What if Softimage died?

[Cacoman]

Actually I got kinda lost over the the workflow comparison. Was it just about retopo workflows compared to Topogun? Because since the new modelling toolkit went into Maya, retopo workflows have been way easier.

The workflow comparison was for the "dorrito" approach.

About Topogun, is that even Softimage has not been updated at the same pace of Maya, there is still a lot of flexibility inside Softimage and ways to achieve the desired behavior without getting "under the hood".

I have not tried the new Maya modeling tools, so I cannot speak of them.

But another example will be the Sculpt Geometry Tools that are available in Maya but not in Softimage.

With the use of ICE and weightmaps you can build a similar toolset inside Softimage.

[missingkey]

I would think the best approach would be to use whatever 3D software, whichever company is willing to pay you the most to use, and be stoked.

[MauricioPC]

I would think the best approach would be to use whatever 3D software, whichever company is willing to pay you the most to use, and be stoked.

I agree, but in the same time that makes the job "less-fun". I mean ... I learned to edit on a AVID and I really liked. I think it's structured approach is better. But one time I had to work as an editor on Final Cut. I was still editing, but I liked a little less the process and I wasn't as fast.

So yes, you should use the software companies are willing to pay the most, but that's not necessarily the best option when you talk about workflow, productivity, etc.

This is an interesting comment, actually. You've noticed that nobody is arguing that the Maya workflow is better. This is not an error. Autodesk is just beginning to rethink maya for smaller shops, starting with modelling. In the Marc Petit era, Maya was just focused on studios, SDKs, and technical people, except for some bits like PaintFX/neuclus. Everyone is completely aware of the concerns, especially with Maya LT which is meant for individuals and small teams.

That's really a good thing. I guess if you can get what 3ds Max has of good (some modeling things and deformers) and what Softimage has of good (workflow, organization, operator stack), you can make Maya even better and more of a powerhouse.

Because let's face it, the Modifier Stack or the Operator Stack are great things that Maya don't have. Funny fact, of all tutorials I have watched (from great artists of the industry), one of the most repeated operations are "Delete History".

[owei]

Well, I guess, the will to make progress is immanent to human. And to me, "being forced" to use Maya does not feel like any "evolution" or "progress" at all. If I hear, that M forgets your pointselection when you change to poly selection mode and go back to pointselection, that you have to keep a certain order to build up a working pass render, you are not allowed to click in the wrong spot otherwise you scene is f*cked up, you don´t have an equivalent to the scene explorer in XSI, you don´t have an operator stack...and NO ICE...?? WTF...? come on...and beside that, it is soooo ugly ;)

Yes, it might have a good SDK, but what does it help when so much is not working (what I hear from experienced Maya users..)...it´s like butting a race car on bike wheels.
To me, there is NO software out there that give me that smooth workflow and that functionality out of the box like Softimage does. If AD even starts to "rethink" Maya in that direction...well, it makes me laugh as they should have started to think about it AT ALL a couple of years ago. Focusing on "big shops" means, the customer can fix the stuff not working or half working with a horde of TDs and programmers and build their own custom workflows...great politics ;) It all speaks for itself. Unfortunately there is no company stepping up and challenges AD on the field of DCC, I mean seriously. If Soft dies in the near future, the best app out of the box, a working horse for individuals, many smaller and midrange shops will vanish without an successor...wow, and we are in the 21st century, aren´t we?

my 2 cents

[Mathaeus]

I knew what an inverse world matrix was before I joined Softimage, but a statickinestate - not so much.

I also heard for world matrix, before Static kine state - but static kine state sounds impressive, doesn't it. I think the recipe for impressive name seems to be a bit oxymoronish mix of differentia specifica and genus proximum. Slight disbalance in number of syllables, too. Like Dual quaternion skinning, Inverse kinematics, Static kine state, Non uniform rational b-spline, or Augmented infinite blending. Last one is product of my mind and this rainy morning, by the way.
Dual quaternion skin is champion in that, naming field, imho.
While ago I've tried to explain to hardcore Max fellow, how to setup the DQ skin in SI with ICE. His comment was, why on the earth everything in SI sounds impressive, even THAT setup, while everything in Max sounds like 'cheap beer and cheese' (local phrase, but I think it's understandable).

Imho it's totally annoying if there's too much of impressive new names, but just a few of them here and there, why not.

[missingkey]

"Augmented Infinite Blending" <---- Tutorial, please!

[Eugen]

You've noticed that nobody is arguing that the Maya workflow is better. This is not an error. Autodesk is just beginning to rethink maya for smaller shops, starting with modelling. In the Marc Petit era, Maya was just focused on studios, SDKs, and technical people, except for some bits like PaintFX/neuclus. Everyone is completely aware of the concerns, especially with Maya LT which is meant for individuals and small teams.

Interesting!
Since we can base our discussions on the assumption that Autodesk is a commercial company: did your managers ever really make an 'educated' business plan which leads to the conclusion that pimping the hell out of Maya, or build an LT version on top, is more cost effective than simply continuing Softimage at a satisfying development rate?
You already have the best 'small shop' tool at hand! Why you not take full advantage of that great asset, is something I cannot fathom, and is the reason why I lost my trust in the sanity of that company.

Put that 'Maya LT' money into Softimage! Leave Maya to the big studios, and stop mocking small studios by advertising Maya like they can 'go hollywood' with it ootb.

Anyway, enough for this wailing wall thread... I'll be watching that Maya LT thing, but guess what my hopes are. If you start 'thinking' about it just now, how long do you think will it take (if ever) until you get where Softimage already is?

After all, XSI is not just some legacy crap application that has it's best days behind it, so it would in the best interest of everybody to move on to something new and better (take Windows XP as an analogy if you like). In the contrary, it was done so well that it still competes with the best 3D apps out there (something to be proud of, Luc-Eric), and could easily(!) be pushed to new heights given the will.

[MauricioPC]

You've noticed that nobody is arguing that the Maya workflow is better. This is not an error. Autodesk is just beginning to rethink maya for smaller shops, starting with modelling. In the Marc Petit era, Maya was just focused on studios, SDKs, and technical people, except for some bits like PaintFX/neuclus. Everyone is completely aware of the concerns, especially with Maya LT which is meant for individuals and small teams.

Interesting!
Since we can base our discussions on the assumption that Autodesk is a commercial company: did your managers ever really make an 'educated' business plan which leads to the conclusion that pimping the hell out of Maya, or build an LT version on top, is more cost effective than simply continuing Softimage at a satisfying development rate?
You already have the best 'small shop' tool at hand! Why you not take full advantage of that great asset, is something I cannot fathom, and is the reason why I lost my trust in the sanity of that company.

Put that 'Maya LT' money into Softimage! Leave Maya to the big studios, and stop mocking small studios by advertising Maya like they can 'go hollywood' with it ootb.

Anyway, enough for this wailing wall thread... I'll be watching that Maya LT thing, but guess what my hopes are. If you start 'thinking' about it just now, how long do you think will it take (if ever) until you get where Softimage already is?

After all, XSI is not just some legacy crap application that has it's best days behind it, so it would in the best interest of everybody to move on to something new and better (take Windows XP as an analogy if you like). In the contrary, it was done so well that it still competes with the best 3D apps out there (something to be proud of, Luc-Eric), and could easily(!) be pushed to new heights given the will.

From what I understand, the only reason they went with Maya is because it's the only 3D app that works on Mac. And I think that's all. Since it has been said that it's almost impossible to port 3ds Max or Softimage to Mac (because of Windows legacy), Maya was the only option.

The problem is, in my view, that Maya LT is in no way a comparison to Modo. Yes, Modo is more expensive now, but aside from texturing, Modo modeling tools are way better than Maya, it has sculpting, etc etc. And if you take a look at the Maya LT videos introduction (which seen to be done for children) and the Modo ones (posted on vimeo by The Foundry), even the approach of introducing the app is wrong. Again ... IMO.

Just as a side note, I don't use Modo, I don't like it very much.

[angus_davidson]

You've noticed that nobody is arguing that the Maya workflow is better. This is not an error. Autodesk is just beginning to rethink maya for smaller shops, starting with modelling. In the Marc Petit era, Maya was just focused on studios, SDKs, and technical people, except for some bits like PaintFX/neuclus. Everyone is completely aware of the concerns, especially with Maya LT which is meant for individuals and small teams.

Interesting!
Since we can base our discussions on the assumption that Autodesk is a commercial company: did your managers ever really make an 'educated' business plan which leads to the conclusion that pimping the hell out of Maya, or build an LT version on top, is more cost effective than simply continuing Softimage at a satisfying development rate?
You already have the best 'small shop' tool at hand! Why you not take full advantage of that great asset, is something I cannot fathom, and is the reason why I lost my trust in the sanity of that company.

Put that 'Maya LT' money into Softimage! Leave Maya to the big studios, and stop mocking small studios by advertising Maya like they can 'go hollywood' with it ootb.

Anyway, enough for this wailing wall thread... I'll be watching that Maya LT thing, but guess what my hopes are. If you start 'thinking' about it just now, how long do you think will it take (if ever) until you get where Softimage already is?

After all, XSI is not just some legacy crap application that has it's best days behind it, so it would in the best interest of everybody to move on to something new and better (take Windows XP as an analogy if you like). In the contrary, it was done so well that it still competes with the best 3D apps out there (something to be proud of, Luc-Eric), and could easily(!) be pushed to new heights given the will.

Very well said

[MauricioPC]

Just another opinion by myself on the subject of how Autodesk sees Softimage.

This month, the great The Mill won three awards in the VES event for best commercial for broadcast using solely Softimage. Now, I'm no marketing expert, but if this were my company and this were my software, wouldn't I make a HUGE article, interviewing The Mill artists about WHY they choose Softimage, whats GOOD in Softimage, what where the challenges, how they approach it, etc etc etc.

What a nice opportunity to market Softimage as the PERFECT tool for small, mid-sized studios, to use Softimage as the tool of choice for broadcast. Hell, I doubt The Mill guys wouldn't be up for this since they already released a cool making-of on the subject on their vimeo channel.

But what has been done? Actually, nothing ... not even a mention on The Area, Autodesk site, Autodesk Facebook, nothing.

Now, maybe it's just me ... but I think it was a very good opportunity that they simply let is pass. Hell, even an marketing intern would figure this out if there was even this taking care of Softimage marketing.

-- EDIT --

WAIT!!! Scratch that ... you don't need to create a article or a interview of a video, The Mill already done it for you ... you just need to SHARE IT!



http://tmbg.co/50rc8

Why the hell wouldn't you use this to promote Softimage is beyond comprehension.

[owei]

...well said, everybody and so true. We had that discussion over and over again. But, and that IS fact in my eyes, that AD never really knew what they had in their hands except a bunch of patents they got for a fist of dollars. They never had a clue what to do with it, where to focus on and where to put it "marketing wise". They did not know until today and the won´t do anything about it in the future. It can get just worse when Soft will be the first app they get rid of...near future will tell.

Meanwhile I´m planning a new webproject dedicated to Softimage and it users. There will be more info soon.

cheers,
oli

[Eugen]

From what I understand, the only reason they went with Maya is because it's the only 3D app that works on Mac. And I think that's all. Since it has been said that it's almost impossible to port 3ds Max or Softimage to Mac (because of Windows legacy), Maya was the only option.

Bootcamp, and let's be done with that! Wanna save the money for a Windows license? Really?
Anyway, Mac is a minority in the 3D world, as is Linux. How come this argument seems to be so important?

Running Linux on a farm might be an argument price-wise, but there's a Linux version of Softimage anyway, and continues to be.

The problem is, in my view, that Maya LT is in no way a comparison to Modo. Yes, Modo is more expensive now, but aside from texturing, Modo modeling tools are way better than Maya, it has sculpting, etc etc. And if you take a look at the Maya LT videos introduction (which seen to be done for children) and the Modo ones (posted on vimeo by The Foundry), even the approach of introducing the app is wrong. Again ... IMO.

Just as a side note, I don't use Modo, I don't like it very much.

Hmm, ok... wanted to play with it (again) to get my impression updated... but that's not very encouraging. Let's see.


@Owei: good news! I'm curious...

[angus_davidson]

From what I understand, the only reason they went with Maya is because it's the only 3D app that works on Mac. And I think that's all. Since it has been said that it's almost impossible to port 3ds Max or Softimage to Mac (because of Windows legacy), Maya was the only option.

The problem is, in my view, that Maya LT is in no way a comparison to Modo. Yes, Modo is more expensive now, but aside from texturing, Modo modeling tools are way better than Maya, it has sculpting, etc etc. And if you take a look at the Maya LT videos introduction (which seen to be done for children) and the Modo ones (posted on vimeo by The Foundry), even the approach of introducing the app is wrong. Again ... IMO.

Just as a side note, I don't use Modo, I don't like it very much.

As much as that warms the cockles of my heart I doubt very much that Maya having a mac version was the reason it was pushed to the front. AD was just following what they perceived as the big money. There is no reason that if they saw the financial incentive they couldn't have rebuilt max or softimage over the last 6 or so years. The problem is the management of their 3 apps has been abysmal. No clear focus at all. Both for the apps as a group and individually. If you take the darling app which gets most of the resources ie Maya and have a look at it , you can see the total lack of a focused vision. Their UI is a prime example of a lack of coherent vision. It requires full time technical resources to allow people to do their jobs. Maya progresses because of the pressure to keep in as the main studio tool. However that progression is haphazard and the out the box / artist experience suffers for it.

Max is very much at the point where they are just trying to keep people on subscription as they have a lot of max seats. Softimage is pretty much at the point where autodesk doesn't really care about the number of seats. They have a small team keeping it in maintenance mode. 2014 was supposed to be the year allowed for the new team to get up to speed so that this year they could restore the faith so to speak. I am not particularly holding my breath for that one. the 2015 release for many will decide to keep up the yearly sub or not.

On the Modo side Eugen there are a lot of really nice new tools in Modo 701. have a look at their new learning videos. The animation (part 1 and 2) was particularly good (took a little bit to hit its stride in the video)

[MauricioPC]

Bootcamp, and let's be done with that! Wanna save the money for a Windows license? Really?
Anyway, Mac is a minority in the 3D world, as is Linux. How come this argument seems to be so important?

Running Linux on a farm might be an argument price-wise, but there's a Linux version of Softimage anyway, and continues to be.

Just to be clear, I don't agree with that perception also. It's just what I have read about it, I think you could get this idea from a thread at CGSociety. Will have a look at that again later and see if I misunderstood.

As much as that warms the cockles of my heart I doubt very much that Maya having a mac version was the reason it was pushed to the front. AD was just following what they perceived as the big money. There is no reason that if they saw the financial incentive they couldn't have rebuilt max or softimage over the last 6 or so years. The problem is the management of their 3 apps has been abysmal. No clear focus at all. Both for the apps as a group and individually. If you take the darling app which gets most of the resources ie Maya and have a look at it , you can see the total lack of a focused vision. Their UI is a prime example of a lack of coherent vision. It requires full time technical resources to allow people to do their jobs. Maya progresses because of the pressure to keep in as the main studio tool. However that progression is haphazard and the out the box / artist experience suffers for it.

Max is very much at the point where they are just trying to keep people on subscription as they have a lot of max seats. Softimage is pretty much at the point where autodesk doesn't really care about the number of seats. They have a small team keeping it in maintenance mode. 2014 was supposed to be the year allowed for the new team to get up to speed so that this year they could restore the faith so to speak. I am not particularly holding my breath for that one. the 2015 release for many will decide to keep up the yearly sub or not.

On the Modo side Eugen there are a lot of really nice new tools in Modo 701. have a look at their new learning videos. The animation (part 1 and 2) was particularly good (took a little bit to hit its stride in the video)

With the money logic, it would make more sense to push 3ds Max since it's the most sold software in the world, it's the more recognizable, etc. But that didn't work out.

As for Modo, it's not that the software is bad. The video training is really good. I just didn't adapt quite well to it, just that.

[Bellsey]

Just another opinion by myself on the subject of how Autodesk sees Softimage.

This month, the great The Mill won three awards in the VES event for best commercial for broadcast using solely Softimage. Now, I'm no marketing expert, but if this were my company and this were my software, wouldn't I make a HUGE article, interviewing The Mill artists about WHY they choose Softimage, whats GOOD in Softimage, what where the challenges, how they approach it, etc etc etc.

What a nice opportunity to market Softimage as the PERFECT tool for small, mid-sized studios, to use Softimage as the tool of choice for broadcast. Hell, I doubt The Mill guys wouldn't be up for this since they already released a cool making-of on the subject on their vimeo channel.

But what has been done? Actually, nothing ... not even a mention on The Area, Autodesk site, Autodesk Facebook, nothing.

Now, maybe it's just me ... but I think it was a very good opportunity that they simply let is pass. Hell, even an marketing intern would figure this out if there was even this taking care of Softimage marketing.

-- EDIT --

WAIT!!! Scratch that ... you don't need to create a article or a interview of a video, The Mill already done it for you ... you just need to SHARE IT!

Why the hell wouldn't you use this to promote Softimage is beyond comprehension.

Ok, you're accusing Autodesk of doing nothing, well I contest that. In fact, it's totally untrue. At the time this went out, articles were posted on the Facebook pages, and twitter feeds. And I should know, because I posted them. I don't have the exact numbers, but the Facebook pages views were very high, well into the high thousands.

As I have said many times before, we can't just rock up and expect The Mill to do a customer storie around a particular spot that they have done. Though we have done that, it's not always possible. The Mill have clients as well, and we have to respect their relationships as well. The Mill, BBDO NY. and Peta had already produced some breakdowns and 'making of's', around this campaign so links to those were posted as well.

And at any events that I presented at, this was one of the Softimage customers examples that I would show and tell.

[luceric]

As much as that warms the cockles of my heart I doubt very much that Maya having a mac version was the reason it was pushed to the front. AD was just following what they perceived as the big money.

Well the thread ws talking about Maya LT, as oposed the big Maya itself. The main users LT is going after are individuals or small shops that are developing mobile apps, mostly on the Mac. These people are known to already be using Maya, if not Modo or blender. So it's the way to legitimize these licenses, and from what I heard it appears to be working. Modo also made a Steam edition, in reaction to LT imho.

These last few weeks, btw, I've been interviewing interns and the vast majority of them are involved in some kind of Unity game project, and they using either Maya or Blender, whether they're learning that in the university or it's a side personal project. They're choosing one of these two apps. Of course, that's not a scientific sample.