Well, the difference is that you can´t choose to pay taxes or not, you HAVE to pay them. You can choose to buy or leave a software though.
And how big a part of your modelling process sculpting is, very much depends on what you´re doing. Character-Modelling - sculpting is important. Architectural Visualization - sculpting is negligible. But I have to say that even I grow somehow tired of this discussion. Vesa obviously choose not to answer some basic questions, and that makes battling over RS3Ds direction or future features pretty useless. RS3D will not improve without Realsofts will to improve it. And I see that will less than ever; sadly. I mean, Vesa, would it be that hard to just give us a five-sentence sneakpeak into what you´re planning to do with the homepage, for example? Or into what you´re planning for RS3D itself? I guess it wouldn´t. But still, best regards Martin -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 22:41:59 +0200 > Von: Juha Mukari <cosmi...@windowslive.com> > An: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > Betreff: RE: You really dont understand... RE: (Future...) Key word is > full-featured btw. > > But you pay taxes also... and you dont need all those things what taxes > does pay.. So dont came to say for me that i am paying from nothing.. i > already do and so are you doing. > And it is not unnessecary thing for those who wants model they 3dmodell > with realsoft.. Sculpting is one part of that prosess: modelling and thats > why it cant be unneseccary unless they are only animating objects with > realsoft or simulating or rendering which are not modelling.. But sculpting is > part of modelling tools and they are necessary to everybody who needs to > modell 3d modells... That's a fact.. > > > Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 21:01:04 +0100 > > From: mengil...@gmx.net > > Subject: Re: You really dont understand... RE: (Future...) Key word is > full-featured btw. > > To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > > > > Again - I understand what you mean, I just see it differently. > > > > But however we see it, the facts still stay the same. > > There are plenty of dedicated sculpting packages out there that often > also are a good deal for the price. Look at 3D-Coat for example. > > People already have learned to use these programs, and getting them to > use RS3D instead would make it necessary for RS3D to implement a full-blown > package of sculpting tools; tools that would possibly even have to be > better than those of the competitors. > > > > And why would they wanna do that? > > Sculpting only works with polygons, so it would only affect one third of > RS3Ds basic construction methods. (SDS+NURBS+CSG) > > For technical and architectural work it wouldn´t be needed at all. > > In the end you would install an extensive toolset that would benefit > only few, but would take away ressources from other development options, and > would most likely drive up the price for RS3D, so that people who didn´t > need sculpting tools would not only not benefit from development, but would > also have to pay additionally for features they never wanted. > > > > So, again, I like sculpting and would find it cool if RS3D had > sculpting. > > For you sculpting obviously is pretty important. > > For me personally it´s not. > > From my point of view there simply are other holes to fix and features > to implement, and tending to sculpting would make it nigh-impossible to tend > to those too. > > > > > > Greetz > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > > Datum: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 20:29:30 +0200 > > > Von: Juha Mukari <cosmi...@windowslive.com> > > > An: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > > > Betreff: You really dont understand... RE: (Future...) Key word is > full-featured btw. > > > > > > > > Sculptinh is modelling... it is same prosess with different tools. > Dont > > > you got it, it is same prosess.. > > > There is: Modelling (including sculpting) model isnt ready before it > has > > > been sculpted... Then tehre is painting, modell isnt ready before it > is > > > textured. > > > After that comes animation: Animation is different prosess. Also > rendering > > > is different prosess and simulation. > > > > > > I think it this way: It is frustrating to modell your 3d modell in > > > realsoft because you cant modell it no more because users' dont have > sculpting > > > tools and i say it again: Sculpting is same thing than modelling.. it > is > > > modelling but with different tools. So why i have to pay more from > same > > > prosess... no i am not gonna pay anymore for nothing... i want > software which makes > > > what it says... > > > Good night. > > > > > > > Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2010 17:53:28 +0100 > > > > From: mengil...@gmx.net > > > > Subject: Re: Understanding is the key word? RE: (Future...) Key word > is > > > full-featured btw. > > > > To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > > > > > > > > I completely understand that it would be cool to have an all-in-one > > > application. > > > > > > > > It´s simply that this is unrealistic to expect from Realsoft. > > > > And let´s face it - there is not a SINGLE 3D package that combines > ALL > > > these features in one application. > > > > And there are reasons for that. > > > > > > > > 3Dstudio, Maya and Softimage for example depend on Mudbox. > > > > This makes sense because this way Autodesk doesn´t have to > implement > > > the same functionality in every single 3D-package. > > > > But even if your not the leading company of the industry this makes > > > sense. > > > > Because you can target customers more precisely. > > > > If someone already uses a certain package and just wants sculpting > > > capability, he doesn´t have to pay for a complete suite but instead > just can > > > buy the standalone sculpting package. > > > > On the other hand, if someone doesn´t need sculpting, he doesn´t > have > > > to pay for it. > > > > > > > > So I rather talk about compatibility. > > > > If RS3D had excellent im- and export and the basic tools needed to > make > > > it unproblematically compatible with, say, 3D-Coat, RS3D itself > wouldn´t > > > have to implement sculpting in the first place. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > > > > Datum: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:48:27 +0200 > > > > > Von: Juha Mukari <cosmi...@windowslive.com> > > > > > An: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > > > > > Betreff: Understanding is the key word? RE: (Future...) Key word > is > > > full-featured btw. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dont you understand it is frustrating to use lots of different > > > softwares > > > > > for same thing... for 3d, like.. for modelling i have used also, > silo, > > > > > cinema 4d and realsoft. > > > > > I also think that sculpting is one way to modell your 3d-modell, > so it > > > is > > > > > not seperated thing.. it is one way modell your 3d-modell and it > is > > > > > frustrating to use different software for same process... for > > > modelling. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And what comes to all in one.. what makes it better... If > everything > > > is > > > > > integreated to one software it makes everything simple because > then > > > users' do > > > > > not need to consider that "is this software compatible with this > > > software > > > > > etc.."... I know this thing and it is shitty thing when you need > lots > > > of > > > > > softwares and they aren't compatible with each other it is > > > frustrating... > > > > > argh... Dont you know this issue? Isn't it familiar to you guys? > > > > > > > > > > I have used in my life about 200different softwares.. i have tried > to > > > > > learn them and i know from this expierence that they aren't > compatible > > > with > > > > > each other. It dosent makes sense to use 5different software for > one > > > thing... > > > > > modelling, or animation, or simulation, or rendering... It dosent > make > > > > > sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, and btw. I am studing movie career in post production so i do > know > > > > > that you need lots of softwares for editing and creating visual > > > effects for > > > > > movies. > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 06:30:23 +0100 > > > > > > From: mengil...@gmx.net > > > > > > Subject: Re: (Future...) Key word is full-featured btw. > > > > > > To: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > > > > > > > > > > > > @Juha: I also think that you expect RS3D to become more than it > > > could or > > > > > even should. > > > > > > I don´t think that RS3D should compete with every other mayor > > > > > competitor. > > > > > > And to be fair - not even the mayor packages offer all of the > > > features > > > > > you proposed. > > > > > > Instead, for example, Autodesk has Mudbox to provide sculpting > and > > > > > painting, and tries to establish it as part of the respective > pipeline > > > with > > > > > Autodesks products. > > > > > > And it makes sense. > > > > > > Of course it´s cool to have sculpting already integrated. > > > > > > But people who don´t need it possibly won´t be willing to pay > an > > > extra > > > > > few hundret or at least dozen bucks, just because this > feature-suite > > > was > > > > > integrated into RS3D. > > > > > > Whereas people who need sculpting can easily turn to a > specialized > > > > > application like Sculptris, 3D-Coat, Mudbox oder Zbrush. > > > > > > Thus in my opinion in this case it makes sense to not spend the > > > > > ressources needed to implement full sculpting capabilities, but to > > > instead just > > > > > make sure that RS3D fits in a pipeline with already existing > sculpting > > > tools. > > > > > > And this would mean quick, easy and reliable UV-Mapping, -Import > and > > > > > -Export, and possibly dedicated handling for respective > > > materiallayers, so > > > > > that e.g. displacement-, diffuse- and specular-maps could easily > be > > > imported > > > > > and/or applied to a model, without having to reconfigure > > > VSL-structures. > > > > > > > > > > > > When it comes to materials in general, RS3D already offers > nearly > > > all > > > > > that´s needed, at least when it comes to the code. > > > > > > It´s really just the graphical user interface and the amount > and > > > > > structuring of presets, that would have to be changed. > > > > > > It could pretty easily be done to make a complete material with > > > boxes > > > > > and sliders just like in Modo or Cinema 4D (by the way, in my > opinion > > > Modo > > > > > does it better than C4D), that would be loaded as a standard > template; > > > for > > > > > example > > > > > > In my opinion, it is about the number of this exact (already > > > existing!) > > > > > templates that you can choose from when building a new material; > it´s > > > that > > > > > these should be expanded and be presented in a way more central to > the > > > > > material-interface. > > > > > > This would mean more, and better, of the material "compounds" > that > > > e.g. > > > > > control Fresnel effects, subsurface scattering, etc., and a better > > > handling > > > > > of them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, based on the criteria that I presented in the last mail, I > > > > > personally would consider the following features important/"most > wise" > > > to be worked > > > > > upon. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Rendering and materials_ > > > > > > RS3D has a powerful material system. But if render-quality or > > > -features > > > > > do not suffice, users switch to other renderers, meaning that > these > > > > > powerful capabilities of RS3D go unused, and a reason to use RS3D > at > > > all > > > > > disappears with them too. > > > > > > So RS3Ds capabilities here should really be improved, so that > people > > > see > > > > > RS3D as an alternative for rendering again. > > > > > > Specifically I would improve: > > > > > > > > > > > > - GI > > > > > > Because RS3D lags so much behind in this respect, while it has a > > > > > potentially very powerful material and rendering system; making GI > > > better would > > > > > complement these strengths. > > > > > > As already said, even freeware renderers are lightyears ahead of > > > RS3D in > > > > > this respect. > > > > > > Another reason why I consider a better GI important is > architectural > > > > > visualisation. > > > > > > I´ve seen and read much about this and RS3D in the past, and it > > > seems > > > > > that RS3D has a bigger foothold with architecture visualizers than > > > with > > > > > other kinds of users. > > > > > > And as I understand it, a quick and simple GI is of utmost > > > importance to > > > > > these users. > > > > > > IES lightdata functionality would of cause also be a nice thing > for > > > > > them. > > > > > > > > > > > > - VSL/materials > > > > > > Because it is one of the great strenghts of RS3D. > > > > > > VSL should be expanded with new compounds and templates, it > NEEDS a > > > good > > > > > SSS template/material, it NEEDS a good and quick way to produce > blurry > > > > > reflections and refractions and ambient occlusion. > > > > > > A nodebased editor for advanced material control would be sweet, > and > > > > > about time, but if this wasn´t integrated, the GUI would at least > > > HAVE to be > > > > > updated to offer an improved workflow through e.g. multiselection > and > > > easy > > > > > management of VSL-components in general. > > > > > > Other suggestions have been written in the section above. > > > > > > However - improving VSL should make it more intuitive and > > > approachable, > > > > > reassuring current users and appealing more to possible customers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Modelling and texturing_ > > > > > > Modelling also is one of the great strengths of RS3D, especially > > > it´s > > > > > NURBS->SDS workflow capability plus CSG and it´s general SDS > tools > > > and > > > > > handling. > > > > > > Texturing on the other hand, and UV-Mapping in special, rather > lack > > > ease > > > > > of use, power, and reliability. > > > > > > These are critical for inter-operability though, so for RS3D to > be > > > > > considered to be part of a pipeline, these parts of the software > > > should be > > > > > improved. > > > > > > On the other hand, SDS capabilities of other programs have > improved > > > > > vastly in the last ten years, and some already outrun RS3D when it > > > comes to > > > > > polygon-modelling and SDS. > > > > > > > > > > > > - Polygon modelling and SDS > > > > > > This could be fixed though, and also pretty easily, I guess. > > > > > > There are only a few tools that I really miss here, mostly "loop > > > > > slice","loop slide", more indepth beveling options, easy cleaning > up > > > of a mesh, > > > > > and a more flexible and dynamic selection-sets/-groups system. > > > > > > In general, RS3D is well suited for hard surface modelling, but > has > > > > > problems with modelling/altering and managing bigger, more complex > > > polygon > > > > > models. > > > > > > Modo for example has way more tools to handle those. > > > > > > > > > > > > - Modelling in general > > > > > > Like for example curve-based deformations, and even inserting a > > > profile > > > > > along a given loop of a polygon model. > > > > > > The latter is probably a pretty advanced feature, but > curve-based > > > > > deformations are already offered by RS3D with the scale/move/size > > > 1D/2D/3D tools; > > > > > they just don´t work right. > > > > > > Or at least I haven´t gotten them to work like they should have > > > EVEN > > > > > ONCE. > > > > > > And that´s a shame, because they are such a powerful feature. > > > > > > Indeed there are a couple of modelling tools in RS3D that are > > > powerful > > > > > but awkward to use. > > > > > > To improve these tools, to make them easy and intuitive to use, > > > > > shouldn´t be much of an effort, but would improve RS3Ds modelling > > > capabilities a > > > > > big deal. > > > > > > Rather it would even really enable the average user (I consider > > > myself > > > > > an average user for that purpose) to really use these features for > the > > > first > > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > - UV-Mapping > > > > > > It´s terrible in RS3D. It´s unintuitive and lacks features. > Easy > > > UV > > > > > im- and export? Nope. > > > > > > As said, this way RS3Ds compatibility is greatly hindered, which > is > > > > > extremely bad for RS3D. > > > > > > Cause if an application already doesn´t offer all that a user > > > needs, it > > > > > should at least enable him to use it in conjunction with another > > > > > application. > > > > > > UV-Mapping DEFINITELY has to be vastly improved. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _Animation and simulation > > > > > > I can´t say to much about that, because I don´t use it. > > > > > > It seems though that a disturbingly great amount of users > > > desperately > > > > > wants these to be updated. > > > > > > Accordingly they should be. > > > > > > If Carlo could get Chrono ready, this would take the need for an > > > > > improvement of RS3Ds inbuilt system. As was already said, Chrono > could > > > even be > > > > > integrated into RS3D, making it an excellent choice for more > > > technically > > > > > oriented users. Would also be no problem to sell a RS3D Standard > and a > > > > > RS3D+Chrono bundle. > > > > > > Particle Rendering has also been often debated and should > > > accordingly be > > > > > tended to. > > > > > > Animation is a field which I can´t say anything decent about. > But > > > as > > > > > said, many other users have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So all in all there would be a few bigger improvements to be > made, > > > with > > > > > many smaller ones that would nonetheless impact RS3D very much. > > > > > > Personally I consider improved GI, VSL/materialcreation and > > > > > UV-mapping/-handling to be most important. > > > > > > > > > > > > But I would be interested in how YOU think about my priorities, > > > criteria > > > > > and explanations - am I mistaken? How does RS3Ds userbase look in > your > > > > > opinion, and what new features do you consider MOST important? > > > > > > I mean, perhaps we could make a list, get all the suggestions > > > together, > > > > > and assign "levels" of importance to them, so Realsoft could see > on > > > one > > > > > page (or so) what features the users desire the most? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Greetz > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > > > > > > Datum: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 18:32:24 -0500 > > > > > > > Von: Jean-Sebastien Perron <j...@neuroworld.ws> > > > > > > > An: user-list@light.realsoft3d.com > > > > > > > Betreff: Re: (Future...) Key word is full-featured btw. > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the industry, they don't use 1 software but ell over 20 > > > softwares > > > > > for > > > > > > > a single movie. > > > > > > > RS can do everything, but it is not specialized. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my own project I have used Vue for trees, VistaPro for the > > > terrain, > > > > > > > Gimp for texture, UVmapper Pro for texture placement, Silo for > > > some > > > > > > > modeling and all that imported in Realsoft. > > > > > > > For character animation I would use something more > specialized. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't care if GI is fake as long as it looks good. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, the only weakness of realsoft is IK for character > > > > > animation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think that one day, a company will make a software that > is > > > > > > > definitive (no improvement needed)? > > > > > > > I does everything you can think of easily. > > > > > > > Or are we condemned > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jean-Sebastien Perron > > > > > > > www.NeuroWorld.ws > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10-11-11 06:14 PM, leee wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thursday 11 Nov 2010, Juha Mukari wrote: > > > > > > > > [snip...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I think it this way: realsoft could raise their software's > > > price > > > > > > > >> really much if they would make it so great software that > you > > > > > > > >> wouldn't need any other softwares if you got realsoft. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I think that this sentence, on it's own, says a lot, and I > think > > > it > > > > > > > > raises two important issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The first is that I don't think that RS want to raise their > > > prices: > > > > > > > > their ethos seems to be to try to provide the best > combination > > > of > > > > > > > > features and quality for a moderate price, and by doing so, > make > > > > > > > > those features and quality more accessible i.e to those on a > > > > > > > > limited budget. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The second issue is that if RS were to take on more people, > to > > > > > > > > provide more features etc, and then raise their price, who > would > > > > > > > > buy it? There are already many other established players in > the > > > > > > > > high-cost region of 3D software, so why would their existing > > > users, > > > > > > > > who will have years of learning and experience invested in > their > > > > > > > > existing 3D packages, bother to switch to RS? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Like anything else you might buy, RS is a trade-off, a > > > compromise > > > > > > > > between price and functionality/capability. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If price is of no importance to you, why are you using RS > when > > > you > > > > > > > > could simply pay a lot more money and use something else? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, RS isn't perfect, but then nothing else is either; > > > everything > > > > > > > > is a compromise, and like I said in an earlier post, you > pays > > > your > > > > > > > > money and makes your choice. If you don't think that RS is > good > > > > > > > > value for money then spend your money elsewhere but don't > > > complain > > > > > > > > that you haven't got a Rolls Royce when you've only paid the > > > price > > > > > > > > of a Ford. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > LeeE > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 €/mtl.! Jetzt auch mit > > > > > > gratis Notebook-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > GRATIS! Movie-FLAT mit über 300 Videos. > > > > Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome > > > > > > > -- > > GRATIS! Movie-FLAT mit über 300 Videos. > > Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome > -- Neu: GMX De-Mail - Einfach wie E-Mail, sicher wie ein Brief! Jetzt De-Mail-Adresse reservieren: http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/demail
