PDA

View Full Version : Autodesk Entertainment Creation Suite 2013


saycon2000
03-27-2012, 06:48 PM
http://area.autodesk.com/products

http://area.autodesk.com/products/features/maya

http://area.autodesk.com/products/features/3dsmax

http://area.autodesk.com/products/features/softimage

http://area.autodesk.com/products/features/motionbuilder

http://area.autodesk.com/products/features/mudbox

ronaldomiranda
03-27-2012, 07:11 PM
as always, ridiculous update.

even worse compared to other companies like Luxology or Pixologic

oglu
03-27-2012, 07:18 PM
as always, ridiculous update.

even worse compared to other companies like Luxology or Pixologic

i dont think so... there is not a single zbrush feature i could use in production... but the new maya version is doing really well here...

Phrenzy84
03-27-2012, 07:20 PM
as always, ridiculous update.

even worse compared to other companies like Luxology or Pixologic

Must suck to be them right about now :rolleyes:

SheepFactory
03-27-2012, 07:27 PM
This rocks


Graph Editor Enhancements: Enjoy the increased efficiency resulting from a new interactive Retime tool, and a stepped preview mode for pose-to-pose animation in the Graph Editor.

hanger102
03-27-2012, 07:27 PM
Anyone know when this is going to be released? Can seem to find the date anywhere.

Stellios
03-27-2012, 08:49 PM
i dont think so... there is not a single zbrush feature is could use in production... but the new maya version is doing really well here...


agreed. Im very happy with what ill be getting out of maya this time.

DuttyFoot
03-27-2012, 09:24 PM
i think all the animators will love this release

Ballo
03-27-2012, 09:38 PM
But not for Mudbox. Mudbox 2012 was a big achievement compared with this release. That "new" tools you can find them in the 2012 SAP.



A bit dissapointed about Mudbox and XSI, really a lack of improvement this time.

irwit
03-27-2012, 09:44 PM
But not for Mudbox. Mudbox 2012 was a big achievement compared with this release. That "new" tools you can find them in the 2012 SAP.



A bit dissapointed about Mudbox and XSI, really a lack of improvement this time.

At least you're not using Max, .... We get a half arsed version of zookeeper which is about as production ready as windows millennium edition!

EyeForComplexity
03-27-2012, 09:56 PM
It feels like a x.5 update to me, taking things from SAP and putting them into the next version as "new" features seems a little bit bullcrap. Although I imagine they have improved and ironed out some kinks in them. For maya they still really need to address performance and stability issues, it still is not as solid as before 2011. I suppose the big studios dont care too much since maya is just an interface for their inhouse tools. Well I shall try and not let it bother me much, afterall jurassic park was done with a lot less than what we have.

techmage
03-27-2012, 10:07 PM
What I'd really like to see happen in maya is some serious development added back the PaintFX engine. I don't know when Autodesk bought maya, they decided paintFX was just peripheral and stopped developing it. But really paint effects is awesome, nothing else quite like it.

Phrenzy84
03-27-2012, 10:14 PM
But not for Mudbox. Mudbox 2012 was a big achievement compared with this release. That "new" tools you can find them in the 2012 SAP.



A bit dissapointed about Mudbox and XSI, really a lack of improvement this time.

The texture updates look pretty good to me, gigatexel and the new layer combinations. Although being a zb user all the texture features look nice :).

TrexGreg
03-27-2012, 10:20 PM
Mudbox 2013 is a nightmare joke!

RebelPixel
03-27-2012, 11:00 PM
time to stop renewing the sub. totally disappointed

Leionaaad
03-27-2012, 11:04 PM
:banghead:
I remember a thread from area.autodesk.com, where they made a poll whether they should focus more on the mental ray integration part. The answers were mostly "yes, definitely". The other answers were like "maya is getting old, needs attention in every possible aspect"
Then they come out with...THIS.
Why did they even bothered asking?
It's just mean from their part.

TrexGreg
03-27-2012, 11:19 PM
What happened to MeshMixer?
I expected by now a total integration within Mudobx.
What sane human is going to update from SAP 2012 to Mudbox 2013??

Maybe it's time to look that weird looking app, called Zbrush...

Phrenzy84
03-27-2012, 11:38 PM
What happened to MeshMixer?
I expected by now a total integration within Mudobx.
What sane human is going to update from SAP 2012 to Mudbox 2013??

Maybe it's time to look that weird looking app, called Zbrush...

Some might say you expect a lot, im sure its on the way (but then again you have to pay for updates). I wonder if i would trade dynamesh for a full suite of UV-space texturing tools.

bytez45
03-27-2012, 11:42 PM
Autodesk is playing it safe. Are those tools made with artists in mind? :banghead:

TrexGreg
03-27-2012, 11:55 PM
Some might say you expect a lot, im sure its on the way (but then again you have to pay for updates). I wonder if i would trade dynamesh for a full suite of UV-space texturing tools.

Did ZBrush users expected a lot when ZBrush bought Sculptris?
Not long after, Dynamesh was introduced...

Why should we expect more time for MeshMixer to find its way inside Mudbox?

Phrenzy84
03-28-2012, 12:26 AM
Did ZBrush users expected a lot when ZBrush bought Sculptris?
Not long after, Dynamesh was introduced...

Why should we expect more time for MeshMixer to find its way inside Mudbox?

Maybe because meshmixer was bought in November 2011 and Sculptris was acquired in July... 2010.

Dynamesh has only been here since September 2011.

TrexGreg
03-28-2012, 12:28 AM
Maybe because meshmixer was bought in November 2011 and Sculptris was acquired in July... 2010.

Dynamesh has only been here since September 2011.

lol...
Okay, fair enough; i was never good with dates...
Seems like a year and more since i saw the meshmixer acquisition...

Maybe next year then, or with the SAP 2013 more likely...

Dr Dardis
03-28-2012, 12:48 AM
My bent is animation/rigging, so the Maya update is the first very significant update I've seen for a while (QT interface re-write not withstanding).

The year is 2013 and we have an ACTUAL node editor. Ladies and Gentlemen... welcome to the future!

Looking forward to see how this speeds up rigging, and how easy it is to work with custom/3rd party nodes (Chaos group etc...).

GE fixes are also nice.

Feel sorry for the mudbox guys though, seems to be a lot of anger from that corner.

bjoern
03-28-2012, 01:30 AM
finaly one node editor for everything... took just a decade....
and it does not have a funky hyperName... :)

Nick2970
03-28-2012, 01:57 AM
The Node editor is a step in the right direction, but as usual misses the mark in ergonomics and functional design. Compare it to either Houdini or Softimage and you will be sorely disappointed.

I don't know how you can claim Bullet and Alembic as new features when they are open source to begin with!

The animation tools are less than spectacular, and if we are being honest its nothing really new. And who really cares about viewport enhancements?, most of us are using 3rd party renderers with custom shaders so the viewport becomes useless anyway for visualising results.

I have a whole list of things I would have liked to have seen implemented and improved, but I am migrating to Softimage away from Maya so all I want is a decent fluid system which Chaos group will most likely supply eventually!

No wonder so many serious productions are migrating to Houdini as a backbone, Side Effects are really one of the last old school 'focus on delivering one great product' companies.

I must admit I had hopes this release was going to be more 'bang' than 'whimper' but I guess the latter is more the case.

N

Stellios
03-28-2012, 03:05 AM
:banghead:
I remember a thread from area.autodesk.com, where they made a poll whether they should focus more on the mental ray integration part. The answers were mostly "yes, definitely". The other answers were like "maya is getting old, needs attention in every possible aspect"
Then they come out with...THIS.
Why did they even bothered asking?
It's just mean from their part.


I would guess its largely because mentalray for maya is a dead exploit.

Hair was simply archaic and needed the help.

As for the node editor, i would consider this a first pass and im sure it will be augmented at some point in time

tonytrout
03-28-2012, 05:26 AM
The curve in 3d space enhancement for mudbox will allow more even revolution of lines and detailing around the model without revolving it I hope (like evenly spaced stitching, riviting etc)

For mental ray I just miss a proper ptex implementation, I have Vray but I have growen to appreciate some of MRs finer points.

SheepFactory
03-28-2012, 05:37 AM
The animation tools are less than spectacular, and if we are being honest its nothing really new. And who really cares about viewport enhancements?, most of us are using 3rd party renderers with custom shaders so the viewport becomes useless anyway for visualising results.


N


Uhhh what? What is "less than spectacular" about the anim tools because I have been making my living with those for years and they are better than anything else out there.

Who really cares about viewport enhancements? I don't know, pretty much every one who wants better performance in the viewport I guess (that would be everyone) Who is "most of us" using 3rd party renderers with custom shaders in the viewport, I have yet to see that in any studio I worked at. What 3rd party renderers? How are 3rd party renderers helping me get better viewport performance when animating or modeling? Viewport 2.0 is so much more than throwing a DOF filter on screen.

Once again the typical cgtalk autodesk hate crew is out in full force calling this release crap because it focuses on production requested features and those never look pretty on a bullet list.

rock
03-28-2012, 05:40 AM
It looks like Autodesk is struggling to fill new features on all the products, but especially on Mudbox 2013 and MotionBuilder 2013.

GQ1
03-28-2012, 06:18 AM
It looks like a nice update to Maya , but why aren't their any brush based styling tools for hair included this time around?

fahr
03-28-2012, 06:29 AM
On one hand:

OMFG nhair!! The nucleus solver system just keeps getting better, and this latest module looks to be one of the best off-the-shelf hair sims available anywhere.

Animation tools are already some of the best around and have received nice updates.


On the other hand:

No new hair sculpting tools? What about working with full bodied furry characters? Do we still have to suffer with Maya fur for that? What about rendering hair and fur? Speaking of rendering....

Rendering workflow remains completely untouched, after YEARS of literally BEGGING for progress on MR integration, yet another year goes by with absolutely nothing being done in that area. (at least, it seems that way, based on the features list).
Have they even bothered to unlock some of the existing MR features in the interface, or do we have to go grab a 3rd party script again to get unified sampling?

So torn on this release... :P

Nick2970
03-28-2012, 06:48 AM
Uhhh what? What is "less than spectacular" about the anim tools because I have been making my living with those for years and they are better than anything else out there.

Who really cares about viewport enhancements? I don't know, pretty much every one who wants better performance in the viewport I guess (that would be everyone) Who is "most of us" using 3rd party renderers with custom shaders in the viewport, I have yet to see that in any studio I worked at. What 3rd party renderers? How are 3rd party renderers helping me get better viewport performance when animating or modeling? Viewport 2.0 is so much more than throwing a DOF filter on screen.

Once again the typical cgtalk autodesk hate crew is out in full force calling this release crap because it focuses on production requested features and those never look pretty on a bullet list.

I was referring to the less than spectacular new tools, not Maya animation in general. I think you are drawing a long bow in claiming the animation tools are better than anything else out there, have you ever tried rigging and animating in Softimage?

Don't get me wrong, I am not flaming Maya in general, I just think things like a hopelessly broken render layer system deserve more attention than this other stuff. Maya has some fundamental problems under the hood with the way it does things, this needs to be acknowledged from within Autodesk.

It really only affects the smaller shops anyway as all the big places circumvent the shortcomings in Maya with clever script based workarounds. This is Maya's biggest strength, the ability to get into it at a low level and do this sort of stuff. But its biggest weakness is much of this stuff you shouldn't have to do!

After 10 years of using almost nothing but Maya, I am learning the joys of Softimage, little things like workgroups where you can have global plugins/scripts and versions of plugins/scripts per user or per project, or per department.

Drop a renderer in one location and it is instantly installed into your whole renderfarm and workstations!

I digress, I am a little disappointed in all the releases across the board, but maybe thats just me....

N

oglu
03-28-2012, 06:55 AM
I remember a thread from area.autodesk.com, where they made a poll whether they should focus more on the mental ray integration part. The answers were mostly "yes, definitely".

they have done a lot under the hood with the mr integration... mr is now a modul... the encapsuled mr from the maya core... its now much easier to integrate 3dparty renderer with callbacks and its easier to update mr...

oglu
03-28-2012, 07:03 AM
After 10 years of using almost nothing but Maya, I am learning the joys of Softimage, little things like workgroups where you can have global plugins/scripts and versions of plugins/scripts per user or per project, or per department.

N

for such stuff you have the new modules in the API

Leionaaad
03-28-2012, 07:11 AM
they have done a lot under the hood with the mr integration... mr is now a modul... the encapsuled mr from the maya core... its now much easier to integrate 3dparty renderer with callbacks and its easier to update mr...

This means nothing for a user who just want to push a button, knowing that button is doing EXACTLY what it says it does(this scenario is still science fiction with mental ray in maya).
Mental ray in maya is full of surprises in the worst possible way, so i have to ask how is what you just said translates to the user?

oglu
03-28-2012, 07:29 AM
at the moment you have nothing form it... but for further mr development its the best solution...

tonytrout
03-28-2012, 07:47 AM
http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/cory/announcing_maya_2013

Jozvex
03-28-2012, 10:19 AM
Much better list! BSDF shaders! The XML and Python stuff for the Attribute Editor looks good too.

mustique
03-28-2012, 12:36 PM
I'd love to praise every effort towards innovative and revolutionary new tool developments from adsk. But I'll say what I think should be said:

The idea of paralel development of a bunch of apps which basically try to do the same things in order to keep your established markets doesn't work.

It leads to an unproductive development pace that looses out to visionaries like Pixologic, SideEffects, Thefoundry, Luxology... You name it.

rock
03-28-2012, 01:17 PM
Maya 2013 feature:

Live Update Service: Check for updates including Service Packs and Hotfixes using the new Autodesk Maya Update Manager.

Should this be corrected to say that:

Live Update Service: Check for updates including Service Packs (Full Large Application Download, Uninstall, and Reinstallation) and Hotfixes using the new Autodesk Maya Update Manager

Nick2970
03-28-2012, 01:24 PM
I'd love to praise every effort towards innovative and revolutionary new tool developments from adsk. But I'll say what I think should be said:

The idea of paralel development of a bunch of apps which basically try to do the same things in order to keep your established markets doesn't work.

It leads to an unproductive development pace that looses out to visionaries like Pixologic, SideEffects, Thefoundry, Luxology... You name it.

Well played sir!

Strob
03-28-2012, 02:06 PM
As a max user and as a one man studio, I would disagree with most people here (except at least SheepFactory) cause I'm really excited with the new features in at least 3dsmax. There are a lot of production features enhancements like the nitrous enhancement (which looks amazingly faster (and was already faster than anything else in 2012!): just look at this 10 millions polys demo on a laptop (http://vimeo.com/39284332) ), gmesh, mcloth, retiming, quicktime support, all the small annoying things fixes and the annoucement of a major pflow update to come... All this is what I personnally need for my work on my productions. I really wonder what all those unhappy users are using this softwares for....

For sure we all have some small features we would like to see added since many years. For my part, I would like Autodesk to buy Xray unwrap and the quad tools from Marius Silaghi (http://www.mariussilaghi.com/qchamfer.htm) like quad chamfer and quad cap and integrate them. For the time being I can at least buy those plugins (when they are updated (xray unwrap was never updated for max 2012 for example).

With all the amazing stuff max can do now, all we can hope for the future is that it can do it faster and with less bugs (and we can always hope for a liquid simulator such as naiad to be integrated).

For sure newer apps like zbrush and blender can get many more new features at each release cause they are newer and they don't do half of what max can do.

And about Side effect, yes they really rock: I sometimes dream that Houdini is used everywhere and that I started learning it 15 years ago, but it's just a dream. In reality I never had time to learn it and I don't know a lot of people using it in my city.

R10k
03-28-2012, 03:14 PM
Hooray! Nice to see some comments that aren't tall poppy, ala the PS6 thread. I'm sure there are lot of nice changes for every program, even if they aren't headline features.

Charkins
03-28-2012, 03:45 PM
A lot of discontent with this thread. I'm curious to know from those who "will not buy" the next release, what features were you expecting? Or what features would you want to see before you buy? Are you contacting Autodesk developers to know why you aren't upgrading?

Max new features are pretty decent, IMHO. I'm using Max, so I'm looking forward to using those new features in production. My only gripe with Max is (and has always been) legacy problems that scripts/plugins resolve. It's just the extra steps and lack of official support.

The Softimage new features look really weak. The .5 release was better than what they're offering here, but even those features will be new to some. Other than some ICE work, I haven't used Softimage in over a year - I would like some Softimage users to weigh in on this release.

I wish they could post up bug fixes, because that's where I'm most concerned. To me, bug fixes are just as important, if not moreso in many cases, than 'new' features when selling upgrades.

TrexGreg
03-28-2012, 04:46 PM
May i ask the thinking and/or reasons for updating (or not) to Mudbox 2013, from people that currently use the Mudbox Subscription Advantage Pack 2012...?

IMHO, they could just rename the SAP 2012 to 2013, place a freebee sticker on top and be done with it; asking money for such "updates" is like an insult to common intelligence...

Br1
03-28-2012, 05:41 PM
well this is the video that impressed me the most. Donno why, maybe the soundtrack, maybe the fact that I've never tried Autodesk designer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2ZvJK48yDKw

for my 3D needs, I'll stick with Houdini ^^

mattwood
03-28-2012, 05:50 PM
May i ask the thinking and/or reasons for updating (or not) to Mudbox 2013, from people that currently use the Mudbox Subscription Advantage Pack 2012...?


Because if you have the SAP, then you're a probably subscription customer and will get the update for free.

Kui
03-28-2012, 06:24 PM
Because if you have the SAP, then you're a probably subscription customer and will get the update for free.

Being a subscription customer still means paying for the upgrade, only less.

Lars3D
03-28-2012, 06:27 PM
Its hard to be excited for a small update like Max 2013 when we know they are working on Max XBR, and Nvidea working on Mental Ray. I am curious though what changes have been made to Mental Ray 3.0. The update doesn't mention what they changed about it. Also hair and fur is promised to be faster...

Bitter
03-28-2012, 06:27 PM
mental ray separation as a plug in means (theoretically) updates and fixes can be added more quickly to Maya as opposed to waiting a whole year for a new compile of mayatomr.

Feature exposure is not a promise. However, better integration/fixes may relax Autodesk enough to begin exposing features. Previously they have been skittish about new features because of lack of testing and if an exposed feature has a bug there was not an easy way to fix it because of how it was integrated into Maya.

This change is also good news for other renderers.

BigPixolin
03-28-2012, 06:44 PM
Because if you have the SAP, then you're a probably subscription customer and will get the update for free.

You get your subscription for free? We have 5 subscriptions, nothing free about that.

Charkins
03-28-2012, 06:50 PM
Its hard to be excited for a small update like Max 2013 when we know they are working on Max XBR, and Nvidea working on Mental Ray.

According to this post (http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/ken/3ds_max_2013_announced), some of the new features are XBR. XBR isn't a thing, it's a several-year long process.

conbom
03-28-2012, 07:09 PM
Live update service may help speed up the frequency of bug fixes, they seemed to hide them well in the past.

Viewport 2.0 layered shaders look really useful for previewing models before exporting to a game engine. I kinda wish they would just throw in turtle render and baking tools as a standard plug in though.

GatorNic
03-28-2012, 07:25 PM
yay for modeling...extrude tool update and geometry pinch brush update. wow breathtaking. :rolleyes:

RebelPixel
03-28-2012, 09:42 PM
I wonder..how comes everytime a new release comes out mental ray doesnt get anything? I mean the answer that is floating around many forums being maya/max/softimage is that almost no new feature is implemented cause lack of testing and being stable.
So how many years must pass before we get a decent mental ray integration feature-wise, this is starting to be beyond ridicolous.

1 year is not enough to test mental ray feature? Cause last i check there are a lot of features missing on the 3 main packages. Startin from IBL/bsdf/IP/iRay/progressive Rendering and so on.

Wont be long for people to drop subscription at this rate, and i seriously hope many people will do. Corporation like AD wont change their mind untill their income drops drastically. And its about time really.

arvinmoses
03-28-2012, 10:10 PM
even worse compared to other companies like Luxology or Pixologic

Why would you say that?? I think the Pixologic and Luxology updates are incredible.
Character animation tools in Modo, with great integration. Quick ways to setup FBIK. That's pretty big.

Zbrush with Dynamesh, Fibertools for sculpting hair.

I think both companies came out with some pretty big updates.

atac
03-29-2012, 01:22 AM
There is more to Mudbox 2013 than what is captured in the "marketing highlights".

A longer list can be found here.

http://area.autodesk.com/forum/autodesk-mudbox/general-discussion/mudbox-2013--new-features/page-1/

AJ
03-29-2012, 09:23 AM
Why would you say that?? I think the Pixologic and Luxology updates are incredible.99.999% sure that's his point :)

BigErn
03-29-2012, 12:28 PM
aaah.. finally :)
Maya Navigation Style

Artists familiar with using Autodesk Maya software will appreciate the new Maya interaction mode that enables them to use the same mouse and key combinations in 3ds Max as they would in Maya to navigate viewports. The ability to use a unified style when working with both packages helps save time and reduce user frustration. In addition, the interaction modes are customizable according to personal preference.

http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/ken/3ds_max_2013_announced

Syndicate
03-29-2012, 01:09 PM
This rocks


Graph Editor Enhancements: Enjoy the increased efficiency resulting from a new interactive Retime tool, and a stepped preview mode for pose-to-pose animation in the Graph Editor.

I have to agree... The bridge between motionbuilder and CAT is also fantastic, something I wished for 3-4 years ago that could have saved a lot of time.

THExDUKE
03-29-2012, 01:14 PM
Uhhh what? What is "less than spectacular" about the anim tools because I have been making my living with those for years and they are better than anything else out there.

Who really cares about viewport enhancements? I don't know, pretty much every one who wants better performance in the viewport I guess (that would be everyone) Who is "most of us" using 3rd party renderers with custom shaders in the viewport, I have yet to see that in any studio I worked at. What 3rd party renderers? How are 3rd party renderers helping me get better viewport performance when animating or modeling? Viewport 2.0 is so much more than throwing a DOF filter on screen.

Once again the typical cgtalk autodesk hate crew is out in full force calling this release crap because it focuses on production requested features and those never look pretty on a bullet list.

And here again we see the haters hate haters posts.

So how was that again? Aggressive fanboy versus notorious stickler? :thumbsup:

Syndicate
03-29-2012, 01:16 PM
And here again we see the haters hate haters posts.

So how was that again? Aggressive fanboy versus notorious stickler? :thumbsup:

Some men aren't looking for anything logical.
They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with.
Some men just want to watch the world burn." - Alfred, Bruce Wayne's Butler

THExDUKE
03-29-2012, 01:46 PM
Some men aren't looking for anything logical.
They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with.
Some men just want to watch the world burn." - Alfred, Bruce Wayne's Butler

Yes, but it should be allowed to criticize a product without being forum-lynched by some hardcore fanboys.

SebKaine
03-29-2012, 02:38 PM
Yes, but it should be allowed to criticize a product without being forum-lynched by some hardcore fanboys.

of course it is allowed ! and i do share your pov man ! ( this should put me in the haters category ... by opposition to the good guy category i guess ...)

but we don't make a good movie without good bad guys after all ... :)

Phrenzy84
03-29-2012, 04:02 PM
Yes, but it should be allowed to criticize a product without being forum-lynched by some hardcore fanboys.

I cant disagree with that, though i would hate to be a developer working on any of the above products reading first thoughts. Must be demoralizing.

If the pricing structure was different then i imagine people would have a different outlook.

Im not an Autodesk user, but when it comes to something like zbrush or houdini i see people take a different approach when they point out shortfalls and lacklustre features.

THExDUKE
03-29-2012, 04:27 PM
of course it is allowed ! and i do share your pov man ! ( this should put me in the haters category ... by opposition to the good guy category i guess ...)

but we don't make a good movie without good bad guys after all ... :)

Yes, but its a dramatic script if innocent pavementwalkers get categorized into good or bad by just commenting out some facts. ;)

I cant disagree with that, though i would hate to be a developer working on any of the above products reading first thoughts. Must be demoralizing.

If the pricing structure was different then i imagine people would have a different outlook.

Im not an Autodesk user, but when it comes to something like zbrush or houdini i see people take a different approach when they point out shortfalls and lacklustre features.

Yes of course it is not nice to read bad crit as a developer, but who is responsible for the result? The developer only from the technical point of view. The user cant just take it and say for the sake of the dev that it is beautiful.
I mean, this isnt the first release of this software, and its every year the same. Some, including me, get disappointed, some can live with that. And that is fine.
But people have to come down and dont freak out when someone is giving out their opinion.

AdrianLazar
03-29-2012, 04:49 PM
Pretty disappointing :( Long time an XSI fan... you can see when it was bought by AD, such a shame!

SheepFactory
03-29-2012, 05:00 PM
And here again we see the haters hate haters posts.

So how was that again? Aggressive fanboy versus notorious stickler? :thumbsup:


Hey nice low content post that doesnt add anything to the discussion. You sure showed me! :thumbsup:

Phrenzy84
03-29-2012, 05:37 PM
Yes of course it is not nice to read bad crit as a developer, but who is responsible for the result? The developer only from the technical point of view. The user cant just take it and say for the sake of the dev that it is beautiful.
I mean, this isnt the first release of this software, and its every year the same. Some, including me, get disappointed, some can live with that. And that is fine.
But people have to come down and dont freak out when someone is giving out their opinion.

Who is responsible or more importantly what is responsible for (what some might say is such) small growth per release. I think the production cycle might be the most contributing factor into the development of these programs. Having an update every year without fail restricts the scope of what can be achieved.

Some problems are harder to tackle than others, they require more time, more resources and possibly restructuring on an architectural level. To tackle such a problem wouldn't be the prime interest because you have to do what you can in 8-12 months, with developing and testing new features, especially making sure it doesn't break what you already have.

As i pointed out earlier in this thread it took a from June 2010, the purchase of sculptris (a key technology for Dynamesh) to September 2011 for it to make it into Zbrush. That kind of autonomy is something I feel Autodesk developers don't have (if they want to please customers with every release). Im sure that feature freeze date is always looming.

Bottom line is money. Would you pay more for an upgrade 18 months or more since the previous release knowing it had bigger/better features that you want/need. I don't know, i dont live in that world. I'm just speculating but i know i would prefer that cycle, maybe the developers might too.

NanoGator
03-29-2012, 07:48 PM
And who really cares about viewport enhancements?, most of us are using 3rd party renderers with custom shaders so the viewport becomes useless anyway for visualising results.

I want to chime in on this question, not to perpetuate the argument, but simply to answer the question as a question. There are a lot of us that sit in the Art Department, next to an Art Director, Production Designer, or even Director who guide us during the design and development phase of a large variety of assets. The closer the viewport gets to what something will actually look like (i.e. Ambient Occlusion is VERY helpful when showing how movie sets fit on a sound stage...), the easier it is to visualize the result and get approval.

If there are third-party viewports, shaders, etc (reminder: I do not work for a game company, so it's not like I have shader writers on staff to help me out...) that can make this process better, I really would love to hear about it. In the mean time, yes, there are people who care a great deal about the viewport.

SYmek
03-29-2012, 11:33 PM
O, I love this kind of threads!

Just let me note, that developing the app with +10 years of history is much harder than brand new technology, like ZBrush or Modo. First for a reason of a huge code base, which inherits limitation of outdated technology, second for a reason of Maya being a complete, production packages for years now.

I have no idea what would have to be implemented in Maya to match the "omg!" effect of an animation in Modo, despite the latter one can't really match Maya robustness in that department. Ironically.

Houdini recent update as usual shines, but on the other hand big part of their efforts concerned on fixing long standing and embarrassing problems of their architecture. Yes, this major fix enabled quite a few improvements, but still - being a little sarcastic for a moment - Maya's Fluids just work for years now, whereas Houdini needed major rewrite to make its fluids really powerful.

I'm not justifying ADSK here, just saying, programs like Maya, are really hard to make significantly batter.

One more word about central thing here: I can't name a single example of goodness coming from a consolidation of knowledge, power, and money. Adsk can't bit smaller companies where it comes to innovation, and reliability, so it has to bit them with bundles, patents and law suit. It's that simple.

Getting bigger the company loses track of its products, in every business. They need attention from people who made them from scratch, and technology development requires standing front to difficulties and passion to make things beautiful, not outsourcing, market strategy and clever adds. This is true for cars, schools, bread and butter. The smaller company the better. Corporation is a headless hydra feeding its main owners: managers. Private company is a Swiss watch made by someone who loved doing it. Plain and simple.

Personally I really don't understand why someone who make, say, good cars, really have to make *all* the cars on a continent? Why GM has to be the biggest manufacturer on the world, albeit none of his cars can bit, say, Subaru, the smallest Japanese car company? See the point? There is a relation between the quality, the ability to invent things and a manageable size, personal devotion, and human vision standing behind any products.

Sorry for offtopic.

ronaldomiranda
03-29-2012, 11:44 PM
Houdini needed major rewrite to make its fluids really powerful.

its the first time i hear something like that about Houdini.

I am not a houdini expert, but i had seen much more great fire, water, dynamics more convincing in houdini than Maya,

at least in my humble and ignorant world of FX.

Ordibble-Plop
03-30-2012, 12:19 AM
Just let me note, that developing the app with +10 years of history is much harder than brand new technology, like ZBrush or Modo.

I bought ZBrush v1.23c in August of 2002 and it had already been going for at least a year at that point. That makes it at least 10 years old by my reckoning ;)

luceric
03-30-2012, 01:36 AM
the life of a developer on a big 3D app is quite complicated. you're developing features, but you also investigating issues, sometime putting out fires, on the hundreds of existing features on the software. you're constantly being pushed and pulled by calls from support, asked for help or consulting by peers, debating risk/value of some change, doing code reviews, etc. obviously, when you work on an app that does fewer things, you don't have to worry about the features that it doesn't have. there is about 12 millions lines of code in Softimage, for example.

one thing I think Autodesk should do better is re-enforce the long term progress of the apps. they can't talk about the future, generally (there was some exception with XBR), but they can talk about the past and re-explained what happened. they should lay that story out more clearly, because right now on these regular release cycle, the perception of progress is getting watered down.

what's happening is that you announce a product, but you don't want to make it too complicated, so you talk about the two big things, and then there is an abbreviated view of the rest. all this stuff is technical, so it's impossible to understand this info without actually having the software, but you have a wait a month for that. by the time it arrives, people have forgotten all of this stuff. they would have to do work to figure out what's new.

the key is probably not do a dump on a single day of year and then go silent again. it's probably doing something like constantly re-selling the last two years of added features, and possibly do things like highlight them in the software. Most studio users are several versions behind and are not even using the stuff that's being updated. Don't assume anyone has understood the information that one-week marketing push, because these products are too complex and the advances to incremental to see the growth across many years.

in the early days of softimage, we were golden; all we had to do was add a rigid body dynamic engine or hair and it looked like we were doing amazing progress... because we had nothing, so anything new looks like a lot of work. after you have all the basics, adding new things is considerably more complicated. in part because you did all the easy stuff already.

mr Bob
03-30-2012, 01:53 AM
You know sidefx has got it right because all the other applications are copying it from Ice in xsi to the new node editor in Maya. Houdini's architecture enables it to change, thats not the case with Maya, its weighted down with old legacy that's bloated beyond belief. To see an awesome example of that you only have to look at F check and then look at Mplay in Houdini.

Sure Maya has the architecture open to enable users to code whatever they want in mel or a python wrapper to mel . But fundamentally out the box it just does not cut the mustard anymore with endless features that just do not deliver. You only have to see the mess that is render layers. Users are driven to immediately find a plugin written by a user in some location or other to render some layers out.

b

rock
03-30-2012, 02:10 AM
What I don't understand is that we can send men to the moon, range rovers to Mars, perform face implants but we have not figure out a way to allow plugins to coexist between version upgrades.

Kabab
03-30-2012, 02:37 AM
I think why people are so excited about say Modo 601 or the latest version of Houdini compared to Max and Maya is because those packages are developing in a coherent manner with clear direction and purpose..

Max and Maya are in a really bad place this massive effort to re-architect the software with complete new UI and viewports half a dozen plugin dynamics solvers etc etc are just making for really messy applications.. Users are paying to alpha/beta test features which they should be gotten in the first place...

Lets look at Maya for example because I'm more familiar with it they say they are going to add a new dynamics system which handles everything in a unified manner so everything just works together! Great the community cheers...

What do we have today roughly 6 different dynamic systems in Maya..

The rendering and modelling have barely improved over 4 releases and the UI and viewport had/have many issues making them bad features and unusable for their first releases.

Then compare this to say the recent Modo 601 launch because they have done everything right to begin with and improved incrementally there is not so much back tracking to fix things which have been left broken for many years.. The new features they have added you can tell have been well thought out and very nicely integrated into the software nothing really feels tacked on..

Houdini i've never used but from what i've seen you can see the core foundation of the application is very strong so they have been able to evolve it without as much drama as Max/Maya is facing..

leuey
03-30-2012, 07:16 AM
Kabab is right, it's all about vision (and modo's been around for 10 years too, btw). What's the vision for Maya? Seriously.....what is it? Because as far as I can tell they keep bolting on bits and pieces of acquired or licensed software in order to meet their legal obligations for charging fees. nParticles/Hair/Cloth are great - why the addition of bullet physics? NVidia Physx? Keeping the old systems around? Do they have a vision for rendering? Or are they just content with the glacial pace and partial/inconsistent integration of MR across their product line?

Here's what I want for Maya 2014 - I want all the crap nobody ever uses gone...I want an interface that doesn't look like somebody barfed up a bowl of fruity pebbles all over my monitor. Maya does amazing things - but it's getting buried under a mountain of mediocrity. I honestly am using modo 601 for stuff now that I used to use Maya for...not necessarily because modo does it all better (though it does do many things better), but because I actually enjoy the program. Maya is just.......arg.....

I also feel bad for Softimage, because eventually one of those apps is going to get the axe...and we all know which one it is. It's a beautiful program, but all the BOD is going to see is that crap-ass webpage with 2 videos and they're going to say 'that one' when it's time for the axe to fall.

-Greg

THExDUKE
03-30-2012, 08:23 AM
Hey nice low content post that doesnt add anything to the discussion. You sure showed me! :thumbsup:

And you think your´s did? There was no intention to "show" you something. Its your uncooperative attitude for getting beasty as soon as someone crits your beloved product. Another word which would describe it precisly would be childish. But to bring this to a point where it actually "adds" something to the discussion:

You mentioned that the VP2 works perfect for you, since you claim that people try to use it with custom shaders or thirdparty renderengines and they complaint that it does not work...well If you call mental ray a third party tool, then you are right, but maybe it is okay in your workflow that you do your stuff with basic Maya shaders, and since Mray is integrated within Maya for quite a while now, we should be allowed to expect a proper integration into VP2 also, shouldn´t we?.
But for me it is not very productive to shade and work with standarts just to use VP2 and since our company is working primarily with Mray, VP2 is simply not usable for us ( or at least it was not...not sure how it´ll be in 2013, but so far I haven´t heard that Mray-shaders work in VP2 with gammacorrected nodes).
So, before you start bitching around people, and then even try to make fun out of my crit, you should consider that there are some people out there who work differently than you do.

Jussslic
03-30-2012, 09:25 AM
in the early days of softimage, we were golden; all we had to do was add a rigid body dynamic engine or hair and it looked like we were doing amazing progress... because we had nothing, so anything new looks like a lot of work. after you have all the basics, adding new things is considerably more complicated. in part because you did all the easy stuff already.

I'm probably not knowledgeable enough to chime into this discussion, but I'm gonna risk it anyway. It seems to me there's an awful lot of truth in the paragraph I quoted. I'm not giving Autodesk a pass for a string of lackluster releases, but....

People bow down to the Pixologic gods (myself included), because they're still adding features left and right. Part of that incredible progress comes from the software being young enough that there are still a lot of things that need development.

The further you get into any consumer-product relationship, the harder it is to really wow the customer, and that doesn't just apply to software development. Obviously there are exceptions, but how many bands release a critically acclaimed album late in their careers? How many shows still feel fresh after five seasons?

Again, not giving Autodesk a pass, but it does get harder and harder. Does anyone think Pixologic will still be pumping out releases every five minutes ten years down the line? (Although I wouldn't put it past em.)

Ballo
03-30-2012, 09:37 AM
Obviously, a life of a 3d developer is quite complicated, more complicated if you have 3 big app to do the same.

I agree with Leuey. Autodesk have too many products. Soon we will see some cuts, or just, leave it to his fate.

conbom
03-30-2012, 09:47 AM
Wow some of you guys are really laying the smackdown upon Maya. I dont see the problems somehow, I used to a number of years ago when getting a real-time lighting preview was seriously lacking, having shadows and stuff in real-time is a major advance for what I use,

seriously some of you guys are inventing problems that don't even exist!

I want an interface that doesn't look like somebody barfed up a bowl of fruity pebbles all over my monitor.

lol what!? It has one of the best user interfaces of all time! ctrl+space the whole screen away and gesture the rest with a pen and right click, with other stuff open on the 2nd display its a very very elegant user interface, masses of screen space fast access to tools, no icons anywhere. Its a lot nicer than what adobe puts out who will never let you change a single little thing, not even a colour!

Oh and the last time I tried Modo (quite some time ago) I realised there was no history, so if I made a wire with a spline and clicked off it, the spline would be gone, with no way of manipulating it again to change the shape of the wire, that really sucked. Especially as it was a sci-fi environment with many many many wires, nontheless that was a deal breaker for me.

mirkoj
03-30-2012, 10:06 AM
ctrl+space and hotbox is ONLY hing I really miss from Maya :)
huge working space and you focus on what you are working on and everything is also at the touhch of space and drag mouse.

But evreything else...

The thng with scraping any of applications is taking away from a lot of people not only a software but complete workflow that they have. And workflow is HUGE thing when talking about productivity. Workflow is something that is learned and accustomed to over a years. And now when for example I work in Softimage like I have gloves and do things 10 and more times than I would do in maya (and 10000 if talking about Max), scraping it would kill years of building that workflow, and workflow is huge part of you as animator or modeler r anything.
So scraping either of those would be killing part of a lot of people.
And it is not matter of which software is better but which software fits you better.
So one day you come to your favorite shoe shop and there is only 1 size of shoes. That doesn't fit all right? It is not matter if other is better than your or color of it, but which one fits you better...
So... Scrapping would be HUGE problem for a lot of people.

Another big problem is that marketing comes before needs as it seems. It shouldn't be priority to create something that will look nice on the next what is new list, but priprity shold be what matters to people that are actually using software every day.

So please keep away marketing people from development and let developers do their job!!!
But that won't happen :)

mustique
03-30-2012, 10:47 AM
... People bow down to the Pixologic gods (myself included), because they're still adding features left and right. Part of that incredible progress comes from the software being young enough that there are still a lot of things that need development...

I agree to some degree with your post, but Pixologic is not the right example in your context.
Zbrush is a focused app. It gets developed in ways not even their users can imagine for more than 10 years.

RebelPixel
03-30-2012, 11:19 AM
Usually when you get to a point where your ideas and development get stagnant you should try to hire people. It is kinda depressing to see more updates and features coming from artist, freelancers, students, than autodesk itself.

Why not contact those people and implement their things in the 3d packages? I seriously think it can be done more than we actually see now.

It is nice to have other companies like Pixologic and Maxon and Luxology or SideFX, and yes i think 10 years from now Pixo developers will still be adding stuff.

Problem with AD i think is they didnt work correctly for years now, and they found themselves a lot of problems to face now which they obviously cant fix. This is the result of adding things on top of each other without a correct workflow, a decent architecture on the backrgound and coherent development.

I'm using Softimage more and more and i'm glad it is still alive because its a jewel of a software, i seriously hope they will work more on it because i had to run away from Maya due to an insane amount of time spent fixing bugs, crashes, thousands of clicks and horrible workflow in almost every aspect of it. Hypershade itself made my life a nightmare.

No one here is saying maya max or xsi are crap software, but sure they can do a lot more of what they periodically do, counting that subscription price goes even up (speakin about softimage lately). I also think that 6 months cycle to develop things is a bit too few.. with the SAP edition and 1 year cycle for normal software release things get messy, and at the end users get disappointed by the overall quality of the product.

I use mental ray a lot and for example i found absurd that 3 packages dont still have a correct full features integration of their native rendering engine. We are at 3.10 release and there are a lot of things missing since years and previous releases. How is this? Dont tell me about the need to add features when they are tested and stable because its been years not days. They had plenty of time to test and make them stables, they just didnt do anything.

Those softwares cost thousands and thousands of money and it starts to get depressing and counter productive to mantain subscription for so few improvement when you take a look at other packages for example, which shines not only for updates, but for marketing/price/support/license system/plugin integration/subscription methods and so on.

Those arent good days for Autodesk.

my 2 cents of a disappointed customer (not for much longer).

Zeddicus
03-30-2012, 05:42 PM
3ds Max has been available to users since 1996, ZBrush since 1999, and Modo since 2004 approximately. Autodesk is a publicly traded company, where as Pixologic and Luxology aren't. Please correct me if I'm wrong as this is the best information I could find using Google. The latter two are free to go in whatever direction they want and the sky is the limit. Autodesk on the other hand is beholden to the stock holders and must always put profits first. I've occasionally wonder how much of an impact this has on the development of their products and the choices they make.

It's not hard to see why some folks are disappointed. I too expected a much more impressive showing, especially after seeing all the fanfare surrounding Modo 601. It's good that Autodesk is finally giving some attention to the areas that really need it, but on the other hand most of these are bugs that should have been fixed years ago. Some have even been around since 1.0. Take Maya style navigation for example. Users have been wanting this for what seems like forever and as a result they've likely given up hoping for it. The same likely goes for many of the other features and bug fixes finally added with this release. It's hard to care about something you gave up on a long time ago. Each new release only served to embitter what were once wide eyed hopeful users, until they got to the point where the only excitement they could muster was a shrug of the shoulders and dejected sigh of resignation. I envy you folks (fans?) who are easily impressed. ;)

One of the features I was hoping to see was native support for Ptex and I am surprised it's not on the list. VRay supports it so at least there is that, but as soon as you do anything to your mesh, like add a symmetry or turbosmooth modifier, Max changes the vertex order. This completely destroys Ptex, rendering it mostly useless. Ptex is a great way to render all types of displacements seamlessly which is why I'm interested in it. It's also a boon to artists whom do not want to deal with UV's. In putting together a list of applications that support it, I was surprised to find that overall support among the competition is pretty decent, greater than 65% approximately. Likewise I was also disappointed that they hadn't taken some time to improve Mudbox integration, a product that does support Ptex by the way (as well as vector displacement, another feature beginning to catch on).

A big problem seems to be their focus. They run the feedback site (http://3dsmaxfeedback.autodesk.com) which is a good place to post your ideas and vote on others, but sometimes I think they don't take any time to consider whether an idea is actually worth spending their valuable time and resources on. Just because something got a lot of votes doesn't automatically mean it's a good idea. It could just mean a lot of people aren't aware that a similar feature is already in there. Take double clicking to select edge loops for example. Was a third selection method really necessary? Seems rather redundant to me, especially considering shift clicking works just fine for both loops and rings. It was a waste of time that would have been better spent elsewhere (XBR is only half done for example). All in all, I'll probably end up skipping this release.

ronaldomiranda
03-30-2012, 05:49 PM
besides the Ptex support that could e a great thing,

what about Alembic actually just supported by Maya?

Just things that could not be left aside.

tburbage3
03-31-2012, 09:30 PM
the life of a developer on a big 3D app is quite complicated. you're developing features, but you also investigating issues, sometime putting out fires, on the hundreds of existing features on the software. you're constantly being pushed and pulled by calls from support, asked for help or consulting by peers, debating risk/value of some change, doing code reviews, etc. obviously, when you work on an app that does fewer things, you don't have to worry about the features that it doesn't have. there is about 12 millions lines of code in Softimage, for example.

one thing I think Autodesk should do better is re-enforce the long term progress of the apps. they can't talk about the future, generally (there was some exception with XBR), but they can talk about the past and re-explained what happened. they should lay that story out more clearly, because right now on these regular release cycle, the perception of progress is getting watered down.

what's happening is that you announce a product, but you don't want to make it too complicated, so you talk about the two big things, and then there is an abbreviated view of the rest. all this stuff is technical, so it's impossible to understand this info without actually having the software, but you have a wait a month for that. by the time it arrives, people have forgotten all of this stuff. they would have to do work to figure out what's new.

the key is probably not do a dump on a single day of year and then go silent again. it's probably doing something like constantly re-selling the last two years of added features, and possibly do things like highlight them in the software. Most studio users are several versions behind and are not even using the stuff that's being updated. Don't assume anyone has understood the information that one-week marketing push, because these products are too complex and the advances to incremental to see the growth across many years.

in the early days of softimage, we were golden; all we had to do was add a rigid body dynamic engine or hair and it looked like we were doing amazing progress... because we had nothing, so anything new looks like a lot of work. after you have all the basics, adding new things is considerably more complicated. in part because you did all the easy stuff already.

It's great to see a weigh in from a developer on the inside. I think you've raised some really good points that I've been thinking about as well as I work in large scale software development too.

"in the early days ... we were golden"
Yes, it definitely was easier to make a hit with the users when so many big feature areas were still just a dream for the future. 3D was 'brave new world' back then. The big general purpose modeling/animation/rendering apps had years worth of development to do just to fill out their feature sets. Things have matured. I think users simply miss the time when the apps were going through revolutionary advancement rather than low key evolutionary refinement. Modo is currently enjoying the feeling of being the innovator in the GP 3D app space, partly because they really are innovating, but also because they are adding features the other big apps already had but they lacked. It becomes a lot trickier when you are trying to build a release around workflow and ease-of-use unless you are able to make some fairly revolutionary advances (and those are hard to do). Like Ali and Brian/Nanogator, I really applaud the work apps are doing to make visual feedback more immediate and closer to the final product. That is a huge productivity advancement from the early days.

Also, part of what really drove innovation was competition. When Maya, Max, and Softimage/XSI were actively competing with each other, it really drove innovation, and it was easier to feel the passion and commitment of the individual development teams to be the best in every aspect of the product. I imagine it is much harder now for the development teams behind each of these products to feel like they have control over their destiny -- over what areas of the product get the most attention and how their baby advances. And the strong contact the team may have felt with their user base before may well have been lost as things became more and more rigid and "corporate-ized".

"the key is probably not do a dump on a single day of year and then go silent again."
Yep. I think Alias probably had it right in that when they announced a release, it was available so you could at least have a look to try to figure out if "exotic-feature-A" actually seemed useful. Just watching a brief video is probably not going to make that clear.

"Most studio users are several versions behind and are not even using the stuff that's being updated."
I think this is the fact the vendors wish we didn't really know. What is sad about that is that the individual users, the people who buy their own licenses, end up funding development. And yet, increasingly, many of the features appear to be geared toward the more specialized mid to large shops and not the individual, more generalist user. Witness the frustration of many Maya users who would like to see Maya's modeling/texturing related tool set advance in functionality and workflow, because that's where they spend the majority of their time, but see almost nothing happen there release after release.

"Don't assume anyone has understood the information"
Absolutely. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be for a feature developer to create something that really does provide a tangible benefit but where the average user just isn't going to connect the dots. If a user doesn't understand a functionality and how it can help them in a concrete way, it might as well not be there.

Thanks again for your thoughtful post. My take-away:
We should all "vote with our wallet", even if that means a painful transition to another software package. Or simply means you use what you have and are already productive with. If we don't like what we are getting, we should not subscribe, and not upgrade if we aren't satisfied. And reward the innovators who are doing the things we like with our support. Software providers may not seem to get some of the "feedback" users provide, but I assure you they do get the "wallet vote".

Kabab
04-01-2012, 01:07 AM
This balony about companies using old versions is actually a reflection of how bad the software is..

It means 3 things really..

Historically the software has been very buggy.
The new features are not compelling enough to justify the cost.
Poor confidence in the software vender..

There was a good interview with cinesite about John Carter on fxguide and they moved to Houdini 12 mid production so I guess if your software improves enough and the customer has enough trust in the developer it can be done..

It actually reflects very poorly on Autodesk that customers are sticking to such old versions even when the have access to newer builds.

fez
04-01-2012, 01:38 AM
Max/Maya/Softimage/Houdini seats in larger companies are typically boosted by hyper talented internal scripters. For some smaller companies without dedicated coders, ahem, upgrades are much more meaningful. I think the Autodesk 3D developers are making mature, difficult decisions based on long term success rather than short term minor marketing victories.

Just my opinion.

tonytrout
04-01-2012, 06:29 AM
Max/Maya/Softimage/Houdini seats in larger companies are typically boosted by hyper talented internal scripters. For some smaller companies without dedicated coders, ahem, upgrades are much more meaningful. I think the Autodesk 3D developers are making mature, difficult decisions based on long term success rather than short term minor marketing victories.

Just my opinion.

I like your opinion, Im good with a longer term horizon with strategic decisions. 3D software is relatively new. The company I work for has a 100 year strategy, something not unusual for larger international business in mature industries. Give it another 10 years and the technicalities will be pretty automatic.

mustique
04-01-2012, 11:44 AM
Companys like pixologic, sideeffects and Lux etc. are raising their own children. Wheras ADSK, has multiple adpoted children and has babysitters to look after them for the rest of their life. Max, maya, etc. even if they will live on for a long time, will always have problems associated with that DNA and its something users will just have to accept as it seems.

Add the fast changing technology landscape to that, and the long term success story goes to the toilet before it even sees the light of the day. Unfortunately.

Ammarkk
04-02-2012, 11:27 PM
Wow some of you guys are really laying the smackdown upon Maya. I dont see the problems somehow, I used to a number of years ago when getting a real-time lighting preview was seriously lacking, having shadows and stuff in real-time is a major advance for what I use,

seriously some of you guys are inventing problems that don't even exist!



lol what!? It has one of the best user interfaces of all time! ctrl+space the whole screen away and gesture the rest with a pen and right click, with other stuff open on the 2nd display its a very very elegant user interface, masses of screen space fast access to tools, no icons anywhere.


I agree with you.

ambient-whisper
04-03-2012, 07:19 PM
It's funny because on another site I have been reading peoples reaction to the autodesk 2013 suite, and the amount of trashing is insane. I see people talking about modo being revolutionary in its release, and yet none of those people have put modo through production hell with that tool set. As much as I like modo for example, I know that on larger projects it completely falls apart. try loading a few 4k images and painting on them for example. It's slow, and as soon as modo falls slow in performance it tends to get crash prone.

I also see a lot of softimage bashing and how autodesk is ruining that product, while for the first 2 years or so after the aquisition we saw major core improvements to the application, where handling massive scenes, and being able to work with really impressive amounts of animation data was a lot more useful for the regular 3d artist than a new unproven technology. Often times stability and performance can be worth its weight in gold compared to new tools.

As much as I dislike maya for its modelling tools for example ( I am after all mostly a modeller ), I still recognize and see that it's ability to act as a glue on larger projects and keep chugging along to be a respectable quality. I just wish that the autodesk QA was at the same standard as cinema4d. I really dislike losing work due to insability. ( one of the reasons why I usually buy modo and shelve it until that version has matured a year or so later. ) Employers after all pay you for getting work done, and not for going back in time every few hours due to instability.

Zeddicus
04-03-2012, 08:02 PM
As much as I like modo for example, I know that on larger projects it completely falls apart. try loading a few 4k images and painting on them for example. It's slow, and as soon as modo falls slow in performance it tends to get crash prone.
Does that still hold true today? Now that the paint engine has been entirely rewritten from the ground up I mean.

ambient-whisper
04-03-2012, 08:26 PM
Does that still hold true today? Now that the paint engine has been entirely rewritten from the ground up I mean.

I didn't notice that much of a difference honestly, and I doubt they would rewrite it entirely. I would rather have a bodypaint/mari type system where I have to bake after painting and have a realtime ( 30-60fps ) brushstroke, than have to make mistakes and see stamps, or have to slow down because the app cant keep up with me. It gets worse when you are painting over seams.

The problem with modo is that it is continuously outputting to texture, which really hurts performance. Bodypaint and mari wait to output to texture after you are done painting. So while yes, it is annoying to have to apply your work from the buffer and onto the texture, at least your stroke was real time.. In some ways modo is ahead of its time, but if being ahead of your time gets ahead of usability, then its not a really worthwhile solution for that task.

So while modo is very nice for some things, and painting is nice at lower resolutions.. in the land of HD rez, and closeups.. the modo painting engine falls short big time unfortunately. I really do like it at lower resolutions though, so its sad that I cant use it how I'd like.

ViCoX
04-03-2012, 08:45 PM
To be honest Softimages biggest upgrade was 3rd party stuff, Softimage + Arnold or Vray.
Modo is definetly my modelling package, but like said its not the product I want to take on when multiple persons are working on the same project. Hows Modos SDK btw?

frog
04-04-2012, 11:28 AM
The problem with modo is that it is continuously outputting to texture, which really hurts performance. Bodypaint and mari wait to output to texture after you are done painting. So while yes, it is annoying to have to apply your work from the buffer and onto the texture, at least your stroke was real time.. In some ways modo is ahead of its time, but if being ahead of your time gets ahead of usability, then its not a really worthwhile solution for that task.

Actually the stroke engine in modo has been re-written for 601, and performance on 4K maps is vastly superior to what it was in 501.

Also painting to a buffer is a matter of taste, when I tested the demo of Mari I found that the buffer nearly drove me mad, having to wait every time I rotated my model was a real flow killer for me. I think we can put that one down to personal preference, I really do prefer the modo and Zbrush workflow of instant paint strokes.

Where modo's painting really does fall apart is in its inability to support multi-tile UVs, meaning that really high-res paint projects are not possible. Mari and Mudbox are much better in this regard.

TrexGreg
04-04-2012, 12:05 PM
the demo of Mari I found that the buffer nearly drove me mad, having to wait every time I rotated my model was a real flow killer for me.

Drove me mad as well; instant dislike for Mari, that "feature" alone!
I prefer Mudbox for any kind of 3d painting task; Eons easier than Zbrush, at least for me, Eons faster than anything on the market right now...

wolverine
04-04-2012, 07:34 PM
A lot of this bad mouthing I think is down to bad PR'ing by Autodesk..

The original post sends you to http://area.autodesk.com/products/features/maya
Looks like a valid URL name right??.. but HALF the stuff is missing there.. Then there is the link on the bottom of that page which sends you to http://usa.autodesk.com/maya/ which has even LESS information about Maya 2013... In fact nothing about 2013.. Just download a Trial (2012)?!

Then there is Cory's blog.. Which has a way more complete list of features for Maya 2013.
http://area.autodesk.com/blogs/cory/announcing_maya_2013

Cory's list is not complete I'm sure.. There is still API stuff etc to be added etc etc..

My point really is.. Autodesk, Why not come out properly with a complete list instead of this half asses lists spread all over?. How about a site dedicated to 2013 features? (This is what exited me about the Modo6 presentation.. and I don't even use Modo).. . I love the Maya 2013 videos though.. but I would like to see wwaaay more of them... Point being.. Get EVERYTHING centralized somewhere and show it off as best as you can. From the smallest feature/bugfix to the biggest features you have... Now it just looks like VP2.0 is the biggest thing to show (AGAIN) and the rest is kinda.. .. . meh.. lets through that in really quick.... NO.. You did a whole bunch of things this year.. under the hood or not.. SHOW IT... What does the MR > true plugin really mean for example.. Is its benefit presentable?.. SHOW IT! No modelling features for Maya but we fixed (tried to for the x time) the Split Tool finally so it works like this.. SHOW IT!.. I know.. You can't show every single little thing.. but GOD.. don't make a weak list like this when you actually have more...

People just don't get excited if you release a list like this...

ambient-whisper
04-04-2012, 09:30 PM
Actually the stroke engine in modo has been re-written for 601, and performance on 4K maps is vastly superior to what it was in 501.

Also painting to a buffer is a matter of taste, when I tested the demo of Mari I found that the buffer nearly drove me mad, having to wait every time I rotated my model was a real flow killer for me. I think we can put that one down to personal preference, I really do prefer the modo and Zbrush workflow of instant paint strokes.

Where modo's painting really does fall apart is in its inability to support multi-tile UVs, meaning that really high-res paint projects are not possible. Mari and Mudbox are much better in this regard.
i didnt notice much of a difference. the problem is that modo doesnt give you the option to work any other way. ive asked for the mari/bodypaint "oldschool" way of working years ago and i got the impression that lux would rather the pains to try harder at getting their current toolset faster. two problems with that, one they arent the ones using the tool on productions, and problem is that years later, if i have a huge landscape, or a macro shot plus a moving camera. i cant do it... even with the updated stroke engine. good support for multi patching would help for sure...but remind me how modo gets with a lot of textures.

zbrush works great but for higher detail maps you have to rely on hd geo..and that too can crash. hd geo can also be rather slow, and at really highdetail levels you can no longer paint large things on your object, as your active circle shrinks with more polys. so its not a perfect system either.

dont get me wrong...i prefer modos workflow to mari, bodypaint...but when it comes time to getting her done, i cant use slow/ unstable tools. especially when the project is demanding.

DuttyFoot
04-05-2012, 05:23 AM
I can only imagine what the reaction will be if and when this does occur. I guess this is based on the tech AD Labs was working on where you will use there 3D apps over the cloud.

TechCrunch just posted this video (http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/04/keen-on-carl-bass-why-autodesk-remains-incredibly-relevant-tctv/), where Andrew Keen interviews Autodesk CEO Carl Bass.The interview is about 12 minutes long. About 2 minutes in, Bass makes possibly the most interesting comment in the interview:

“I’d say two to three years from now, every one of our products will be used online. The only way to use them will be online.”

If that happens, it will be a truly transformative and disruptive event.

But how can it possibly happen?

Autodesk has, over the years, built or bought a large stable of high-end graphics applications, including 3DS Max, Maya, AutoCAD, Inventor, Revit, and many others. The company continues to invest massive resources in all the tedious details of updating, fixing, and connecting these products. Customer wish lists still include items from years ago. Performance and bugs are still issues. Within this context, how can Autodesk transform the architecture of these major applications, used by on the order of 12 million people, so that they will run efficiently online?

Possibly the answer will reveal itself. Two or three years from now. If they manage to pull it off, it’ll be impressive.

http://www.3dcadtips.com/will-autodesk-products-all-be-used-online/

rintintin
04-05-2012, 09:43 AM
Hi ambient-whisper, does mudbox get used much for painting ? It has its new "Gigatexel engine"
(I hate buzz words) and appears to be trying to compete with Mari.

oglu
04-05-2012, 10:21 AM
i use mud a lot for painting... but its not competing with mari... its different in manny ways... mud is a 3d painter mari more the projection painter... mari has a non linear channel stack and mud has a layer system... mari is designed for specialiced texture artists mud more for the allround user... for my day to day work i prefer mud... if i would do textures all day long i would use mari...

Phrenzy84
04-05-2012, 10:27 AM
“I’d say two to three years from now, every one of our products will be used online. The only way to use them will be online.”

Comments like are either gonna make people laugh, or get people to look for future alternatives. The only way, will be to use it online? I imagine a lot of CTO's are thinking... now why do you have to go and do that..... guess i better look at retooling this joint. :)

frog
04-05-2012, 11:34 AM
dont get me wrong...i prefer modos workflow to mari, bodypaint...but when it comes time to getting her done, i cant use slow/ unstable tools. especially when the project is demanding.

I don't want to go too far OT, but yes for a few reasons modo is not ready to be used as a high-end painting solution - no argument there. That's not to say that the tools haven't been improved in the latest release though, because they have. Handling of large datasets is still a weakness in modo though.

Kui
04-05-2012, 01:37 PM
What I'd really like to see happen in maya is some serious development added back the PaintFX engine. I don't know when Autodesk bought maya, they decided paintFX was just peripheral and stopped developing it. But really paint effects is awesome, nothing else quite like it.

When I saw "Tangled" just yesterday on Bluray, I remembered something I've read some months ago:

http://www.3dworldmag.com/2011/08/09/autodesk-gets-exclusive-licence-for-disneys-xgen-technology/

I agree, that luxology for example shines a little brighter when they add new features that other packages cover already for a long time (Still I think luxology does everything very well and thoughtful and I even consider a full swich to modo one day).

Of course you always have to get reminded that Maya already has tons of great features.
But still: I expected a little more. One killer feature per release can be hoped for, I guess.
I really counted on Xgen or ICE for Maya.
It's a solid release, but I can still understand when people are underwhelmed.
So I guess I'll stick to subscription for now, maybe Maya 2014 or 2015 will see some (really) cool new technologies implemented.

saycon2000
04-08-2012, 12:48 AM
Maya 2013 Docs
http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/maya2013/en_us/index.html
http://docs.autodesk.com/MAYAUL/2013/ENU/Maya-API-Documentation/index.html

Softimage 2013 Docs
http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2013/en_us/userguide/index.html
http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/softimage2013/en_us/sdkguide/

Mudbox 2013 Docs
http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/mudbox2013/en_us/index.html
http://docs.autodesk.com/MUD/2013/ENU/Mudbox-SDK-Documentation/index.html

some new feature on MR 3.10:

-mental ray rendering support for GPU cached Alembic files

-Irradiance Particles and Final Gathering

-New mental ray BSDF shaders + misss_fast_shader2 + misss_mia_skin2_phen

-more MetaSL shaders..........i dont know if it's new :-)

Bitter
04-08-2012, 12:57 AM
The BSDF shaders aren't new. They are just newly exposed.

FG + IP has been reworked for better performance together (you need to defeat the AD UI that keeps you from using them together.)

saycon2000
04-08-2012, 02:03 AM
Thanks !

by the way your blog rocks ! when i read that ILM rendered The Driller on MR ....my first thought was : MR....is back ! ( terminator face ) :)

can't wait for your next update on MR 3.10 Features in production !

Bitter
04-08-2012, 02:45 AM
The hair used in Tangled is actually a very nice shader. And I'm hopeful Autodesk will help ARC make their own version for inclusion later (can't be an exact copy, it's patented)

Discussions are already happening on how to render with Unified Sampling and hair with a smarter model and brute force lighting (even final gather) that renders much faster than before and will allow you to fully raytrace a scene with hair adaptively and with motion blur.

Early tests have been very nice and fast and noise-free. Hopefully Puppet will update his shaders with this type of method.

saycon2000
04-09-2012, 05:16 PM
3dsmax 2013 docs
http://docs.autodesk.com/3DSMAX/15/ENU/3ds-Max-Help/index.html
http://docs.autodesk.com/3DSMAX/15/ENU/MAXScript-Help/
http://docs.autodesk.com/3DSMAX/15/ENU/3ds-Max-SDK-Programmer-Guide/

Mental ray 2013
http://docs.autodesk.com/MENTALRAY/2013/ENU/mental-ray-help/

saycon2000
04-10-2012, 04:48 PM
Motionbuilder 2013 Docs
http://download.autodesk.com/global/docs/motionbuilder2013/en-us/
http://docs.autodesk.com/MB/MB2013/ENU/MotionBuilder-SDK-Documentation/index.html

CGTalk Moderation
04-10-2012, 04:48 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.