PDA

View Full Version : Modo 201


DotPainter
05-25-2006, 02:16 AM
www.luxology.com (http://www.luxology.com)

Rogosh
05-25-2006, 02:41 AM
Yep... downloading now!

DarkTure
05-25-2006, 02:44 AM
Cool. I'll have to wait for the demo :)

Nicodemus
05-25-2006, 02:48 AM
Going to go drowl now.

Leslie

Beamtracer
05-25-2006, 03:12 AM
The world's best modeling program just gained a renderer.

A lot of people have waited a long time for this. The Luxology render has finally been released. What was it.... about 5 years in the making?

It's officially available as a BitTorrent download too, which is pretty cool.

I think Lux is really rising up to challenge the incumbent Maya/Max/XSI.

Poly_Pusher
05-25-2006, 03:30 AM
Well, I gotta say modo 103 is fabulous...and from what Ive seen on the videos, 201 looks outrageous. Im downloading it now. I hope the painting features are as good as has been hyped.

knellotron
05-25-2006, 03:43 AM
Cool. I'll have to wait for the demo :)

and I'll have to wait for the Linux version. (how's the beta testing going?)

Sonk
05-25-2006, 06:59 AM
downloading it right now.

nvvm
05-25-2006, 09:09 AM
not as buggy as hexagon 2 but buggy none the less

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 09:26 AM
There are some bugs here and there, but you can finish a day without a single crash most of the time. And most of the bugs i encounter right now are related to how things should work rather than stability issues. But the number is not that high in my opinion, compraring to some other softwares number well may be low. Thou it may depend on the graphic card and driver revision. I am on nvidia 7600gt with 91.28 nvidia beta deriver

TeeWorks
05-25-2006, 11:57 AM
fire up your torrents peeps! :thumbsup: ...1,5 gig of video-tutorials, awsome!! :) but we need some more bandwidth! ;)

yog
05-25-2006, 01:30 PM
fire up your torrents peeps! :thumbsup: ...1,5 gig of video-tutorials, awsome!! :) but we need some more bandwidth! ;)Doing my part ;)

DDS
05-25-2006, 04:59 PM
wow, release date has been delayed 6 months. I hope they are worth and the program is stable...

bbennett
05-25-2006, 05:00 PM
that is a new website and there are some amazing images in the gallery for sure

modo is growing up!

Puffin
05-25-2006, 05:29 PM
not as buggy as hexagon 2 but buggy none the less

I have to disagree as I havent run into any bugs other then ones they stated in the readme. It shouldn't even be compared to Hex 2 which is still a mess (at least on the mac side).

poly-phobic
05-25-2006, 05:34 PM
can it paint in layers or not?

their website didnt specify?

tikal26
05-25-2006, 05:40 PM
I must say that so far it has beign stable. The only time it crashed I triple and freezed a high poly model. The rednere is nice and I was got a nice response from the render tri layout even though I was using maxwell int eh back ( I though that I was not going to get anything) it is fast compared to anyother native render I still haven't compared it to stand alone ones .

Gwot
05-25-2006, 05:40 PM
Modo is more stable for me now than it ever has been. 103 always ran well on my systems too though.

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 05:46 PM
you can paint in layers , you specify different texture images as different layers if you would like, you can see it in realtime with other procedurals+bumps,dispmaps etc within shader system in the render preview if you are not working with very complex scenes, you should get somewhat realtime. Otherwise you can see your texture paint in opengl.

you can paint any channel pretty much including displacement, subsurface etc.

can it paint in layers or not?

their website didnt specify?

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 06:07 PM
I personally think that modo`s render is the best out of the box render engine out there. At least without alot of setup you can get really nice results with very decent render times (or sometimes faster), including gi and good aa. Render engine has simple setups with good amount of shading styles, procedurals, ps style blending modes for texture layers, very nice mask based material settings etc. I personally would like to know the real comparison between maxwell and modo.



I must say that so far it has beign stable. The only time it crashed I triple and freezed a high poly model. The rednere is nice and I was got a nice response from the render tri layout even though I was using maxwell int eh back ( I though that I was not going to get anything) it is fast compared to anyother native render I still haven't compared it to stand alone ones .

nvvm
05-25-2006, 06:10 PM
I have to disagree as I havent run into any bugs other then ones they stated in the readme. It shouldn't even be compared to Hex 2 which is still a mess (at least on the mac side).

So you disagree that modo 201 is not as buggy as hex2 ? Tell me why do you think modo 201 is as buggy as hex 2 ? As far as product comparisions your right you can't compare Hex2 and modo 201. But when comparing product launches you can definately make the comparision.

BUZZFX
05-25-2006, 06:11 PM
Does Modo have displacement painting like zbrush and hexagon? I couldn't see any examples on their website. Did they not have a video of displacement painting a few month back?

Lone Deranger
05-25-2006, 06:18 PM
He disagrees with you calling modo 201 'buggy nonetheless' smartass....

So you disagree that modo 201 is not as buggy as hex2 ? Tell me why do you think modo 201 is as buggy as hex 2 ? As far as product comparisions your right you can't compare Hex2 and modo 201. But when comparing product launches you can definately make the comparision.

bbennett
05-25-2006, 06:48 PM
You wrote: Does Modo have displacement painting like zbrush and hexagon? I couldn't see any examples on their website. Did they not have a video of displacement painting a few month back?

let me see if I can get this right, I just tested it on a sphere in modo 201. modo allows you to paint a displacement channel in 3D that is rendered into millions of little polys at render time. When you are painting you are not directly sculpting geometry as you would be in ZBrush. modo is able to accept normal maps from Zbrush and display them interactively. So the 2 can be used together. modo has its own sculpting tools that work directly on geometry but they are not as dramatic as Zbrush in terms of creating high surface detail. When you paint in modo, you can see bump (not displacements) in real-time or near real-time in an OpenGL viewport.

i do not know about a displacement painting video - but many videos are on the site and many come with modo.

leuey
05-25-2006, 06:54 PM
Modo won't sculpt like Zbrush, but it works very well with Zbrush. I would think that ZBrush style sculpting is pretty high on their list but it's not in 201. You can paint on the displacement channel - just like any other channel. But it's not the same thing.


-Greg

jeremybirn
05-25-2006, 07:09 PM
The latest Lighting Challenge thread has turned into almost a commercial for the Modo 201 beta, take a look at how many of the posts are using it starting around page 5 or 6:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=356958

-Jeremy

leuey
05-25-2006, 09:09 PM
Hey Jeremy - I almost jumped into that too (still might). I was going to post there about it - somebody on the Modo beta list saw your challenge and everybody got pretty excited about it knowing what Modo could do. Since it was so close to release the testers were allowed too jump it. I hope it wasn't to obnoxious. : )

Anyway, good idea on the challenges - it's actually a good way for people to learn new software. (I'd like to see more lighting and less HDRI'ing if you know what I mean, though)

ok, back on topic.

-Greg




The latest Lighting Challenge thread has turned into almost a commercial for the Modo 201 beta, take a look at how many of the posts are using it starting around page 5 or 6:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=356958

-Jeremy

SaucyJack
05-25-2006, 09:11 PM
Has snapping improved in any way in 201? Sounds mad but it was the one thing that put me off the package. Really tempted by 201. The intergrated painting sounds right up my street.

Congrats to Lux on the launch anyway

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 09:28 PM
Actually, it would be better if you tell us what you are looking for.



Has snapping improved in any way in 201? Sounds mad but it was the one thing that put me off the package. Really tempted by 201. The intergrated painting sounds right up my street.

Congrats to Lux on the launch anyway

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 09:32 PM
I own both and i love both (use them daily ) , so i will make basic comparison for you.

Hexagon2 is very very good modelling tool with decent tool set and you can not beat their introduction price.

Modo2 is a very very good modelling tool with advanced tool set, like rendering, morphs, scripting-macros, .ma-.fbx support, painting (better than ehxagon texture paint) etc.

Hexagon had some bad bugs and currently it is holding ok.

Modo had some bad bugs and currently it is more stable than hexagon in my opinion.

One thing that hexagon beats Modo is basic sculpting tools it has.



So you disagree that modo 201 is not as buggy as hex2 ? Tell me why do you think modo 201 is as buggy as hex 2 ? As far as product comparisions your right you can't compare Hex2 and modo 201. But when comparing product launches you can definately make the comparision.

yolao
05-25-2006, 09:45 PM
The latest Lighting Challenge thread has turned into almost a commercial for the Modo 201 beta, take a look at how many of the posts are using it starting around page 5 or 6:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=356958

-Jeremy

hey Jeremy, can you tell me what do you think so far of Modo 201 rendering system?

ThirdEye
05-25-2006, 09:56 PM
I personally would like to know the real comparison between maxwell and modo.

Unless the rendering engine of modo shares the same unbiased technology of Maxwell there's no point in this comparison, apples to oranges.

ZippZopp
05-25-2006, 10:02 PM
i've not used modo yet, but it looks very interesting. looks like it has lots of nice features. how have you guys found the learning curve to be with it? i've seen so many great features in every new package. i'm a maya user and now that i've seen modeling in Max with polyboost plugin and now Modo, i realize how maya's modeling tools are really lacking. it is probably time for me to get into a new modeling package....hmmm...Modo or Max?

csutcliffe
05-25-2006, 10:11 PM
Has anybody had trouble ordering the downloadable upgrade? I've tried to order it 3 times and I still keep getting an error which suggests that the CVC or post code may be wrong (neither of which were wrong).

ThirdEye
05-25-2006, 10:17 PM
it is probably time for me to get into a new modeling package....hmmm...Modo or Max?


Considering the price i'd either get Silo or Hexagon. Modo seems a really cool app, but if you just need modeling...

RingoM
05-25-2006, 10:21 PM
Hexagon 2.1 is rumour to be coming out tomorrow. We should see.

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 10:22 PM
sure that is true, but there can be practical comparison based on the results and usage. Otherwise it is not possible one to choose one over another if that is the argument we use.





Unless the rendering engine of modo shares the same unbiased technology of Maxwell there's no point in this comparison, apples to oranges.

ThirdEye
05-25-2006, 10:27 PM
Otherwise it is not possible one to choose one over another if that is the argument we use.


Simple, you base your choice on your needs. You need physical accuracy? You get Maxwell. You just want to see a good result from a flexible renderer? You get Modo. Simple as that. Unless you need animations, which Modo can't render afaik, but Maxwell is very slow so it's more or less the same thing.

barbapapa
05-25-2006, 10:34 PM
QUOTE=ZippZopp] i realize how maya's modeling tools are really lacking. it is probably time for me to get into a new modeling package....hmmm...Modo or Max?[/QUOTE]

try XSI be happy. :) its a great modeler, plus you get a neat animation system and another seat of mental ray. just for 500 bucks. Never max, its viewport problems are way to much for heavy modeling. and modo is ok has some grat tools that no other software has (and now a painting system which is great), but a bit expensive just for modeling. I havent seen something done in modo that i couldn achieve on xsi... i really recomend it

kursad_pileksuz
05-25-2006, 10:57 PM
i have a better deal for you, there is wings3d, it has most of the modelling tools xsi or any other software has and it is free :) I actually use that one here and there as well. I recommend wings3d to anyone who wants to get into basic or advanced modelling.




QUOTE=ZippZopp] i realize how maya's modeling tools are really lacking. it is probably time for me to get into a new modeling package....hmmm...Modo or Max?

try XSI be happy. :) its a great modeler, plus you get a neat animation system and another seat of mental ray. just for 500 bucks. Never max, its viewport problems are way to much for heavy modeling. and modo is ok has some grat tools that no other software has (and now a painting system which is great), but a bit expensive just for modeling. I havent seen something done in modo that i couldn achieve on xsi... i really recomend it[/QUOTE]

Paul-Angelo
05-26-2006, 03:14 AM
QUOTE=ZippZopp] i realize how maya's modeling tools are really lacking. it is probably time for me to get into a new modeling package....hmmm...Modo or Max?

try XSI be happy. :) its a great modeler, plus you get a neat animation system and another seat of mental ray. just for 500 bucks. Never max, its viewport problems are way to much for heavy modeling. and modo is ok has some grat tools that no other software has (and now a painting system which is great), but a bit expensive just for modeling. I havent seen something done in modo that i couldn achieve on xsi... i really recomend it


My belief is I can achieve good results in most major aps but what makes the difference is workflow/speed. I can get results faster using the tools in Modo that enchance my workflow. Especially when talking Sub-D modeling.

ZippZopp
05-26-2006, 03:21 AM
My belief is I can achieve good results in most major aps but what makes the difference is workflow/speed. I can get results faster using the tools in Modo that enchance my workflow. Especially when talking Sub-D modeling.

for sure, I can get great results with maya. but there are workflow issues, selection issues, etc that slow me down. i colleague of mine was showing me 3d studio max with the polyboost plugin and it looked amazing. having the set flow option alone in there is worth it to me. it is basically where you'll split edges and it keepts the curvature of the surface which is a godsend. you don't know how often i split in maya and then have to manually move the points to follow the curvature of the surface. i'm going to look into all of these packages and make a decision

nvvm
05-26-2006, 05:23 AM
He disagrees with you calling modo 201 'buggy nonetheless' smartass....
No need for all that, software has it's problems period. It's not like they won't be able to fix it in future updates. But for verification it is indeed BUGGY drop by the product support in the forums. No need to take my lone experience for it. :rolleyes:

Hexagon had some bad bugs and currently it is holding ok.

Modo had some bad bugs and currently it is more stable than hexagon in my opinion.
We are pretty much saying the same thing here :wise:

One thing that hexagon beats Modo is basic sculpting tools it has. agreed

thematt
05-26-2006, 10:36 AM
he ZippZopp you could try that if you haven't:

Young_PolyAvergTools 0.2.1

you can find it on highend, it does what you want and it's all in mel so it's customisable.

hope that help

cheers

Mike RB
05-26-2006, 12:10 PM
The latest Lighting Challenge thread has turned into almost a commercial for the Modo 201 beta, take a look at how many of the posts are using it starting around page 5 or 6:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=356958

-Jeremy

Thanks for the nice test scene. It's been fun trying different things for that challenge. These 2 are my favorites:

http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/bottop01.jpg
http://www.elementvfx.com/WebDemo/botgreen02.jpg

Shade01
05-26-2006, 06:08 PM
I still can't get past that $895 price tag for something that doesn't animate.

P_T
05-26-2006, 06:25 PM
Slightly OT. You guys know where I can find a good comparison review on hex/modo/silo that discusses their workflows? I know I could probably download and demo all of them myself but if I can just eliminate one of them, that'll save me time downloading/installing/trying one software.

leuey
05-26-2006, 06:30 PM
RM for Maya is more than that and it's just a renderer, Maxwell is more than that and it's just a renderer, Brazil is more than that and it's just a renderer, V-Ray is more than that and it's just a renderer...ad infinium...

I guess if the Modo renderer (and modeller, and painter) were 1 big plugin people would be more accepting of the price (or if Avid didn't give away XSI for $500 - I mean, nobody is going to beat that deal).

It can function as a plug-in, model and UV, paint, bake textures, normal, AO, etc. - export to FBX and animate away.

-Greg


I still can't get past that $895 price tag for something that doesn't animate.

lovisx
05-26-2006, 06:49 PM
Slightly OT. You guys know where I can find a good comparison review on hex/modo/silo that discusses their workflows? I know I could probably download and demo all of them myself but if I can just eliminate one of them, that'll save me time downloading/installing/trying one software.

that is the great mystery of our time...


not fare to compare silo till silo 2 comes out.

ZippZopp
05-26-2006, 07:03 PM
he ZippZopp you could try that if you haven't:

Young_PolyAvergTools 0.2.1

you can find it on highend, it does what you want and it's all in mel so it's customisable.

hope that help

cheers

ahhh sweeeeet! thanks, i'm going to try this out! the only issue i see with it is that it makes the split in the middle of the faces you're splitting. so for example, if you wanted that split 1/4 of the way between 2 faces it wouldn't be able to do that and keep the curvature

Gwot
05-26-2006, 07:39 PM
Actually, Modo makes a perfect plugin to XSI. I can now model, uv, morph and texture my characters and pipe them directly to XSI via XSI's built in Point Oven. The price isn't a big deal at all considering how much more comfortably I can do most of my work in the program.

Working with normal maps as a game artist, it's awesome to be able to now see them right inside a realtime viewport and continue to model or texture or build morphs at the same time in the same viewport. I can't do that in XSI yet.

Even just as a 3d paint tool, Modo is priced in the same ballpark as other dedicated 3d painters. Add to that a complete suite of modeling tools including UV and Morph as well as a badass fully integrated preview render and it really makes you wonder where people get their sense of value from when they complain. Modo IS priced competitively in todays market. Just because you can't afford it doesn't mean Lux should accomodate you.

Spin99
05-26-2006, 08:50 PM
I still can't get past that $895 price tag for something that doesn't animate.RM for Maya is more than that and it's just a renderer, Maxwell is more than that and it's just a renderer, Brazil is more than that and it's just a renderer, V-Ray is more than that and it's just a renderer...ad infinium...Air by Sitex is cheaper :D

True people that do CG software can charge as much as they want,
specially if you look at who their main clients are..
Yet I really think Modo is just pricey, not extravagant?

It seems like a really nice all round tool,
and the renderer keeps throwing out so much eye candy I can't stop drooling ;)

kursad_pileksuz
05-26-2006, 09:16 PM
I think that Luxology could actually create a downgrade version purely for subd modelling without nifty features like painting-rendering-morphing etc for way lower price. So that everyone would be happy :)

wigal
05-26-2006, 09:21 PM
I agree with most of the above said! Prize should be ok.... but still... DAMN I have that sweet renderer and cant render sequences! I hope theres gonna be some import/export solutions soon, to get by this limitations...

kursad_pileksuz
05-26-2006, 09:23 PM
you can render turntable :)
also there is a script for rendering camera animation kind of thing. It should be public soon i guess.


I agree with most of the above said! Prize should be ok.... but still... DAMN I have that sweet renderer and cant render sequences! I hope theres gonna be some import/export solutions soon, to get by this limitations...

Ariel
05-26-2006, 09:45 PM
Working with normal maps as a game artist, it's awesome to be able to now see them right inside a realtime viewport and continue to model or texture or build morphs at the same time in the same viewport. I can't do that in XSI yet.


Really? You can use XSI's ultimapper preview to see realtime display of normalmaps in a viewport.

I personally think that Modo, with all the good tools and features it has is way way overpriced. As good as the renderer might be, I just don't think it fits production studios' pipelines the way that mental ray, turtle and renderman do. I think that at $500 it would be a no-brainer for most people and could easily become one of the most popular modeling packages out there.. but paying $900 when everything most people need are the modeling tools, just doesn't make any sense. Like people have said here, XSI is much more complete at $500 than Modo is at $900.

schuubars
05-27-2006, 06:14 AM
Really? You can use XSI's ultimapper preview to see realtime display of normalmaps in a viewport.


Sure but that is not exactly was Gwot said.

DanSilverman
05-27-2006, 06:14 AM
I guess it depends. Frankly, I can model faster and better in Modo than any other modeling software (Silo comes in second ... for me). Add on top of that all the additional features (3D painting, nice UV mapping tools, a great UI and workflow, rendering, baking textures, layers for paint, normal, bump and displacement map creation ...) and I think the price is justified. In most cases, it only takes one 3D job to pay off this tool and then all the rest are making money for you with this tool. If the tool can help you work faster (as Modo does for me) then the tool may actually earn you a bit more money as well, thus paying for itself more quickly and possibly earning you more as well.

Ariel
05-27-2006, 08:06 AM
Sure but that is not exactly was Gwot said.

lol! you're absolutely right. I completely missed the last part of his statement :)

Spin99
05-27-2006, 02:15 PM
Like people have said here, XSI is much more complete at $500 than Modo is at $900.Yup there's some real competition.
Mental Ray -> Modo renderer are they comparable and is one better than the other?

ThirdEye
05-27-2006, 02:42 PM
Yup there's some real competition.
Mental Ray -> Modo renderer are they comparable and is one better than the other?

Features wise they might be comparable, the biggest difference is Mental Ray is production proven, while Modo's is... Well, new.

Cheers
05-27-2006, 04:47 PM
I still can't get past that $895 price tag for something that doesn't animate.

Your missing the point IMHO...you are buying into an investment. If you have taken the time to see Luxology's SIGGRAPH showcase video and what animation Nexus is capable of, then I think you may get a little more excited ;)

As for price, isn't it all to do with your point of view? Maxwell ($1000) for just a rendering engine...not much good without a modeller. Bodypaint...how much is that now? Just for a 3D Painting app. I could go on and on.

Ok Maxwell had a pre release price...but so did Modo; $695 for 103 with a free upgrade to 201 ;) $695 for that kind of deal, doesn't seem too bad to me...infact it was a steal for what you get! Modeller, renderer, 3D Painting, advanced UV editing AND free upgrade.

Maybe you didn't look far enough past the price and was blinded by misconceptions ;)

Cheers

Cheers
05-27-2006, 04:49 PM
Features wise they might be comparable, the biggest difference is Mental Ray is production proven, while Modo's is... Well, new.


"...well, new...", but proven in production.

Cheers

ThirdEye
05-27-2006, 05:17 PM
"...well, new...", but proven in production.

Cheers

Such as? By production proven i mean several years of production experience in feature films, commercials and whatnot.

nvvm
05-27-2006, 05:28 PM
It's interesting that the main concerns of some here is price, I myself feel that the price isn't expensive, for the quality of the modeling tools, renderer, scripting/macros abilities, uv and paint tools. I'm curious to what the updates will bring and users have been requesting hair and cloth among other things. So what if that price of 895 allows you a free cloth or hair update or both, they does the value increase ? It seems to me that's why the price is what it is, to allow for a stabilized price as they add features. Versus increasing everytime they release a new feature, Lux has a price point that will allow them to introduce these new features for free to their userbase much like they did with the uv tools in Modo 103. That greatly increases the value

Youu just have to remember they are building a complete app here the pricing allows for that.

leuey
05-27-2006, 07:51 PM
I can see a hobbysist thinking it's too expensive. I don't spend that much on my hobbies. But for a professional - it's hardly anything, even a lone freelancer wth any kind of regular businesss will be profitable after 1 job. For small and large companies it's nothing - paying a modeller $50K a year (who's generating a couple hundred K in revenue) you're not going to balk buying a $900 program that makes them bettter at what they do.


And if Modo were $299 then there would be no Modo - you can't support the number of programmers they have and give the software away. If you drop the price that low you're catering to the hobbyists and hoping there's enough of them to sell 3x the number of licenses (who knows, maybe there is - but I doubt it).

And would people please stop comparing it to XSI for $500? Nothing, and I mean nothing is comparable to that program at that price. That's the whole reason Avid is giving it away. They're trying to attract new users in a Max and Maya dominated market. They can afford to because they make 10x more money from their edit systems and can try this market share grab. If they were a small company and this was their only product they would go under trying to pay all the people necessary for the R&D for that complicated program - the entire 3D market is quite small considering it's the most sophisticated consumer software out there.


-Greg

vfxcreator
05-27-2006, 09:12 PM
For small and large companies it's nothing - paying a modeller $50K a year (who's generating a couple hundred K in revenue) you're not going to balk buying a $900 program that makes them bettter at what they do.

fyi, a 50k salary modeler will not generate a couple hundred k in revenue for a company... :) but yeah, for a 'normal, profitable business', a $900 price tag is not really going to make them think twice at getting a few/many seats of modo. its just part of operating costs.

i do agree the price tag in general is somewhat high. 6-700 would be a better price when you look at the competition pricing - (zbrush, silo, xsi, etc...)

either way, i'll check out the 201 demo when it comes. i'd be more interested in the 3d painting at this point... i'm completely happy with my maya modeling workflow.

Sonk
05-27-2006, 10:14 PM
IMO, i dont think the price is too high. Your getting alot for your money(paint,UV unwrap, modeling, rendering). I only found one rendering "bug" but its not a show stopper and it doesnt affect stability. Also the Blur , Smudge tools seems to be slower than the brush tool.

All in all, im quite happy with Modo 201, its stable and im not tweaking a bunch of stuff to get lovely images(which is why i hate Mental Ray, learning curve is too high).

Para
05-27-2006, 10:44 PM
Your missing the point IMHO...you are buying into an investment. If you have taken the time to see Luxology's SIGGRAPH showcase video and what animation Nexus is capable of, then I think you may get a little more excited ;)

To be honest the main point of the Nexus part of the presentation was to say "In Nexus we can animate every single input" and while it's cool and all it's still far away from even a bearable animation package - namely, it doesn't exist.

JDex
05-27-2006, 11:14 PM
Yup there's some real competition.
Mental Ray -> Modo renderer are they comparable and is one better than the other?Features wise they might be comparable, the biggest difference is Mental Ray is production proven, while Modo's is... Well, new.

Can Modo's renderer write editable rendering files that can be edited/managed in a large pipeline like Renderman and MR? I don't believe so, so that would be a huge difference that would make it less desirable in many studios, but it sure does have some good stuff. :D

bigbackcomics
05-28-2006, 02:47 AM
What I find odd about Modo' pricing has less to do with the price $895 (which I do find to be too much personally when compared to similar apps Silo $109, Hexagon $269, Zbrush $495, and also compared to what you get for other full apps i.e. Lightwave 9 $795, XSI Foundation $500). In the end, the artist has choice. Choice not to buy Modo at $895 or choice to buy it. I find it too much so at this point in time I choose not to. But I digress somewhat...

What I really find odd about Modo's pricing is when you break it down alot of users of Modo 1 paid $895 for it. Now a year or so later those same users are expected to pay another $295 which when you do the math equates to $1200. However new users to Modo 201 pay $895 or $695 if they took advantage of the presale... so exisiting Modo users have to pay $1200 bucks for the same features that someone new to Modo pays $895 for? Is it just me or does this seem odd to anyone? If this holds true new Modo 301 users will pay $895 for the same app that long time Modo users will have ended up paying nearly $1500 for. Now I may very well be missing something here and if I am someone please e-bash me over the head. I understand software needs to be updated and users should have to pay for updates, but this pricing strategy seems wierd. Give a price break to new users of Modo and make exisiting customers pay more for the same product?

It would make more sense to me if they projected the final retail price of Modo to be $895 that they simply divde that by 3 (modelling, rendering, animation) and charge incrementally for each module. Modo 1 would then have been $298. Modo 201 would now be $596 and Modo 301 would be $895? And then charge the difference in updgrades. Personally I would have gone for Modo 1 at $300 and upgraded to 201 for an xtra $300.

Sorry for all the math. :) hahahah it hurts my head re-reading it. Its just something that has been bugging me and I thought perhaps someone else could explain to me what I am missing here.

Cheers,

Mike RB
05-28-2006, 02:54 AM
2 problems with your math.

1. The people that bought before modo2 got to use modo1 that whole time. As opposed to the poeple buying now, who haven't had up to a year and a half to use it.

2. This is just standard practice when offering upgrades, LW 10 will probably retail for the same amount as LW 9, however, if you own LW 9 you will be able to get the upgrade for around 300 dollars. Which will mean the poor LW9 upgraders will have to pay LW9 retail + the upgrade, and those of us who have had LW since 5.6 will have to have paid retail cost plus 5 upgrades for LW10....

mistrrhappy
05-28-2006, 04:27 AM
I still can't get past that $895 price tag for something that doesn't animate.

I have noticed that many people in various forums have, imho, unrealistic views on how the incredibly complex software they use on a daily basis should be priced. These are tools. Tools designed for professional use in production studios. Ask any tradesman about the tools he/she uses, and and they'll tell you what they currently use to get the job done- and the tools they aspire to when they can afford to aquire them. They do not complain to Bosch and Makita about the cost of those tools, because they expect to pay more for professional tools than they would for tools for the layman sold at Wal-Mart. The recent price cuts in median and higher-end 3d software represent ill-asvised attempts to increase grass-roots marketshare for certain application vendors, not an overall market correction. I note that Photoshop CS2 retails for more than 300.00 (USD), and it is 2D only. I rarely hear anyone complain about its pricing as a professional tool. Given modo's overall complexity, as well as the new toolsets and workflow it offers, and the common knowledge that modo is under development as a suite of software tools complete with animation, I'd say 895.00 (USD) is a bargain. I think many modo users will agree.

bigbackcomics
05-28-2006, 04:41 AM
2 problems with your math.

1. The people that bought before modo2 got to use modo1 that whole time. As opposed to the poeple buying now, who haven't had up to a year and a half to use it.

2. This is just standard practice when offering upgrades, LW 10 will probably retail for the same amount as LW 9, however, if you own LW 9 you will be able to get the upgrade for around 300 dollars. Which will mean the poor LW9 upgraders will have to pay LW9 retail + the upgrade, and those of us who have had LW since 5.6 will have to have paid retail cost plus 5 upgrades for LW10....

Well anywone who knows me could argue there was bound to be something wrong with my math before I even wrote my post. :) Math was never one of my best subjects. :) Your responses makes total sense.

Thank you.

I guess when I look at it, the part that seems odd to me is that Modo is being released in stages. LW 9 to 10 is really about new updates to the system. Its has always been a finished product if that makes sense? Modo on the other hand won't be "finished" till after 301 or when the animation part is done. So in the end Modo 301 users will be getting a finished product for $895 (or whatever their price will be at the time) for the same price that Modo 1 users will be getting a modeller only. But I am getting myself caught up with semantics I guess. I suppose that updates to software are simply that. Updates. People are investing in Modo with a vision of where its going in the future.

Thanks again for helping me see the light.


Cheers,

leuey
05-28-2006, 04:53 AM
Well I'm not sure where you work or how your company operates but I own and run a production company and a single animator definately can bring in between 1 and 200K a year (as can 1 editor) - at between 1-1.5K/day of service (I admit 200K is on the high end). Before I owned my own company I made the people I was working for several hundred thousand a year (they booked me at $2,500/day and I was busy ALL the time) and I made a whopping fraction of that (forming my own company). Anyway - it definately depends on the market and I suppose there's a wide range. But if you factor in the cost of a workstation, software, rent, workers comp, insurence, security, utilities, furniture, etc. - then a $50K a year modeller had better be worth at least $100K to the company or they're going to be getting a salary reduction.

You are correct that a small company wouldn't think twice about buying a program to get a project done - for example, I would never normally buy Poser. A project came in that required some Poserish type work - so I bought it (I think it was about $500 at the time) - the project was $6K, kinda paid for itself there (I don't think it's ever been used since though).

So yes, kind of pricey for the guy in the basement - but not for a business. And as for people paying more for having bought the original modo for $895 - I suppose you weren't around for the $40,000 Maya either, or the $2,500 LW (+years of upgrades). All 3D apps have had price drops - except maybe Max.


best,

Greg

fyi, a 50k salary modeler will not generate a couple hundred k in revenue for a company... :) but yeah, for a 'normal, profitable business', a $900 price tag is not really going to make them think twice at getting a few/many seats of modo. its just part of operating costs.
.

R10k
05-28-2006, 06:46 AM
I remember reading somewhere that Modo was priced the way it was so that Luxology could make back enough money to survive in the 3D development business. While that may be true, I think they've missed the right pricing for Modo, in the same way the best pricing of DVDs gets missed when they first arrive on the store shelves. Everyone knows after a couple of months they hit the lower pricing module, and then they actually sell much better, and earn back a great deal more (this is true in Australia, at least) than when they were priced at that initial "How much can we get people to pay for this?" price.

So, while charging a fair amount for Modo may seem like the right thing to do, my feeling is Luxology would actually do better to drop the price right down, and make it accessible to a great deal more people. More people will upgrade, more people will spread the word of how great Modo is, and more people would be looking to Luxology for other products in the future... which is what I would expect any company looking to survive would want.

mistrrhappy
05-28-2006, 07:16 AM
I remember reading somewhere that Modo was priced the way it was so that Luxology could make back enough money to survive in the 3D development business. While that may be true, I think they've missed the right pricing for Modo, in the same way the best pricing of DVDs gets missed when they first arrive on the store shelves. Everyone knows after a couple of months they hit the lower pricing module, and then they actually sell much better, and earn back a great deal more (this is true in Australia, at least) than when they were priced at that initial "How much can we get people to pay for this?" price.

So, while charging a fair amount for Modo may seem like the right thing to do, my feeling is Luxology would actually do better to drop the price right down, and make it accessible to a great deal more people. More people will upgrade, more people will spread the word of how great Modo is, and more people would be looking to Luxology for other products in the future... which is what I would expect any company looking to survive would want.

I think the issue of pricing is dependant on the developer's target market for the application in question. I think Luxology is aiming for the same market as XSI Advanced, Maya Unlimited, Lightwave 3D (in the television VFX market) and 3DS Max (Max as a gaming development asset). They seem to be pricing modo according to its current state of development as it relates to its targeted market competitors. I think its feature set and overall functionality will aquit its pricing model and developers according to its suitability to those markets. Having multitudes of hobbyists utilizing the software will not translate into greater marketshare in the specified target markets. Maya and Softimage have only survived this long due to their ability to focus on the professional marketplace, price cuts not withstanding...

nick74
05-28-2006, 07:27 AM
I cant see how modo is that expensive, it is after all not a hobby program.

My office chair is more expensive than modo and I dont want to think about my desk.

R10k
05-28-2006, 07:33 AM
Having a look over the Luxology website, it seems as though you're right- that is where they're targeting. Still, I often wonder why someone who tries to target one market, doesn't adjust their pricing (not dramatically, but just enough) that another target market can also open up. Silo obviously isn't in the same league as Modo anymore (because of the additional features) but even though you could suggest that the main target market of Silo is professional modellers, its price has also made the program available to a number of other markets as well, creating more sales (and perhaps more revenue than upping the price and sticking to one market alone). It'd be interesting to know... and interesting to know if dropping the price of Modo would be more financially beneficial.

I cant see how modo is that expensive, it is after all not a hobby program.

It may not have been designed to be a hobby program, but there's no reason it can't be used as a hobby program.

nvvm
05-30-2006, 06:52 PM
Why would any company cater to the needs of a non-intended off target market, especially a less profitable one ?

pixelmonk
05-30-2006, 08:28 PM
IMO, i dont think the price is too high. Your getting alot for your money(paint,UV unwrap, modeling, rendering). I only found one rendering "bug" but its not a show stopper and it doesnt affect stability. Also the Blur , Smudge tools seems to be slower than the brush tool.

All in all, im quite happy with Modo 201, its stable and im not tweaking a bunch of stuff to get lovely images(which is why i hate Mental Ray, learning curve is too high).

learning curve to high for MR? uh?

pixelmonk
05-30-2006, 08:30 PM
So yes, kind of pricey for the guy in the basement - but not for a business. And as for people paying more for having bought the original modo for $895 - I suppose you weren't around for the $40,000 Maya either, or the $2,500 LW (+years of upgrades). All 3D apps have had price drops - except maybe Max.


best,

Greg

actually maya was never 40K.. maybe you're thinking of PA :)

leuey
05-30-2006, 10:52 PM
I think it was - because I was desperately trying to convince the owner of the company I worked at at the time to buy it. All the modules together (Artisian was a seperate module, so was modelling, etc. this is way back at version 1) - not too long after that they bundled the modules and dropped the price to 16K or something (talk about pissed people)

-Greg


actually maya was never 40K.. maybe you're thinking of PA :)

mech7
05-30-2006, 11:17 PM
Mental ray has definitly a learning curve.. just setting up sss shader is a b*tch

learning curve to high for MR? uh?

blacknoise
05-31-2006, 12:10 AM
I think it was - because I was desperately trying to convince the owner of the company I worked at at the time to buy it. All the modules together (Artisian was a seperate module, so was modelling, etc. this is way back at version 1) - not too long after that they bundled the modules and dropped the price to 16K or something (talk about pissed people)

-Greg

i can confirm that ;)

GaryHaus
05-31-2006, 12:39 AM
If you account for StudioPaint and the advanced modules, the price was astronomical... I was there, started on SGI and Alias(Research) products circa 1991-1992.... Yikes, long time ago!

Gary

pixelmonk
05-31-2006, 02:18 AM
Mental ray has definitly a learning curve.. just setting up sss shader is a b*tch


eh.. not that bad. Besides, there's at least 2-4 different S3 shaders you can grab from here or Highend and there's a few hundred posts and tutorials on it.

MadMax
05-31-2006, 03:48 AM
I personally get a kick out of the "Modo is too expensive compared to" argument.

895.00 is really only a recent price. For the last couple of years you could buy it for 695.00 or less. I only paid 500.00 - 295.00 for the upgrade. A far cry from the 1200.00+ dollar figure others have quoted.

Regarding LW, it was 1500.00 until last Siggraph, when Newtek decided they needed to firesale their products to entice people to buy them. What do you suppose was the competeing product that forced them into doing that?

Rhino 2D... 895.00, modeler only. PLUS, you have to spend some hefty dollars to add on features.

Hexagon & Silo? please. Not even worth commenting on.

Zbrush isn't even a comparable product.

IS Modo too expensive? hell no. That is just a stupid argument from the start.

schuubars
05-31-2006, 07:17 AM
I think the only people that can say if it is overpriced or not, are the people that bought it...just easy as that.
-----------------------

You underestimate the "worth" of this tools...

Hexagon & Silo? please. Not even worth commenting on.

Shade01
05-31-2006, 08:03 AM
I personally get a kick out of the "Modo is too expensive compared to" argument.

895.00 is really only a recent price. For the last couple of years you could buy it for 695.00 or less. I only paid 500.00 - 295.00 for the upgrade. A far cry from the 1200.00+ dollar figure others have quoted.

Regarding LW, it was 1500.00 until last Siggraph, when Newtek decided they needed to firesale their products to entice people to buy them. What do you suppose was the competeing product that forced them into doing that?

Rhino 2D... 895.00, modeler only. PLUS, you have to spend some hefty dollars to add on features.

Hexagon & Silo? please. Not even worth commenting on.

Zbrush isn't even a comparable product.

IS Modo too expensive? hell no. That is just a stupid argument from the start.

At the end of the day, it's $895 for just a modeler, a modeler that doesn't do anything spectacularly better than all the other modelers, that also happen to animate. If XSI is $500, and Lightwave is $800, and Wings is FREE, and they can all turn out the same types of models, Lightwave and XSI renders look just as nice AND I can animate and use particles, dynamics, and host of other things, where is the value in an $895 modeler? But whatever, as long as your happy :)

schuubars
05-31-2006, 08:41 AM
Your examples can't paint, with exception of Blender, but you have not mentioned blender.

I use more than one app, but i don't get it, there are plugins out there who cost much more than modo...and that are just plugins...


btw The whole disp. is trash.

If you need a app for a job fine, but if not, don't complain about a price if you won't pay for it anyway...

R10k
05-31-2006, 08:49 AM
...AND I can animate and use particles, dynamics, and host of other things, where is the value in an $895 modeler? But whatever, as long as your happy.

Spot on. Was Modo worth the cost when all it could do was model things? Are Luxology being really kind by letting us have more for the same price, (the non-special price) or was Modo simply overpriced before it had these additional features? As with all software, it's relative.

...don't complain about a price if you won't pay for it anyway...

I don't believe people are complaining- they're commenting on whether or not it's priced incorrectly for the current market.

ulb
05-31-2006, 08:57 AM
it's not just a modeler...

actually the renderer and the 3d paint parts are the most interesting to me. i saw the videos from friday updates on the luxology forum and i was really impressed. comparing to other softwares, taking into account the quality of this app and the prices of the other apps, 895$ looks like a normal price to me. But it's still a lot of money for an hobbyist.

I'll keep an eye on this app as i think it will be really great when it will get animation and particles.

deli-rium
05-31-2006, 09:58 AM
It seems to me that Modo 201 is way overpriced compared to its capabilities.
WHy?
Let's see. We have XSI foundation, great modeling and animation software at a 495$, right.
Now, I can still get ZBrush for the same price as XSI F. which gives 990$ in total. What do you get? The most kick ass, value for money production toolset there is. There is a new plugin for XSI F that makes hair and fur. It costs 50$. You already have MR renderer. Too difficult to learn, come on.

Noone can tell me that Modo 201 in itself is better the this duo. No way.

Mike RB
05-31-2006, 10:07 AM
I love the math that includes XSI foundation. By your calculations, XSI essentials and advanced are themselves way overpriced compared to what you get for only $500 in foundation, and noone should ever use anything other than foundation. Unfortunately if that was the case Avid couldn't afford to R+D foundation and development would stop. Foundation is a giveaway tactic to pull people away from maya and into thier more advanced versions. There's no way Luxology can compete with XSI on that level. If they (Lux) are satisfied with the balance of sales vs income then their price is a fair one. If it's too expensive for you, don't buy it.

Michael

deli-rium
05-31-2006, 10:21 AM
I love the math that includes XSI foundation. By your calculations, XSI essentials and advanced are themselves way overpriced compared to what you get for only $500 in foundation, and noone should ever use anything other than foundation. Unfortunately if that was the case Avid couldn't afford to R+D foundation and development would stop. Foundation is a giveaway tactic to pull people away from maya and into thier more advanced versions. There's no way Luxology can compete with XSI on that level. If they (Lux) are satisfied with the balance of sales vs income then their price is a fair one. If it's too expensive for you, don't buy it.

Michael

You're talking politics. I don't work for either Autodesk, Luxology or Softimage. I am not also saying that I don't care how they can handle financialy, cause I do care. I also care how I can economically do my work the best I can.
If I am supposted feel sorry that I am able to buy two great pieces of software instead of one that will not give me any chances for work, then you must be out of you damn mind.

Mike RB
05-31-2006, 10:28 AM
I'm not saying you should feel sorry, I'm just saying that if you feel its overpriced for you, don't buy it. That dosen't make it overpriced. Only time will tell if they have misjudged thier pricepoint by the impact it will have on development.

deli-rium
05-31-2006, 10:37 AM
I'm not saying you should feel sorry, I'm just saying that if you feel its overpriced for you, don't buy it. That dosen't make it overpriced. Only time will tell if they have misjudged thier pricepoint by the impact it will have on development.

I agree, but the pricing policy should also include the ability of the new software to gain new ground in terms of production houses, freelancers, etc.
If you look at my example, then you'll see that newcomers or hobbyst going pro or even studios on the costs cut period will go for my combination instead of Modo201 regardless of how good it is.
It is live and die out there at the moment.

Did you read the x-men3 article? How many companies were there involved? The work pace is getting crazy, there are more good artists today and less money goes there to be split among more companies. Costs need to be cut. It is a jungle.

schuubars
05-31-2006, 10:49 AM
But try to see it this way, at least you can soon judge forself if it's worth for you or not with the coming eval. version, and the eval has no limitations at least, and you can extend the eval. time.

Ibanezhead
05-31-2006, 12:51 PM
Too expensive?

I think people have missed the point that modo is going to eventually be a complete package. So when, and if, 301 has animation capabilities, will it still be too expensive at $895? It's better for them to keep the price the same, than to have a lower price now, and then when the animation upgrade takes place, to up the price. That would really make people mad. I paid $595 for my copy of 103 and got 201 for free from Safe Harbor. Not bad for a complete modeling, texturing, and rendering solution...

ib

mech7
05-31-2006, 12:56 PM
So you are willing to pay a price for something that will eventually have the capabillities.. But when it has these you will pay for them again :shrug:

Too expensive?
I think people have missed the point that modo is going to eventually be a complete package. So when, and if, 301 has animation capabilities, will it still be too expensive at $895?
ib

Ibanezhead
05-31-2006, 01:03 PM
No, I am explaining why I think they have made the price the way they have.

I took advantage of a great deal from Safe Harbor and saved about $695... Currently, Modo 103 = $895, Modo 201 upgrade = $395... I paid $595 and got both.

ib

ThirdEye
05-31-2006, 01:09 PM
So when, and if,

These and money don't go well together.

deli-rium
05-31-2006, 03:16 PM
No, I am explaining why I think they have made the price the way they have.

I took advantage of a great deal from Safe Harbor and saved about $695... Currently, Modo 103 = $895, Modo 201 upgrade = $395... I paid $595 and got both.

ib

Alright.
Will you get 301 cheaper? When will it come out and for how much? "These are the things I need to know!"
But seriously, you making software decisions based on what MAY happen in the future. Let's hear this. I am going to my boss or better I am the boss and an employee come to me and says:
"Let's buy modo cause it is great value for money. We can only model and paint now but I am sure someday they might add some animation tools. Then, I am sure, they will sell it to us same cheap as today."
Having heard such requests many times, I can tell you that employer after hearing this will laugh his/her ass off at best.

Now, making characters, you need a separate piece of software for rigging and posing. Well, you can always model directly into stance or better move about all the vertexes how you need them.
Then, lets say customer comes and says: "I don't like that, please make several different poses for this character for me today". Good luck doing that.
I, being sarcastic and rude, would answer that for you to customer:"Well, can I wait untill 301 will be out with all that animation tools?"

I know modo 201 is a great tool, I have seen it all and what it can do, but it isn't a complete package yet. I know that it is hardly one package that does all the work but there are alternatives that do more and are cheaper.
I wish all the best for Luxology and its software and I hope they will make it way better in the future.

:thumbsup:

Ibanezhead
05-31-2006, 03:36 PM
Again, all I was saying was that this may be the reason why they have chosen the price point that they have. May be a little high for a modeler, but it seems closer to what you would want for a modeler and renderer, and then it will certainly be a good price for the full package. Many standalone, and plugin renderers are far more expensive than modo...

DanSilverman
05-31-2006, 04:16 PM
It seems to me that Modo 201 is way overpriced compared to its capabilities.
WHy?
Let's see. We have XSI foundation, great modeling and animation software at a 495$, right.
Now, I can still get ZBrush for the same price as XSI F. which gives 990$ in total. What do you get? The most kick ass, value for money production toolset there is. There is a new plugin for XSI F that makes hair and fur. It costs 50$. You already have MR renderer. Too difficult to learn, come on.

Noone can tell me that Modo 201 in itself is better the this duo. No way.

Well, let's just look at one little example. From what I remember, XSI does not allow you to paint in either 2D or 3D within itself, so you cannot do that within XSI. Now you obviously can paint in ZBrush, but there are some issues. For example, if you have UVs that overlap (a common thing to do to conserve UV space for things like real-time 3D games) then you CANNOT paint these shared UVs in ZBrush. You get either errors in the paint after dropping the object from Projection Master or ZBrush crashes and burns. Therefore, a trick often used in the game industry (overlapping UVs) is deadly to ZBrush. You would then have to add a third app to the mix: Photoshop. But then you are not painting in 3D are you? So you might want to add either Body Paint 3D or Deep Paint 3D ... neither are cheap.

In Modo I can paint on both the 2D UVs and on the 3D models themselves. The tools are very close to Photoshop's brushes so I can do most (if not all) of my painting within the same tool. In this aspect I would say that Modo "beats" the "duo" you present.

In any case, like many people in this thread, I don't use just one 3D tool. ZBrush has its place. So does Modo. Modo, for me, has an outstanding workflow and a well thought out toolset. As a result, I model faster and better in Modo. Since time is often money, then my INVESTMENT in Modo has long since paid off.

So you are willing to pay a price for something that will eventually have the capabillities.. But when it has these you will pay for them again

This is just a dumb statement. This is how it works: You pay for a LICENSE to use the product NOW as it IS at this very MOMENT (including any updates that come out along the way). In other words, if someone is looking for a great modeler and may also need great rendering and is also looking for a 3D paint solution, then Modo is certainly an option. When 301 is released, it is then a new product. If someone needs the addition of animation then they can pay for the update. If not, they can stick with 201 (or 202, 3 or whatever).

BTW - Paying for major updates is what every software shop does (i.e. MAX 4 to MAX 5, etc).

MadMax
05-31-2006, 04:49 PM
Using the incredibly poor logic that is being pushed in this thread, then EVERY software venfor is a complete rip off and not worth the money.

Example:

Lightwave. It's price has been all over the board over the years. 995.00 1500.00 1995.00, 795.00 can't even keep track of it.

So if I paid 1500.00 for LW, why shoudl I have to pay 500.00 for an upgrade, meaning it cost me 2000.00, when someone can just walk in off the street and get the new verszion for only 1500.00?

How about buying LW for 1500.00, paying for 3 or more upgrade cycles at 500.00 each? that means LW cost over 3,000.00 when anyone off the street can now get the same thing for 795.00!!!

And I love when people are stupid enough to drag XSI Foundation into the picture. You do realize that Foundation is extremely limited right? Remind me again how many render nodes you get with that 500.00 software?

If Foundation were anymore stripped down from what it is now, it would be a demo only version.

Want to really drag this price thing out? then why not just say NO SOFTWARE is worth the cost since Wings and Blender are free??? XSI Foundation is a rip-off. LW is a rip off.

It's more than painfully obvious that some of you just have no clue what you are talking about.

yog
05-31-2006, 05:00 PM
There seem to be a number of people that have no intention of buying Modo getting very upset at it's pricing structure.:shrug:

This leads me to believe one of two things, either they are annoyed because they wanted to buy Modo, but can't afford it, or they are annoyed on my behalf as they believe I have been "swindled" out of my money when I bought it.
If it is the former reason, then sorry I can't help. If it is the latter reason, don't sweat it, I've been using it for a while and consider it a good investment (for what I have already recieved, not for what I might get) and money well spent.

P.s. I'm also an XSI Essentials owner/user, so speculation on the differences between the two programs from people who have only read feature lists don't mean too much to me. :)

lovisx
05-31-2006, 05:19 PM
I could see people arguing that version 103 was expensive... but I don't think it's fare to argue version 2 is expensive. Imagine if you baught all the features of modo seperate... 3d painting software costs $400 bucks, a good renderer costs $1000 (and you have to have an interface to go with it...), a good modeler costs around $100-200. Possible total... $1500. Just XSI and something like deep paint, or body paint, or zbrush costs more then $1000.

Modo is a bargain for what it is.

MadMax
05-31-2006, 05:30 PM
This thread would be better titled Pros vs. Joes.


The arguments seem to be wrapped in perceived value, and the disbelief that Modo could possibly bring anything new to the table. When I see comments like this, it's clear the person has no idea what he is talking about, and hasn't tried the software in question.

I used LW for years. After actually TRYING Modo, I fouind that the vastly improved workflow allowed me to do the same modeling in Modo in a fraction of the time I spent making the same model in LW and navigating all the work arounds that people have come up with over the years.

Not to mention, Modo just had less bugs than LW.

So I compare my 500.00 = 295.00 upgrade for Modo 201, to my 1500.00 Lightwave that I have paid for upgrades since day one costing me well over 3,000.00........

And I find I can crank out extremely high detail models of the same quality in almost half the time using Modo, times directly attributable to a better workflow and better toolset.

Maybe I should complain that Newtek ripped me off for charging such a high price for software that was clearly way overpriced? It would at least be in line with the ridiculous complaints this thread has generated so far.

If you guys are haoppy with Silo, more power to you. I tried the demo, I thought it sucked. I'd rather use Blender for free than Silo at any price.

As for Modo, I'm quite happy with it. I'm making plenty of money from it, and it's more than paid for itself.





There seem to be a number of people that have no intention of buying Modo getting very upset at it's pricing structure.:shrug:

This leads me to believe one of two things, either they are annoyed because they wanted to buy Modo, but can't afford it, or they are annoyed on my behalf as they believe I have been "swindled" out of my money when I bought it.

pixelmonk
05-31-2006, 05:38 PM
This thread would be better titled Pros vs. Joes.


The arguments seem to be wrapped in perceived value, and the disbelief that Modo could possibly bring anything new to the table. When I see comments like this, it's clear the person has no idea what he is talking about, and hasn't tried the software in question.
....snipped...

If you guys are haoppy with Silo, more power to you. I tried the demo, I thought it sucked. I'd rather use Blender for free than Silo at any price.

As for Modo, I'm quite happy with it. I'm making plenty of money from it, and it's more than paid for itself.

so you're basically calling people out claiming they don't know what the hell they are talking about however, you clearly have an opinion on Silo, which you claim sucks. Are we supposed to think your opinion of Modo is more valid than that of your opinion of Silo?

A perfect post for the old addage... opinions are like... you know. bottom line is to take this bloated opinion with a grain of salt along with the others. Try the software out for yourself.. only you can determine if it's worth the price, and don't listen to the whiners and the fanboys.

Mike RB
05-31-2006, 05:42 PM
MadMax: That's the difference, to anyone who makes a living doing this stuff a business investment that's under a couple grand, and that will increase productivity isn't a tough choice. Nitpicking if somthing is "worth it" or not for a couple hundred bucks is really kind of pointless.

With GIMP, Blender, and Wings out there even XSI foundation+Zbrush are incredibly overpriced with the logic being used in this thread. And as far as being "ripped-off" everytime one of these companys charges for an upgrade, because even though you used it for the past year, made 12 house payments and 12 car payments with the income earned by using it, some guy buying it 12 months later and not having to pay the upgrade cost is just dumb.

Michael

SheepFactory
05-31-2006, 05:44 PM
And I love when people are stupid enough to drag XSI Foundation into the picture. You do realize that Foundation is extremely limited right? Remind me again how many render nodes you get with that 500.00 software?

If Foundation were anymore stripped down from what it is now, it would be a demo only version.


It's more than painfully obvious that some of you just have no clue what you are talking about.

uhh...I think you dont have much of a clue yourself mate , For what you get for $500 I would not consider foundation stripped in anyway.

I dont think modo is expensive or anything , if it saves the modeler time in production (and it did in ours) than it pays for itself in a day. These software price point arguments are null at this day and age unless you are a hobbyist complaining that you cant afford the latest software.

MadMax
05-31-2006, 06:08 PM
uhh...I think you dont have much of a clue yourself mate , For what you get for $500 I would not consider foundation stripped in anyway.



Just go to their webstie and compare features between the 3 tiers of XSI.

MadMax
05-31-2006, 06:25 PM
No, I'm calling out the people who are sitting here trying to say Modo isn't worth the price, and have clearly never seen or used it, and rely on extremely weak arguments like Silo being 109.00

As for opinions, I really don't give a damn what you think of my opinion. I'll call out people making stupid remarks whether you like it or not.

I notice you were incapable of offering a counter opinion, just a personal attack.



so you're basically calling people out claiming they don't know what the hell they are talking about however, you clearly have an opinion on Silo, which you claim sucks. Are we supposed to think your opinion of Modo is more valid than that of your opinion of Silo?

schuubars
05-31-2006, 06:35 PM
err, i think before that price drop FND was not cheap and had the price of Essentials(now), so no big cuts there.

Just go to their webstie and compare features between the 3 tiers of XSI.

MadMax
05-31-2006, 06:40 PM
err, i think before that price drop FND was not cheap and had the price of Essentials(now), so no big cuts there.

Does it matter what the price WAS compared to IS NOW?

ThirdEye
05-31-2006, 06:41 PM
Does it matter what the price WAS compared to IS NOW?

I think you need to calm down dude.

Shade01
05-31-2006, 06:44 PM
Does it matter what the price WAS compared to IS NOW?

How can you ask that question after making this post? (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=3597771&postcount=107)

Mike RB
05-31-2006, 06:48 PM
How can you ask that question after making this post? (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=3597771&postcount=107)

Uhm, that post was illustrating why you *can't* think historically when it comes to software cost. That factoring in all the upgrades dosen't make sense...

schuubars
05-31-2006, 07:03 PM
My post had nothing to do with the price but rather that the FND is not limited as you tried to suggest.
As the FND was in the 2000$ range, it had the same features as FND 4.0 for 500$.
They just added more features to the Essentials and Advanced version as in FND, so in fact sur enot crippled down.

And I love when people are stupid enough to drag XSI Foundation into the picture. You do realize that Foundation is extremely limited right? Remind me again how many render nodes you get with that 500.00 software?


Just go to their webstie and compare features between the 3 tiers of XSI.

Does it matter what the price WAS compared to IS NOW?

pixelmonk
05-31-2006, 07:31 PM
I notice you were incapable of offering a counter opinion, just a personal attack.

again.. go back to the old addage of opinions are like a**holes.. everyone has one. Why should I add mine to the long list of "me too" responses? Instead, I pointed out yours, which was easy to do, to prove that point. Now carry on.

MadMax
05-31-2006, 07:42 PM
You people are too funny.

I take your own arguments that Package X is too expensive or limited in functionality, and turn it back on your love obsessions, and all of a sudden you guys are going ballistic and scrambling to attack.

Pretty amusing to watch.

But as Mike already stated, this price argument is pointless to professionals. it's really a stupid argument. If tools are too expensive, don't buy them. It's just that simple.

And this thread, no matter how entertaining, isn't going to effect sales of Modo. They seem to be doing quite well in spite of the negativity.

And hey, remember, today is the last day to get Hexagon for 1.95.

SheepFactory
05-31-2006, 07:48 PM
Just go to their webstie and compare features between the 3 tiers of XSI.

I dont need to , I use all three daily.

Show me another package that gives you the kind of animation , rigging , modeling and rendering (it comes with two MR licenses which by itself is more expensive than fnd anyway) FND gives you for $500 and I'll agree. As it stands you have no clue and making comments about a software you dont use. But you keep on fighting the good fight , arguing on forums about some companies software is not my thing. :)

over and out.

ambient-whisper
06-02-2006, 04:09 AM
For example, if you have UVs that overlap (a common thing to do to conserve UV space for things like real-time 3D games) then you CANNOT paint these shared UVs in ZBrush. You get either errors in the paint after dropping the object from Projection Master or ZBrush crashes and burns. Therefore, a trick often used in the game industry (overlapping UVs) is deadly to ZBrush. You would then have to add a third app to the mix: Photoshop. But then you are not painting in 3D are you? So you might want to add either Body Paint 3D or Deep Paint 3D ... neither are cheap.


as much as i see the potential of modo 201s paint system. currently its projection painting system also has the same problem that zbrushes projection master has. overlayed uv areas always act undesirably. in modo its stable to do so, but your results will be a pile of mangled crap if you try. so the idea here is, if you have overlayed uvs, dont use projection. also. the projection mode doesnt always act 100% on seams i find ( and as you will find out, many others are experiencing as well, so im not alone. ). however i still find that 201 is a great upgrade, but if i had to take xsi+zbrush or modo, id definitely take the first option as theres sooo much i couldnt do with modo that the combo does. ( though theres a bunch of things in modo that are very useful as well.) thats why i see no point in this arguement, because i dont see a problem being able to use what you preffer for whatever task.