New Blender viewport (early stage) and Maya comparative

[Nizar]

The early stage on blender viewport, after so many time under work, finally can be tested
here a comparative with Maya

[Bullit]

Looks good. Fabric Engine maybe should be looking to Blender also.

[luceric]

It's in french, and it says the blender viewport is OK zoomed out, but becomes "unusable" ("innutilisable") when you zoom in, unlike Maya where the frame rate remains high

[El Burritoh]

Actually, Maya was even a little faster when zoomed in, it seemed to me...

[Draise]

Yeah. Still needs a lot of optimization.

[Nizar]

Yes, had problem when zooming, also reported by others user.
Anyway this is the first test builds available, the first implementation will be ready (probably) in next release, 2.76 actually we are at 2.75, so in less than 2 month we have a stable version.
Some users arrived to 128.985.602 polygons in sculpt mode per single object.

Indeed really interesting, viewport capabilities was not exactly great in blender.

Even on viewport side, here a test on the new PBR viewport:


And opensubdivision is also on the way (ton tweet somewhere, cannot find at the moment)

[MauricioPC]

Great video nizar. I'm everyday more impressed with Blender.

Is there a great tutorial for beginners? There's a lot out there, but is there one that you recommend?

[Nizar]

Hi MauricioPC,
I think Kent Trammel did a great tutorial here:

a bit dated, but nice.

I boring the introduction tutorial, for every software. If you want a introductory tutorial, here cgcookie have one very complete:
https://cgcookie.com/flow/introduction-to-blender/
must register, but is free.

Anyway, you need to use blender from start to finish, fighting against frustration because you just have habits in other software. Blender is not a Maya or softimage clone, is a different software, like is different C4d or 3dsm, so a different logic for the some problem: polymodelling, digital sculpt, rendering, animation etc. etc. Take an entire week, better two if you have time, and use only blender from start to finish an entire project (even simple), I doing so when I need to learn a new software. All seems odd at beginning, but is not bad at all, and every release have something improving in every field (modelling, animation, rendering, GUI and more), but learn the basis, than search addon resolving your need, or speedup your workflow, also can customizing it more deeply I thought, but I suggesting you customizing and adding addon only after learned it.

About open subdivsion, here the link with Ton message:
https://mobile.twitter.com/tonroosendaa ... 6908427264

[Rez007]

It looks nice, but I idk what to think about Blender still. How many NEW technologies have they come up with? (I really do not know, as I do not use Blender) Or do they just emulate what other companies spend a lot of money on for R&D..? Is there a chance that Softimage got EOL'd because of Blender? Perhaps. If companies have to pool their resources and focus on particular products because they are getting competition from a "free" software, then that could very well be a possibility. While the advancements in Blender are intriguing, I just say - tread lightly.

[luceric]

Maybe they should call it the "HQ Viewport"

[Mathaeus]

It looks nice, but I idk what to think about Blender still. How many NEW technologies have they come up with? (I really do not know, as I do not use Blender)

I wouldn't be happy by knowing nothing about Blender, these days. By the way, in times of XSI 5 - 6 -7, there was exact case where Blender was a huge helper to Softimage XSI. It was a free connection to RoadKill unwraper, which was based on LSCM/ABF unwrapping code from Blender. So, a little chain of open source implementations, actually raised a value of one typical commercial app like XSI - while Blender got nothing in return.... In mentioned times, XSI had no any (comparable to lscm/abf) unwrapper.
Anyway, generally you won't expect some refined, brand new implementation in open source software. But, probably you will expect a smart use of existing ideas and patterns, and some parts of Blender definitively deserves the all good words, imho. After all, a lot of innovations, maybe majority, does not belongs to developers of 3ds Max or some another software owned by AD.
On flip side, price of commercial 3d these days, really is not enough high to 'protect' the owner of small business - come on, renting a car for taxi service, or truck for something else - it's several times higher than renting 3ds Max.
All in all, I'm pretty sure that open source actually is helper to entire, still unbelievable small 3d field.
Another story is, that some people don't feel good if they do not hold the absolute monopoly.

[MauricioPC]

Maybe they should call it the "HQ Viewport"

I see what you did here!

[Rez007]

It looks nice, but I idk what to think about Blender still. How many NEW technologies have they come up with? (I really do not know, as I do not use Blender)

I wouldn't be happy by knowing nothing about Blender, these days. By the way, in times of XSI 5 - 6 -7, there was exact case where Blender was a huge helper to Softimage XSI. It was a free connection to RoadKill unwraper, which was based on LSCM/ABF unwrapping code from Blender. So, a little chain of open source implementations, actually raised a value of one typical commercial app like XSI - while Blender got nothing in return.... In mentioned times, XSI had no any (comparable to lscm/abf) unwrapper.
Anyway, generally you won't expect some refined, brand new implementation in open source software. But, probably you will expect a smart use of existing ideas and patterns, and some parts of Blender definitively deserves the all good words, imho. After all, a lot of innovations, maybe majority, does not belongs to developers of 3ds Max or some another software owned by AD.
On flip side, price of commercial 3d these days, really is not enough high to 'protect' the owner of small business - come on, renting a car for taxi service, or truck for something else - it's several times higher than renting 3ds Max.
All in all, I'm pretty sure that open source actually is helper to entire, still unbelievable small 3d field.
Another story is, that some people don't feel good if they do not hold the absolute monopoly.

Well, I never said I am not happy about not knowing anything about Blender. I do know things about Blender, I just don't really use it right now and I do not follow it as much as some users do. I am sure Blender users are more in the "know' than I am, so that is why I asked. Can't know everything about every Application in existence...

I think you are missing the point of my statement. I have no qualms about Blender getting the good news about it, or new advancements that are implemented, or people using it - that's fine. However, some things that are getting implemented are researched by companies that pay out big money for these advancements and then write out white papers on their discoveries. And that is why I was thinking about Softimage...can't have Autodesk funding and paying developers to develop the software of three different applications (Maya, Max and Softimage) that co-exist in the same space while taking on competition from a free application which users then migrate to. So, they then pool their resources together and focus on a product that will be attractive to users - in this case, it seems that Autodesk is pretty much putting their money into Maya. I was just shedding light that this progression with Blender (which is a good one, no doubt) is what could have aided in Softimage's demise.

I am thinking more long term, and this might be what Autodesk is doing as well, in how the rentals seem to benefit larger studios and not really the freelancer. Where are companies like Autodesk, SideFX, Maxon, etc. going to get their money to pay developers to make these advancements if everyone goes open source - Blender? Somehow, I do not think you will be seeing major advancements added to Blender if these other companies weren't the ones making the strides first, unless people start funding Blender...then that would possibly be a totally different story. I am looking at it from a "pricing saves developers/software" point of view.

[Mathaeus]

However, some things that are getting implemented are researched by companies that pay out big money for these advancements and then write out white papers on their discoveries.

So, you know for some 'white paper' written by AD or AVID or Adobe ? Somehow, I can't remember. Maybe some small, irrelevant thing here and there. However, Pixar is opposite story - but , just in case of Open Subdivs it's exactly Pixar who wants to see their technology implemented everywhere, including Blender. The rest of available, usable stuff, probably belongs to universities. Don't worry, if there was any chance to stop some open source because of copyrights, it will be done, already.

And that is why I was thinking about Softimage...can't have Autodesk funding and paying developers to develop the software of three different applications (Maya, Max and Softimage) that co-exist in the same space while taking on competition from a free application which users then migrate to. So, they then pool their resources together and focus on a product that will be attractive to users - in this case, it seems that Autodesk is pretty much putting their money into Maya. I was just shedding light that this progression with Blender (which is a good one, no doubt) is what could have aided in Softimage's demise.

Sorry but I think you're joking...... poor baby AD. So how Houdini or Modo become unaffected by Blender threat? Their owners have more money than AD, or what? If so, I think definitively it's time to cancel your AD subscription. Run as fast as you can.... because they already showed as incompetent to keep what they, voluntarily, bought, one day in 2008. Why they bought SI if they were unable to keep it ? Tomorrow, they'll do same with another software, with even more insane 'explanation''.

Where are companies like Autodesk, SideFX, Maxon, etc. going to get their money to pay developers to make these advancements if everyone goes open source - Blender?

I can't predict the future - but I'm pretty sure it will be, as usually, somewhere in middle. Open source 3d exists long time before Blender, it will exist in future, too. Someone will prefer only one of two sides, someone will be able to utilize both. Most of people will use something commercial, I believe.
By the way, afaik Blender Foundation is getting some money from subsidies, too, donations are only small part. Some developers have a regular job, with salaries. In other word, nothing is 'free', it's just a different way of distribution, that's all.

[Nizar]

The most common error, about Blender, people doing is believing blender is free, so is free the blender development.

Blender is not free, some people paying for it, some on regular basis (5,10,15,20 etc euro per month), some do a simple one time donation, some other buying tutorials or gadgets, because the developers behind blender have a salary like any other programmers. The difference between the usual commercial software is the money don't go for a big % to shareholder, than CEO, vice CEO etc. and than, only a part arrived to programmers, the money collected by blender Foundation go entirely to developers, if there is an excess of money they hire for some months (or weeks) a new coder for some specific task.

Blender is behind some commercial application, and don't doing innovation like others (except some minor things, like grease pencil), but as stated, nto all the commercial software house are so innovative. Without zbrush we probably have not Blender sculpt module, but also no Modo sculpt mode, or C4d sculpt etc. What, in example, so innovative in Modo? Or in 3dsm?

If the Blender foundation plan is correct, and they can follow it, we will see blender innovative only after release 3.0, at moment they catch commercial applications, in some field are better or in par, in other no (one I lamented is exactly the viewport, probably after release 2.76 will be ok for me)

Don't forgot, anyway, the aim of Blender Foundation: freelance and small studio, and not Hollywood pipeline. In this "market", I guess, they are really strong.

I'm happy about blender, not perfect, but very stable and in many tasks very fast, also cycles is great render engine, and release after release becoming better and better, every release have new implementation in every module (blender is a small suite), and new tools and improvement are really stable. If blender was a commercial application I'll be happy to buy it for around 1000 Euro, maybe 1500.

This strictly for my need, probably a FX artist will not so happy about, but know many animator loving it.

Edit: ops, I missed Mathaeus comment, we said the some things..

Another difference with commercial application, I really like, is how users can contact and talk with developers, request this, or report some issue, a direct contact with about daily builds and soon testable new implementation.

[luceric]

It looks nice, but I idk what to think about Blender still. How many NEW technologies have they come up with? (I really do not know, as I do not use Blender)

I wouldn't be happy by knowing nothing about Blender, these days. By the way, in times of XSI 5 - 6 -7, there was exact case where Blender was a huge helper to Softimage XSI. It was a free connection to RoadKill unwraper, which was based on LSCM/ABF unwrapping code from Blender. So, a little chain of open source implementations, actually raised a value of one typical commercial app like XSI - while Blender got nothing in return.... In mentioned times, XSI had no any (comparable to lscm/abf) unwrapper.

For LSCM unwrapping, Blender simply integrated a premade library called OpenNL library, developed by Inria two years prior, copy/paste as it always does with things, and this is absolutely not a blender development.