Softimage the best Autodesk tool against competition

[Bullit]

Houdini and Cinema 4D.

Softimage have ICE which is the best tool against Houdini OP and Cinema 4D Mograph, it also has a stepchild unloved Fxtree that could work against Cinema 4D +Adobe After Effects alliance.

From 2014 releases we saw nothing, only a disfunctional Autodesk sitting in their laurels.

So what should be the Autodesk answer to Adobe + Maxon full broad attack?

[Eugen]

Fully develop Softimage's SDK and ICE framework, so the community / 3rd parties can do the job of adding "high-level" tools instead...
e.g. 3ds Max survived because is has an extremely open SDK.

[Tekano]

Houdini and Cinema 4D.

So what should be the Autodesk answer to Adobe + Maxon full broad attack?

as already demonstrated and mentioned they put some FX tech from naiad and something similar to Softimage ICE into Maya, their flagship product. simples.

[luceric]

I don't think asking here is asking the right audience. But in any case, I've heard from a source that Cinema 4D will be part of Adobe Creative Cloud, so people would be able to get it for a few dollars a month extra (something like 500$ a year). That effectively dries up the market opportunities for everyone.
If Autodesk showed actual interested in that motion graphics market, IMHO, I think they should make a Max+Thinking Particle bundle. It's a lot cheaper than doing the hundreds of feature modernization/update that would be necessary on XSI and it would validate if there is an actual market there. The markets that Softimage is in has already by large chosen not to use Softimage; trying out new markets, especially if you required a bunch of new work for it, is not obvious. Now Houdini, I think that's different. I think a lot of place considering Houdini are only reluctantly doing so and just need a little bit of it of proceduralism, not the whole pain of the app. However, I've had sources tell me that the Houdini user base is in fact smaller than the current user base of Softimage, no matter how much more you hear of it. I'm having some difficulty believing this, but if it's true it means there is not a lot to go after there. All of this would validate the Suite approach.

[Eugen]

...doing the hundreds of feature modernization/update that would be necessary on XSI...

Don't you exaggerate here a bit?
Mind listing some of that missing features off the top of your head?

[Mathaeus]

So what should be the Autodesk answer to Adobe + Maxon full broad attack?

Nothing, imho. 3d app bundled with After Effects, it's not about "best" tool, it's about "easy to use". All three AD apps, including Max, are too much overcomplicated for this purpose. Try to explain to new people, what's difference between editable poly and editable mesh in Max, when to use Graphite Tools (with a new level of overlapping features), what's purpose of smoothing groups (well, to keep the compatibility with all game engines, built on top of this)... so on.
While some features of Cinema are far away for easy, probably whole Esspreso thing, they always have a talent to keep the first experience enough easy, as well as very straight border between "easy" and "hard" part. Softimage is exactly opposite, having a "smooth border" between artistical and technical part - great for those who want to learn, always nightmare for those who want to do everything in few easy steps.
In Softimage, if I'm correct, out-of-the-box render engine still won't render motion blur with plain animated particles, for simulation you'll want two point clouds, one for sim another for reading the cache, explorer throws a tons of info right in the face of user.... Again, nothing wrong for dedicated power user, but for average After Effects user, no way.

Anyway I don't see anything wrong with this. While Cinema is somehow boring, it still respects the design, philosophy of three AD apps - shouldn't be hard to switch from Cinema to something stronger and more complex, one day.

[Bellsey]

C4D is a very well know quantity in the motion graphics space, together with its After Effects interop. This, I assume, will only improved in the light of the recent announcement between Adobe and Maxon.

So entering into this space isn't easy, however I have to slightly disagree with my learned colleague. Imho Softimage & ICE are absolutely a viable alternatives to C4D and its infamous mograph and xpresso. I believe I stated in a previous thread commenting on a really nice piece of C4D work, that there wasn't anything in the video clip I saw that I couldnt already do in Softimage/ICE, and I do stand by that.
However, I can concede the usability of C4D in this area does give it an advantage in enabling artists to create the effects they want, same goes for After Effects. Gustavo's tools have proved that Soft/ICE is more than capable and what can be done, but catching up to Mograph wouldn't be easy (if we wanted to take that path).

However, there's alot to be said for knowledge and usability. I look at C4D and its motion graphics workflow and it looks confusing to me, but then usability can be subjective. This topic cropped up in another thread here and I agree with peoples comments there, that ICE is (and can be) more open and approachable than what people realise, it possible we haven't done as good a job at showing people that. Even now I still come across people who aren't really sure what ICE is.

[luceric]

All three AD apps, including Max, are too much overcomplicated for this purpose. Try to explain to new people, what's difference between editable poly and editable mesh in Max, when to use Graphite Tools (with a new level of overlapping features), what's purpose of smoothing groups (well, to keep the compatibility with all game engines, built on top of this)... so on.

Actually modern 3DSMax isn't like that. You just use the tools on the ribbon directly to do everything. You don't need to know any of the legacy stuff that's been left in for old users. It's the old users of Max that get confused and use a mix both the old and the new UI and know the old stuff is there. If adsk made a product for motion graphic with max, they could make a simplified max that removes all the legacy stuff and make a cheaper product. Max is already the top motion graphic application, btw. When your grip against max is that you need to do an "edit poly" before modeling something.. it's very simple problem and easy to fix.

[Eugen]

...they could make a simplified max that removes all the legacy stuff and make a cheaper product...

Very good idea! Ditch all the legacy crap in Max and sell it for 1/3rd of the price!
;p

[Letterbox]

Anyone who does motion graphics will get c4d there is no question, I've seen people pick it up in very little time, nothing much compares it's ability in that arena. (possibly Modo)

ICE, even with Gustavo's work, and with (who remembers) Helge's fmx presentation, it's still not as complete. ICE is not learned in a few days, and still to many is confusing, and not much is being done to address that, apart from Stephens excellent efforts.

There was a motion graphics plugin for maya, they looked very capable, done free 3rd party if I remember, that would be a reasonable alternative. But again complexity of Maya precludes the 'ease of use c4d' crowd from going in that direction, and no post integration, so why bother?

As for Houdini, it's much deeper, interms of tech, improvements and a deeper level of integration than ICE currently offers, eg hair, rbd, fluids, nurbs etc etc. it's a completely different game to what everyone else is playing, and it does it very well.

Your not going to be able to convince people who work with c4d and AE to switch to Max and TP, that's simply put, - a daydream - come nightmare for artists NOT technical people, never mind it again offers no integration, and mixed ui integration, why would anyone want to even go there.

If Maxon are smart, they'll allow people to move up to the studio edition and keep them loyal. Or if more complexity is needed in post, modelling & animation, it'll be move to The Foundry’s Modo / Nuke, which acts as a great replacement for both parts, while delivering great tools / training / support / ongoing development.

But in some ways to answer the OP, the horse has bolted, it's going to be next year before ad come up with anything, and by then people will be too settled in what they have to make changes and the subscription to adobe's cloud to even care.

As for the fx tree bullit, that's long since dead, sadly seemingly like many other parts of SI.

As for more new 3rd part dev's after the near-stagnant 2014 release, it wont encourage them to join in its growth for something who's future, still to this day, “looks” unsure, for the same-old reasons.

I just don't see anyone with a vision for the product, nor enthusiasm, nor confidence, irrespective of 'we cant say' legalities, which to be honest reads more and more like a tired excuse.

While I DO have faith in Softimage and what it does, moreover in absolutely what it could do, I sadly don’t have faith in the management of the product that it will ever achieve many of those goals.



PS. Those new SI videos on youtube were a bit of a let down, whoever did them sure did not have the motivation nor enthusiasm nor confidence nor preparation of Chinny in his Gator / Motor videos back in the day.

[Mathaeus]

All three AD apps, including Max, are too much overcomplicated for this purpose. Try to explain to new people, what's difference between editable poly and editable mesh in Max, when to use Graphite Tools (with a new level of overlapping features), what's purpose of smoothing groups (well, to keep the compatibility with all game engines, built on top of this)... so on.

Actually modern 3DSMax isn't like that.

Well not everyone can afford to update to "modern" one, that's problem. There is V-Ray and plugins which have a precedence, after all. As Eugen said, perhaps there's a time to go with 1/3 of price, actually 1/5 sounds better. Maxon always had versions....

[luceric]

...doing the hundreds of feature modernization/update that would be necessary on XSI...

Don't you exaggerate here a bit?
Mind listing some of that missing features off the top of your head?

Don't get me wrong, it's a great high end 3D app. But I think there is nothing in XSI, and of course even less so Maya, IMHO that's makes it appropriate for *motion graphics* users without years of work. example : proper illustrator support, and other popular file format, good preset material libraries, a global timeline/dopesheet interface, the video support is obsolete, the text tool is not full featured or interactive, tons of workflow work such as 'motion trail' and other stuff to sketch object animation and visibility, there would be tons of work to be able to have "ICE Presets" that doesn't require an understanding of simulation/caching/construction modes, the rendering setup is complex and riddled with legacy, etc. And of course it's not on the mac. I know a lot of these people just see a gray interface with hundreds of text menus, and lots of stuff that's not where it would be in window/mac applications or an adobe app, different culture. And therefore lots of distance to getting an animation rendered.
Personally, I would have loved to make a motion graphic app based on XSI; somebody tried with Avid3D (remember?) but they were kind of not talking to anyone actually using Media Composer or AE to ask them what they need. Not that they would have have time and resource to do much anway. Anyway they just figured to make a simplified UI with lots of preset, but that's not enough. People don't actually want to use black box presets with some customization, they want to be able to put something *unique* together quickly. Avid also bundled BorisFX and AFAIK that's what the users actually ended up using.

[Bullit]

I have to disagree with those that talk about the market limits.
Motion Graphics market is so widespread that will always exist an opening. Everything in graphic world has some sort of Motion Graphics or some area that Motion Graphics can be applied to. Many works in this area are a mix.
Saying that Motion Graphics market doesn't matter it is almost like saying that a 3d application shouldn't have 3d modeling.
Also we should not forget those many 3d studios that sometimes have to do motion graphics but it is not their main work.
The widespread use of motion graphics means that if the tool is available in the generalist package is also a sure way to prevent users from going to other packages.
Also would interesting to check the trends in motion graphics and increasing complexity.

[Eugen]

Anyway they just figured to make a simplified UI with lots of preset, but that's not enough. People don't actually want to use black box presets with some customization, they want to be able to put something *unique* together quickly. Avid also bundled BorisFX and AFAIK that's what the users actually ended up using.

I'd prefer an application with lots of flexibility and some presets over one with little flexibility and tons of presets, of course. It's easy to create presets on a solid foundation, but not the other way round.

Also, Softimage does not need to be too appealing to the faintest of heart - meaning people who do not even want to bother with the usual interface stuff any 3D app needs, or people who want to create a 3D-look without any knowledge of 3D graphics at all. Sure there are many such people, but let them stick to Photoshop plugins or whatever.
Actually, Soft has the most attractive and "shallow" interface among all the high-end 3D apps, does it not.
Yet, admittedly, even here it makes much sense to have many good presets, also for the experienced users who want to save themselves the hassle of doing basic setups over and over again.

I wonder why the central addon repository accessible via Netview did go down the drain. Having such a hub as a first resort where to look for "presets" or addons was a big advantage! What happened? What's the big deal here?

[Eugen]

I just don't see anyone with a vision for the product, nor enthusiasm, nor confidence, irrespective of 'we cant say' legalities, which to be honest reads more and more like a tired excuse.

It's easy now to jump into that lamentation again. I wouldn't say that there's no enthusiasm for Softimage, quite the opposite, from the user's side anyway, and as far as I can tell, from the new developers as well.

It's seemingly true, though, for the management. At the moment it seems as if XSI's development resources are just above the line under which it would croak and dissolve. Probably 10 times of the money is pumped into Maya, but that still does not make it truly appealing or user friendly. What a failure...

[Nizar]

I just don't see anyone with a vision for the product, nor enthusiasm, nor confidence, irrespective of 'we cant say' legalities, which to be honest reads more and more like a tired excuse.

It's easy now to jump into that lamentation again. I wouldn't say that there's no enthusiasm for Softimage, quite the opposite, from the user's side anyway, and as far as I can tell, from the new developers as well.

It's seemingly true, though, for the management. At the moment it seems as if XSI's development resources are just above the line under which it would croak and dissolve. Probably 10 times of the money is pumped into Maya, but that still does not make it truly appealing or user friendly. What a failure...

Maya is a more profitable application. Why AD must divert money coming from maya market to softimage?

Actually I don't see all these love by AD for maya or 3dsm, sure, are flagship products, but 2014 release was features poor like softimage (where best feature is stability and I like it), and however, old team or new, IMHO the new features are implemented seamless compared to maya or 3dsm new tabs/windows/menus mess