf5wAismtSxlMt7XDScnmAm0npYblVdzNlG8TkF-W-0&e= Subject: Re: Softimage - not going away... Although I understand where you are coming from the minimising risk side, it is also true that you end up investing a lot more in both, the software and glue to communicate various software applications with a myriad of file formats and what not, therefore I advocate for a hybrid approach in which; - You define your FX and render backbone (one single application always) and everything else feeds it. - No plugins if possible unless you have a solid environment resolution system in place and are willing to maintain it. - No strategic dependencies with one manufacturer with a proven record of discontinuing software (Apple and Autodesk are specially bad) - And make sure you build as much as possible in open standards like Alembic, OpenColorIO, OpenImageIO, USD, VDB, etc... With that in my head, I go and evaluate the next things to define what should be my backbone. > Software companies with a fair price and licensing structure have 1 point. > Software companies that support and adopt open standards have an extra point. > Software companies with strong R&D also have another extra point. > Software companies that maintain their code have another extra point. > Software companies that top support have another extra point. > Software companies that understand what we do have another extra point. > Software companies that keep refining their UX have another extra point. > Software companies that keep refining their core have an extra point. > Software companies that listen to their customers in a prompt and agile way > have another extra point. You make the choice of course for your particular scenarios but this is my view of how to choose your backbone. Hope this makes sense. jb On 28 Oct 2017, at 14:20, skuby <sku...@gmail.com<mailto:sku...@gmail.com>> wrote: Investing your time into mastering the totality of one major software is risky. The specific example that I want to test in the coming months doesn't seem unreasonable for one person (and you could swap the parts out to suit your tastes/budget/needs/prior experience) (but please critique the idea. I value your experience Mirko and I've lurked around enough to pick up a lot from you, so feel free to tear the idea apart): Modeling (Blender +Plug-ins & Marvelous Deisgner). Sculpting (Mudbox). Retopo for baking/animation (ZBrush & Blender). UV's (semi-automated via Houdini). Baking/Painting (Mudbox & Substance). Rigging+Animation (Houdini or possibly Akeytsu). Everything else i.e. Shading/Lighting/Hair/Dynamics/FX/etc. (Houdini or Unreal Engine 4). Then pick your favorite compositor. With the above, I already know Blender and the plug-ins I need for modeling/Marvelous Designer/Mudbox/ZBrush (and a decent bit of UE4) for the tasks I want to accomplish. The rest of it is a work in progress/I'm still deciding. The cost isn't even too bad. Blender = free. Marvelous Designer = $50 a month as needed. Mudbox $10 a month. ZBrush one time $800. Substance $20 a month or as needed. Houdini Indie $200 a year (OR if you needed it Houdini FX $2,495 a year after the first ($4,495) year). Akeytsu (Haven't tested it yet, but it's cheap at $200 and it looks powerful). Unreal Engine Free up front + 0% to 5% depending on the project. I cannot see myself mastering every single one of those (or even ever mastering just Houdini on it's own), but I can see myself using each one to great effect for a very very specific task and leveraging that tool's specific strengths to improve the final quality (and perhaps in spots even winning back some lost time). For me the options are stay with Softimage and eventually be completely limited, try to pick a major software to master again to replace Softimage (aka. Houdini / Blender / Maya) which seems very risky/foolish. Or go the above route, changing things on an as needed basis. On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Mirko Jankovic <mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com<mailto:mirkoj.anima...@gmail.com>> wrote: How replacing 1 tool with 5 or more, and work that could be done by 1 man now requires 5 or more as well can be advantage? [https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mailfoogae.appspot.com_t-3Fsender-3DabWlya29qLmFuaW1hdG9yQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ-253D-253D-26type-3Dzerocontent-26guid-3D18ab6473-2D9d07-2D444e-2D96fc-2D3658295d0504-5D-25E1-2590-25A7&d=DwIGaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=wOx6c6PpXXej-OS2OE4X72A_OaZ_8Mi6rLQg93Jusjg&s=FssiiAjL1qzLCEP9rn-ijK1Sogp_93o6LFdg2_XxDtQ&e= ------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. ------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
