I have a friend in her early 30's compared to my 60's who is a brilliant artist and has a masters in IT and worked in the field before she came here. She wants to start doing character modeling and animation and possibly work with Vue xStream. Any suggestions on whether she should get Maya, Cinema 4D or 3D Max? The only one of the three I used in the past was Cinema 4D and not for character animation. They are familiar with Poser but she wants to create more of her own.

She wants a program strong in character model creation and animation.

Any ideas from people using those programs and links would be much appreciated. friday I will show them the forums on renderosity.

Thanks for this help in advance.

I believe that Lightwave is supposed to be fairly strong in the character modelling department.

Depending on her wealth of course it might be one of the more logical ones to consider (I.e. it is less than half the price of maya, 3ds but does basically all the same stuff!)

You might want to check this site for more information, http://newtek.com/features-lightwave-menu.html

I have been using LW for quite a while and I think it is a very good program which is often overlooked, which is why I mention it as one you might consider looking at.

Sorry for adding more things for you to look at :D

It also has a trial version so you/she can play with it (as they all do mind!)

Zbrush is just about essential as an add-on if you are going to create characters for any program. Maya, combined with Motion Builder, is excellent for character animation, but the expense is extreme and the learning curve is steep.

I'll second Paloth, ZBrush is necessary, or Mudbox, for modern character design. But still, you'(ll need to decide where the basdic modelling will be done. Latest version of C4D has great tools for  character modelling and rigging, but it comes with a price, since those tools are only available in the Studio version, the most expensive one.

Mudbox is included with 3DS now, or no?  I'd start there anyway and then add onto it with Vue and other 3D apps.  You mentioned the masters in IT bit.  So I'd assume they want the most industry standard for their platfom.  Possibly using Vue often translates to going with some other package.  As long as the major modeling core used is from 3DS, there will be all kinds of choices for add-ons later.

Thanks for the help. I appreciate it.

Maya is undoubtedly the most advanced and versatile of the character modellers. (I'm a Maya user, but also make some limited use of Max, Lightwave and XSI.) Currently, it is in "industry standard" for movies and very high end fine art.

There have been at least three significant developments in character modelling technologies (technically, "rigging" and "skinning") over the last decade. The first generation technology is present in all of the major 3d applications, although these applications differ significantly in terms of ease of use and presentation of features and tools designed for character modelling.

Autodesk MAX might reasonably be said to not go further than this - as it tends to be used more for architecture and general-purpose modelling. Lightwave, C4D, XSI and Maya certainly contain more powerful skinning tools than MAX - they could be considered to have "second-generation" character modelling and animation  technologies.

But, now to disagree respectfully with some of the above comments.  While I like Lightwave very much, especially having purchased and admiring the latest tutorials for character development in it, I must respectfully disagree with Mr. Potter on the notion that Lightwave and Maya are equivalent when it comes to character modelling. Actually, the very latest technology for character modelling (the third generation of technological developments)  is one which is being developed to realistically simulate the movement and deformation of muscles under skin. To my knowledge, this technology is reasonably present only in Maya, as "Maya Muscles." I would have to say that this is a technology still under development, although Maya's tools are quite sophisticated and advanced.

Also, I would like to disagree with the comment that Zbrush or Mudbox are necessary, and perhaps lean hard on an implication that they could be useful character creation and animation tools all by themselves. I find this implication in the above comments, and think that it would seriously mislead a non-knowledable person asking where to begin. (And to clarify, I'm speaking as a Mudbox user also.) 

ZBrush and Mudbox are polygon/subdivision surface model sculpting tools. They are important and powerful tools in the process of creating the massive amounts of fine details that make a character truely realistic. Mudbox additionally has super-fine texture creation and painting tools for characters. (I've finally given up Maxxon's Body Paint (part of C4D) in favor of Mudbox.) For those of us who do a lot of character development,

But the basic processes of building the roots of a character's shape, of ensuring that the essential elements of mesh topology are laid out in good and efficient ways for a particular kind of character, and that will support realistic deformation of joints and skin, and therefore enable good animation are best done in applications such as XSI, C4D, Lightwave, Max and Maya. Skeleton development and rigging of the mesh are far, far better and more powerfully done in these tools. Building good control rigs (those things that control a character's animation movements) also is best done in these tools.  While it certainly is possible to build characters from scratch in Zbrush and Mudbox, and to animate them, (and people do this all the time), this is not how one who is interested in character development, with an eye to animation really would do things. That is, building a character's mesh is only one fourth of the task of character creation - if it is assumed that we are talking about animation. Character creation's four task are 1) building the mesh [including UV mapping and texture or material creation and application], 2) rigging the mesh [giving the mesh a suitable skeleton or set of joints for general purposes or for a particular kind of animation], 3) skinning the mesh (attaching all the various vertices of the mesh to appropriate joints, using appropriate weighting so that more than one joint can move an area of the mesh), and then 4) building a good set of controls over the skeleton for purposes of animation.

Both Zbrush and Mudbox are made with systems of interfaces or linkages to Maya, Max, Lightwave, sometimes C4D and others, just so that the latter main applications can be used for these primary tasks.

I am a long, long ways from expert in the business of character development, but I would consider it a significant disservice to point someone new to Zbrush or Mudbox, and tell them to start here, this is all that you will need if you want to enter the realm of character creation. The only time this might be acceptable, in my humble opinion, would be for a person who wants to sculpt still (non-moving) characters - as in the process of building statues.

For me, and for most of us in the profession, I would recommend Lightwave to a person on a restricted budget and who might be unsure of whether or not they really want to get into this kind of thing.

If the person is an experienced IT professional (as I was when I started in this field), and certain-sure they want to enter take up this endeavor, I would have them purchase Maya. The cost of the program will not be misspent, and ALL the relevant technologies are present. There is quite a lot to learn well before a person ever needs Mudbox or Zbrush. Maya is complex and certainly has a long learning curve, but for an IT professional, this is not going to be an impediment. (Unless, of course, the person you have in mind was basically a network professional - in which case this is all going to be quite a new world, indeed.)

Paula, character modelling is really quite a complex enterprise - requiring mastery of many more things than just box modelling and texture application. As you probably know, in the movie studios, model-builders, riggers and skinners, and animators often are completely separate occupations, with few people in one of those areas having anything other than rudimentary knowledge of the other areas. It is only us general-purpose free-lancers that have to learn it all. 

I think if I were advising someone like the IT professional that I used to be, the first thing I would do is recommend a three-month or six-month subscription to Digital-Tutors, and advise that person that they want to start with the Maya character modelling, character rigging, character skinning, and finally animation series of tutorials. Unfortunately, neither Gnomon Labs nor Digital Tutors organize or point out that their tutorials span the history of character development technologies, so that sometimes, you start out with old stuff, or only after working through it all, you come to realize that you have been looking at a history of three techological developments.  I've purchased all of Gnomon Labs and DT's tuts on these subjects and found them worth every penny. Unfortunately, I also spent a bunch on books on these same subjects over the years. Looking back, I should have spent zero on the books, and every dime on the interactive tuts, instead. (Some of the specialized character development books I own are pretty good references for me now, but they were never the best way to learn, in the beginning.)

If I was advising myself, the person I used to be when I first entered this field, I would day, purchase Autodesk's Creation Suite (it will include Maya and Mudbox, as well as MAX and XSI, and possibly Matchmover), and take out a three-month subscription to Digital Tutors.

Then, start with the DT Intro to Maya tuts. Don't worry about character creation for a couple of months. Just learn the basics of 3D modelling - polygon, NURBS, subdivision surfaces, UV mapping, Hypershade (the Material Editor), and then the basics of animation. (A little on Lighting and Rendering, of course, but not much.) This gives a reasonable foundation.

Then, start with the DT tuts on character modelling. Regardless of technology, the basics of character modelling and typology are ever the same - the old tuts are good. Once the person can build a basic character model satisfactorily within, say, eight-hour's time, it is time for the next step.

At this point, I would have a person take up Mudbox or Zbrush. Again, the DT tuts are good, but Gnomon Labs also has an excellent tut or two on Mudbox. My next comment is purely person opinion, but I prefer Mudbox to Zbrush. To me, Zbrush appears a bit as an end in itself, a tool maybe more for still sculpturing than as part of a larger toolkit for character creation and animation. Mudbox is simpler and more than servicable.

Whoops - an interrupt - more later.

Sorry about that interrupt, and the length of this reply.

Anyhow, while still in the phase of model-building, Mudbox tuts are just the thing. Your person might need to take a side-step here and go through some of the DT tuts on UV mapping, and the UV maps must be built for the character mesh before Mudbox will be of any real use. Also, of course, you want those UV maps laid on correctly before the fine details are added to the mesh. So, since UV map arrangement for characters rarely can be done with default settings, the tuts on UV mapping are appropriate just before Mudbox is taken up.

Anyhow, after the person learns basic mesh-building and Mudbox, then it is time to take up rigging (skeleton creation) the mesh. Either the DT tuts or the excellent Gnomon Labs tuts are great at this stage. And the older tuts are just fine. (I've not found that either Gnomon Labs or DT has kept up with the improvements in the Maya rigging tools, but that is of no great matter. Its always nice to discover that something is actually easier to do in the software than you were just told it would be in the tuts.)

Then, finally, we come to the next knowledge chunk that has to do with skinning. Here is where the recent changes in the technology are important/critical. If it were me, I'd basically be keeping a sharp eye on any learning aids that have to do with Maya Muscle. Not much point here in learning the oldest skinning techniques - IMHO. I did, of course, because I hadn't found any thing that would tell me about the developments in the technologies, so I had to work through everything by myself before figuring out that a bunch of what I was in the middle of learning was essentially obsolete. This is a particularly delicate stage of trying to figure things out, and here is the main point where a person should not invest in books. Until you have figured out what you need to know, and what not to bother with, you can be blowing $60.00 each on the wrong books.

Finally, as nearly as I can figure out, the only good learning aids for development of control rigs (as opposed to general purpose animation principles) are all DT Tuts. The Forums at Creativecrash.com are most helpful at this stage of things.

Then, we are left with animation-proper. This will be a stage of relief to the learner, as it is relatively simple compared to all that has gone on before. Free tuts abound all over the web. Any book is helpful. The self-learning frustration level should plummet and one can wake up with a grin in the morning.

OK, this has probably gone on too long, but as a person who has spent the past year and half on this particularly trajectory, these are the kinds of observations I would offer up.

Bruno, I always find you to be "right on"!!! 

p.s.     I meant that "Motionbuilder" (not Matchmover") comes included in Autodesk's Creation Suite.

That was an epic response, forester, but I don't believe anyone in this thread suggested that character creators should start with Zbrush or Mudbox to the exclusion of a conventional modeling/animation package. That being said, you could create a character from the ground up in Zbrush and then do a retopology (in a program like 3dcoat) to optimize for bending and animation in Maya.

Thank you for the clarification, Paloth. You and Bruno certainly did not suggest that, but Shawn does, I believe. Although, perhaps I misinterpreted his answer. (I never do quite know what he means by "3DS.")

You are most correct that a person can create a character from the ground up in Mudbox and Zbrush. Particularly so in Zbrush, as it has tools made specifically with this intention. As for me, I often like to sculpt models of bonsai like this - for simple relaxation and recreation. But I am not intending to animate the bonsai.

You are certainly correct that it is possible to purchase programs that automatically re-topologize (reduce the number of polygons in a model according to a series of mathematical functions) a mesh made with Zbrush or Mudbox. Zbrush has a relatively nice built-in function for this purpose, but Mudbox does not. 3DCoat's automatically retopologizing feature is quite interesting in that it can be "semi-automatic" and give you some control over the direction of the edge-rings that need to be preserved for purposes of animation. Some of these re-topologizing programs are more powerful and efficient than others. I myself make use of Atangeo Balancer (http://www.atangeo.com/) for working on Reaflow water meshes that are intended to be static objects, and not animated.

So, it is good of you to point this out.  For people interested only and entirely in "sculpting", this surely is the way to go. To purchase Zbrush (would be my first choice if this is the primary interest and intent), or possibly Mudbox, and then to consider purchase of a third-party re-topologizer if the sculpted mesh is intended to be used in Vue or some other environment sure to include lots of other high-polygon-count objects.

My comments were meant only to clarify the idea that characters intended for animation (or even for re-posing among a number of static positions) generally are thought to require design for this purpose.

The intentional design is accomplished by considering musculature and skeleton and thinking about how these two things are deformed under movement. Simple cartoon characters perhaps don't need a lot of planning in this regard, but the closer and closer a character is intended to come toward a realworld animal or human, the more and more planning and forethought have to go into this deliberate design.  (ouch! I can hear the cries of the pro's complaining that cartoon characters need every bit as much planning as photorealistic characters, even now.)

Once these things have been considered and planned out, the critical task of the model-builder is to deliberately design and lay out a mesh topology to accomplish this.

The primary tools for creating a foundation mesh of this sort are the conventional 3d model-building tools. For a foundation mesh, almost any of the conventional 3d programs will do the job. Such programs give the model-builder the ability to exactly control the extent and direction of mesh lines and their interconnections (topology), and to make corrections to these mesh line directions and interconnections as they prove necessary.

This is not the realm of Zbrush and Mudbox and 3DCoat. Instead, these latter are programs for reshaping areas of a pre-constructed mesh.  You can pinch and fold, and push down and pull up. These are "surface resculpters," if you will. And that's the only point I was trying to make. And only because a person newly come to 3d modelling might not know this.

Most of these programs have demos or non commercial versions. She should download them and find out what works for her. Every artist is different. One size does not fit all.

If she is planning to purchase a commercial version she should also look at the license agreements. Some are a lot more flexible than others.

In particular the CINEMA 4D licensing is much more flexible than Maya or 3D Max, in particular you are allowed to resell it. Not the case with Autodesk products.

Another criteria might be that it should be possible to run the software on Windows or OS X with no penalty for switching.

If you can master one piece of software it is quite easy and often rewarding to learn another.

Again, I want to thank all of you for helping out my friend. I knew I could count on this group to have lots of good ideas. The basic suggestion I made since I have not used most of these programs or used them much is to download as many as possible and see which are the best fit since we all work differently and have different comfort zones.

Thanks again,

paula

3DS, as in 3D Studio.  Some just call it Max now.  I mentioned Mudbox probably because it can be used to paint/sculpt detail on modeled objects.  And it doesn't have ZBrush's metaphor GUI.

Anyway.  I'll play the Libertarian hand this time and suggest getting Blender for free and using just that app for everything.

Thanks, Shawn.  I did wonder as I see you refer to "3DS" in many of your posts. Yeh, even we who started way back in Version 2, call it "Max" now.

So, Shawn, I'm not familar with Blender. Mind commenting on its rigging and skinning features? What is your opinion of them?