Uh-oh.

If like me your are considering moving into a major 3D application, with Poser as a "feeder" for assets, there has been a significant shift in the players since Siggraph.

Previously, in my mind, if you wanted a major professional raytrace render engine, advanced animation tools, top flight modelling and truly great dynamic hair/fur and cloth, there were four players in two price categories....

Maya   $7000
XSI  $7000
Cinema 4D    $3500-3800 (includes plugins to bring it to Max-level functionality)
3DSMax     $3500

(Lightwave people will probably want inclusion at this point but I don't know if fits.)

But now, Softimage has changed their price structure and product lineup for XSI....

It used to be you had to license "Advanced" to get hair and cloth, and Advanced cost $7000. Now, not only has Advanced been repriced to $5000, but Hair/Cloth has been moved into Essentials, and Essentails repriced at $3000.

That is a rather violent shakeup.

With XSI now, for a pricetag $500 lower than 3DSMax, you get a soup to nuts major 3D system including a very strong hair module and arguably THE BEST cloth simulator in the biz,

http://www.syflex.biz/clnt/sylene1.mov
http://www.syflex.biz/clnt/sylene2.mov
http://www.syflex.biz/clnt/masahiro1.mov
http://www.syflex.biz/clnt/clothtalk1.mov

along with Mental Ray renderer. As I understand it, XSI's strength is character animation, which is my interest.

The path from Poser to these apps is probably best thought of as a COLLADA export out of DazStudio or PoserPro and import into the big app for rigging, animation and render. At this point and in my opinion, I believe the path from Poser assets to any of the four will be about the same, grief-wise.

I have always had my eye on XSI, but the price was so far above my capability. I am even shaking in my boots at the thought of spending $3500 on Max this summer. I'm studying Max deeply right now on a one-month trial. I have several other reasons besides price for going with Max,

my son is learning it in college
gigantic professional support community
i have two friends who are Max-oreinted
Max has VRay, XSI does not
Lbrush (aka LipService) plugin available for Max, not for XSI

and this price earthquake at Softimage will not make me stop or even reduce the intensity of my Max investigation. But the XSI revolution does stir my blood.

::::: Opera :::::

Or you can get Modo from DAZ right now for dirt cheap:

http://www.daz3d.com/i.x/shop/itemdetails/-/?item=5541&trid=516109668

http://www.luxology.com/whatismodo/advancedergonomics.aspx

Throw in Lightwave and a couple of plug-ins for hair, etc., and you're good to go. When Poser Pro comes out, you can add that one into your toolbox, too. And all of it comes for a LOT less than $7000. Or even than $5000. Probably even less than $3500. Unless, of course, if someone also buys Vue, Carrara Pro, Photoshop, etc., etc., etc.............that might drive the price up a bit. But even so -- you come out with a TON of functionality for "dirt cheap" prices, comparatively speaking.

Sure, all of the apps that you are talking about in your post are absolutely top-notch apps. And I've heard from someone who knows that dynamic hair works beautifully in XSI. But spending that kind of money for the software -- not to mention the hardware needed to drive it -- is probably a little bit over the budget of your average Poser user -- even those who have high-end aspirations. Studios and businesses might drop that kind of money all of the time -- but it's a bit much for most 3D hobbyists. Or even for those in the semi-pro category.

You can get a good used car for $5000. Or a really hot desktop PC.

I suppose that such a price tag might make for a decent tax write-off at the end of the year, as a business expense -- providing that you actually make any money with it.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Quote - With XSI now, for a pricetag $500 lower than 3DSMax, you get a soup to nuts major 3D system including a very strong hair module and arguably THE BEST cloth simulator in the biz

Not just syflex, it also comes with Shave, the best hair system. Well so does MAX.

Anyway you cant go wrong with MAX. XSI and MAX are pretty close in terms of features and tools. XSI wins in some areas, notably performance, flexibility and animation tools. MAX wins in terms of ease of use, modelling and more variety of plugins. Both use Syflex and Shave. MAX has better particles and XSI has better hard bodies.

MAX has an edge in renderers, though a VRay plugin for XSI is in the works also. MAX also has that plugin that hosts poser scenes, while XSI has nothing similar. XSI works better with mentalray though since it is built from the ground up to use it. Uses less RAM and renders faster. MAX also has more issues with stability then XSI, notably in heavy scenes.

Also let me throw another curve ball at you. XSI also has its low cost Foundation version ($500 or so). This version comes with almost all the tools of XSI Essential/Advanced, except that it uses XSI cloth instead of Syflex and does not have hair. XSI cloth is actually pretty good and is actually more accurate then syflex. The catch being that it is slower. And for hair you can buy a plugin for XSI called BHairy that gives you the same render results as you would with shave. But the limitation being that it requires more work to animate.

Worth checking out if you dont immediately want to spend $3k+ on anything.

The $5000 price point for XSI advanced includes 36 nodes of Mental Ray and a module for orchestrating vast battle scenes and crowd behavior. It's a film studio-level release.

But at the $3000-3500 level, that is a different matter. My point is that there are now three major apps at that level, not two. Ghonma, thanks for the idea....I've got the money put aside for a license in this range, but if I get too nervous I'll look into Foundation.

Modo comes out to about $434.00 to go from nothing to the about to be released version. That's if you have Daz PC, which I do have, to start with the 101 version and upgrade. As for Lightwave, that might be a solution in price below $3000.

::::: Opera :::::

WHOA! STOP THE PRESSES.

I just found another $1000.00

If you purchase the current version of XSI Essentials before Sept 6th at $2000, you get a free upgrade to the new 6.5 with Syflex. That is just amazing.

http://store.softimage.com/store/Products/Details/default.asp?fam=false&ITEMID=253&lang=en

::::: Opera :::::

To each their own -- it depends upon what you are wanting to accomplish -- and how much cash you are willing to cough up to get there.

I've been pleasantly surprised to discover just how many "pros" use and praise Modo -- especially at its low price point.

You probably won't be able to get into Modo for such a low price again for quite some time to come. I'm planning on striking while the iron is hot on that one.

XSI? Maya? Wonderful apps -- but I can't justify that kind of investment at my current advanced amateur / semi-pro level. 3DS Max I could possibly see my way to doing at some point -- but only if I expected to create a return on the initial investment. It's a bit more than I'd care to spend on a single app for recreational purposes.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

"XSI? Maya? Wonderful apps -- but I can't justify that kind of investment at my current advanced amateur / semi-pro level. 3DS Max I could possibly see my way to doing at some point -- but only if I expected to create a return on the initial investment. It's a bit more than I'd care to spend on a single app for recreational purposes."*

Thank You!!

Agreed!!

My sentiments exactly

When a 3D mesh becomes a rightously defended personification of your personal desires
It has become an IDOL and YOU have become its **worshipper,slave and servant
**-Tain-

My website

YouTube Channel

XENOPHONZ

I am not sure why you are banging away about Modo. I agree it is a very highly regarded modeler. So is ZBrush. I too feel the pull to acquire a $800 modeler for $400, just to get it. The recent ZBrush sale at Daz was just as tempting.

But fine as they are, these are modellers. I started this thread to attract anyone considering moving up to a professional app pipeline from modeling thru animation render. I thought that would be implicitly understood, as anyone considering these advanced tools with a $3500 pricepoint would not be recreational, period.

Your lightwave option, which I did mention, is a contender, granted.

So, i explicitly extend the stipulation................ "...for professional or semi-professional purposes..." OK?

Meanwhile, the XSI Essentials 6.5 package for $2000 has to be considered a gigantic temptation (or windfall) for all those Poser people planning to go up the ladder for professional purposes. There are many of us.

::::: Opera :::::

Opera -- I intended no offense -- if you want / need XSI or Maya -- then go for it: and have fun (unless if you don't want to have fun, of course).

I was responding to your apparent misgivings over spending the amounts of cash in question -- and I was suggesting alternatives. This was in no way an attempt to jab at you for having an interest in something else. Go for whatever you like -- far be it from me to tell you what you can and cannot do with your own resources.

However -- if you post in here, then it's an open invitation for public discussion.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

I don't know about everyone else, but Carrara6 impressed the heck out of me. It does things Truespace doesn't even attempt for less than the price of Truespace's plug-in renderer. I'm sure that XSI is probably better in every way than Carrara, but I am (at least until the month's end) comparing a $200 program to a $2000 one here. The new hair looks great, but I'm really stoked about those atmospheres, displacement modeling, and oh yeah, COLLADA export.

But it still doesn't have Truespace's awesome realtime "photoreal" workspace. I hope they're planning that for version 7.

(Lightwave people will probably want inclusion at this point but I don't know if fits.)

Yeah it fits at about $1000 . Even if you spend another $1000 on plugins then your still better off.

Handle every stressful situation like a dog.

If you can't eat it or play with it,

just pee on it and walk away. :-)

....................................................

I wouldnt have to manage my anger

if people would manage their stupidity......

Carrara 6 impressed me enough to plan on upgrading to Carrara Pro at DAZ's sale price before the end of this month. Plus picking up Modo at the sale price (uh......no offense, anyone.......).

I already have Lightwave. And I am hoping that some of the issues vis-a-vis Lightwave and Poser cooperation are about to be addressed effectively with Poser Pro.

Quote - Yeah it fits at about $1000

I'm finding that it 'fits' very well.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

**moogal,
**I've looked over the Cararra situation and am seriously considering spending the $192 to get into the top of the product, more or less for 'insurance.' The hair....it's so new...you might be able to 'grow' it, but i have not seen any actual brilliant sim or animation of it. No Dynamic Cloth yet, either. I'm tempted on that Modo situation, and the fact you can get the upcoming new release of ZBrush for less if you buy now before release....etc. I'll probably be in the market for PoserPro, too.

But right now.....I am stunned by the XSI restructure+$1000 special.

::::: Opera :::::

Xeno, never took offense and never had the slightest misgiving. Excited (quaking), yes. But no misgiving. I'm going to get the best new tools, like Christmas morning, for a great price. Considering that about 10-15 years ago you could not get a pipeline like Max or XSI for less than $30,000 and needed at $15000 workstation to drive it.....wow, amazing.

::::: Opera :::::

Yes.....that fact is amazing. 3D has come a long way.

It's like when I was back in college -- I couldn't do on a dumb terminal connected to a $35,000,000 IBM mainframe anything even remotely like what I can do on my desktop PC today. It comes a little cheaper now.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

I'm also one of those who was considering a higher end solution for my Poser stuff. I was looking at 3dsmax and Cinema 4D more than any others. Cinema for it's supposedly great Poser plugin, and 3dsmax simply because everything I see done with it over on CGTalk is astonishing. I don't know if it's the app itself, or just the people using it that are so good, but I'd say 90% of all the best organic and inorganic works over there that I looked at were done with 3dsmax for some reason. I never even considered XSI before because of it's price, and I was skeptical even about Cinema, only because of the lack of really great human renders I see from it. But this deal has my heart beating faster. This is more within my doing! I'm not doing animation, but just for the power it has over what I'm using now, it might be worth it.

I realize now Carrara is also much more reasonably priced and still loaded with power. I forgot about that one.

IMHO, Cinema 4D and Kuroyume's interPoser Pro are far and away the most accurate conversion into any of the bigger apps. In terms of capability, they all have very nice features and it's pretty hard to say one's definitely better than another because they all have so much power and flexibility.

A more reasonable opening config for Cinema 4D is more like $2600, for Cinema 4D R10 XL + the Hair module.

Dynamic cloth in MOCCA (included in XL)
Advanced Render (included in XL)
3 network render seats
Dynamic hair

This leaves you with the option of adding Dynamics later if you really care to simulate rigid or semi-rigid objects.

My Freebies

Don't forget Blender!
It is a major app. also, and it's free.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

and wings3d (also free).

Jeff

Renderosity Senior Moderator

Hablo español

Ich spreche Deutsch

Je parle français

Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?

That's a real good deal right there. XSI are trying to bite into Autodesk's total dominance in the industry, now that they own both 3dsmax and Maya. I think Lightwave, Cinema, and 3dsmax probably have the strongest base of independent artists or hobbyists using their software, and XSI probably sees money in that. Regardless, it's a great offer, and if I were you, I wouldn't think twice. The only thing you might regret is that XSI is nowhere near as user-friendly as 3dsmax, and there isn't near the level of online support for it, in regards to tutorials or forums. As a newby to high end 3d, you'd be almost on your own with the learning curve compared to the stong online support for apps like 3dsMax, Cinema, or Lightwave. Something to consider anyway.

I've used 3dsMax for about 5 years or so, and have used Lightwave for the past couple years, and I'd hate to be without either of them.

Jeff

Renderosity Senior Moderator

Hablo español

Ich spreche Deutsch

Je parle français

Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?

Just One Mans Opinion:
Those Only Looking to get their content/figures etc away from poser render engine
(Undertstandable)

1.)should look first at the apps that "officially" support
the esoteric format of poser figures natively
VUEI and the new Carrara looks promising

2.)Look second at Third party plugins that offer EFFECTIVE GATEWAYS to other Application environments
An "effective" gateway in my opinion is one that imports the content with the highest amount of original functionality( Functional morph dials,conformers and application of Mat poses,still and animated poses)
it is no secret by now that based on this standard,
Cinema4D with IPP Clearly defeats ALL others in release
including the pranksters at Reiss studio and yes even the
impending "poser pro7"
both of whom only offer "hosting"
EF themselves Confirmed this at Siggraph ,"poser pro7" will be "hosting" content for rendering only
NOT transferring it to the other application
any changes to the "guest figure" need to be done in poser and resaved updated etc..
and be assured that a simple Point upgrade release from autodesk,maxon etc applied to the "host App" will very likely BREAK the poser pro importer. its propack4 redux.

3.) "Im going to buy this high end production pipeline solution
and use the wholly untested "collada" exporter to get my poser fig over to X app with least her bones in place and figure it out from there "

Fine... good luck brave soul but be aware that you will likely spend many hours trying to force this high end app to play nice with a "rig" it was NOT designed to drive and many more hours being insulted and discouraged by Online Snobs ,who use those apps, who will,at worst, repeatedly berate you with statements like:
"You spent $2000 just to try and render that nekkid "V" chick
in this powerful pro level blah blah......"
the most polite of them will kindly suggest you learn your modeling and rigging tools and build a "proper rig".

4.)Give up this folly render everything in poser and be patient get better/more hardware etc etc

Just FYI Im not some opinionated newbie to this subject
lve been using poser since "Fractal designs poser 2" and searched MANY years in earnest for alternative render from bryce 2 on up.

I have MAXON Cinema4D Full With bodypaint,mocca clothilde, advanced renderer sketch&toon+IPP,
Poser 6 with puppet master
Wardobe Wizard and Poser Physics.
Vue5 Easel
DAZ studio 1.7 with FBX
Adobe CS2
Adobe After Affects 6.5
Adobe premiere 6.5 OSX
Autodesk combustion 2
Apple Final Cut pro 4 with compressor
Apple DVD Studio Pro2 Volume License
Toast Titanium7

im 43 and done!!
Not another penny chasing the "Grail"
at some point you have to commit to your work/hobby and use what you have.

Apologies in advance for the semi rant

When a 3D mesh becomes a rightously defended personification of your personal desires
It has become an IDOL and YOU have become its worshipper,slave and servant
-Tain-

My website

YouTube Channel

To those commenting about the various modeling applications, zbrush, blender, wings, modo, etc., in a thread about the anticipation of acquiring one of three-out-of-four big players in 3D, namely Max, XSI and Cinema.....

Don't those big boys have tremendously powerful modeling built in? And inline/integrated, to boot?

Comments please.

::::: Opera :::::

P.S. To add to my quandary about this, my son who is in college for game design, a college that is 3DSMax-oriented, said to me "Dad, can we get ZBrush? Everyone at school is raving about it."

Yeah, the modeling in 3dsMax and Lightwave can't be beat, but the other issue is price. Not everyone has several hundred to several thousand to invest in software. But if you do, and you're serious about modelling, animation, rendering, etc, then get one of the high-end ones. Wings, blender and anim8tor are good modelers and they're free, so for those on a limited budget, they can't be beat

Jeff

Renderosity Senior Moderator

Hablo español

Ich spreche Deutsch

Je parle français

Mi parolas Esperanton. Ĉu vi?

Blender isn't a modeller only.
It is a full featured app. comparable to any of the commercial packages.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

http://www.blender.org/features-gallery/features/

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

pjz, your price comments for Cinema are noted....

Package for Cinema4D.................
CINEMA 4D $895.00
Advanced Render $595.00
Dynamics $395.00
Hair (Pre-order) $395.00
MOCCA (includes cloth) $595.00
NET Render $395.00
Sketch and Toon $595.00
total $3,865.00 was my initial itemized list

So, take out Toon and Dynamics and the total is $2895

However, getting the XL version plus hair is $2195+$395 = $2590 which is below the Max $3500 and XSI $3000 price point (leaving out the current $1000 sale for XSI). So I wish I could edit my initial post in this thread and amend somewhat my pricing there. Oh well.

I don't know if that is a level playing field or not, however, because I actually personally DO require a first-rate toon function. I notice with Max that the plugin "FinalToon" is balyhooed, so I wonder how these three apps, XSI, Max and Cinema compare -- without plugin -- for toon render. Wolf, are you doing those comix toon renders in another thread WITH or WITHOUT the toon module for Cinema?

My other issues with Cinema are the hair and cloth modules, which are very important to me. Max and XSI include Syflex and ShaveAndAHaircut, which are very fine. Can the Cinema people SOBERLY make a comparison of their cloth and hair tools to those in XSI and Max?

::::: Opera :::::

devilsreject:

Quote - That's a real good deal right there. XSI are trying to bite into Autodesk's total dominance in the industry, now that they own both 3dsmax and Maya. I think Lightwave, Cinema, and 3dsmax probably have the strongest base of independent artists or hobbyists using their software, and XSI probably sees money in that. Regardless, it's a great offer, and if I were you, I wouldn't think twice. The only thing you might regret is that XSI is nowhere near as user-friendly as 3dsmax, and there isn't near the level of online support for it, in regards to tutorials or forums. As a newby to high end 3d, you'd be almost on your own with the learning curve compared to the stong online support for apps like 3dsMax, Cinema, or Lightwave. Something to consider anyway.

I believe you on all counts. While I have been eyeing XSI for a long time, since it is suposedly slanted toward character animation, I never had to REALLY look into it because of the price. Now, not only can I get XSI for less than Max, there is a $1000 sale below that. I have to decide, soon, or just let the $1000 go and decide slower. I'd planned to do trials of Cinema and XSI, but am into my Max trial first.

So I went over to Softimage and viewed some of the videos. I see what you mean about it not being as user-friendly as the others. And indeed the 'community' is not even close to the power of the other two apps, escpecially Max. I REALLY lean on community when learning and tweaking. I also spent time this weekend at various Max forums reading the buzz on the upcoming Max2008 release, coming in October. Looks brilliant, but not necessarily slanted towards character animation.

I have gone up the learning curve on some very demanding applications, such as Logic Pro for composing, Visual Fox Pro for high-end database programming, and recently learned Flash to get the skill of that kind of website. So, I am not completely intimidated by XSI. However, while I am in the gestation period of an ambitious and realworld for-profit enterprise with 3D, I am actually (as you realized) an 'independant artist', not a production house that can afford to hire technical staff. I'd like things a little easier at this point, please.

::::: Opera :::::

blender......wow.
guess I'd better try that out too! get in line!

C4D + InterPoser is pretty unbeatable imho. Need to spend some time properly setting up materials (which I'm about done with) and you give up a little bit of flexibility with the character rig, especially at the hips, but you can use all the features that "hosting" your content won't allow, e.g. C4D native dynamic hair and cloth and full access to C4D materials. The renderer pounds the crap out of Poser's (as it should, it costs many times more money).

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1503999
*goes to nudity

My Freebies

Here's the listing, with pics, of the announced Carrara 6 improvememnts, including hair.[

http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=63703](http://forum.daz3d.com/viewtopic.php?t=63703)

I couldn't find the video showing the hair, but it looked quite nice. The hair seemed too "alive" to me, but I'm sure that can be toned down somehow.

Blender is indeed quite full featured. The fluid sim is especially impressive. I didn't really take to the interface that much though.

*"Wolf, are you doing those comix toon renders in another thread WITH or WITHOUT the toon module for Cinema?*"

Those are with the toon module

I have the older 9.2 bundle
it includes the toon module
as does the new R10 bundle at $3495 at Maxon shop US

When a 3D mesh becomes a rightously defended personification of your personal desires
It has become an IDOL and YOU have become its worshipper,slave and servant
-Tain-

My website

YouTube Channel

Quote - blender......wow.
guess I'd better try that out too! get in line!

If your bringing Blender into it, then add Fluid Simulation to your list :-
NextLimit RealFlow4 (2CPU) $2700
Blender $0

The Blender fluid simulation isn't as sophisticated as RealFlow, but the price is the clincher.

Yeah......it's tough to beat Blender's price.

Maybe if a random company that made some other 3D app PAID you to use it..............

And yeah: if I decide to expand beyond Lightwave and Modo for modeling apps.....then it'll likely be 3DS Max for me. At least that's the way that I'd do it right now -- but I'll have to re-evaluate the extant situation if / when I start seriously thinking in such a direction.

Mastering what I've already got on my plate is enough -- I have a day job + an online 3D-related job at night. This doesn't leave me with copious amounts of time to dedicate to learning every app that's out there. Especially not if I also want to have a social life of any substance. Sleeping once in awhile is nice, too. :biggrin:

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Quote - To those commenting about the various modeling applications, zbrush, blender, wings, modo, etc., in a thread about the anticipation of acquiring one of three-out-of-four big players in 3D, namely Max, XSI and Cinema.....

Don't those big boys have tremendously powerful modeling built in? And inline/integrated, to boot?

Comments please.

::::: Opera :::::

P.S. To add to my quandary about this, my son who is in college for game design, a college that is 3DSMax-oriented, said to me "Dad, can we get ZBrush? Everyone at school is raving about it."

To answer some of the questions here, yes, the big boys have tremendously powerful modelling built in. Lightwave and 3dsmax have long been known to have some of the best polygon and SubD modelling tools. If you need evidence, just take a look over at CGArchitect and notice that most of the high end work there is 3dsmax. Plus 80% or more of all today's high-end, low-poly game modelling, which isn't quite as low poly as it used to be, is done in Max (as your son is probably finding out now). That said, Zbrush is a different world. It has the ability to model using traditional SubD, but it's success and primary focus from the beginning was always on modelling using brushes and sculpting tools. So artists who are used to that more natural modelling feel fell for it really quickly, because it handles a mesh as if it were virtual clay. Zbrush is also used in professional pipelines for creating very highly detailed displacment maps to use in other traditional modelling applications, simply because it allows you to virtually and literally paint extremely fine surface deformations right into a high res mesh, and then use those details in their entirety on a much lower resolution base model, freeing up enormous resources, while still getting incredible results.

If your son is going to school to learn Max for things like game creation, that's probably why he wants Zbrush. Zbrush is used this way to make normal maps, which in the gaming industry, are like the holy grail, making very low poly objects seem much more detailed than they really are. Max can bake these normal maps and other information into a lowres model, which can then be exported for use in a game engine.

One more thing before I go tonight.

I don't know if you're familiar with Blur Studio. If not, you need to look them up and see some of their productions. These guys produce some of the best animated 3DCG on the planet for cinematic game trailors and also short movies and special FX. They were nominated for an Oscar for one of their shorts, and always continue to push the envelope of what is possible with 3D. Up until fairly recently, Blur were famously using only 3dsMax as their modelling, rendering, and animation production software. In fact, Splutterfish, who are the creators of the Brazil rendering system, was founded by a couple guys who worked for Blur, and Blur actually incorporated a lot of the features you see in the 3dsmax application today on their own, way before we ever actually saw them commercially available in the retail version of the app. If it had not been for great studios like Blur and a few others (Animal Logic, Blizzard Ent., and The Orphanage), 3dsmax may have never been taken seriously for character animation at cinema level, because the app was never originally intended for that purpose. Anyway, my point is this... Blur Studios recently incorporated XSI into their pipeline for character animation, and were one of those who originally helped dev XSI's high end Face Robot. Maybe they did more than help dev the software, but that's what I read. They still use 3dsMax for modelling and rendering, but now it's out to XSI for animation. So although this may not interest you, it says something right there about XSI's great animation support and features.

devil's,

That was an amazing explanation of ZBrush and the role it plays. You are sensing exactly what is going on at my son's school. I'll quiz him closer. Thanks for the true clarity.

Yes, I attended several XSI usergroup meetings here in Los Angeles with Blur people in attendance. It was FaceRobot that pulled me in. The app is obviously mind-boggling for anyone focused on human interaction and facial emotion. I understand the positioning and pricing of the the product......it is intended to replace hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary in big production settings. No problem. Suffice it to say, it is not for artists and small studios.

But Blur using XSI for animation sandwiched between Max and Max....I guess that path can be smooth and getting smoother with Alias owning both.

Thanks for the info and oh by the way your gallery is terrif. I like WiseGuy the best.

::::: Opera :::::

Yep Blur studio are awesome, and incidently that 'Gentlemen's Agreement' short someone posted here a while back was done in XSI by them. See this interview for some interesting thoughts on XSI:

Interview with Diego Garcia

Quote - **
What were the most challenging aspects of your work for this project?**

Blur has been traditionally a 3dsMax house but, at some point two years ago, we realized that we were reaching the limits of this software with our rigging pipeline. We started to look for other solutions and it turned out that XSI suited our needs perfectly. We also could count with the help and support of SoftImage Special projects which happens to be just around the corner from the studio.
Gentleman's Duel was the perfect project to start the transition to XSI, so the most challenging aspect for the tools team was precisely changing the whole Animation and Rigging pipeline to XSI. We had around 6 months to make it happen and production would be happening at the same time we were working on it... Also, for all of us it was the first time we programmed tools for XSI and we had to make sure animators and riggers would have the same set of tools that they were used to before when they were working in 3dsmax.

Quote -
What do you think are strong points of XSI?

In general XSI feels more consistent than other packages, it almost never crashes, it is efficient with large amount of data, modular, and everything works with everything, a new feature is the same well integrated than the old ones. References is another strong point of this package, with the new delta referencing in XSI 6.0 it will allow pipeline developers to overlap the processes even more, with the amount of time and money saved that represents. And for SoftImage as company, it is just the fresh ideas that they have ( Face Robot, GATOR, MOTOR ) , they are willing to listen and help their users, and that they are open to work with different packages like 3dsmax or Maya.

Quote -
Which areas should be improved?

One of the areas I haven't gotten used to is the UI programming, It seems to me that is a bit limited, everything has to be gray or you have to develop some kind of hybrid application using the netview. That is why we have taken a look at other alternatives like QT or pyQT. It would be nice if it were possible to create your own native UI controls, treeviews, spinners, etc ... Also, since we use it as our main scripting language, I'd like to see more integration between python and XSI, for example, at the moment we develop our custom operators in Javascript or C++ because of evaluation efficiency.
From the artist point of view, I think it is well known that XSI lacks a robust particle system ( although from what they say on their website it seems they are working on it )

LOL, Wolf will love this: I went over to CGArchitect and the stuff I liked best came from Dennis Allain

http://www.cgarchitect.com/upclose/article1_DA.asp

His weapon of choice: Cinema 4D.

It's all good!

::::: Opera :::::

Also regarding Blur: We used to have a guy who worked at Blur Studios as a lighting supervisor or something posting replies and helping people over in the 3dsmax forum right here on Renderosity. Haven't seen him around lately, but that was exciting to see here.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

They all (Max, Maya, C4D, Blender) have the same basic capabilities, with varying "comfort levels" in the user interface:
Polygon modeling
NURBS modeling
non-destructive construction history
High quality render features e.g. area lights, area shadows, GI, various forms of AO
High quality materials/shader features - personally I've gotten to like C4D's materials presentation VERY much, in comparison to Max and Maya, but it boils down to the presentation; feature-wise it's hard to say which is really "better"
Dynamic cloth
Dynamic hair
particle physics
etc etc etc

...which is why I suggest C4D + interPoser Pro, because the area where they're not equal is whether you can get a rigged, easily customizable human figure with a bunch of the scut-work already done (textures, morphs, yadda yadda). OBJ animation import is unacceptable for me, as is "hosting" a Poser scene.

My Freebies

Quote - They all (Max, Maya, C4D, Blender) have the same basic capabilities, with varying "comfort levels" in the user interface:
Polygon modeling
NURBS modeling
non-destructive construction history
High quality render features e.g. area lights, area shadows, GI, various forms of AO
High quality materials/shader features - personally I've gotten to like C4D's materials presentation VERY much, in comparison to Max and Maya, but it boils down to the presentation; feature-wise it's hard to say which is really "better"
Dynamic cloth
Dynamic hair
particle physics
etc etc etc

True. Although the one thing Cinema4D doesn't have that all the others do is a connection to MentalRay. Not a big deal or even a concern to most casual users, but could be a turn-off to some pro users, and also keep it out of some prod houses that might use MR in their rendering pipeline. So I think the upcoming Vray connection to Cin4D will even the playing field that much more.

Maybe I'm wrong about the MR thing though. Does C4D have an MR connection?

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

No, and I don't expect it ever would - however in this context it's not a factor. It's just as true to say a flaw of the Autodesk products is that they don't have a connection to C4D's Advanced Render (not that it's the be-all end-all either). Are there some major features that Mental Ray has over any other big-price render engine? When you get into specific app choices to follow some production house, of course it would make great sense to go with what your employer uses.

Note there are also other powerful render engines that integrate with C4D if you're really serious, like Maxwell or FinalRender, although the features offered by those engines are out of my league (at least right now).

My Freebies

Quote - No, and I don't expect it ever would - however in this context it's not a factor. It's just as true to say a flaw of the Autodesk products is that they don't have a connection to C4D's Advanced Render (not that it's the be-all end-all either). Are there some major features that Mental Ray has over any other big-price render engine?

Well, as you pointed out, in this context it wouldn't have much of an advantage over other high end render solutions like Vray or FinalRender, but specifically for a large production pipeline, yes it does have big advantages in it's modularity and scalability. Specifically, it's value is in it's MI scene description language and Phenomena, which can be used by technical directors to program it with additional functionality for very specific rendering tasks. This makes it extremly useful for demanding production, where other renderers, aside from perhaps PRman, wouldn't be nearly as efficient.

http://www.mentalimages.com/2_1_0_mentalray/index.html

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

Maxxx, I don't see Cinema getting snubbed by big CG houses solely on the fact that it doesn't have MR support, because so many of these other renderers are making their way into the industry now, there will be some way to incorporate Cinema into the workflow. I know some studios doing this right now. Even if it's just utilizing some feature in Cinema to do something, then going back into another product to continue the workflow, similar to what Blur is doing with 3dsmax and XSI. However, since the render pipeline is the lifeblood of any major studio, not having at least export options to an Mi scripted scene file is not playing in their favor. I believe even Poser here has a RIB export option, which makes it possible to integrate it right into your renderman pipeline. What's more, MentalRay is not usually used for the entire render pipeline in most CG houses anyway. I can't think of one that only uses MentalRay for everything they do.

operaguy...Your biggest point was about price and you mention 3DS Max has Vray, but I didn't see you mention the extra price to purchase Vray.
Besides that, I would stay clear of XSI...it is indeed a kick arse character animation package, but only if you fancy putting years of experience into it.
3DS Max, Maya...well there is a reason why 3-4yr degree courses are designed around these apps ;0)
To be honest, I would stay clear of Poser meshes for advanced animation in hi-end packages. You are going to get no where near what XSI/Maya/3DS Max is capable of, by importing a mesh that was designed for a totally different kind of animation system.

C4D, is fine...probably the quickest to get up to speed with, but compared to other systems MOCCA just doesn't quite get there.

Oh, and please don't think COLLADA is the Holy Grail for file translation...a Poser figure mesh will always be the same mesh and working with it for animation out of its native program will always cause headaches.

If I was you I would go with C4D...it's a nice app to work with, plays pretty well with Poser (due to 3rd party support), is pretty powerful and also has great integration with other 2D and 3D apps.

ZBrush...well thats another kettle of fish!

My personal pipeline: Model in Modo, adding detail with ZBrush (soon to be Modo 301 as well), rigging and rendering in Maya (also been known to use C4D). Saying all that, without doubt the best translation of Poser meshes within another software has been Vue. You lose your modelling with Vue...but as already mentioned there is Modo/Silo/Hexagon etc, etc.

It really does all depend what you want from your final output...if you will have clients breathing down your neck, asking for the best quality, then sure I would and have gone the Maya/XSI/3DS Max/Modo route...if all your going to be posting on a website (with the odd freelance work)...well, you won't go far wrong with Poser, Vue, Modo/Carrara combination.

I've been using animation packages of one sort or another for nearly the last 20 years, and I must say, for me, Modo is one of the best modelling packages I have used...don't discount it...in fact, give the demo a try and check out the great community over at Luxology.

Actually I have just written all this and find myself totally agreeing with wolf359's sentiments...but I'll be damned if I'm going to delete all that I've written now!

Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!

Twitter: Follow @the3dscene

YouTube Channel

--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------

Yes, I don't like agreeing with Wolf either! Good thing his 'better self' PJZ is in this thread! Let's agree to agree with her/him.

First, I never discounted Modo; I'm very tempted to go for the current path to get to the full new 301 for $434. My question in general about the stand-alone modelers was: why do people use them if there is great modeling onboard the main application? Devil'sReject helped me understand that for zbrush very well. Why do you use Modo when you have Maya?

Second, thanks for the advice about Poser mesh into the other apps. Along with discarding 'hosting' I have pretty much already given up on that idea for rigged human models -- unless I get hooked on Cinema. My current self-study as we speak is MakeHuman mesh into Max and learn Max rigging.

My intended use? More than a website with odd freelance work, but less than a firm with clients over the shoulder; my only client is myself. It's for animated and partially animated adult fiction multimedia, on a for-profit basis. First film (8 minutes) is in production now, in Poser and AfterEffects. That's "adult" as in 'grown-ups.'

I am looking into the Vray-with-Max pricing, if any.

::::: Opera :::::

It appears VRay plugin is NOT included in the price of Max. Add between $650-$750.

Max comes with it's own scanline rendered and MentalRay integrated and with 8 satelite licenses.

:: og ::

Yeah, don't forget the MR integration with Max is pretty solid, and really there is no need to have Vray, unless you want the extra speed for GI or perhaps Occlusion. The only reason I'm using Vray is because I bought it before my version of Max had the Mental Ray renderer included in the package, and I get the updates at no additional cost. Well, plus Vray is extremely easy to use in Max, and very very fast. I don't think anyone will argue different. Especially at GI, and even the ambient occlusion in 1.5 seems much faster than I ever was able to get out of Mental Ray, but I don't claim to know all the tricks and scripting that a TD would know, so I'm probably not getting the full benefits of all that from MR. I did work on a commercial project with a studio here locally that used MR exclusively in their pipeline, and I learned a lot about Mental Ray that way, but nothing I would be able to apply here with my personal works.

I also think Vray has a lot more community support. I can't tell you just how much I've learned in their forums, and how many great materials that are out there for it. Free of charge.

I really like the sound of that Cinema/Poser plugin though. I wish 3dsmax had something like that which would be reliable.

Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

It's nice, it isn't a perfect conversion but it's really very close to Poser. You can also do things like add conforming clothing or smart props or load pose files from a single very clean, visual interface, you pretty much don't need to enter Poser at all once you commit to working with it. The only thing that needs really serious attention right at conversion time is materials settings, but Robert may decide to bundle some skin shader setups with it in the future; and I'm making my own work in that department public once I get it finalized (pretty close now). Plus magnets don't import at all, which means V4 has stiff boobies, but that can be addressed with C4D's own deformers as required.

My Freebies

Quote - ...My question in general about the stand-alone modelers was: why do people use them if there is great modeling onboard the main application?...

The stand-alone might be easier to use.
The stand-alone might be faster.
The stand-alone might have a better modelling interface.
The stand-alone might be better overall.
The stand-alone might be more well suited for a particular job.
Maybe you are just more comfortable with the stand-alone (very very important one).

There are many reasons for stand-alone modellers. Personal taste is a big factor for a modelling app. More important, IMO, than a feature list.

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

Fascinating discussion. This is giving me plenty of food for thought.

Quote - 3DS Max, Maya...well there is a reason why 3-4yr degree courses are designed around these apps ;0)

Opera -- perhaps you should consider signing up as a student at the same school that your son is going to...........

Speaking for myself, getting into highend 3D (of the type that is being discussed here) represents a considerable career change for me. It's funny -- if you mention AutoCAD to an engineer: of course the engineer will know precisely what you are talking about, and normally they'll know about it in great detail. But if you mention 3DS Max to them, the average engineer might (maybe) recall having heard the name somewhere..........if you mention Lightwave, Cinema 4D, Maya, XSI, Modo (or Carrara or Poser) to them -- the near-universal response from engineering types is: *"Huh?"

*I work with engineers who are so single-minded (and so lacking in imagination or in any artistic bent whatsoever) -- that they can't comprehend much beyond programming DCS systems or discussing chemical batch processes. Or installing a certain number of lumens worth of light fixtures per square foot. Engineers are boring people.

Heh, heh.............:biggrin:

When it comes to top-end 3D, I believe that I'll need to graduate from high school (figuratively speaking), before I attempt to go on to grad school. I'm a quick study -- but in my experience: there's no substitute for experience.

The more that I learn about 3D: the more that I am enjoying it. I"ve never been able to get where I wanted to go based upon enthusiasm alone -- but it helps.

Thanks for posting in here, pros. Y'all have some great information to offer.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Ok, why do I model with Modo and not Maya - Basically I can get the same job done much quicker in Modo than I can Maya. I've used Maya for a number of years, have learnt Mel scripting to achieve better workflow, but only after a solid day modelling with the Modo demo, I purchased it. It took less clicks to achieve the same result in Modo than it did in Maya.

See, this is the thing....I would always recommend anybody to try all the demos first, for some length of time. Yes, we have Max, Maya, XSI, Lightwave, C4D, Mirai, Houdini etc, etc,...but we also have Silo, Wings, Modo, Carrara, Hexagon etc....and if there is one thing I have learnt is that you can have the best all singing, all dancing app, but if you don't get on with it, you're not going to create squat. Because somebody has an app with hair and fur, fluid dynamics, cloth etc, it doesn't mean that they are going to create great dynamics. It's the same as animation features, it's no good somebody having a great character animation toolset available if they can't string a walk cycle together.

Now the Poser ---->> [insert particular app here]...well, I will stand by the C4D or Vue combination with Poser, depending on what final result u would like to achieve...also there is a nice circle of compatability when all those 3 apps are put together - Poser into Vue, Vue into C4D via Xstream.

Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!

Twitter: Follow @the3dscene

YouTube Channel

--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------

I'd rather master Modo (or C4D or Lightwave or whatever) prior to tackling XSI or Maya. But that's just me. Others might prefer to take a different approach.

Vue -- in its current form -- is top-notch.

Something To Do At 3:00AM

Quote -> Quote - ...My question in general about the stand-alone modelers was: why do people use them if there is great modeling onboard the main application?...

The stand-alone might be easier to use.
The stand-alone might be faster.
The stand-alone might have a better modelling interface.
The stand-alone might be better overall.
The stand-alone might be more well suited for a particular job.
Maybe you are just more comfortable with the stand-alone (very very important one).

There are many reasons for stand-alone modellers. Personal taste is a big factor for a modelling app. More important, IMO, than a feature list.

Yup Yup! Thos are all good reasons why I ended up doing most of my modelling in Hexagon - in spite of having Max. There are just some polylooping that is qucker to do in hex, and would have had to spend few hundred dollars im plugins to get Max to behave the same.. while I was able to get Hex for just a few bucks. And Hex, IMO, plays well with Max.

Big apps are great, but sometimes little apps are great for quick projects. I tend to use what helps me get the project done easiest and fastest.

Hi, my namez: "NO, Bad Kitteh, NO!" Whaz yurs?
BadKittehCo Store BadKittehCo Freebies and product support

Ok, good answers about the modelling aps..

But it thus inspires me to ask another question.

Devil'sReject had a very potent answer about Zbrush and displacement maps and fine detail painted on....etc.

Would the proponents of Modo and/or Hexagon say they can be used the same way? Because right now if a separate modelling app is in my future, it will probably be ZBrush, since my son is all over it and I have a clear conception of how it can be put to use.

To clarify: my useage would be more for creating facial morphs and skin, not modelling the human form or any creatures or cars etc.

::::: Opera :::::

Modo 301 will have sculpting, and I have always seen and looked at ZBrush as an add on to a polygon modeller (ZBrush is a 2.5D app, not 3D vertex pushing app)...and don't forget that you can only use morphs created outside Poser within Poser that have the same amount as vertices as the group it is replacing. There for you can't just create a new morph or add polygons to an existing group and expect it to work).
Of course you can export a base mesh out, add detail and then render it in the app of your choice....if that is the case, then in theory you would not really need Poser as you could just extract the base OBJ file from purchased content then import it to sculpt.

NB...ZBrush isn't the only sculpting app....there is also Mudbox (to be aquired by Autodesk in the next couple of months), but really for sculpting Mudbox looked short of the mark after ZBrush 3 was released (only my personal opinion).

Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!

Twitter: Follow @the3dscene

YouTube Channel

--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------

Quote - Modo 301 will have sculpting, and I have always seen and looked at ZBrush as an add on to a polygon modeller (ZBrush is a 2.5D app, not 3D vertex pushing app)...and don't forget that you can only use morphs created outside Poser within Poser that have the same amount as vertices as the group it is replacing.

I hope you don't mind if I clarify this a bit. zBrush started out as a layer based paint program. The chief difference between its layers and something like photoshop's is that these layers store depth information. This would allow you to add a true 3d mesh to a 2D canvas, and while you'd lose the ability to look at the model from any angle, the preservation of depth in the canvas would allow you to relight the scene as you would in a normal 3D program, though in near real-time. Also it would be possible to clone a very detailed object many times across the canvas without the overhead a true 3D space would require. Pixologic coined the term "pixols" to refer to the "enhanced" pixels their canvas used, and "2.5" is their term for this technique that combines elements of 2D and 3D without being true 3D. Most of their paint tools at that time were designed to just work on these canvas layers. Next came the ability to import meshes and snap them (remove back faces etc., a non-reversable process only affecting the mesh that is snapped) to the canvas. With this came the ability to store a mesh as a tool, and to use the paint modes to texture the mesh for export. Version 2 added zSperes, a powerful way to model organic models and various methods for adding higher levels of detail as well as to transfer (via normal maps) higher levels of detail to lower level meshes. zBrush's strength is not in architecture or mechanical forms though it is now a true 3D program. Most users find that if they are not creating an organic mesh from scratch using zSpheres they often get better results working with meshes imported in from programs such as Wings or Hex (or Max or Maya). This is mostly due to weaknesses in zBrush's handling of things like edge loops and creases, which become especially apparent with models that aren't the characters and cartoon objects zBrush is strongest with. There are several threads discussing ways to use zBrush's sculpt tools to create non-organic models using box-modeling techniques, but most agree that it is not zBrush's true strength and there are many other programs which can do this job quicker and more effectively. Also, zBrush doesn't have a standard UV unwrapper, and instead uses a technique called Adaptive UV tiling. Meshes imported from other programs can still be textured with their previous UV coords preserved, though zBrush seems to prefer that those UVs do not overlap.

Dang it, now I have to clarify my own post. Snapping a mesh to the canvas was one of the most confusing things to new users. Your mesh is a "tool", and is stored in the "tool palette" as a fully 3D object. When you select it you can then use it like a traditional brush. You can stamp it down anywhere on the canvas, as many times as you like, and because it's a 3D object, you can change its orientation and scale. However, you cannot retrieve the original mesh from the canvas. Early users were often confused by this process as it was possible to begin painting the mesh without realising it had been snapped to the canvas and all unseen detail had been lost. You can go from 3d to 2.5d, but not the other way. You can paint on a mesh that is active in the tool palette for export to another program, you just can't recover it from the canvas in the event that it is accidentally or deliberately painted there.

I don't mind at all moogal - you clarified it a lot better then I could and with less words...and a great description of the idea behind ZBrush to boot!

Website: The 3D Scene - Returning Soon!

Twitter: Follow @the3dscene

YouTube Channel

--------------- A life?! Cool!! Where do I download one of those?---------------

I would like to add that blender allready has a sculpting tool in its feature list... Don't knkow with the other oacakeges but blender seems to be the one with the fullest feature list.

Quote - I would like to add that blender allready has a sculpting tool in its feature list... Don't knkow with the other oacakeges but blender seems to be the one with the fullest feature list.

Without a doubt, blender's feature set is quite full. Game engine, physics, GLSL shaders, hair, softbodies, fluids, node editor, sculpting, etc. If someone could replace the UI with one that was even slightly intuitive, I'd be all over it. I've tried several times to learn it, but it seems too keyboard/shortcut based while I prefer instead icons and widgets.

Blender was my first real 3d application. Being low on funds and wanted something open source i went for the best option I found answering my criteria. Had only worked with terragen before and it took me a better half a month to get to know blender. The shortcut perspective I feel is very good. Since it doesn't make the GUI all cluttered with buttons and things. and the workspace you can configure to your liking. resizing and splitting and joining different windows. All non overlapping. And not to note that the development is great for that app. Now the foundation that supports the blender development (blender foundation) is making its second movie to speed up development and to show of blender ability. See more at blender.org.

Blender, i keep hearing great things...and then the subject of the interface. Can you answer one thing....

to "pose" a model, do you do so by grabbing an element directly with the mouse and moving it? Or is it move-by-dials/sliders?

:: og ::

To pose is not in the poser sense of posing. It is more like manipulating the mesh. If you not have armature involved in the thing. That i belive you have to add yourself to the poser mesh.

But manipulating the mesh is done by scaling, moving and rotating. Also extruding the mesh is important... It is realivly easy to find the shortcuts on the keyboard for those things. as the first letter indicates which key to press. exsept moving. that is "g" for grab. And there is no need to manipulate the mesh by dialers. and sliders there is not any. THere are many modifers to use....

To say it like this. Blender is very different from poser. But is able to import poser objects.

Attached Link: Blender newbies

another thing check out. [http://blendernewbies.blogspot.com/ ](http://http//blendernewbies.blogspot.com/) That site has lots of video tutorials that you can follow step by step to get to know blender better.

www.wegehenkel.com/tutorial-blender-shortcuts.html This site lists all the shortcuts in blender and what they do.

en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Blender_3D:_Noob_to_Pro This site have lots and lots off tutorials and stuff about blender. This was the first thing i started with. making a basic man as a newbie. it explains lots and got lots of pages to go through.

If that isn't enough. Check out blenderartists.org/cms/index.php A lot of artists and blender users go there and post stuff. it got many sections and don't be afraid of asking... There are lots of nice folks there.

Quote - Blender was my first real 3d application. Being low on funds and wanted something open source i went for the best option I found answering my criteria. Had only worked with terragen before and it took me a better half a month to get to know blender. The shortcut perspective I feel is very good. Since it doesn't make the GUI all cluttered with buttons and things. and the workspace you can configure to your liking. resizing and splitting and joining different windows. All non overlapping. And not to note that the development is great for that app. Now the foundation that supports the blender development (blender foundation) is making its second movie to speed up development and to show of blender ability. See more at blender.org.

I don't really consider them shortcuts as there's no getting around them as far as I can tell. I've used only a handful of programs that didn't require one or both hands near the keyboard at all times, but found those programs to be easiest for me to use. Early versions of truespace, and Wings (except shift and ctrl) are good examples. The Carrara interface seems really nice to me also. I keep saying one day I will learn blender, as the interface obviously works judging from many of the excellent works I see blender users making. That you hadn't used another 3D package before blender may be part of why it was easy for you to pick up. Many blender users seem to have begun 3D with blender and don't understand why people coming from other programs find it so hard to get used to.

There is menues that you can go in with your mouse and pick them. The keyboard shortcuts is optional. But you do work a lot faster using them. It is allways some getting used to. Every program is different. I belive max, maya, c4d and all those packages has their own setups and different quirks that can make it hard to transist between them. So why are everyone bashing the blender gui? Is it so "special" in comparison to other programs? Or could it have to do with that it is open source and free so many more download it and don't take the time to learn the interface. Blender is a complex program and folks need to sit down and use time to learn it. Nothing comes for free. Except blender that is. but to learn it demands work.

You mean the Blender knowledge base isn't implanted directly into the brain on download?
What is wrong with these software designers?.:rolleyes:

Friends don't let friends use booleans.

I would go so far that none of the software out there has inituitive lay out of their gui.. everythiong has to be learned

I agree in the most important principles of what you are saying, Tobak. I really do. Just forget about the people complaining about the interface.

....but also, since I have never booted up Blender....

I am just asking....you get a viewport, right? You can see your models in the viewport. Can you take the mouse, select the hand (for instance) and move/scale/rotate it by dragging with the mouse?

Thank you,

::::: Opera :::::

Mostly yes. But as most of the other 3d modelling packages out there there is no direct posing of the caracters in that program as it is in poser. So you cant import a poser figure in ad pose it as in poser. It is harder than that. But to make stuff it is limitless. You can do so much more in blender than in poser. Just try out blender. Go to www.blender.org and download blender. It is about 14 mb and tottaly free. So it is no money invested and follow a couple of the tutorials to get to know the app better and then the olnly stopping you is your creativity. Every time you are stuck in the program you can allways check out the problem on the internet since it is a whole lot of documentation out there or just ask at blenderartists.org.

Quote - There is menues that you can go in with your mouse and pick them. The keyboard shortcuts is optional. But you do work a lot faster using them. It is allways some getting used to. Every program is different. I belive max, maya, c4d and all those packages has their own setups and different quirks that can make it hard to transist between them. So why are everyone bashing the blender gui? Is it so "special" in comparison to other programs? Or could it have to do with that it is open source and free so many more download it and don't take the time to learn the interface. Blender is a complex program and folks need to sit down and use time to learn it. Nothing comes for free. Except blender that is. but to learn it demands work.

No, most everyone loves that it's free. That is how so many people are able to try it and find that they do not like the GUI in the first place. People would love for it to be something stupid like that, but it's sadly not the case. In the early days, every program had a tri-view, borrowed from drafting/mechanical drawing. Caligari was one of the first desktop programs to incorporate the modeling tools into a perspective 3D view. Within a few years, most programs had added or switched to that. With Truespace they added the navigation widget, and it also exists unchanged in several programs today. Over the years there have been a few different ways of working that are distinct enough to probably stay in use for a while. Blender seems to have its own way of doing so many things. On the PC/Mac, even the Amiga, the earliest 3D programs all dated back to the confusing times when no one really had a standard way of doing most things. Those programs all competed with each other, borrowing when necessary the best of their competitors' innovations when it was obvious they were improvements. Blender seems to have gotten where it is by being the only modern 3D application on Linux which, let's be realistic, has historically been much more popular among CS and IT people than among designers. It was only a matter of time before one of the open source 3D programs matured and became dominant, and with little real competition on Linux, blender could be as unique as Ton wanted it to be. Now, between Microsoft's Vista debacle and the great improvements to the Linux desktop experience, many people are trying Linux and discovering blender. It generally seems to me that they are attracted to its features and put off by its interface, as was my experience, even after spending $50 on a book to make sense of it.

What i meant with open and free is that it is so easy to get it. And when it is easy to get it maybe folks also think its an easy program. But it is not. I belive also that max and maya etc. have a steep learning curve. but as folks use money to get the programs they also use time to get to know the program since itwould be harder to basically throw money out of the window.

I cut myself off before saying that there is rumoured to be alot of UI changes in the upcoming 2.5 release, and that I plan to try a little harder to learn it if that is the case. That is planned to be a major release, and things that are changed in it will probably remain for some time. I think blender has a very bright future, and given how much I've spent on 3D over the years, it's only going to get more tempting.

Quote - What i meant with open and free is that it is so easy to get it. And when it is easy to get it maybe folks also think its an easy program. But it is not. I belive also that max and maya etc. have a steep learning curve. but as folks use money to get the programs they also use time to get to know the program since itwould be harder to basically throw money out of the window.

No doubt. I'm sure alot of people have downloaded it that wouldn' t spend $35 let alone $3500 on a 3D package. That said, Anim8or is free for Windows, and I've never heard a complaint about it being hard to use. I've heard complaints about lack of features or slow renders, but it's got a very intuitive interface for the most part. Blender is great for beginners who don't know what to expect of it, harder for people coming from other popular programs. Nendo was the quickest program I ever learned (so I'm a fan of Wings), Aladdin 4D on the Amiga was the one that made the least sense to me. Blender isn't nearly that bad, just cumbersome enough that I always go back to something I'm used to. Some programs suck you in immediately, and make you wonder how you ever got along without them. Sometimes something as simple as reversing up and down will make the program unusable for half of the people trying the program. You know what they say about first impressions!

i am not sure what is meant by not being able to pose in most 3d apps the way you can in poser.

I am finding just the opposite. I have now put three applications on trial:

3DSMax
Carrara
Cinema 4D

and in all of them, I find it easier to pose human characters than in Poser.

Why? Because you can SELECT actors (as they are called in Poser) more easily, and as soon as you do translation and rotation manipulators become active. And in all three of these apps, the manipulation of actors is powerful.

::::: Opera :::::

For the upcoming release of blender 2.50 there will be something called rafractor.. the whole core will be redesiged so it is easier to get build in stuff and change stuff. I think the setup and gui will remain the same. But it will be made more customable. By changing hot keys and stuff like that. And there is also work to gather all physics under one place in blender so its easier to do. ++++ a lot more. Check out the forum at blenderartists.org for more info. Or at blender.org

Quote - For the upcoming release of blender 2.50 there will be something called rafractor.. the whole core will be redesiged so it is easier to get build in stuff and change stuff. I think the setup and gui will remain the same. But it will be made more customable. By changing hot keys and stuff like that. And there is also work to gather all physics under one place in blender so its easier to do. ++++ a lot more. Check out the forum at blenderartists.org for more info. Or at blender.org

I think eventually you will be able to choose which major app the blender interface most resembles, or at least change nav and controls ot be more familiar.

Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL

Subject: OT somewhat: Poser --> Major 3D App, XSI earthquake!