What if Softimage died?

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

that's a pretty contrived argument. It's saying is that Softimage has a an interactive layout editor (which I originally wrote, btw), which Maya does not. But that's where the UI customisability options ends.

Yes, I admit, the customisability ends with you can have any layout you want ;). It ends in maya at docking left or right and tearing it of. Show me a layout where AE and Channelbox are docked side by side. Show me one, only one custom dualscreen layout like mine for maya. I can have aditional floating windows to obstruct my view by simply locking the one in the layout and open another one. You know, you wrote it. I thank you for that.
Now, why aren't windows in maya dockable by default, so anyone can have what he or she prefers? That is the question. If the possibilities in maya are endless, why in all the world do I have to use mel to achieve it? You have no interface to configure your interface in maya, that is a joke. Congratulations Maya LT users, you are stuck with what limited options you have by default.

"Also, the "docked editor" that the guy creates with MEL is something you can drag to the sides of the screen with the mouse, add to the tab deck, or tear off. You can reorder the tab deck. No need to get into layout editing mode and save the layout. Try "un-docking" a docked view in XSI to make it floating and free up the layout space? Is it just dragging it away like in Maya? Yeah, anyone can pick contrived examples. Another example: you can't put any of the panels (like Selection) at the right of the XSI UI in a floating window, or have them in two places in a layout. It's simply impossible. and XSI doesn't save the floating views you had between sessions, etc. Layout editing is just one feature of XSI.

Yes layout editing is just one feature of SI, which maya doesn't have.


Edit: I know this is a little contrived (and also childish for all that matters) but I'm having a lot of fun with it.
Look, I can maya! Can you Softimage? (Please note the multiple instances of: Explorer, material manager and ICE tree) And soooo many windows to move out of the way. Man, for some people it must pure horror to work with nuke or AFX or other tools, where you first have to undock all your windows to get that good old messy, crawling work experience that they love so much. Hihihihi...

si_maya.jpg

Edit2: (sorry, can't stop, this is so much fun..)
Selection floater:

selection floater.jpg

[brudney]

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

Yes, you're right. Enough.

Nevertheless, if AD really wants Si users to switch or have more people buy maya suites, these issues are the most pressing.
I'm not all contra maya. I own a maya suite, but I use maya only when I really, really have to and I would love to use it a lot more if it wasn't so tedious to use.
I think one of the Si users fears caused by the assumed death of SI is the thought of having to use maya the way it is today.

[luchifer]

The problem for many people is that if you're coming from another package to a new one, you simple can't just continue in the same way of working that you have been used to. It just doesn't work. And yet, this is one of the most common mistakes people make, even now.
Many can just go through some basic tutorials, then just dive in, can't find what they need and then get frustrated.

I've often heard that Maya is hard to learn, or its UI is tricky, but frankly this is a myth. It's really no better, or worse than any other package to learn really. The one thing to remember about Maya, is that it's very open, it was designed that way. So there can be different ways to do the same thing. Also, Maya has a lot of preferences, so you can actually change many things, including the UI. It's mastering those things, that can often be the trick. I still see people now, who aren't using the hotbox or marknig menus correctly and they're key to Maya's UI and usability.

I have to agree with Bellsey. You cant force a software to behave like you are used to with Softimage.

I love Softimage, but I switched to Cinema 4d for my work because the robust MoGraph tools and xpresso (I work in broadcast TV). The Interface is far more customizable than I thought it was. And, the main reason I post, is because I have been following this topic for quite some time and :

1. I cant believe no one included Cinema in the poll.
2. The big problem for softimage (in my eyes), its that the software its aiming WAY TOO HIGH for the users they want. Allow me to explain:

Lets pretend im a new user, and in fact, lets pretent I am who I am, a guy who uses 3d software in my work (broadcast TV)

In one hand I have in XSI a beautiful render pass system, Gator, ICE with compound for quaternions and everything I can imagine, and lagoa multiphysiques (excelent work by the way), and face robot.

In the other hand, I have, in Cinema4d a medium quality very fast render, and a content browser, with lots of toys that I use everyday: for example a pumpkin for halloween, a world in 3d for news, pie charts and graph bars for election day and so on and so fort, and the possibility to expand what I know via Xpresso and MoGraph, and with a nice integration to After Effects.

Now.. ask me again.. why did I made the switch?

what XSI needs, in my point of view, is his own content browser with lots and lots of everyday presets for new users. and what it doesnt need, its people who waste their time asking what happens if/when XSI dies, or if tomorrow the dead will rise and take over the world. Im still very fond of XSI. and in my free hours Im learning python for XSI so hopefully one day I can help expanding a future "Softimage Library Tools" (I just invented the name, I believe it was called NetView back in the 00's)

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

Ok, one last post from me to this topic.
There are things you can master, and things you just cannot do and things you can do but they are fast here and slow there. There are things in every software, that do not have anything to do with skill or the amonut of time you spend learning a workflow. This is true for any software.
Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xajEw4s60nk

In all objectivity, no matter how hard you try, you cannot do that as near as fast in may as you can in SI or more comfortable than in cinema. Except you create a script that does it for you or mimics a behaviour of another software.
All that counts in the end is, how fast can I do what I need to do to get my job done. Based on this rule I choose my tool. I do toon outlines in maya. I do cellphone modelling in MoI. What matters to me is a full reliable toolset.
I have no problem using different workflows in different tools as long as they do not slow me down. A workflow like that in the video slows me down.


PS: I know you can do it faster than in the video, but it is still not as fast as in SI and updating is extreeeeemly slow.

[luceric]

The equivalent of Softimage's "duplicate from animation" (and a very classic Softimage feature indeed) in Maya is more like Animate->Create Animation Snapshot what shown that video. staircase tutorial Not sure why one of the many instance-along-curve scripts haven't been integrated.

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

The equivalent of Softimage's "duplicate from animation" (and a very classic Softimage feature indeed) in Maya is more like Animate->Create Animation Snapshot what shown that video. staircase tutorial Not sure why one of the many instance-along-curve scripts haven't been integrated.

I know, doesn't work with sets or groups of objects eg sphere/box/cone/sphere/box/cone.
And it doesn't update in realtime when you alter the curve. Integrate said script and I'm happy ;)

[iamVFX]

http://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2013/11/05 ... n-the-web/

[angus_davidson]

Well it does mean I could in theory get Softimage running on a Mac without boot camping it.

Although I doubt the speeds from AWS to south africa are nearly fast enough.

[Hirazi Blue]

Renting a license, software in a browser, does anyone detect a trend here, or is it just paranoid old me?
;)

[aio]

I think one of the Si users fears caused by the assumed death of SI is the thought of having to use maya the way it is today.

That is very correct sir.

[Eugen]

"One does not simply walk into Maya-land. Its black UI is guarded by more than just ugly icons. There is evil there that does not sleep. The Great AD Eye is ever watchful"...
; )

[angus_davidson]

Softimage via iPad !

[Bullit]

I have to agree with Bellsey. You cant force a software to behave like you are used to with Softimage.

I love Softimage, but I switched to Cinema 4d for my work because the robust MoGraph tools and xpresso (I work in broadcast TV). The Interface is far more customizable than I thought it was. And, the main reason I post, is because I have been following this topic for quite some time and :

1. I cant believe no one included Cinema in the poll.
2. The big problem for softimage (in my eyes), its that the software its aiming WAY TOO HIGH for the users they want. Allow me to explain:

Lets pretend im a new user, and in fact, lets pretent I am who I am, a guy who uses 3d software in my work (broadcast TV)

In one hand I have in XSI a beautiful render pass system, Gator, ICE with compound for quaternions and everything I can imagine, and lagoa multiphysiques (excelent work by the way), and face robot.

In the other hand, I have, in Cinema4d a medium quality very fast render, and a content browser, with lots of toys that I use everyday: for example a pumpkin for halloween, a world in 3d for news, pie charts and graph bars for election day and so on and so fort, and the possibility to expand what I know via Xpresso and MoGraph, and with a nice integration to After Effects.

Now.. ask me again.. why did I made the switch?

what XSI needs, in my point of view, is his own content browser with lots and lots of everyday presets for new users. and what it doesnt need, its people who waste their time asking what happens if/when XSI dies, or if tomorrow the dead will rise and take over the world. Im still very fond of XSI. and in my free hours Im learning python for XSI so hopefully one day I can help expanding a future "Softimage Library Tools" (I just invented the name, I believe it was called NetView back in the 00's)

I agree with general view of this post.
There seems to have been a way of thinking in Softimage developers that don't regard ease of use and implement a short way to user reward because they obsess about Hollywood and cinema.
For example it is unexplainable that there isn't something like Mograph in Softimage after all this years.

[luceric]

Well it does mean I could in theory get Softimage running on a Mac without boot camping it.

Although I doubt the speeds from AWS to south africa are nearly fast enough.

ho yeah, running softimage on a PC in a VM in the cloud, streamed to your mac through the web browser should indeed be an awesome alternative

[angus_davidson]

Well it does mean I could in theory get Softimage running on a Mac without boot camping it.

Although I doubt the speeds from AWS to south africa are nearly fast enough.

ho yeah, running softimage on a PC in a VM in the cloud, streamed to your mac through the web browser should indeed be an awesome alternative

Its funny my old man came from a situation where everything was done remotely, and then sent back to his terminal. he made the painful transition to a PC(no doubt aided by my then youthful exuberance). With this whole trend of back to the cloud he is smiling more smugly then usual. As if he was just waiting.