Future of Maya?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03 March 2011   #16
I'm only using Maya for a few months so can't really comment on it's history/future, but I have spent quite a lot of time using another program and therefore I've been a regular on CG forums for a few years.

You want to know something interesting?

After pretty much every release of a new version of any program you can find threads like this on the CG forums. Some people are delighted with the new features while others are full of doom and gloom and saying that this is the last version or that they have no plans to upgrade because the company that made the program is not meeting their needs.

Bill Cosby said 'I don't know the secret to success, but I do know that the secret to failure is trying to please everybody'.

Cheers,
Brian
 
Old 03 March 2011   #17
Originally Posted by royterr: be honest, Maya 2012 new fancy features are just dust in the eyes, the main renderer "Mental Ray" is still broken and that's one of Maya's main problems i think.

Maya is starting to look like a retarded caveman compared to Captain Excalibur and his high tech shiny nano suit.

The only question now is if Autodesk Maya team is doing that out of stupidness or if all that is part of a martketing plan wiith a financial puropse somwhere.

Just like Maya 2010 and Maya 2011, Maya 2012 is a complete desception for me. I am not blaming team members in the AMT (Autodesk Maya Tream) that worked hard on this version but product developement team leaders and their decisions witch are holding Maya back in the race.

Hold On Maya Users, we will prevail!


Why is mentalray still broken? When you have a big brain, you can make almost anything with it. Ok the speed is slow in dof and motion blur, but we have composite. wish you renderman in maya?
 
Old 03 March 2011   #18
Mental ray has issues for sure, but we produce several shots a week using it and we do just fine. Vray might be better, but we have 40 Dedicated rendernodes and 20 more that roll in at night. That gets a bit pricey. My boss is great with budgeting when I can show him a chart as to why its a good idea, I come up short when I try and quantify on a business level why vray is worth the money.

I also used renderman for several years and had tons of issues. I like it better for sure. But its no button solution by any stretch.



Originally Posted by Horganovski: After pretty much every release of a new version of any program you can find threads like this on the CG forums.


This is very true. We have a max guy that would always make fun of the bugs in Maya. Then when we got a second max person it came to light that he was having lots of bugs in max as well, he just didn't tell anyone.

We do have a Maya user that is considering switching for some legitimate reasons in my opinion. I don't think this thread was a waste. Its a big decision to switch packages and I think this would be a good place to get some perspective. (I do think the doomsday predictions are a waste though)
__________________
My Reel -- <YouTube > -- <720p > -- <1080p >

Last edited by rBrady : 03 March 2011 at 05:28 PM.
 
Old 03 March 2011   #19
I think it is clear now that the AD 3D packages all are heading into the same direction. QT Interface, viewport 2.0, etc. My guess is AD wants to maintain one 3D package and not so many, I guess the only reason they do is to not piss off customers.
__________________
Digital Characters R&D - Suntoucher Labs
 
Old 03 March 2011   #20
I think all 3 will be in development and have new releases for a long time. I'm getting the impression autodesk, realizing they have 3 well rounded 3d apps, want people to have reasons to buy two or of them and not just one. That's painfully obvious with their offer to tack xsi onto the package for a little more money.

They'll try to unify them and make them more compatible with each other so they aren't painful to use together, and then at the same time they'll make each app focused on different things as much as possible to create a reason for an artist to want more than just 1 app. In time, it looks like xsi is going to be more effects oriented.

Maybe eventually, a single super-app will emerge, or maybe that super-app will be called max and we'll all end up switching to it 10 years from now.

It sucks learning new apps, but we all pretty much do it all the time as we learn new features, workflows, sidekick apps, etc

Last edited by sentry66 : 03 March 2011 at 08:00 PM.
 
Old 03 March 2011   #21
I think the first application that could become integrated into another, therefore reaching the end of development as a standalone application, is Motionbuilder. It seems with every release Maya and Max are getting more integrated workflows with Motionbuilder, and bringing more tools into the core application.

The first step of bringing compositing into Maya comes with the 2012 release. Maybe Autodesk have a new plan after Toxik and Composite both fail to achieve wide adoption. Maybe Composite will be an integrated function of future versions...

I suppose over time the core functionality of Mudbox could be developed into Maya And Max - thus again removing the need for a separate application.

With the way Autodesk are promoting Max and Maya to higher degree than Softimage, and bundling Softimage in the Suite packages, one interpretation of this, is that Autodesk maybe see Softimage development ending in a few years. Maybe they plan to bring the best of ICE to Max and Maya...

Even further into the future, Maya and Max would eventually reach a point where they share a high degree of common code. So they would really just be versions of Autodesk Ultimate 3D Application. The future of the code base would be very modular in nature allowing them to create other specialized versions of Autodesk Ultimate 3D Application.

I don't think Autodesk will start from scratch if they ever build the Ultimate 3D Application. I think it's more likely they will use there current software lineup and morph it over a long period of time. Anyone who has read about 3D Max and the Nitrous ground up rebuild (that failed), and Lightwave Core (which is taking a along time, and probably costing many users) will know that sometimes a full rebuild is just to risky.

This is pure assumption and guess work of course.

Honestly though I'd just be happy with them developing separately. As long as the core technologies eventually find themselves integrated into each package. But I understand finical reasons and saving development time...That said no 3D artist wants there application to reach the end of development...Which is why it's easier for me to point out Softimage as the first major package to be discontinued and integrated into other packages as a sprinkle of core technology - if that is what Autodesk are set to do.

Last edited by Braden99 : 03 March 2011 at 08:50 PM.
 
Old 03 March 2011   #22
Originally Posted by InfernalDarkness: ...............


Infernal for what you do I don't understand why Maya is any better? Modo or Max might be a better fit I think. Rhino plays very well with Modo from what I understand. You might be stuck in your ways like me

I do mainly modeling and rendering. Over last two years I have repeatedly tried dumping Maya for Modo and even tried Max as Autodesk seems to be positioning it as the visualization app but I keep running back to Maya. Truth be told it is because I am defective and too comfortable with Maya. I am just not giving other apps a proper chance. I just get the impression that for modeling and rendering there is a much better world out there than Maya. I am just too chicken so far to embrace this better world.

I did not renew my Maya subscription this time. I will think hard about what to do this year before the chance to renew the subscription runs out later in the year. Fact is modeling and rendering in Maya has not got any love for a while now. I just get the impression that there is too much politics going on at Autodesk.

I am at a crossroads and as a small guy I need to think hard where my $ goes. So far I have not got value for money that I have thrown at Autodek in last 3-4 years. So it will be Modo + Zbrush or Maya + Mudbox for me. Once I make that decision I won't look back.

Last edited by DieMachinist : 03 March 2011 at 09:00 PM.
 
Old 03 March 2011   #23
Infernal for what you do I don't understand why Maya is any better? Modo or Max might be a better fit I think. Rhino plays very well with Modo from what I understand. You might be stuck in your ways like me


I would say Maya and Max, since they would both do the same thing for me, rendering geometry from Rhino into photorealism, would be equal. I don't think Vray or mental ray are available in Modo, though. So it's a non-question - no way can Modo keep up with the speed and flexibility of mental ray or Vray. I have only used Vray in Rhino directly, and it sucked, like I said. mental ray also sucks in many ways, but not enough to stop me from cranking out 300dpi prints on a tight deadline. Every day. The sheer tunability and speed control alone is the key reason I keep using it.

In 2004, after years of using low-end software like Ray Dream Studio, Bryce, Vue, etc., I made the decision to start using Maya since I wanted to "go career". At the time, I tested Max, C4D, and Maya with equal fervor - comparing all three to Rhino/Vray directly. Maya came up the winner, for my workflow, thinkflow, and especially ease-of-use with Rhino. I think these others are great packages, and sure I could use C4D/Vray in place of Maya/mental ray, but C4D's workflow and thinkflow bother me. I feel stifled in Max and C4D. XSI and Lightwave are a little easier for me, but I demand Maya's node-based flow, it's part of my thinkflow now, maybe it shouldn't be but to me it's a LOT of freedom. I still play with the other app's demos when new versions come out, so as not to be totally out of the loop, but I much prefer Maya.

As for Rhino playing very well with Modo - it wouldn't be any different unless Modo could read Rhino files directly and had every tool inside it that Rhino does. It does not. Nor does Maya, not even close. But as a rendering platform, Modo simply can't keep up with my daily deadlines. It lacks many of the tools I use in Maya for project management still, and there's no need to "switch" when Maya works great. Also, there's the money and downtime involved - my boss won't pay me to learn new software, nor will he shell out for more software that won't directly affect profits. And I don't blame him.
__________________
Commodore 64 @ 1MHz
64KB RAM
1541 Floppy Drive


"Like stone we battle the wind... Beat down and strangle the rains..."
 
Old 03 March 2011   #24
Originally Posted by InfernalDarkness: ...but I demand Maya's node-based flow, it's part of my thinkflow now, maybe it shouldn't be but to me it's a LOT of freedom...


I am very curious, so a quick '?': aside from hypershade in maya, which has a principal utility of a material editor, what other node-based 'flows' are so indispensable and so well implemented in maya that you can't find specifically in 3dsmax, since it features now the slate material editor for the already mentioned use of the hypershade?
__________________
..je suis -L -S -D!
 
Old 03 March 2011   #25
I know that some people dont use it but I use the hypershade/connection editor with far more than materials in Maya. Anything can be connected to anything, maybe there isn't a cute interface for it, but its there. I can make node connections like this with ease:
frame width * camera rotation X + the color of my texture at u .55 v .23 = my ik pole vector angle y.

This is a useless example but that kind of freedom in a 3d app is rare. Some people cherish it.
__________________
My Reel -- <YouTube > -- <720p > -- <1080p >
 
Old 03 March 2011   #26
About maya hypershade/hypergraph it look like someone start to build it , lay down good basics and never finish job especially for hypergraph.

For hypergraph there are flags in docs to make it act like hypershade , for adding ,removing nodes , and i edit mayas hypergraph right click menu to add this commands and now is usable.

I work for the most part in these two "panes" , side by side , in hypershade i drop nodes of interest , and in hypergraph , "monitoring" and selecting nodes in networks.

And connection editor more options for filtering attributes , and search functionality.
 
Old 03 March 2011   #27
Indeed, the Hypershade panel is minimalistic visibly, but very powerful. I use it for lights, shaders, anything that needs to get connected outside of the Hyergraph's functions. Sure other applications have similar functionality, but I've yet to see one as open-ended and powerful as Hypershade. That's why they call it "Hyper", I think.

Like I said, only dabbled in the other applications, but saw nothing like what I'm used to. C4D for example doesn't even have nodes. Very claustrophobic for me.
__________________
Commodore 64 @ 1MHz
64KB RAM
1541 Floppy Drive


"Like stone we battle the wind... Beat down and strangle the rains..."
 
Old 03 March 2011   #28
Originally Posted by InfernalDarkness: But as a rendering platform, Modo simply can't keep up with my daily deadlines. It lacks many of the tools I use in Maya for project management still, and there's no need to "switch" when Maya works great. Also, there's the money and downtime involved - my boss won't pay me to learn new software, nor will he shell out for more software that won't directly affect profits. And I don't blame him.

We did some little tests Modo 501 vs mentalray in Maya 2010 and the renderer in Modo 501 smokes! MR as soon as you have bounce lighting its 2x as fast and significantly cleaner results..

Also its far easier to set there isn't 120 variables to tweak to get a nice image.

Only downside is the shader tree i really don't like it I'd much rather a node based system, that said though the shaders them selves are far simpler to use..
__________________
Vizual-Element | Automotive Superstore
 
Old 03 March 2011   #29
@Kabab
yes the modo render engine is very nice, in v 501 it has pixar subd, but mental ray is also nice when your PC is strong enough.
 
Old 03 March 2011   #30
We did some little tests Modo 501 vs mentalray in Maya 2010 and the renderer in Modo 501 smokes! MR as soon as you have bounce lighting its 2x as fast and significantly cleaner results..


Ahh, but what are you rendering? How many 4K or 8K textures did you have in your scene? How many portal lights, spot lights, and point lights? How heavy was your IBL structure? How much glass did you have in the scene? How well are caustics controlled? Are you able to optimize the entire renderflow on a per-shader and per-object basis independently? Were you rendering at 300dpi, 3300x2550 or larger? What was your RAM usage, and was it tunable? How well does Modo work with AutoCAD or Rhino? It doesn't even have NURBS.

Not saying Modo isn't cool, and it's results are pretty nice... I just really need a lot of flexibility in my pipeline, and haven't used Modo since 301, so perhaps they've come a long way. But it certainly won't push Maya out anytime soon from a production standpoint. Might have some useful modeling tools too, but that's not necessary for my work at all - it's not going to outperform Rhino in this fashion, nor does Maya itself. Point being, my workflow's pretty well established, tested, debugged, and blazing fast for daily deadlines. Modo has nothing to offer for arch/viz in this regard and can't replace Rhino and Maya combined, much less Maya itself.
__________________
Commodore 64 @ 1MHz
64KB RAM
1541 Floppy Drive


"Like stone we battle the wind... Beat down and strangle the rains..."
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.