Being a software developer has to be a tough job.
There isn’t one piece of software I own who’s user-base isn’t like this (at least to some degree) or forum isn’t full of ‘what’s missing’.
It doesn’t matter which forum one visits, it is always full of complaints and “I wants”…some have a little more positive voices mixed in but the EI forum isn’t particularily different than others. Just not as busy.
PaulS,
hold on, I’m not complaining about a minor this or that.
EI itself, through VizzFizz has mentioned that:
Originally Posted by Vizfizz
[i]CJ and Richard,
developers found a considerable amount of internal infrastructure work needs to be done in order to accomplish those high level CA and vertex level features.[/i]
this is no small complaint. One could read this as EI being the betamax of 3d software. Basically the developers just “didnt get it” when the other guys were making the infrastructure changes and updates to thier apps.
Now I know that no one likes a crybaby playing like a broken record player. But I’ve got a lot of EIAS pride and built up frustration that the software I’ve been pumping money towards is just finally seeing what needs to happen.
If I could go back 5,6 or 7 years, I’d move on. But Ive got too much invested in workflow to just go somewhere else. So, coming to the end of my crying… Its about friggin time EI and please hurry up!
Mike Fitz
www.3dartz.com
Paul,
Perhaps… but to be honest, our CGTalk forum has been doing quite well. The number of posts are increasing and EI’s Forum has been getting more and more visitors. I think the interest is there its just easy to always want more. Last time I checked with Brad, EI’s site was averaging 1500-2000 hits a month. That’s respectable.
Mike,
Frustration noted…and I don’t want you to think that I think you’re being a whiner. You’ve got a rightful reason to be concerned. I’m just trying to point out that EITG is moving…probably more so than it has in years. That may still seem small against its competitors, but I really think Brad has considerably more focus on what needs to be done than Dwight ever did.
The infrastructure work is important. But it has to be done on a limited staff…plus there also has to be new tools in the mix in order to sell the next version. Ultimately an infusion of 250k would be really nice and it would fix a lot of problems…but that’s not available right now…but it could be especially if we keep addressing these major issues. I think Tesla will go a long way to help EITG get back online. Getting our modeler back will get EI out of the “specially application” status and provide a complete solution again.
I wouldn’t place the “blame” on the developers, but rather a complacent management team and a parent company that went belly up. Combine that with a disgruntled user base and a little black listing from industry groups and you’ve got our current situation.
I’m here to tell you that EITG is not the same company anymore…but it has a legacy it has to deal with. Brad’s position on that is; “that was then, this is now”. He’s sticking with it and promises change. Gone are the days of frivolous spending. From what I’ve seen, and after talking to him personally, I believe he can do it. It just takes resources. That’s the tough part.
I hate this phrase but I am going to apply it here. "I feel your pain"..argh. I said it. Only because really, I do. I have been there.
When your livelihood, creative aspirations, money and plain pride is riding on software that has had setbacks it's despairing to say the least. Especially when it was the leading software on the Mac for Professional 3D work in Hollywood. It's was painful even incorporating other software because of EIAS LOVE.
Set backs happen but so do "Come Backs". EI is setting itself up for a come-back with the internal restructuring needed to take it higher. Tesla is that very internal restructuring frame work for a "Come Back". The lost of EIM was a setback and so was the "Play" managerial era. Brad seems to be the Play ComeBack. Sometimes just takes the right people. Brad seems to be the Steve Jobs of EIAS...so to speak :)
As Apple Mac users we have seen "great" companies tedder on the brink of obsolence and come back up to the top of the heap with a vengenence as a hot commodity, moneymaker, Earth shaker. But it's a process. Doesn't happen over nite. Sometimes you have to go down to come up.
When your on the "Down Low" you have to count the good points (the blessings). The small steps are really big ones. Kernel rebuiding is a much bigger accomplishment than adding CA featurettes after the core is in place. Adding 10 CA features will be much easier and effective once old code has be rehashed. Long as they are doing it EIAS has good future.
Here's the real truth, Electric Image users are still landing major industry clients, getting work done, doing commericial and movies. The gallery rocks. New release are coming out with key SOTA rendering feature. Awards are still being won.
Gotta to count the good with bad. There's still lots of great things happening with EIAS. I still use it for CA. Yes, I have incorporated other software where it lacks so I am not as stress. I had to find a UV editor and modeler after EIM but there's still plenty there in EIAS 7.0 that I use currently and things are getting better.
Before I used Maya, I used Wing3D and even Blender. There's inexpensive means to supplement (UV, Modeler) and reduce anxiety until the "really" good stuff hits again :)
Movies are still being made in EIAS…Ok…well being planned …bout to be…ha.
True. it was a set-back having nothing to do with the quality of the software.
As heresay would have it, Info was leaked to the masses that EI was an affordable, production oriented SFX software used by a leading FX big house in Hollywood. Their secret weapon had been exposed and they penialized EIAS by giving all licenses the BOOT.
We on our own now…best thing is to keep doing great stuff.
But I miss seeing EI in the Cinefex mags., gave it Hollywood crediblity.
Guess we are going to have to produce our own Hollywood Hits! 
Oh…it was more than that. There was definitely some corporate favoritism and agreements going on, some broken promises made by certain vfx executives, some hot headed responses, and some poor decisions made. This turned the internal tide against EI (understandably considering EI’s responses) and dozens perhaps hundreds of artists took those sentiments into the future. Fast forward to today. Those artists are now running companies or are in senior positions and have bad memories of EI and refuse to use it. Those who stuck with it got burned by Play and its vaporware promises. More users lost. Complacent EI management kept it alive, but didn’t really move it forward correctly…this resulted in more user slippage.
Brad is the first CEO of EITG that seems to be doing something about it. I think he has the will…what he lacks is the means. It isn’t the 1990’s any more and EI’s market share has been squandered. So, he’s taking the only logical course of action.
Somewhere in there, a new marketing and sales plan has to be put in place.
Oh…it was more than that. There was definitely some corporate favoritism and agreements going on, some broken promises made by certain vfx executives, some hot headed responses, and some poor decisions made. This turned the internal tide against EI (understandably considering EI’s responses) and dozens perhaps hundreds of artists took those sentiments into the future. Fast forward to today. Those artists are now running companies or are in senior positions and have bad memories of EI and refuse to use it. Those who stuck with it got burned by Play and its vaporware promises. More users lost. Complacent EI management kept it alive, but didn’t really move it forward correctly…this resulted in more user slippage.
Brad is the first CEO of EITG that seems to be doing something about it. I think he has the will…what he lacks is the means. It isn’t the 1990’s any more and EI’s market share has been squandered. So, he’s taking the only logical course of action.
Somewhere in there, a new marketing and sales plan has to be put in place. The future of EI doesn’t lie in recovering old users, its creating a market in new ones.
That’s probably a good idea actually, its just a pitty something more radical cannot be done with the GUI, even a good skin job- just to give a more modern look would do a lot of good, visual appearances are important IMO, its been i long time since anything major has happened in this area, if ever…
Reuben
Tradeshows, Exhibits, SIGs? Schools seem to be a slow turn around.
Well, I figure you know what “really” happened. Just as people like you and Tomas and other industry pros know how valuable EI is in a production house. I mean EI in action really getting things done in previs and production.
I don’t advertise so I don’t have much to say there. But I do know business is about RELATIONSHIPS. So it’s best to treat people well, you never know when the tables will turn. As you say, lots of those low level artists are now “running the show” or heads of departments or have influence on scouts looking for teams. Not everybody has a forgive and forget attitude. What goes around often comes around…rather quickly if you ask me.
I thought Brad was Big Daddy War-BUCKS…I mean had DOUGH to throw at EI?
Even so, it’s best to seek funding as long as they don’t dictate to much.
I would really like EITG to listen to the requirements of it’s users. My requests for tools is not because I want them, it is because I am going to be forced to move to another app because EIAS is lacking them.
Example… I model a character in EIM, pose that character in EIAS… because of lacking tools, I bring that posed character into Modo for corrections. My request for better IK and weightmaps is very, VERY, important to me.
I understand working on underlying architecture, but how is that a “feature”?
Cj
CJ,
Without specific infrastructure enhancements, EIAS isn’t capable of performing some of the features we require as character animators. None of these features are impossible, they just require the foundations to be there to implement. Slowly but surely, these infrastructure enhancements have been making their way into EI as part of regular upgrades. For example, the plugin APIs have been expanded to permit non-modal windows and there is improved interconnectivity between plugins and the host package. Xpressionist was the first plugin to really take advantage of this with EI’s deformations. Now a XP script can drive a deformation in realtime. If plugin manufacturers take advantage of this, we should eventually start seeing plugins that can remain open, allow interaction with the host, and communicate between themselves. Imagine, for example, keeping Dante open and altering the parameters on the fly and seeing particles update in the host package rather than having to close the plugin interface. Theoretically, I believe this is now possible.
The meshing subsystem Animator requires is necessary for Animator to understand what it means to control something on the component level rather than just the object level. If we want tools to draw splines, create clusters, have lattices, and to reshape geometry on the vertex level, Animator has to be taught how to understand all of that. Right now, it doesn’t need to because it relies on an outside modeling package to manipulate geometry. That’s a real bummer for the CA animator cause a lot of our work requires vertex level manipulation.
When Tesla comes back into the picture, there has been some talk about bridging the two applications in a similar method that Lightwave talks to its Modeler through a hub. That’s one potential solution…but not a very graceful method. The other option is teach Animator how to do some of that stuff itself…and the last option is to bypass that all together and just pass the CA animation requirements off to a future Tesla incarnation because Telsa has the foundation already in place.
Other foundational infrastructure subsystems in addition to ‘Mesh’ mentioned by the developers include:
Better Data re-routing for improved channel control outside of using expressions. It could also set up cloning scenarios, master/slave capabilities, and so forth. Right now, the user has to script functions like that in XP and that doesn’t really solve everything.
Hidden plugin technology for dynamic attribute enhancements to an object. These “hidden plugins” essentially permit users to add dynamic attributes to an objects channel data. A sphere that is tapped by Dante as a surface emitter could then access its “emission” channel data without opening the plugin, plus other “hidden plugins” could talk directly to Dante if they needed to. This kind of stackable interaction between these data bridges (hidden plugins) allows a more open system of communication. A cruder example of this now is what’s found in Paralumino’s geometry plugins. These plugins are designed to stack and talk to each other in order to build new geometry. Trestle feeds Swage, or Braider breaks down an Ubersphere in order for it to become extrusion paths for Swage or Scrim.
I guess the point I’m trying to make CJ is by asking EITG to embrace CA to a degree that is competitive with other packages means EIAS has to make a major evolution. If it doesn’t…whatever is added is just another piecemeal patch to entry level CA tools that exist now. We need more.
One other worry is repeating work. There could be means to make minor enhancements to the existing CA system now, but do we want to waste that effort if something better is possible? Its a really tough call. Right now I believe there are several enhancements that can be made to EIAS that will benefit a Character Animator without repeating or wasting work. Hopefully they’ll be addressed.
I wonder what would be the “top ten” features that would attract non-hardcore pros and non-pro newcomers alike the most, by the way. Currently it is hard to see EIAS mentioned even in Mac-based 3D forums, while C4D and even MacLightwave thrive there. I think EIAS has this vague halo of being expensive, difficult, import/export-problematic and things, and there must be some way of dispelling it. I don’t know, perhaps adding some small touches that make things easier to everybody (say, AE-style Ease In/out contextual menu commands, which would be grand to have, actually), really bulletproofing things like OBJ import (without relying on third-party plugins). The videotutorials probably are the most important tool to promote (now that I think of it, Spanish forum Macuarium is in for some caffeinated Ian videogoodness :D).
The forward IK may be above what the current application can handle… but fixing the weightmap system, and improving the IK solution… I cant imagine needing this. I am not asking for Motionbuilder inside EI, I already own MB, I am pointing out my real world, and others, issues that are crippling. I am more than willing to work around them for the short term, but if you are telling me it will be v9 (2 years) until I could possibly expect improvements, this is troublesome!
To be fair… ( I dont want to claim something without explaining)
Whats wrong with Weightmaps? Even though there should be blending of regions, it does not occur, and if it does, it is unpredictable. This makes it almost completely impossible to control joints, like arms and legs. And if you have a character with large limbs, like a rodent or dog, it is absolutely impossible. Using placeholder bones is the workaround, but it only gets you so far.
Whats wrong with IK? The minimizer is the best IK option, but any of the options produce unpredictable results. I can have it positioned properly, then save the file, when reopened, the solution is completely changed. A foot or hand that was flat to the ground will now be rotated. The pole vector and rotation do not work as expected, and the combination of the three is almost uncontrollable.
Cj
Quite a dilemma.
Building CA workarounds into the current EIAS foundation doesn’t sound very efficient. And waiting two years for a new foundation sounds intolerable.
There must be a more acceptable temporary solution, like:
Building Tesla as a modeler and FBX renderer
Working a deal to lease leading CA tools to EIAS users at a low price until EI has a better CA solution.
I’m sure you all have better ideas than these…
JM
Quite a dilemma.
Building CA workarounds into the current EIAS foundation doesn’t sound very efficient. And waiting two years for a new foundation sounds intolerable.
There must be a more acceptable temporary solution, like:
Quickly building Tesla as a modeler and FBX renderer
Working a deal to lease leading CA tools to EIAS users at a low price until EI has a better CA solution.
I’m sure you all have better ideas than these…
JM
CJ…those are fair questions and there still are opportunities to block in potential features on the development schedule provided we have a CA familiar programmer that can get the job done. The Igors are more render oriented so the logical choice is Blair. However, his time has been highly capitalized so that means finding a potential alternative. If the Igors get their lighting and render enhancements done along with the 64 bit conversion, they might be able to tackle it. The unknown factor is Ramjac and what they can or cannot provide for v8.
I think, in defense of the developers, they are trying to address the CA question in earnest…fully and completely. I can attest that all agree that CA is important and critical to the success of EIAS. However I agree with you…sometimes they’ll gloss over things because there is “too much to do” before something can be addressed so they go with what’s safe. I also know they’re very concerned about wasted effort. If correcting those issues absorbs 25-40% of the development cycle, only to see their efforts replaced when they really attack CA issues, they think the time would be better spent on potential features that can help draw in new users and remain solvent in future upgrades.
The only way to resolve this issue faster is to have more money to hire more programmers…and Brad is expending his resources. He’s footing 6.6, 7.0, 7.0.1, 7.0.2, 8, Sonica and Tesla.
During these few months i have being exploring different 3d softwares,matchmove apps,node compositors. IMOP evryday there are some new tools,some new app doing things in diferent ways , more user friendly but that doesnt mean the final product will look better. Take a look at NUKE the interface is far from friendly,and yet is a great application . Zbrush and Mudbox they both seemed to do the same for me is just a matter of preferences.I dont use neither of them but it will be good if EIAS had some good Zbrush import feautures, so it could be used in a production team.
So what i mean to say is that EIAS cant be good at every little detail of today´s 3D pipeline but it can stand out from the rest. If it is mainly used for its fast rendering capabilities than it could be a good idea to let it be as it is well known, a fast rendering engine and bring TESLA as a modeler but with some animation capabilities where you could pose characters via bones ,UV editor, Camera for previewing textures,etc and use Electirimage for rendering your projects combinig all the capabilities that already has…like .FBX capabilities,Camera Mapping ,Image Based Lightning, Mocon which is by far better than integrating After Effects with Cinema4d. The other day there was someone asking how to export camera data from Cinema 4d to Nuke. EIAS is not a beginners application like everybody speaks about they just dont know the power of this tool but that is what it is a tool that it must be used in several ways to get the respect it deserves.
Edgard Iriarte
Senior Broadcast Designer
EI 2.9cd( Looking to upgrade this year when TESLA ships)
James,
The solution is difficult. I personally think Brad is betting on Tesla to generate capital and new interest in EITG. He has no intention on shelving EIAS and he’s fully committed to keeping it alive. We all know we need a modeler back in the picture in order to be seen as a full service package again so I’m completely on board and in favor of EIM’s/Tesla’s return. It has more priority than CA and too be honest, I think it has more priority than any other potential upgrade. Now some may argue and say no, we don’t need it that badly…but I don’t think so. Kishore is a talented guy and he’s providing the foundations for something new. Tesla is the key to the next generation of EIAS users.
Now lets consider this. Tesla is due around the May time frame. If it goes over well, a version 2 of Tesla could hit the shelves around the same time v8 is released at the end of the year. Could a v2 Tesla have CA animation capabilities? Not realistically. But it could have some kind of kick butt vertex manipulation tools and potentially some kind of bridge to Animator. As mentioned this is not the most elegant solution, but it is the most obtainable. At that point, depending on how things are going, a choice will have to be made as to where CA will ultimately land.
There’s a lot of things to consider.