I was browsing through Eovia's website gallery and particularly the gallery work labeled as "Done with Carrara." (I just downloaded my new upgrade to Pro 4 today)

Specifically, the work done by Marcel Laverdet caught my eye. "Amazing," says me... so I do a google for the dude and find much of his stuff at UV mapper site. There they list his work as being done with Z-Brush. Now that makes sense... I have seen very organic work done with Z-Brush, of the sort that Mr. Laverdet does.

Now to the bottom line... what exactly of the samples that Carrara claims are done with their software is actually done with it? I think that perhaps (in the case of Mr. Laverdet) the rendering was the only thing done (or maybe some background stuff) with Carrara.

Now this strikes me as strange and smacks of deceptivity.... I've done conventional illustration for years (see it if you like at my web site) and to me what Carrara is doing would be like me taking some other artist's drawing and slapping some color on it and putting my name on the art and telling folks that it is my work.

Does anybody else think that Eovia/Carrara should be a little more up front with their claims? I've used the "Carrara" product for years, starting with Ray Dream before it went through the hoops to all the different owners/developers.

Honestly (that's the issue, isn't it?) this makes me uncomfortable... I think we all like to deal with straight shooters.

Whaddya think?

I think Eovia should at least mention which renders went through Photoshop afterwards.

That's a good idea...

The implication is that what is on Carrara's site, in their ads and on the box that contains Carrara, was actually modeled in Carrara. Unfortunately, I don't think that would be an accurate assumption.

Just about anything going to press has to be tweaked and color corrected (usually in PhotoShop). That is normal production procedure regardless of how the art was created.

Something that says "made with Carrara" but was actually modeled in another 3D program (like Z-Brush) should clearly be marked as such. Rendering is great, but the modeling is the heart and birth of a project.

I'm pretty sure that the pirate they are using in their email promos for Carrara upgrades was not modeled in Carrara. I wish someone would tell me I'm wrong, because it is awesome work. (Looks like the work of Marcel Laverdet to me... perhaps I should email him and get the straight scoop about his work appearing in the Carrara promotions.)

Attached Link: http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?threadid=205705

Attached Link: http://206.145.80.239/zbc/showthread.php?t=23836&page=4&pp=15

"well, I work with eovia' guys, too... I mention zbrush, when posting on the eovia forum, as well as on cgtalk forum, each time (nearly always) I use the program... but of course, different programs show my pictures in the idea of demonstrating qualities (well, I hope, maybe it's counter appealing!...) of their software, to obtain different effects... carrara is a complete program, but a lot of people, like me, use it mainly as a render program, like Brazil or Mental ray..."

They have only to say "rendered in Carrara, modeled elsewhere" (or even just "rendered in Carrara") to make things clear.

Message edited on: 02/25/2005 02:40

Carrara used to do that, especially on the box. This version the box is 100% Carrara! I think the use of Photoshop for print is always needed (correcting after changing to cmyk for instance), when people are pasting parts of pictures in the image, I think it should be mentioned. To be honest, I think that pirate could be done in Carrara, if one wanted, but it would take a year of modelling. But one could never get that render in ZBrush. To get the image that is the end result of Marcel's work, Carrara was an important tool. I must say that, as a growing company, Eovio has all the rights to show what art is made with their software, in a world where people are using multiple programs. But a small addition like 'rendered in C4 Pro' , or 'Carrara with TransPoser' is a bit of 'truth in advertising' that is good for everyone.

Hoof, Are you saying that the sky in David Tosches C4 box image was made in Carrara?

:) If I remember correctly, TOXE said in his 3DXtract article that he didn't have to worry about the sky.

You nitpicker! You got me! No, the sky is a photograph that is imported in Carrara. But it is not made in another program. Everybody can stick his or her camera out of the window to 'make' his or her own sky. There also might be a texture or two that is based on photographs...

Attached Link: http://www.eovia.com/solutions/gallery/gallery_illustration.asp

++"What is the url to the "made with Carrara gallery"?
I could not find it."++

As far as I know there is no such gallery.

What I said was, "gallery work labeled as "Done with Carrara." If you look at the Carrara/Eovia gallery of samples, there are categories (under the thumbnails) of what program was used to create the image - it's here = http://www.eovia.com/solutions/gallery/gallery_illustration.asp

Whether a potential client is new to 3d or not, I don't think claiming or implying that an image was made with a particular software is right unless it was. Disclaimers like modeled with, rendered with, etc. is the way to put all the cards on the table.

In most of my illustration work, when I use 3D, I model major parts of the project in Rhino and, like Marcel, take it to Carrara for rendering. So, I am well aware of the use of multiple packages to create images. Nearly everything I do is finalized in PhotoShop... the client/viewer does not care, but I am delivering illustration, not selling a software product. If someone asks, I am not hesitant to explain in detail how it was created.

Fair is fair...

Thanks for the link to Marcel's explanation of his Pirate piece... it is just as I expected. (I need to learn Zbrush, dang, that is awesome!)

I appreciate your input, and hope that Carrara/Eovia will get on the wagon.

Hoof and Falcon, It maybe a nit and I certainly was not surprised that the sky was a photo BUT Eovia makes a marketing point that their software includes a newly revised "Realistic Sky" creator/editor so the un-initiated might well think that the cover images would demostrate its capabilities. I frequently look at 3d software advertisements and their included images with thought to buying. With this kind of misrepresentation becomming popular in the marketplace I would be well advised to look at them with a wary eye! Don't get me wrong, I think C4 is good software, but I will not become an apologist for Eovia.

You have a good point there sailor_ed, I think the box art is not the best example (most of the time it is made with the previous version or a beta) but in other promotional material it should be clear. A lot of the visuals are not make especially for Carrara promotion purposes, so you can't blame anyone. A large disclaimer with each image is not the best way to advertise the software. It is still true anyone can re-make the box art with just Carrara (and a picture of a sky), for a lot of other picture you may need other software, more time than the original artist and the same talent as the artist. I think most buyers of Carrara do a broader information search than just checking the gallery at Eovia, there are a lot of beautiful pics in the 'Carrara' gallery over here to convince people that it is a quite powerful piece of software, for a very nice price.

To anyone who browses the forums here it is obvious that it is the artist and not the software that in the end makes the dramatic, memorable, heart stopping, image that any software company would love to show to advertise their product. The solution for Eovia is to hire such talented artists to create their advertising images entirely in Carrara. This probably won't happen anytime soom but it would put discussions such as this to rest.

Good idea. I think Eovia could try a 'no cure no pay'-construction where they do a kind of challenge and pay people that make images they will use in advertising. I think a lot of artist around here would be happy with, say, 250 $ and the honor that the company uses your work. It does take some dollar, but you get work that makes the very best of Carrara. Mmmm. I don't think I should give this advice away for free... I would try to find time to make some images if they would do anything like this.

Attached Link: http://www.3d02.com/3d_model_index.asp

Message edited on: 02/25/2005 09:56

@ steama, that is actually what we are talking about... The car was used to illustrate the hdri rendering, not the modelling capabilities of Carrara. The Masarati could be made in Carrara if one has the time and talent.

Hoof, Good idea! We all heard it first here ;-)

I believe that model can be done in Carrara. ;-)
What EOVIAs do its like a whisky advertise with tea inside the bottle. But I think its doesnt matter if you need to retouch your scene with Photoshop or use Mental Ray to render a model. The only limit is the artist skills. A good artist can use various tools to create a illusion. So,if I cant convince my clients with my renders, screw me! Im gonna sell popcorn in football stadiuns to survive! ;-D

Message edited on: 02/25/2005 13:50

You're missing the point, noviski. Eovia's marketing/web guy is using questionable artwork to get Carrara buyers.

Hi all,
Marcel's artwork is amazing but mainly made with Zbrush, where Carrara was used to render, as Carrara rendering engine supports millions of polygons for models, while being quite cheap regarding the competion.
However, it sounds to me also like a rip-off for the newbies, who could be fooled thinking that they can do the same artwork than Marcel with out-of-the-box Carrara's tools. Also don't forget that Marcel have first TALENT, then after the tools....
But lot of things in the gallery are also made with Amapi/Carrara, and a few images done with extra products don't discredit the software itself.
Also Eovia grab various artwork made with Carrara/Amapi for its internal use and promotion, but don't show them all (or can't)...
:)

Message edited on: 02/25/2005 14:47

Sorry, SHONNER. Thats exactly what I mean when I wrote "What EOVIAs do its like a whisky advertise with tea inside the bottle". Maybe its a low trick to sell Carrara to the costumers. And I agree with Pete about the newbies be fooled. But we cant believe in everything what EOVIAs wrote. For that reason exists the trial version of the products. You like it, you buy it.

Maybe Eovia simply overlooked the creation details of some of the 3d artwork posted in their galleries. Whoever handles the images submited to the Eovia Galleries may not know whether Carrara did the complete artwork or not (texturing, modeling and/or rendering) who knows. They may not even use Carrara. They just post good images that are submitted. Who cares if the creation details are all listed and correct? It is not that big of deal (right?). We will buy anyway! Pobody's Nerfect. Even though the end-user deserves better if they are buying the product.

Steama, You are giving Eovia too much leeway. It is the business of people who deal with illustration professionally to know the background of the images they use.

I know. I feel like a flat footed 3d goon to be honest. I acctually believed in the use of software galleries as a way to select buying a software package. I don't know of anything more idiotic now that the wool is off my eyes. LOL, live and learn. I do wish I could trust all those images on the Eovia site.

I still would have bought Carrara regardless. It is the best at what I need it for (mostly print advertising). It does so much for such a small price. You can build a 3d workcenter around Carrara very well (The skys, terrains, plants, Transposer and multiple modelers are great stuff). It just can't do EVERYTHING (yet). For that I can or need to use other tools like Zbrush, Poser, Amapi, Lightwave and so on. It all can work with Carrara being the render/texture center. Now just to get Eovia to make some gallery adjustments...LOL

Message edited on: 02/25/2005 20:49

You guys are silly.

Such picking at little things. Really. Get a hobby.

So the image wasn't completely made in Carrara. Is any image really completely made in one product? 99.1% of the time some other software was used to create any image.

Personally I think its wrong that you guys don't quote what operating system you used to run the software of your choosing, I mean it does play a big roll. And hey while you are at it, how about what computer, I mean you couldn't render without it. And Carrara doesn't even work with out a processor and hey your monitor, quote that too!!! Of course maybe I am being to harse and sarcastic. If I am, well I apologize. I understand what you say, but be realistic.

Message edited on: 02/25/2005 21:03

Ethics. Some people value them. And some people have contempt for those who value them.

Ethics.

A disappearing archaic concept, apparently.

With the popularity of game shows like survivors giving awards to those who lie and cheat to win the "game" I think the trend is toward a day when many will not even know what you are talking about when you say words like ethics and honesty.

If I bought a watch from a catalog that used photos of Rolexes instead of their own product, and when my order arrived it was a Timex, then I shouldn't complain, right?

No wonder that corporations are having employees sign affadivits saying that they will not steal from their employers... sad, sad, sad.

My question is, when do the corporations start signing those affadavits?

This is probably getting all out of proportion. Carrara is a great product and I have enjoyed using it and its predecessors for years... just wish they would polish up their marketing tactics.

It's about the tools used to create illustations. That is why "software used information" is not simply ethical it is crucial.

The question: Was it modeled and textured in Zbrush (which is the heart of the art) or Carrara? Or was it only rendered in Carrara? Why should there even be the question? The information should be provided. PERIOD

I think this type of question is valid. For a commercial company selling software for illustration it is a simple question of ethics and honesty. It is better to share correct information than pose and dance as something you are not.

I believe in Ethics. All I am saying is that its not a matter of ethics. They are demonstrating the product. And you can head on over to any other software's gallery, and you will rarely, if ever see a quote of other software used to produce the image. And it can be assumed that at least photoshop was used. Also, keep in mind that many of the images are sent by users, and the user says in the email, I made this in Carrara, so Eovia posts the image, and because they don't have the information they just post it as Carrara. And Eovia may pop into the forums from time to time, but they don't track the images and what was made with what. If you look on the Eovia gallery, you will see that a few images do have quotes as to software used. I just think you guys are being a bit harsh, with the limited information that you have. I do firmly believe that every image in the gallery could be created almost completely with Carrara given a person with enough talent and determination. That said, maybe I am being a bit moody, I've had a rough week, so forgive me.

Brian, Without wishing to make an already bad week worse, I think you've missed that this discussion started with a specific example - Marcel Laverdet's illustrations - and that Marcel has stated [quoted above] that he has told Eovia that he used ZBrush in the creation of his images. Now, I agree that a talented enough artist with enough time and patience could produce a very similar image in Carrara alone (or build the Statue of Liberty in matchsticks come to that) BUT the point is that Marcel didn't, he used ZBrush. Now in my view Eovia are not only letting down their customers by not telling the whole truth but they're letting down the artist too. I'd be very unhappy if an image of mine was used to promote a product in this way - not least because you could have the same image promoting several different softwares which wouldn't help anybody.

False advertising and mis-representation regarding Carrara is what this all boils down to. It is too bad. Anyone that is concerned should send an email to Eovia PR: pr@eovia.com

Ok. I won't argue. I do agree with what you are saying. I just know from experience that Eovia is far from the only company that does this. And I apologize if I was harsh or rude to anyone.

Message edited on: 02/26/2005 11:46

Attached Link: http://gallery.mcneel.com/?language=en&i=13881

One example = http://gallery.mcneel.com/?language=en&i=13881

To protect their own reputation and credentials, a company should not accept images for display as examples of work done with their product without an explanation of programs used to create the image. To not display such information is negligence.

Ok, I got kind of tired after a while and didn't bother to read absolutely everything (there are a lot of posts here). Yes, Eovia should state that zbrush was used, like they do on some images: Carrara+3dsmax for instance is used on Thomas Roussel's crazy break dancing indian elf thing. So it should say Zbrush+Carrara, I too was amazed by the quality of these images, but at least they show what can be done through the rendering engine of Carrara.

And Photoshop.

Blatant misrepresentation. I surprised that no one has called them on it yet. I don't know what they do in France but here in the United States it is defiantly against the law. Several companies have been successfully sued for just this type of misrepresentation. I can just see Eovia in court... "And why did you use the Zbrush and Lightwave models in your Carrara promotion material and not state that it really wasn't your models at all?" "Ahh, sir. We were just, ahh, using the models to show our rendering ability with Carrara." "Then why didn't you just put one of your own models in to render if all you were doing was to show your rendering ability?" Silence falls on the courtroom THE TRUTH The answer to this is obvious. Because the other programs produce far superior models over what we have been able to produce using Carrara and nothing looks better rendered than a greatly produced model. Some will say that given enough time and talent the same caliber of models produced in Lightwave or Zbrush can be produced in Carrara and Eovia was just "saving time" by using the Lightwave and Zbrush models. The story is the same old one I'm sure everyone has heard at one time or another. If you could of, you would of, but you didn't, because you can't!

I am not really up on Eovias internal structure and I hope others will give their informed opinions, but could this issue be related to the lack of artistic talent WITHIN Eovia since its sale and restructuring? It seems to me that in times past Eovias own people did the advertising images.

I do think that Amapi is quite on par with Lightwave and the other more advanced modeling programs, so I don't doubt that the models could be produced with CS4 Pro and Designer very easily. I don't think the question is whether it could be done, because we all know that its possible. Its just why it wasn't done. I think as users of Carrara we aren't necessarily upset that other programs were used to produce the models in the images, just upset that they weren't quoted, and that Carrara, Amapi, etc, were not demonstrated as they should be. Now that I've taken the time to read this thread a bit mroe, I do see where you all are coming from. Personally I'm just disappointed that Eovia doesn't petition the community for Carrara/Amapi images made in the program, and I don't see any harm in labeling that another piece of software was used, as it show's Carrara's compatibility and workflow value. Brian

Brian, I agree absolutely. There are many talented artists who produce excellent images using only Carrara/Amapi. I'm sure many of them would be thrilled to have their work shown on the Eovia website. And for those that use other software as well, I can only see it as an advantage for Carrara to be shown as part of their workflow.

Shonner: Well, if every image that ever used photoshop or some other 2d graphics suite for anything, stated that, then 99.9% of all advertising images for 3d works would have to say so. Most people who do GREAT work, use a 2d program along with the 3d program, as they make textures (there are slight limits to what can be done with procedurals unless you make extreme amounts of shading domains) or they do compositing, or for that matter just simply cropping or resizing. I think it should have something to do with how extensively other software was used. It's almost like adding Windows or Mac OS X was used to run the program on (yes I know it's extreme to say that, as it's not the same thing, but exaggeration is one of the things that makes language work). Infocentral: Carrara didn't make the images, they just asked the artist who used there software for the rendering to be allowed to use it. So, yes, you are correct, but what you wrote stated that eovia made those images themselves internally. Yes, I am being a nitpicky bastard. And Brian is right, they should try to get more of that great Amapi stuff shown off. I know from amapi.net that some of the users(thinking of stu (laughingnome), who did his first Carrara render in early Feb, and he makes amazing Amapi work) of Amapi are not familiar with using Carrara. Then I think maybe the Eovia guys should help setting up the scene and rendering in Carrara along with the original artist, either through simple tips and stuff, or by actually doing the lighting setup and such. Have it rendered and used for advertising.

I think Eovia has produced magic! We call it sleight of hands. You think you see a Carrara model rendered but its not! And we never tell. Shhhh....its magic.

No. You call it sleight of hands. And you think you are looking at a Carrara model. It is not magic, it is incomplete information.

"It is not magic, it is incomplete information." Always the fundamental technique in use when trying to pull the wool over someones eyes. I believe it is Newsweek that is currently in big trouble for putting a cover picture of Martha Stewart's head with someone elses body and deciding not to make it perfectly clear the picture is not what it appears to be. Sounds very similar to what Eovia has been doing doesn't it.

Info,
not to " kill the messenger" or feed the flames, but....
As negative as you are on anything from Eovia, why haven't you moved on?
If I thought a company had broken trust with me or other users, I wouldn't hang out in forums for programs I no longer owned or wanted to use.
What are you trying to achieve here with your posts? (I know you didn't start this thread but you seem the most upset by this)
If you are trying to make Eovia a better company wouldn't a more productive thing to do, be to email them and tell them your concerns over the lack of complete information on their website? Maybe you have already done this and could share their reply (or lack of reply) to you. There is nothing wrong with bringing up legitimate issues that should be addressed but to keep dragging them on with no objective other than to bash the company seems like a waste of time.

I'm not going to explain, defend or excuse the way Eovia does it's business, that's their job.

I don't work for them but I do own their stuff & have had some things I rendered used by them. In the years I have been dealing with them they have been up front and honest with me in every case. Maybe I am an exception and not the rule, but I don't think so.
I own a few programs from bigger developers (Alias & Avid being two) and the level of support out of Eovia has been on par or above what I have been able to get from either of those larger companies. The others charge more for their programs (and in theory are worth more) but also charge a fee for support.

No company is perfect but I don't see Eovia in the same light as I assume you do from your posts.

wayne k
guam usa

This is not about whether or not Eovia makes good products or not. Carrara an Amapi are great! It is about the company not being totally forthcoming on the creation of art posted in the galleries. Something seemingly small and simple, an important issue non-the-less. More information should be included on many works of art in the Eovia galleries. That is a simple observation and fact. It is called shooting straight. In my opinion Eovia is basically an honest company and wants the best for her customers, that's why this practice in the galleries should change. I did send them an email at: pr@eovia.com and an attached pdf of this thread. Everyone concerned should do the same in my opinion (you are right). Most everyone appreciates what Eovia does. Most everyone here loves Carrara. That does not mean the company Eovia is perfect or free from the scrutiny of it's customers' eye. We are the people that push Eovia to be better. The paying customers have their reasons to expect better from Eovia.

"This is not about whether or not Eovia makes good products or not. Carrara an Amapi are great! It is about the company not being totally forthcoming on the creation of art posted in the galleries." Very well said steama. This is the topic being discussed on this thread wayne, not me. It is a well known fact, if you have ever participated in any type of debate, that when the object of the discussion changes from the topic to the person that you have conceded the argument and can no longer debate logically. There are a few extremists here who would like nothing more then to direct the course of conversation on this forum. Then are the "say nothing bad about Eovia or their products" or we will attack you. They are to ones who say, "go away" when the truth is told. They are also the ones who are in constant contact with Eovia. We all know who you are. "Oh, don't say anything bad about Eovia or their products on the forum. Contact them secretly by e-mail so no one will hear about what is going on." Give me a break! The fact is that I am a Carrara user and I have dealt with Eovia. I will discuss with users here about issues that develop whenever I wish and I will not be shutdown by those who agenda it is to promote Eovia at all costs. I believe there are a lot more of us moderate Carrara users here who won't be molded or told what to say or not to say or how to say or where to say or who to say it too. You want to debate with me. I'm here. You want to attack me personally. Read the TOS! You few outspoken company frontmen don't run this forum or this website.

Well put.

Info,
Sorry about that, I did specifically focus on you because of the heated (dare I say sarcastic?) tone of your posts and wanted to know where you were coming from (my mistake -blame it on my public high school education).
I think this last reply shows that we will not be able to meet on any common ground. Ill try to tone down my Eovia cheerleading in the future so that it is not so obvious.

wayne k
guam usa

back to working for the man, sure hope that Eovia frontman check clears so I can make this this months rent.

Message edited on: 03/04/2005 01:24

I'm sure its on its way...

thats an very interesting thread and i have to say that i wanted to start something like this in the german carrara amapi forum,the reason for this was that newbies are believing that everything you see in the gallery is made with carrara and amapi(nearly ewverything in the gallery can be done with amapi and carrara)and 2 personal messages i recieved a while ago. no company is perfect and also no program is perfect and i think when im going to buy a new tool i dont browse to the galleries from a company(most of the time)im always looking for forums like this and for the galleries to make my decision,for me it is very important to see and hear what the users are thinking and so on.i made the same when i bought carrara studio 2 some years ago when i found this forum what i really like and gave me all i needed to know i was sure that i have bought something great.i think eovia should write which image was done with (for example)lightwave and carrara or amapi and max this would be better for the newbies.i have lightwave and use it togehter with carrara cause i think carrara rocks and also amapi.but since im using lightwave togehter with carrara it looks like im a bad man,maybe im a traitor,hahahaha.:) have a nice day/night and happy modeling and rendering no matter what you use and sorry for my stupid comment. Dominik

Full circle... Could of, would of, didn't, can't. The models are real. Its the "could of" that remains a dream, theory, belief, wish, expression of love for the program. I think what we all seek is a little truth in advertising. That's all. It is what it is. "Stupid is as stupid does," said Forest Gump.