I just purchased the download version of Vue 4 and I am very disappointed. No doubt, they make fine pictures. But they are absolutely not professional in programming basics (the same as with Poser). The program has severe problems with access rights on NT/W2k/WinXP (a multiuser system since 10 years). One can only run it with admin rights. This is a design flaw (e.g. needs write access to program directory; they spend not a minute on security considderations). On a network (this is 2005) you are absolutely lost - just because of the problems with access rigths. Another story is that the software cannot even remember the last save path and there are no configuration options for paths. These are simple programming basics. For me, the software has only shareware quality and a pricing of some 100 in what ever currency is far too much. Even the 50 EUR for Vue4 are too much. 25 are okay - for the nice pictures.

Well, it's a point of view but one I find rather strange. You spend just 50 euro for software to create great images, find that it does just that, and aren't happy because it doesn't meet your definition of 'professional' programming?

You need to bear in mind that most Vue 4 users are probably hobbyists (like me) and for them Vue 4 does a fine job. If you want something to be used for professional purposes, would you not buy Vue Pro (or Vue Infinite, now)? I have no idea if Vue 4 Pro would do the things you want, but considering that the eon site says that that version is specifically intended for professionals, it seems likely that if you want to run Vue over a network that's the version you want.

Well, it WOULD be nice (and easy to program) if the program would allow you to set some folder paths (for opening and saving). A minor irritation.

have to agree, vue can always improve on alot of small things, but if youre looking for a pro solution you need a: be open to paying more then 60..... b: pick up v5I or v4Pro thats the pro lineup.

Basically, I agree with mandaboo. In both Vue 4 and Poser there are so many instances of shoddy programming that if one were teaching computer science one could make a good lecture on how not to design software using examples just from Vue and Poser. Many of the examples would indeed be small things, but attention to detail makes the difference between a well-designed program that is pleasant to use, and a badly designed one that thwarts the user's expectations. I'll give you another small example. Whenever you wish to change the colour of something, what do you do? You see a box showing the present colour. The obvious thing to do is to click the box. This has no effect. You have to RIGHT click the box and choose "Edit colour" from the pop-up menu. This defeats one's expectations and is more cumbersome. Agreed, the pop-up menu allows you other choices like "Copy colour". But nine times out of ten what you want to do is change the colour, and since no other function is assigned to a left click on the colour box, why not also allow a left click to access the change colour routine? The amount of coding to implement this would be trivial. A well-designed program takes the effort of simple repetitive tasks away from the user. Every time you save the user an unecessary click in common tasks speeds up the workflow. Vue 4 (and I don't know that 5 is any better) is not carefully designed, and the interface is not well thought through. Poser is even worse. The merit of both programs lies in the results you can obtain. But how much nicer they would both be if you weren't forever battling against clumsy design.

Thanks for your answers.

Try to make things clearer:

"Professional" to me is when they want to make money with programming (as I do, in a very different field). And I expect from a professional that he/she is able to make a program work out of the box, not that I have to contact the support even to install the software. I do not mean professional features, I mean handling the very basics (like paths, access rights etc., to know what a home directory is).

I can forgive a lot if I try a free program. See Blender. It has highly professional features but the user interface is terrible. It's free - and it's ok. Vue on the other side seems to be designed as a money mashine. Should I really hope the "Pro" version will handle paths the right way? That hope may come expensive...

Yes, it's rather notable that things that are wrong with Vue4 are fixed in Vue4 Pro. But it's one thing to charge extra for new functionality and another to charge extra to correct things that shouldn't have been wrong in the first place (like the fact that zooming one orthogonal view zooms all three).

"(...)And I expect from a professional that he/she is able to make a program work out of the box, not that I have to contact the support even to install the software.(...)" ...so I must be a genius, because I found that Vue 4 is one of the easiest and user friendly program I've tryed until now...

...so I must be a genius, because I found that Vue 4 is one of the easiest and user friendly program I've tryed until now...

Yes.....I must be a programming genius, too.

BTW - Vue 4 Professional does a lot more than "repair" problems in Vue 4.

It's also interesting to note that most "professional-level" 3D software tends to run anywhere from $1500 US to $6000 US. Check out Lightwave, Maya, 3DS Max, AutoCAD, et al.

All in all, I'd say that Vue 4 is dirt cheap at the price.

Keep in mind that Photoshop CS is around $700 US, last time that I checked. I have the program: but I purchased it about a year ago from a local retailer -- so it might have been a tad high for me.

For a pro-level package -- $600 US for Vue Pro (re: Vue Infinite) is just about right by the market. In fact, it's a bit on the low side.

I don't know what kind of "professional" software prices that you are used to, but it's not the kind that I am used to.

One might argue that professional-grade software prices are too high.........so's the cost of bread at the grocery store.

I can't do anything about that, either. Message edited on: 02/03/2005 14:10

For that matter, Poser is dirt cheap, too.

In fact, I haven't seen much truly "professional" software for under $500.

About the only thing that might qualify would be the Microsoft Office Suite. And you'll pay a lot for that, too. Certainly far more than the cost of Vue 4 or Poser.

I have Adobe Acrobat Professional 6.0. They didn't give that one away, either.

Message edited on: 02/03/2005 14:15

P.S. If you want an excellent image editor for under $100, then I recommend Ulead's PhotoImpact 10. Fantastic features at a surprisingly low price.

I think this is the first time in my life I can claim to be a genius. My parents would be proud ;).

What mandaboo is saying is that he thinks e-on lacks professionalism in the design of Vue 4 - not in its features. The reality of software development is that it is very difficult to successfully balance usability, features and budget. e-on does not have infinite resources. They have to generate a profit so they can survive as a company. They have to decide how much to invest (and how long) in each side of the development - that is, bug fixes, new features and enhancements of old features. In general, they have done a good job listening to users feedback but of course, they don't have the time to fix everything for every version. Hey... even Microsoft, with its nearly infinite resources, is not particularly known for their spotless, bug free, user friendly software (as a reference, Microsoft recently reported profits of $10 billion last year, more than what each of 48 out of 50 states in the US get in taxes in a year :) ).

What mandaboo is saying is that he thinks e-on lacks professionalism in the design of Vue 4 - not in its features.

That part I don't necessarily have an argument with -- although, based upon mandaboo's tone, I'd tend to make certain assumptions concerning his overall evaluation of the software........and it isn't a positive result.

To each their own. Personally, I've rarely been as satisfied with a program as I am with Vue 4 Pro.

Sure, there is always room for improvement. Vue Infinite is that room.

However, sometimes one's tone communicates more information than the things that one is actually saying.......not surprisingly, people tend to respond in kind.

Phantast makes some valid points. I'm sure that those suggestions could be of help in e-on's online forums.

E-on might even respond positively to them.
Message edited on: 02/03/2005 14:46

"The program has severe problems with access rights on NT/W2k/WinXP (a multiuser system since 10 years). One can only run it with admin rights."

Odd, Ive run Vue 4 on NT4, W2k and XP Pro without that problem. Are you sure you know how to install software properly?

Oh, I know that Vue 4 Pro does a hell of a lot more than fix some of the poor design in Vue 4. My point is that e-on should simply have fixed the features in Vue 4 at the same time. One shouldn't have to shell out for all the extras in Pro just to get a version of Vue 4 that behaves sensibly. The point about professionalism has been misinterpreted. I would say that professionalism is about standards. It's about making thoughtful, well-designed interfaces. I can give other examples of how Vue simply goes against principles of good software design, in ways that "professional" software should not err. It's careless, it's slipshod. Any decent program should be able to remember where you store different types of file. It's not a matter of "e-on has limited resources". Making a program aware of your work paths is trivially easy. Really, really simple. I've done it myself, and I'm not a professional programmer. Not doing it is sloppy. The fact that Microsoft can't be bothered to it doesn't mean it isn't sloppy. I wouldn't hold Microsoft programs up as an example of good programming practice - they just have huge marketing muscle.

The way I see it?? Someone comes here and says that they want to make money fron the program.. fine.. but doesnt a bit of research come into play here?? Lets face it.. Vue 4 and Poser ( put your edition here) are actually on the low end of the 3d scale, these programs are designed for the hobbiest ( although there are a few really talented artists out there) But for someone to come here and just BLAST these products.. well, it just screams novice to me and I for one will not enter into a debate about this. If you want to make money, then invest in the higher end products ie Maya, Rhino.. ect. But do not blast products that you have not explored in depth.. see statement about talented artists. who have explored the product. Just my opinion.

I would not call either program "low-end". There are people here and about that use both Professionally. Even over CGTalk today...someone posted a pic using Poser...that they did for their job in advertising. I've seen Poser used on the History Channel/Discovery Channel/Tv Ads(those are bad).....It's all how one uses the tools they possess.

Personally Vue worked perfectly with W2000 Pro and now with XP pro.
I have never had problems.

I am enchanted with this product.

But it is only my opinion..:o)

Valentin

Shiollie - if by BLAST you mean negative comments that are just along the lines of "this sucks" then, OK, negativity is never good. But ANY program is subject to critique in terms of the principles of software design. The difference between a high-end program and a low-end one is in feature set. Principles of usability ought to be the same in both. The difference between a cheap car and an expensive car is all the flashy stuff you get with an expensive one against the low frills of the cheap one. If the cheap car has square wheels, it's no defense to say, "well, it's only a cheap one, you want round wheels buy a Mercedes". NO car should have square wheels. If software has the equivalent of square wheels it does not matter whether it's aimed at the hobbyist or at the Hollywood studio. It should not be like that. And one is quite correct in criticising it.

Keeping in mind that as none of us have access to the actual source code, there may be -reasons- why something is structured in a manner that annoys a percentage of the user base. And keeping in mind that actual rules and capabilities of programming have changed over the years.

Phantast: If so, I would say that Vue has fairly round weels. I find the interface to be one of the better and more easy to learn. (I do however agree on the color choser and to same agree when it comes to not remembering the paths... ;) ) XENOPHONZ: Well for pro below $500 try XSI Foundation at $450 ;)

Hellborn: It is relatively simple in many respects, I grant you that. It just lacks a lot of the little touches that make a program pleasant to use, and lacks many things that ought to be basic functionality (like hot keys for cameras, see other thread). I am pretty sure that in 99% of cases it's just thoughtlessness that's responsible, and is nothing to do with some deep structure of the source code. Windows programming is not black magic. It follows certain rules that are inherent in the Windows model. Let's have another little example. You have a light called "Light1". Duplicate it. What is the new light called? In Bryce it's called "Light2". In Vue it's called "Light1". Whoever programmed Bryce thought, "Well, there is never going to be a case where the user actually wants two lights called 'Light1', so let's check the name of the item to be duplicated and give the new item a name that's an intelligent variant on that". Whoever programmed Vue couldn't be bothered. The programming involved is trivial. Result: you have the extra task of renaming the new light by hand. On the other hand, the Vue developer DID think that it would be a good idea, whenever copying a material from one material zone to another, to eliminate the duplicated material zone. The problem here is that if you want to make variations on a material, the easy way to do it is copy the original material and then change the one aspect you want to vary (say, make it a bit shinier). However, you now can't do that, because as soon as you do the copy, the material zone is destroyed without any question or confirmation. If you need to make variations on a material you have to resort to elaborate workarounds. Nothing to do with complex coding problems, everything to do with a bit of software design that simply wasn't thought through properly. That's what I mean by square wheels (metaphorically speaking). This example may not be as extreme as actual square wheels on a car, but it is still just poor design.

XENOPHONZ: Well for pro below $500 try XSI Foundation at $450 ;) Ah! You found something! (Still costs a good bit more than Vue 4......)

Phantast -- Your comments in this thread about the software come across as....."professional". That's both constructive and worth listening to. E-on would be the central party that needs to hear such things.

They may not participate a lot since they have their own official forum to deal with, but I can guarantie you that e-on employees are reading this forum :) (~~~ waving at them)

Aha, thank you for that! I will experiment with it. Meanwhile, let me give you another example. A common task: change the aspect ratio of the scene. How to do it - open the Render Options window, and you can pick what aspect, size you like, etc. So far so good. Now you have made your changes. The window has two options at the side: "OK" and "X". Now, anyone with any experience of Windows software will immediately have an expectation of what will happen when one of these options is chosen. "OK" should mean "accept the changes and close this window", and "X" should mean "cancel the changes and close this window". This is the behaviour you would expect in any other program. But Vue confounds your expectation. "OK" confirms the changes you have made - but it also starts rendering! Who asked it to do that? It's silly, because after changing the aspect ratio the camera framing will almost certainly need to be adjusted, so you can guarantee that the render is not wanted. So you have to interrupt the render, possibly confirm the interrupt (see other thread) and close the render window - completely unecessary tasks. What happens if you select the "X"? Vue closes the window and cancels the changes you made, EXCEPT to the aspect ratio. So if you only want to change the aspect ratio, you can actually select cancel to make the change without starting an unwanted render - but you lose any other changes you made. However, if you genuinely changed your mind and really did want to cancel the whole operation, you would be justifiably puzzled as to why Vue has implemented your aspect ratio change even when you told it to cancel. Now, things like this don't cripple the program, you can work round them. But they give the user a bad taste that one is fighting against the interface rather than having the interface assisting you. It also gives one the strong impression that the programmer didn't understand principles of good software design. If something looks like a cancel button, it should behave like a cancel button, that's practically software design beginner's rule #1.

Oh yes I agree, it is a really odd behavior! It seems they have do something to correct that in 5 but it is not as it must be, you have a button to close the dialog... It saves changes, and don't launch the render, but it is a little bit hidden (2 per 2 pixel button in the top right of the dialog). Since Vue 4 Pro there is the camera manager too, it is another way to do that without rendering;) But you never think to that and while moving your cursor to the ok buton, you know you are doing something wrong, and then...you click! "Oh f... this stupid button again (growl)" :) Like when you want to test the thickness of ice on a lake with your foot, knowing pertinentely that it is not more than some millimeters...

If you double click on the color window...the color thing comes up....you don't have to right click ;)....Just discovered that tonight :)

The fact that it took you so long to discover makes one ask why it requires a double-click and not a single one ;) Going back to the "store material" feature, this gives one a better workaround for modifying materials than ones previously discussed in this forum, but it's still a workaround for a problem which is quite artificial. The problem could have been SOLVED quite neatly this way: Wherever there is a menu entry for "Paste material" it should be followed by another entry "Merge material". Merge material would do what paste material currently does, i.e. destroy a duplicated material zone. Paste material would apply the copied material without merging zones. Unless there's something very odd about how Vue stores material information, this ought to be extremely easy to implement code-wise. Another little annoyance I hit the other day. Suppose you import a Poser model that has various material zones. Suppose two are "toe" and "heel". Since Poser metals never import well, I apply two standard Vue materials, silver for the toe and chrome for the heel. Now I come back to the scene after a while and I decide I would rather have the toe gold. Open the material browser. Where is "toe"? You can't find it, because it's now called "silver". And if you can't remember which material you previously applied to the toe, you have problems. As you also do if there is anything else silver in the scene. It would be much better if Vue did NOT rename material zones with the library name whenever loading a material from the library. It isn't convenient, and it just causes needless problems.