Should I stay or should I go

#39

is xsi easy to learn?

You know one thing I did notice is there is no perfect application.
There is always that one tool from one program you want, that your tool ain’t got.

I wish I could combine Sketchup, Zbrush, and Silo all in one for modelling.

I wish A:M would import at least OBJ or FBX like all the other 3d programs do.

But then the Lightwavers have their deal they wish for, C4d folks were looking for N-Gons and less modules, Max needs this and that, etc.

Nothing is perfect, but I guess as an artist I work with what I can :slight_smile:

I need to learn more about XSI.

I need something with a good renderer, easy animating and rigging, celshading and easy to use hair.

#40

XSI looks really good to me and the latest new tools are just more compelling reasons to check it out. I’ve heard the ease of setting up shaders and rendering are smooth as butter. I’ve been thinking of getting Foundation just to add it to the toolbox. I have played with it in the past. Really excellent toolset and elegant UI. Just don’t know if it’s worth it to me at this point to pick up yet another app. Between Max, Bodypaint, Maya, Zbrush, and A:M, I think I’m pretty tapped out.

I haven’t used A:M for about a year now. I stopped at v. 11. I didn’t “quit” out of any real dissatisfaction, just didn’t have enough time to devote to it. My day job was Max-centered until I switched teams. Now we are Maya-centered. So, squeezing in A:M time was difficult. This morning, on a lark, I re-installed A:M on my home computer. I have been trying to get as good as I could with those other apps, but I still love the deceptively simple A:M world (I say deceptive because there is a ton of depth there).

What’s the word on v. 12? Hot or not?

#41

Version 12 is great. The clothing and hair are awesome.

It does pack alot of power. I think if it got past that whole spline only or better yet created a hybrid fully sketch type modeling(splines in the background) I think it would reign supreme.

Checked out your gallery, dude your rock!!!

Hey just wondering since you use both. Can you spline FASTER than you POLY?

I think it may just be me when modelling with splines. I guess I’m just slow using that. I mean I have made models in the past but just don’t feel the speed.

#42

Q: is xsi easy to learn?
– I guess that depends on the person. I can only speak for myself. But I find my migration to XSI pretty easy. Yesterday I could set up a 2 character fighting sequence - this would normally take me a couple days or a week to do in A:M.

   [i]Quote: I need something with a good renderer, easy animating and rigging, celshading and easy to use hair.[/i]

I fell inlove with XSI’s cel shade. Honestly thats the first thing that pulled me away from A:M and Lightwave (btw, you know how fast you can cel shade in XSI? - just 1 click!!! and its on. Well just set color of course but its still fast)

   A good renderer. Another reason I fell for XSI - Mental Ray. Its simply the best. Nuff said.

Easy animating and rigging - LOL. Another 1 click task I found in XSI is the rigging. This is where XSI kicked Maya’s butt. Maya doesnt come with the amazing rigs XSI have. Right off the bat you can animate these rigs easily.

   [i]Can you spline FASTER than you POLY?[/i]
   
   -- There's no way in hell spline can beat poly modeling. This has been always my frustrations with A:M. I hope by A:M v27.x they will open the door for poly modeling and SubD's.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t work for Softimage. I just know a good software when I see one.

I love A:M for its character animation ability. But that’s that. Rendering, modeling, Texture maps and STABILITY in A:M is just a pain in the @$$. I don’t hate A:M or anything, I just wanna be more productive. A:M still rocks in a few areas. And I mean few (like one or two).

#43

Version 12 is great. The clothing and hair are awesome.

That’s great to hear. When I started using the hair tools, in 11 I really like them, but they always killed me when it was time to render. I’m sure the Hash folks have made some improvements in that department. I love how powerful and simple the hair tools are.

I’m curious about the cloth tools. I never played with the existing cloth sim stuff that was in the previous versions, but I am intrigued to see how it works now.

Hey just wondering since you use both. Can you spline FASTER than you POLY?

I suppose coming from a 3DS Max/Maya/Gaming background, I find polys easier to play with - but in the past year or so, I really have tried to expand upon the basic modeling techniques I employed for gaming and dive more into the Bay Raitt edgeloop topology world. I say this because learning how to model for higher-res/subdivision surface models is an artform unto itself. Understaning how to set up good edge loop flows is really critical, especially when trying to expound upon a mesh in Zbrush. I guess speed is one of those things that’s kind of relative for me as it really depends on what I’m building. But in general, I find I need to spend more time planning on how I’m going to model something (something organic, to be specific) when I model with splines. What I’m seeing also is how the world of patches, which favor quads, and hi-res polygonal modeling really are kind of cross-application modalities. Building a good curve network is application independent. The only really irritating qualities about patches are the little things - like dealing with creases - but again, understanding good topology does much to mitigate this. I like the economy of modeling with splines/patches. You don’t need many splines to make most volumes. For what it’s worth, I think A:M has, by far, the best patch modeling system available. I guess it has to be, since it is really the only way to fly in the A:M world.

I think it may just be me when modelling with splines. I guess I’m just slow using that. I mean I have made models in the past but just don’t feel the speed.

I hear you. I think once you commit fully to that world, you’ll see speed benefits. I definitely model slower in A:M, but I think it has more to do with the different demands of patch-modeling/versus poly-modeling.

Checked out your gallery, dude your rock!!!

Well, thanks, Flog. That’s really nice for you to say. I try my best.

Oh yeah, I have a question for you: Do you find the UV tools in A:M unstable? I had some stability problems using them with 10.5 and 11. More often than not, I would crash when I had a lot of sets of UV groups and I started trying to pack them on a grid (that darn game backgroudn showing up again.

#44

A:M still rocks in a few areas. And I mean few (like one or two).

:scream: :scream: :scream:

I like A:M… it’s insanely simple and powerful, but with all that you mentioned in XSI, sounds like a winner.

#45

Simple - sure.

Powerful - LOL. Very funny. When it stops crashing I’ll give it a second thought :wink:

#46

Naa, now come on, A:M’s come a long way since 9.5 it’s overall stability has greatly improved. Yeah it crashes from time to time but not like it has in the past, not like 9.5, that was a sick, sick, joke. In 9.5 I would click on the little A:M logo to open the program and a message would appear shortly afterward stating, “The hell you are”.

But what other app. offers you cloth, hair and fabulous animation tools for the $299?

#47

None!!

Plain and simple the most features

To even get hair in XSI you have to spend 6,995 dollars, wow!!!

I was wondering does XSI have any tools similiar to C4Ds Clothtilde?

#48

Give me a break.

  Sure A:M claims to have hair and other dynamics... but come on, let's be realistic.
  The results are just no way near the quality of Maya, LWave, Max nor XSI.

Cloth and other dynamics in A:M always crashed on my machine (2Ghz AMD w/ 2GB of ram). A simple ball and a flat cloth surface with barely 12 patches on the scene would cause A:M to crash… wtf?!

  I guess it all goes down to what you pay for. Like my father always say: [i][b]"You buy peanuts, you get peanuts"[/b][/i].
  
  [b]Powerful [/b]you say? I'm just gonna stop here and smile.

Thank you for opening this thread Flog. It has taught me a lot. I was giving A:M another shot. In the beginning of this thread I was even convincing you to stay. But like you, I always come back and struggle with that same question: Should I stay or should I go?

  This time, for real, I'm gone.
  
  3D is a serious passion for me and I need a serious package on my arsenal.
  
  Good luck to you all and more power to Hash :)
  
  Cheers.
#49

… and by the way… you get Sasquatch (hair plug-in) built-in Lightwave for $795… now that’s a [b]WOW!

[/b]Seriously, is it worth saving money than saving yourself the stress? Go figure.

#50

You can make money with A:M, look at these guys they’re making a boat-load of cash using A:M and a few other guys too, this is just all I could think of.

Even Jeff Lew and Victor Navone still uses A:M for their personal stuff and they’ve got a serious passion for 3d.

Flog, if you’re looking for a good modeling app. you should look at this. I think you can convert the files to A:M too. But as far as I know you can produce high-end models with this program.

#51

RHINO exports A:M?!? That would be wonderful. That would actually solve all my problems getting a modeller such as this to work with A:M. I’ve used Rhino before and it is great to model with. If it could work with A:M that would be awesome.

You know I was playing with A:M the other day, and I’m still in love with the program. It was my first program I ever bought.

Bought in 97’. I still wish I had my models I built back than. I had created like 50 characters. Of course they are not up to today’s standard, well I don’t know a few of them may be a little better, lol.

I think back then I was a little more patient and had nothing really to accomplish (okay I was working on a series then too) LOL. but I was at home with my parents.

You know I wish there were more “WINK” videos on modelling to show us other’s techniques. I would love to see how someone with more skill can model.

You know I have my way of doing things in splines but maybe my way is wrong and the “slow” way to do it, and I just gave up to fast or disheartened to fast.

Have you seen what has been accomplished in A:M? That is why I use the tool.

Haruwo
Nosferatu
Killer Bean
Soulcage
etc.

Great shorts created with a one man team. If I really had my way, I would love to work with a team of A:M users and make a bigger movie showing everyone what the little program that could can do at it’s max.

You would have people asking you “You used what? A 299 dollar program?” “WOW!!”

Some people today still think you need Maya in order to get something done, but thing is A:M can go head on with Maya in the right hands.

You know what? If no one will make a “WINK video” modelling with A:M I can go ahead and try it, and maybe people can see what I’m doing wrong.

I would love to stick with A:M especially since I am doing an Indie film and would like to have that program with the Indie spirit by my side.

What I am going to do as far as my production is going is just use a mix of programs. A:M for animation and some advance camera projects and to achieve the look I need, then for compositing. I’ll use Vue, Silo, Sketchup mix for backgrounds and modelling the background characters.

If you have ever seen URDA , Magical Play, or even Soulcage’s work. Alot of times they use A:M for character animation (who can beat it in this area) but for backgrounds and such I believe they use Lightwave.

I do owe A:M alot. It was the program that opened my world and made 3d animation possible for me.

A:M is definately an inspiration to the little guy!!

#52

I wonder if I go over to the XSI forum, will I find AM users dissing XSI? I don’t know as I’ve never been over there. But I doubt it. The very fact that you prefer XSI but yet still here you are speaks volumes to me.

#53

You know I guess for anyone you just have to find that tool that works best for you and your needs.

No tool will ever be perfect.

I went over to XSIs forum and found people who are not to fond of the difficulty behind rendering.

I went over to Lightwave and some folks complaining how the toon shader has not been updated in years and needs work

I am in the A:M forum and find people complaining about not being able to work with Poly’s and would like to use A:M striclty for animating

I went to the Maya forum and found people who are mad at other things.

No one will ever find the perfect program, I guess I have had a little reflection on this.
I tried checking out XSI and for what I need it is Uber Expensive. 6,995 dollars just for hair, and it does look difficult in the rendering department. I’d like to see some videos.

Lightwave animating does not seem as fun.

Maya takes a PHD to learn it.

Don’t get me started on Max.

Lightwave, Maya, A:M, XSI, etc, not one is perfect and not everyone will ever be fully satisfied. This is what i have come to realize in my research and visiting other forums.

We all just have to look for our own feel and find the one that is right for us.
Should I stay or should I go? When I finish my movie I’ll let you all know how I did it and with what. I’m still trying to find the work flow that is best for me, researching what else is out there.

A:M does continue to rock, and I’m sure the Lightwavers, C4Ders, Maxers, Mayans etc all believe in their program but also have their complaints and wishes as well.

This is why I love A:M

Look how easy it is to animate
http://www.noah3d.com/making_spider.html

I mean he has a character and he just animates its, like nothing. Most programs you have to type in some code or something, go to a menu, click a special button, jump in a circle, just to make it move one leg. Forget rigging it.

#54

Sheesh.

Why am I here? I’ve been using A:M since version 7, that’s why. I used to think this software has lots of potentials. Over the years I have suck it up for A:M but I finally had it when this thread started.

What worked for me might not work for everyone. I was just giving Flog an input cuz like him, I would like to take advantage of the tools and resources available in the industry.

If I start to model on A:M, I can only make rendered backgrounds from Lightwave. If I model in Silo, I can only animate it in Lwave because A:M can’t open Subd’s natively. They had to be re-modeled or clean up the works.

The character models I make can be easily transfered from any package (silo, maya, max, lwave, c4d, xsi, etc.) without degradations. Its perfect. Try modeling in splines and bring it to these packages… would you have the same result? u-uh.

I am not asking you guys to like XSI or anything. I just said it worked for me. If you don’t like it, fine. What brought Jeff Lew and Victor Navone to the top was their talent - they still use high-end apps at their jobs and not A:M. They just use it for personal projects. As I see it, you can’t get professional with A:M.

If A:M is so powerful like most of you say, why won’t ILM or dreamworks use it on their pipeline? What’s the reason?

Yup, A:M is a great tool for Char. Animation. What else? Render? Modeling? Texturing?

If there’s two things to describe this package its simple and cheap.

But don’t call it powerful. A system that crashes on simple collission detection, UV mapping and boolean operations isn’t a powerful software.

Flog, just finish what you need to finish, doesn’t matter how you get there but GET THERE. You’ll be judged on your final product, not the tools you used to make it.

#55

Thanks for the confidence.

I have liked everyone’s words of encouragement and perspective. I know I’m not alone in my endeavors and frustrations.

Not really when it comes to packages but the journey to making a film. It is frustrating, and weigh’s on my mind.

I think sometimes projects don’t go as fast as you would like. I wish everyone the best in all they try to achieve. I cannot wait to let you see what I create and I would love to see what you create.

At the end of the day, art is art.

When I think about it more I think…Taking a photograph is an art. It is quicker and you can take more pictures than it does to paint, but then painting is an art as well no matter how long it takes to do.

I saw one guy who takes six months to do one picture using a typewriter and letters.

All in all

I just can’t wait to get there and hope to share it with everyone sooner.

Thanks again for all your support, comments, suggestions, EVERYTHING. It helped me brainstorm, saw the good and the bad of the my tools, and really helped in encouraging me to press on.

I don’t feel as frustrated as I did before and I thank you all for that.

#56

Glad to help anytime. If you need a collaborator in the future let me know :wink:

Here’s a few showcase of my work:
http://ice2big.com/html%20collection/htmlsv%2011/gallery/stillrenders/still.htm

– its pretty outdated though.

#57

RHINO exports A:M?!?

Nope… not what I said… I said, “I think you can convert the files to A:M” so that A:M can open it. So don’t get mad when you crack open rhino and there’s no export to .mdl feature.:eek:

But hey, since you’re having such a hard time with modeling you ought to look into hiring one of the guys (or gals) at the hash forums (or here) to build your stuff for you. Just tell them what you can afford and see who’s willing to do it at that price. Give yourself a budget like $100 - $200 and build out of that budget. In other words, you’re probably going to get more attention and more things accomplished if you wave money in front of faces. Why, I myself make it a firm rule to always sit up from my slouched position when I see cash. $10 or $20 or more from your budget, (per model) if you want to start there, as long as it’s something. A lot of times when you inquire about said work you get offers ranging from free to several hundreds of dollars, so I’d just state what you can afford and get on with it.

Another avenue would be to utilize the mass trove of free models that were recently donated. Just modify the model(s) to fit your needs, OR pay someone to modify them for you which could turn out to be cheaper than building new from scratch, plus they’re all rigged and most of them are textured.

…and remember that this is an investment (isn’t it, I think it is) so know that you’ll get the money you put into the project back -somehow.

Actually, it sounds like you’re more of a director than a modeler, like you’re just really ready to start giving direction and seeing your story play out… which is a good thing! But if that’s the case then you REALLY might want to subcontract some of the work while you tackle other obsticles. Collaborations generally don’t go in favor of the originator’s initial plans due to lack of incentive for the artist(s).

#58

Great. Instead of converting us to XSI, you’re just calling our software of choice a piece of shit. No, I wouldn’t call AM simple. I’d call it elegant and yes…powerful. I don’t know why you get crashes, but it doesn’t happen here and if it does (as with any software) I report them and get them fixed pronto.

And, as I’m sure you already know, most effects studios use in-house software and occasionally off the shelf apps that have had a strangle hold on the market through sheer advertising grunt.

OK, AM mightn’t have all the plugins/models/support/etc of other apps and that has as much to do with it being so cheap and it being thought of as a toy. But I’ve got to say, I’ve never found it lacking.

As Flog says, it’s all about the result at the end of the day…who cares what software is used to make it.