How does the Blender Foundation work, since it does not make any money?

Become a member of the CGSociety

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

REPLY TO THREAD
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  4 Weeks Ago
Originally Posted by Shenan: I'm not saying that you're saying this with this intention, but I think that this is a common smear against open source software developers and projects. If you look at the facts, most popular open source projects are very responsive to users' requests. Of course they don't respond to every whim and whine from users, but I've seen open source developers (including Blender's) regularly and frequently modify their software due to user feedback. They wouldn't be very popular software if they didn't. However, of course you can't force developers to do what you want if you don't have strong financial power over them. But that's worked out OK for the most part so far.
Yup its fine for many. What happens if there is say a serious regression that actually is a show stopper for pipeline's production?
I used to work for a DCC for 8 years. This was a priority 1 issue with the fastest possible turnaround to the client. This is also the kinda issue that might be harder to blender to respond to methinks.
And regressing an entire pipeline is not an option. Big studios are used to a "you-fix-it-or-else" expectation. aka a Service Pack. Side Effects has the best option IMHO -they can turn around a *custom build* for you sometimes the same day (!!)
I am not convinced open source can be managed to the same level of response. How can they manage escalation on something some guy did on his 'free time'? This is what you pay for.
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Originally Posted by Tiles: Yikes, typoe at my end. Of course it is allowed. That's what i wanted to say. I even gave an example then, with the Blender Addons.

Thanks for correction


Not for usability unfortunately. A sometimes weird UI design and the "i do it my way" mentality goes like a red thread through nearly all popular non profit open source projects. Linux with its thousands of distributions is an excellent example here. And it is system made. It is simply more sexy to write the next killer feature compared to change something at the UI or UX design. Remember, here you have to make the developer happy, that's what pays him as a substitute for money. UI UX design is in big parts a boring repetitive job with the danger to burn the community with this changes.

Add to this that the more experienced a developer becomes , the bigger the chance is that he wants to earn money with what he does. And not longer work for free in a open source project. When you are really good at something, then don't do it for free.

But it gets better nowadays. UI / UX is not longer a heavily ignored field in open source.

Either way, the resistance against UI improvements at the Blender side is legendary. They promised a change at the UI when they invented the UI task force with the Andrew Price incident five years ago. Nothing happened, asides from a few new alibi tabs. Then they announced to have a Workflow release with 2.8 two and a half years ago. They just postponed everything workflow related before a few days from the initial 2.8 release. No top bar, no 101, no left click select, no ... . Once more it is more sexy to develop the next killer feature instead.

And UI cleanup, like to optimize the workflow with the GUI, or to remove the hundrets of double menu entries ( a so easy to correct beginner mistake ) , was never part of the plan anyways.

No problem, I thought you might have written the opposite of what you meant, but I wasn't sure.

I understand what you're saying about open source UIs. They definitely have the well-earned reputation of not being good in general, for the reasons you stated. I was also disappointed to hear about them dropping those targets for 2.8. I do wish that they would focus more on this. However, in terms of Blender specifically, they do seem to get the backing of the majority of the community to keep things going as they are. Perhaps I'm misreading things, but I've seen many people be very adamant that they love the way Blender works now and that they don't want any major changes. But I've also seen people seem to universally like when things have been improved (like with 2.5). I guess it goes back to what Steve Jobs said about customers not knowing what they want and that you have to tell them what they want.

Since you have had some background with coding and with the Blender source code specifically, did you try to work with them on making the improvements that you describe before you forked it to bforartists?
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Originally Posted by moogaloonie: I have to assume that there was some financial arrangement between blender foundation and Smith Micro when the latter decided to integrate Cycles into Poser...
This is probably a stupid question, but if Cycles is GPL as part of blender, shouldn't the Cycles source need be available through SM? I'm seeing all kinds of stuff based on open source work and always wonder if people are honoring the part of the arrangement that requires source be made available. I seem to recall some allegations against a few large companies for not doing this.
Also, if a change needed be made to Cycles in the process of adapting it to Poser, is that change still under GPL as well? Do they have to put their changes where the blender folks can access them?

Moogaloonie, Cycles is a separate project(?) of the Blender foundation, and it was coded from scratch to use a different license (Apache License) which intentionally allows complete integration with commercial software (https://www.cycles-renderer.org/). I'm not sure if Smith Micro contributed money or code back to the project out of courtesy, but they had no obligation to. It's also available commercially(?) as a 3rd-party add-on for Cinema 4D and is apparently in development to be integrated with Rhino (this is all mentioned on that page).
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Originally Posted by circusboy: Yup its fine for many. What happens if there is say a serious regression that actually is a show stopper for pipeline's production?
I used to work for a DCC for 8 years. This was a priority 1 issue with the fastest possible turnaround to the client. This is also the kinda issue that might be harder to blender to respond to methinks.
And regressing an entire pipeline is not an option. Big studios are used to a "you-fix-it-or-else" expectation. aka a Service Pack. Side Effects has the best option IMHO -they can turn around a *custom build* for you sometimes the same day (!!)
I am not convinced open source can be managed to the same level of response. How can they manage escalation on something some guy did on his 'free time'? This is what you pay for.

It's a good question and good point, and I don't know the answer exactly. Anecdotally I've heard many cases of open source developers (and Blender developers specifically) fixing serious bugs faster than some commercial software vendors, but there is no official commitment to do so or mechanism to demand that, that I'm aware of. I understand that this is a major barrier. I work at a public organization and at least my department will not touch any major open source software (IT systems) that doesn't have an official, paid, support system in place. It's a bit frustrating sometimes, but I understand the decision. I see two possible solutions:

1. It seems that it's been proposed many times that the Blender foundation start offering paid support both as a revenue source and to address the issue you mentioned. This is what Red Hat does for example. For whatever reason BF don't seem to be interested in doing that, and instead want some 3rd-party to take on that role.

2. Newer, smaller, more dynamic studios/companies seem to be willing to take on that risk. Sometimes, if they're large enough, they actually take measures to mitigate against this and for other benefits by actually hiring Blender developers directly. This is one of the interesting different strategies that come into play with open source. You can probably get some some really good service if you actually hire some of the developers directly. Obviously only open to larger players, but it's an option. Consider that a developer's salary would be equivalent to X subscriptions to an alternative commercial suite and at some point it does become a viable option.
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Quote: Since you have had some background with coding and with the Blender source code specifically, did you try to work with them on making the improvements that you describe before you forked it to bforartists?

Of course i tried. This would have been the best thing. Didn't work. The module owner didn't see "the value in this feature". And everything UI is a untouchable design decision anyways. In the end parts of the community nearly killed me for permanently nagging for a UI change. UI in Blender is a holy cow. Don't even mention it when you are not prepared to battle for your life.

The fork goes into a completely different usability direction. Away from the hotkey centered workflow. Towards a good to use graphical UI. And this is simply not what they want to have. Not a single commit from me would make it into the master. The Blender Mantra is one hand at the keyboard, one hand at the mouse. That's with what they have grown big. So they don't see a need for a change. Which i can even understand to some degree. Never change a working system. And which i had to accept at one point. And so i started the fork instead.

Quote: I guess it goes back to what Steve Jobs said about customers not knowing what they want and that you have to tell them what they want.
Wasn't the original quotation from John Ford, when you ask people what they want, then they say faster horses or so? ^^
__________________
Free Gamegraphics, Freeware Games http://www.reinerstilesets.de
Die deutsche 3D Community: http://www.3d-ring.de

Last edited by Tiles : 4 Weeks Ago at 09:34 AM.
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Originally Posted by Tiles: Of course i tried. This would have been the best thing. Didn't work. The module owner didn't see "the value in this feature". And everything UI is a untouchable design decision anyways. In the end parts of the community nearly killed me for permanently nagging for a UI change. UI in Blender is a holy cow. Don't even mention it when you are not prepared to battle for your life.

The fork goes into a completely different usability direction. Away from the hotkey centered workflow. Towards a good to use graphical UI. And this is simply not what they want to have. Not a single commit from me would make it into the master. The Blender Mantra is one hand at the keyboard, one hand at the mouse. That's with what they have grown big. So they don't see a need for a change. Which i can even understand to some degree. Never change a working system. And which i had to accept at one point. And so i started the fork instead.

Wasn't the original quotation from John Ford, when you ask people what they want, then they say faster horses or so? ^^

Sorry to hear that it was such a struggle. I can definitely understand the developers and the proficient users wanting to keep a hotkey workflow because that is the fastest way to work. But that doesn't mean that meaningful changes couldn't be made to accommodate new users as long as it didn't slow the experts down. Also anything that is completely unnecessary or cumbersome for both types of users should definitely be looked at.

I hadn't heard that one from John Ford, but it makes sense.
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Originally Posted by Shenan: Moogaloonie, Cycles is a separate project(?) of the Blender foundation, and it was coded from scratch to use a different license (Apache License) which intentionally allows complete integration with commercial software (https://www.cycles-renderer.org/). I'm not sure if Smith Micro contributed money or code back to the project out of courtesy, but they had no obligation to. It's also available commercially(?) as a 3rd-party add-on for Cinema 4D and is apparently in development to be integrated with Rhino (this is all mentioned on that page).
Oh, then maybe I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for Poser to get Eevee as its viewport. Thank you for the clarification.
 
  4 Weeks Ago
Tiles, thanks for Bforartists.

I am learning it now. I am a long term Maya/Max user and I just can't justify AD prices for private 'fun' work outside the workplace. Very much appreciated.

Tried Blender and I really hated it. Your solution is MUCH better. Now, if only I had more time...

Do you plan on continuing to develop it? Any plans you can share?
__________________
GENESIS
 
  4 Weeks Ago
HI Genesis,

The development continues of course

Next upcoming release 0.9.6 will bring the Blender 2.78a changes and a ton of new icons. This one is nearly ready, we just wait for Blender 2.79a to go live. Midlevel goals is polishing and continue with improving the UI , usability, and of course the documentation. And we need much more tutorials. And then the next very big task is to port all the changes to Blender 2.8. So the work never really ends

Kind regards

Reiner
__________________
Free Gamegraphics, Freeware Games http://www.reinerstilesets.de
Die deutsche 3D Community: http://www.3d-ring.de

Last edited by Tiles : 4 Weeks Ago at 07:34 AM.
 
reply 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 05:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.