Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=1549205

I've been spending most of my time lately learning how to use Maya....Saw the discussion in the Zhann thread and thought I'd give Erlik's image a shot using only terrain objects. .. . Using the tools available in the more high end programs is efficient and saves time. . . but the speed and variety of 3d object creation possible when using the Bryce terrain editor still owns my allegience. . . . as I advance in my understanding of Maya. . . . I hope to experiment with exporting objects into Maya after their creation in the Bryce editor. Long live Bryce!! : ) . . . . . . .

Some of you may recall this image with the accompanying text from a thread posted by me last December. I provided the link to the original thread for anyone who may be interested. At that time I had been a Bryce user for about 8 years and like every true Brycean, realized that the creative possibilities of this application was limited only by the skill of the individual artist. I still believe the truth of that statement. That was almost a year ago. . . . .

In the time since then, I have spent countless hours and invested hundreds of dollars beginning to learn the complexities of Maya with the hope that one day I could bring to life a game concept that I had been developing. I realized that Maya could take me in a direction that Bryce could not.

After reading some of the comments in recent threads ( i.e. . .Since Bryce is so much ahead of all software they had to clip it wings to be leveled with Maya, 3D studio Max.. .. Kemel; . . .My boolean modelling skills and those of many other brycers around are way better then most peoples polygon modelling skills will ever be!. . if we can do the things we do with just bryce, they'll be out of a job when we get our hands on 3DSMAX ;) rayraz), I had an interesting thought. . . . . . .

Would anyone in the Bryce community be interested to learn what kind of modeling tools a high -end program like Maya has to offer?

I am still learning Maya basics (I havent created one complete scene yet!!) but I could post a few illustrations of the advanced modeling features that I have learned and share them with the Bryce community. I think that you would then comprehend, as I have, the coolness of it all.

And YES rayraz. . . . . . if you can do the things you do with bryce. . . .theres no telling what you can do if you get your hands on 3DSMAX, Maya or any other high-end program!

So whats the verdict? A little Maya yes. . . . or a little Maya no!

You decide! : )

depends what you're most comfortable with. if i put my mind with bryce booleans and terrain modelling, i could probably get the results i want. but i use bryce as a means to an end, so in my case it's ridiculous to use the app's modelling abilities when i can whip somehting similar out in 5s in wings. the point is what you render for. if you're a 3d pro, or like to think you are, then specializing in a number of apps is important. if you're just a hobbyist, then use whatever makes you feel happy :) great work with terrains, btw :)

I can sympathize..just started trying Blender..hoo boy..;) looks pretty good so far there, never got that good with terrains..I'll continue use that other 'w' program..;)

Nuski, excellent Bryce modeling now as it was last December, without a doubt! Shows what Bryce is capable of doing in skilled hands, a little perseverance, forethought and planning as you obviously demonstrate. We must not allude ourselves into thinking that Bryce is the Rosetta Stone of all 3D art, it is true that within limited resources, Bryce will get the job done. As you and many have shown, Bryce can be used as improvisational for higher-end products including Maya, LightWave and 3D StudioMax. Obviously these Bryce renditions would take more time to figure out and puzzle together than one could do with access to higher-end products. I for one would love to see your Maya models and your newer developments. Good seeing you around again.

I'm interested Nuski! I'm teaching myself Rhino right now 'cause the course was canceled this qtr. for lack of enrollment. I still have the book though and I work mornings in the computer labs. All the computers have Rhino, SolidWorks, AutoCad, Animation Master, and PS installed, and I'm having a blast just reading and tinkering so I can learn different apps and techniques. I think Maya is probably the pro app. that I am most interested in. You look at the features list and it's so all-inclusive that it is hard to beat. By the way, that is a gorgeous armillary sphere!

@Pakled-have you installed the python script in Blender that lets you import and export Wings files? There's one for .obj too. Funny thing, I was just tinkering with Blender tonight. ;-)

I have very specific aims with 3d modelling and rendering - just to be able to illustrate designs and ideas so that prospective clients can understand what I'm waffling on about. If I was younger and less specialised I'd definitely be trying to learn 3d apps other than the ones I use now. If you need modelling skills at more than hobby level, you need to be able to use a high-end application. I don't think anyone should have loyalty to a piece of software. It's all about what suits you. Maya is pretty complicated, not to mention expensive! Most people will never get to use it. Basic skills learned in other programs (3d modelling is 3d modelling, lighting is lighting, texturing is texturing) can be carried from program to program. If you've no prospect of ever being able to afford a legitimate copy of Maya, it seems to me like you'd be better off learning the basics in cheaper programs, progressing to more expensive/flexible programs as your skill-level and purse allow.

poggie is wise

Very nice work nuski. Impressive as hell. I agree with everything stated above.. The artist does matter much more than the brush.. I do admit loyalty to software, I have been using Rhino for 3 years and have no plans on ever using another major modeler..Even Maya professionals use Rhino a lot for certain modeling jobs that Maya isn't adept at.. Rhino is one of the best modelers at any price.. Fact! As for Bryce, even top pros use it at times for specific things that it excels at.. No software should be discounted, because every program has things that it does very well, even if it's just one..Every thing you learn in every program you use will become a page of your knowledge and understanding.. The kind of quality and imagry we are capable of producing at home on inexpensive computers, and commercial software would of cost millions 15 years ago..... We have some seriously cool toys at out disposal........

nuski im looking forward to those tuts. its always intresting to see how people work.

Nice Model - didn't we see this not so long ago? On the subject of Bryce versus other apps: What troubles me most about these so-called 'high-end' apps is the way they describe things. In max for instance I seem to remember it being swamped with mysterious icons and strange words I didn't/don't understand. L/wave is another, nice looking UI but full of strange sounding names. Bryce is simple and straight forward. No fancy language, just arrows/pointers and drop-downs which actually show you what you are going to get when you apply this or that. Personly, I have a short-term memory problem (due to nerve damage from being poisoned years ago) Tackling something like max is quite literally a head-ache for me. OK, so you got a good memory? Great! Go ahead and learn max. But what for? The thing we want most is to create our pictures. What we don't want it to be blinded by geek-speak and hyroglyphics. There is simply no need for it. Doctors for me show the case in point. The human body is mapped by the medical profession using latin names. Yet latin is a dead language. Nobody uses it anymore. We've moved on. In the 3d community we brycers are regarded with disdain. Why? Because we are more prudent with our money, because we don't want to learn 'their' language, because 'their' way of doing things is over-complicated, because our results are just as good as theirs, because 'they' are professionals? No! It's because we are different. We look at the cg world in a different way. We're not looking at a 4 section screen. We're not using nurbs or polygons or whatever. They are trying to tell us that they are better than us. But that's like a painter who uses oils telling a guy using water-colours he is not a real artist! And how ridiculous is that? At the end of the day we are the ones who should ignore 'them'. They have made their own little world and they can live in it. We have made ours and should be happy with that. Of course there's always gonna be some snotty, stuck-up, snob who is gonna snipe and deride us for what we use and what we are, but that happens in all walks of life, from car owners to house-buyers to scientists to archaologists to religieous zealots and so on. We don't need critics! We are self-critical. We just need to believe in ourselves and to hell with the 'opposition'.

@ Bryster: Yep, you've seen it not a long ago. It was one of those "faulty" threads. :-) To be more precisely, nuski decided to recreate in Bryce what I had done in Rhino. And did a commendable job of it. But I agree with kaom. Every program has its use. For instance, my renaissance instruments (AD: in the marketplace warehouse :-)). I had to spend several hours drawing and connecting lines for the rose of the lute. In Bryce, I just put in the photo and bingo, the rose was done. But with a penalty - with five times the polygons that the whole ensemble has now. If I wanted to just create a pic, Bryce rose would have been excellent. Not for distribution. When I come to Bryce from Rhino, I really miss sweeps, revolutions, flows and so on. I miss the pure ease of modelling. That's why I almost completely abandoned modelling in Bryce. I simply cannot express myself freely in it anymore. OTOH, I wish I could use the terrain modelling of Bryce in Rhino. So I don't consider Bryce inferior. Just different. I also play with Cinema. And see that its modelling tools are really inferior in some regards to those of Rhino. They lack the obvious precision, for instance. Still, there are things that I can do in Cinema that I simply cannot do in Rhino, even with models. So, they are just different. I can live with that. What I cannot live with is people equating the difficulty of learning with quality. Unlike you, I don't have problems with memory. Possibly just the opposite. But I still think that the workflow and outline of Max was badly thought out. Cinema is quite better in that regard, Rhino runs rings around it and Bryce is infinitely better. I think I already said here that it's difficult to learn Max, but once you learn it it's quite easy to master. Both Bryce and Rhino are easy to learn, but quite difficult to master. I can say I know both programs pretty well, but I still have quite a long way to go to the top. And I don't mind it, because they didn't put a sheer cliff in front of me. Still, nuski, I would be interested in seeing what Maya can offer. I downloaded PLE, but I have never installed it.

are you kidding me? LOL hell yeah! I'd almost give away one of my legs to get a shot at Maya, or another professional app like that :D like I said, see what we all can do with just bryce, we'd blow the industry if we take that level of skill and devotion to Maya ;)

Maya is powerful, as regards modeling. Rendering a finished scene is terrifically complicated, because you have to have a pretty good understanding of nodes and things that relate to materials. Once you understand it a bit better (and I still don't understand it super well), they way materials are handled is pretty nice. Meanwhile, the use of all the various animation tools and being able to pipe your scene to a variety of renderers is mighty nice. Learning the terms they use? That varies from app to app. Bryce's interface is just the most intuitive around, so it is still easier to learn. The jargon is not all that important when using Bryce, but, with Lightwave, for instance, you'd better know what term to use, because everything is text on the buttons now. Blender is similar, only it is so convoluted, to me, that it is just a bit more of a pain than I'd like to sustain. Bottom line. What's the end product? Orbital and Rochr can turn out amazing things, and some of us aren't any slouch either. Who uses the product is what really matters most. Period. The more I learn to use Bryce, the better photorealism I'm able to achieve. If I were going to go into a studio, I'd have to be proficient at Maya. That's all there is to it. Rhino is great, and they do use it in some studios, but the ones who really make it sing are those who do models for die casting, engineering, jewelry design and so forth, not to mention sculpting and, more and more, architecture. Enjoy what you have. Make it sing. Use it to your ends. Have a great time. Happy rendering.

Aye, I've enjoyed Maya for years, but never actually used it to do anything. I've had Lightwave for over a year now, and never actually made an image in it. Only a few short animations for the people funding it, and nothing since. I've tinkered with it endlessly, but never really got anywhere. It's the wrong tool for imaging. When it comes to still images, Bryce is much more efficient, generally. But as for modeling, I'm with Erlik on Rhino. I understand SolidWorks wil be important for real-life work, but Rhino is simply amazing. THe only things worth modeling in Bryce, with a program like Rhino around, are the terrains. Oh yeah, I use the TreeLab a lot... But my days of primitive boolean modeling are over.

The TreeLab will really be worth something when (and if) DAZ adds things like gnarliness or real tropisms, and when (IF!) they fix the branch angle thingy. For instance, there's a tutorial to create a weeping willow. The ends of branches look excellent. Unfortunately, there's that sharp angle transition when they come closer to the trunk. (Not to mention the trunk indentation bug.) IMO, the best way to achieve at least semi-realistic tree is to take a trunk created somewhere else and use Bryce trees as clumps of leaves. Like I did in After the Rain & Heart's Ease Lake. I hope somebody has a better way.

Aye, that's the best way that I know of, and apparently something that Vue excels in over Bryce. Does anyone know if Maya or Lightwave have plugins for trees? I've never seen one, yet...

There used to be this thing called Tree druid or something. maybe that's compatible with Maya?