Hardsurface artists: The world famous Maya vs 3ds max conflict in a diffrent way...

13
polycounter lvl 6
Offline / Send Message
CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
Hello everybody!
I am a fairly new artist, about a year or two into CG and I always had this internal conflict between 3ds max and Maya. Back then I decided to start out with Maya just because most of the digital tutors courses where held in Maya aswell and the gnomon courses. Now looking back I think this was a bad idea since I see about 98 % or all hardsurface and weapons/vehicles artist using 3ds max. I saw maybe two or three good Maya guns but the rest that made me make :OOOOOOOO was made in 3ds max mostly. Most of the CSS gamebanana community also uses 3ds max, most notably Racer 445 and Millenia and other people I saw on polycount, like the weapons artist from Mw3 and this guy http://polygoo.com/, and most of all the Gears of war Artists use MAX :(

It just really confuses me. On the other hand people always say to me: "NO no dude, it deosnt matter what program you use"
, but why then is most of the stunning hardsurface stuff made in max.

Right now i am in a little indie dev team, and i am the only one using Maya really. All the artist around me are using Max and make stunning art. I just always look at my art and I think it could be better and the costant bugs in Maya just fusturate me. Now you might say: "Well then just switch lol" Well the thing is that i actually know 3ds max, like the tools and everything, but I am jussstttt sooo slow in it. Everytime i start in Max i go right back to Maya because I dont have the luxury right now to experiment, cause I do have deadlines.
My fellow Artist are telling me to switch, but i dont know If I have the time to adjust myself to 3ds max and to become as good in it as I am in Maya. It took alot of work to get there where I am now (and i am not saying that I am a good artist or anything, but I am saying that studied alot to understand Maya and modeling in general, and I dont just want to throw my hardwork away)
Also I fairly enjoy to look through the portfolios that get posted in the reviews sections in this forum. It always kinda discourages me to see that most of the hardsuface artist there use 3ds max, and I am talking about the really amazing ones. Besides like one or two exceptions, I usually only see medicore work done in Maya, hardsurface wise, and then again those used a little bit of 3ds max here and there. Usually its their experimental project in Maya and their main program is 3ds max.
I know most of the replies to this post will be "It doesnt matter what program you use" I know that because i looked on millions of other forums before to find the answer to this question. BUt the fact is that the a majority of the jaw dropping hardusrface artist use MAx instead of Maya and my goal is to become one of them... I feel like Maya is holding me back. BUt then I see amazing work being done in Maya which brings me back into this cycle

I hope you can somewhat enlighten me on this topic and my concern.
Thank you so much in advance

PS: sorry for my grammer, I am not a native :D

Replies

  • Ace-Angel
    Offline / Send Message
    Ace-Angel polycounter lvl 7
    People use Max because they like or have been using Max for years, it has nothing to do with what the program can do. That's a very silly notion to even entertain.

    I could for example use Maya and create a gun, even make a tutorial out of it, but what is the point when at the end of the day, it's all about the polygons and map baking, which is exactly the same in both applications? Might as well watch some HD tutorials, and transfer the same 'idea' into my own app.

    Also, many artists have been doing some really awesome HD work with ZBrush or 3DC, but that doesn't mean Max is suddenly obsolete.
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    well what you are saying is very true. But max has soem features that truly enhance the thing you are doing. For example. In max i can bake maps with material Ids. In maya u have to explode ur model...great for normals and but functional for AOs...
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    but the rest that made me make :OOOOOOOO was made in 3ds max mostly.
    [...]
    are using Max and make stunning art.
    [...]
    I usually only see medicore work done in Maya, hardsurface wise
    [...]
    The quality of of an asset is no indicator of which program was used to make it.
    BUt then I see amazing work being done in Maya
    Lol, make up your mind.
    I am saying that studied alot to understand Maya and modeling in general, and I dont just want to throw my hardwork away)
    Most of that hard work was learning universal concepts of modeling. And, since you're asking a noob question I can't imagine that you have 20 years experience using Maya.
    I know most of the replies to this post will be "It doesnt matter what program you use"

    Of course it matters what tools you use. Some people who are politically correct to the point of fanaticism will claim otherwise, but that doesn't stop it from being obviously true.

    If you've read so many of the threads, why don't you follow the conclusion that pretty much every single one of them offer? ----> Start learning Max and see which one you prefer.

    How to use Max:
    Make a primitive, right-click it in the modifier menu, choose "Convert to Editable Poly". Now you have your poly tools in the command panel on the right and in a ribbon at the top of your screen (depending on your max version). This is pretty much all you need to get access to the modeling tools you're used to in Maya. If you want to change viewport options, just click the viewport label, if you want snaps and other common stuff, just check the toolbar.

    Just keep in mind that if you want to use the true potential of Max, you're going to have to work for it. If you can't be bothered to read documentation and configure the app, might as well stick with any other 3d app.

    Ace-Angel wrote: »
    People use Max because they like or have been using Max for years, it has nothing to do with what the program can do. That's a very silly notion to even entertain.

    [...]
    at the end of the day, it's all about the polygons and map baking, which is exactly the same in both applications?

    Ace :( You've had a long string of good posts now, where did you dig up this nonsense? There are vast differences between the apps, in particular for hard-surface modeling.
    Ace-Angel wrote: »
    Also, many artists have been doing some really awesome HD work with ZBrush or 3DC, but that doesn't mean Max is suddenly obsolete.
    A topic for a different thread, I suppose, but I think you are already aware of the major and obvious objections to what you're touching on here.

    CyberGameArts: You'll find that absolutely everything that can be said about max VS maya has been covered in other threads.
  • Ace-Angel
    Offline / Send Message
    Ace-Angel polycounter lvl 7
    @Cyber: You still have to do that in Max if you want proper bakes, especially from a high poly, I really doubt you want to go around on a 1 million poly mesh and select one by one certain faces to material ID just so you can bake part of it on your low poly mesh.

    Exploding models is a workflow almost everyone does because it easier and quicker to manage, and gives much cleaner results honestly. It's predictable on what you're going to get basically.

    @Perna: Unless I missed something, you could very easily create, say a M16 rifle, in Maya as you can in Max, if a couple of tools are missing akin to Polyboost, you can easily get those from scripts for Maya, shortcuts and etc not withstanding.

    Considering that many peeps won't even touch some of them more 'robust' tools which will help you with certain kind of modeling techniques, it honestly comes down to how much the traditional tools can do to pull their weight, and unless AD in the last few years (I haven't use Maya in a while) went out of their way to gimp certain aspects of the program (then again, they did with Max too), I don't think it's as dire as it's being put here.

    I'm not saying don't learn Max, or that there are zero differences, but they're not as dire as many people in these kinds of threads make them out to be.

    Also, about my ZB comment, maybe I worded it's in the wrong way, but what I meant to say is that even back when ZB was starting out, people still could push (with it's limits) HD work for a program that very specifically catered to the organic market. We got more savvy tools now in that respect, but people were still able to pull off some crazy stuff, and from there, I simply am saying no program is totally gimped in the creation of certain techniques.

    Sure, maybe slower or more clunky, but never enough to leave you stranded.
  • Kon Artist
    Offline / Send Message
    Kon Artist polycounter lvl 6
    I think it's always good to learn new software-- as learning the next one becomes easier.
  • Laughing_Bun
    Offline / Send Message
    Laughing_Bun polycounter lvl 12
    Having switched from 3ds max to maya I can say that you are right in your assumption, modeling complex things in maya can get very tiresome. Maya seems to require a lot of micro-managing of every operation you perform. But they arn't that different, so don't expect max to solve all your problems.
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    Ace-Angel wrote: »
    @Perna: Unless I missed something, you could very easily create, say a M16 rifle, in Maya as you can in Max, if a couple of tools are missing akin to Polyboost, you can easily get those from scripts for Maya, shortcuts and etc not withstanding.

    You are talking about basic poly operations now. They are pretty much the same in almost all 3D programs.

    3ds first and foremost has the modifier panel, with all its secondary functions and interoperability with instancing, referencing, parameter linking, and so on, which gives the app mad CAD-like powers, which is a great benefit, a great time saver for hard-surface modeling and unique to 3ds (though blender is making headway - go blender!).

    The second major benefit it has is an ungodly amount of free and commercial extensions and huge communities around the making of such extensions. Just count the number of Maxscript VS MEL threads on polycount.

    Some say that it's too much work to learn all of the unique 3ds stuff, some don't bother, and some are oblivious, but we don't see anyone who has successfully adapted those advantages into their workflow claim they have little value.

    Hell, if it just boiled down to out-of-the-box polymodeling tools, I wouldn't touch neither Max nor Maya with a ten-foot pole.

    It's commonly accepted and uncontroversial that Max has better modeling and Maya has better animation tools (of course you will always find individuals dissenters, as with any other issue). To my knowledge, Autodesk themselves have pretty much conceded this directly and are designing around that.

    I'm surprised, I thought you used Max - ?
  • deolol
    Offline / Send Message
    deolol polycounter lvl 6
    OP what about all the cool stuff made with maya? Easy to forget huh...

    Its just peer pressure and suggestibility
  • Billabong
    Offline / Send Message
    Billabong polycounter lvl 11
    I'm gonna stick my neck out here real quick.

    I've been a max user for almost 7 years now and the one thing that Maya has that I wish Max had was solid Nurbs and the ability to convert those Nurbs into quads, which you can do in Maya.

    -B
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    Billa:
    http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/scripts/polynurbs-1-0-released

    Also try Power Nurbs. It's reasonably priced, for someone who uses Nurbs a lot. If you use Nurbs all the time, there's of course actual Nurbs apps which make the Max/Maya tools look silly.
  • Billabong
    Offline / Send Message
    Billabong polycounter lvl 11
    perna wrote: »
    Billa:
    http://www.scriptspot.com/3ds-max/scripts/polynurbs-1-0-released

    Also try Power Nurbs. It's reasonably priced, for someone who uses Nurbs a lot. If you use Nurbs all the time, there's of course actual Nurbs apps which make the Max/Maya tools look silly.

    That script looks pretty awesome, gonna have to give that a shot. I know about power nurbs, but I was really referring to Nurbs built in to the actual software, buying a 3rd party app, is not really an option at this point in time. But thanks for the script Perna, will have a look at that.

    -B
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    It's commonly accepted and uncontroversial that Max has better modeling and Maya has better animation tools (of course you will always find individuals dissenters, as with any other issue). To my knowledge, Autodesk themselves have pretty much conceded this directly and are designing around that.
    thats kinda my point LOL. Also it seems like there are more things 3ds max can do that maya also can do, but not the other way around. And you are right i dont have 20 years of experience and this might really seem like the stupiest post every, but I do care what i put my effort in learning wise. The time i spend learning Maya i could have spend learning 3ds max. Also for all teh others: There is amazing work in Maya...but my point is that it is not as frequent as amazing work in Max....there has to be a reason why lol (Thats pretty much the thesis of my concern)
    U are also right in saying that max generally has much more support, script wise. I am totally jelous of the 3 point shader plugin for Max.... :(
  • gray
    well, i can tell you with absolute certainty that my software is the best... absolutely without question, its obvious and uncontroversial.

    i'm not really convinced by your examples and argument but there is some history to what your saying that shoud be explained so new people know the history.

    up until a few years ago games were almost 100% max and film was 100% maya. so anyone who wants to argue which has the better tool set or artists is a noob. experienced artist know that the great work in both industries was done in separate packages so there is obviously no solid argument for one package vs the other.

    it was mostly cost. i don't have the numbers here but maya was over 40,000usd a seat and ran on SGI IRIX. game studios went for max on dos/pc. the cost and platform were the main things.

    all that is history. but it would not be surprising to find pockets of very good game artists that all use max and vise versa for maya because it has been that way for years.

    but for modeling at this point there is really no excuses or examples you can make to show one is superior to the other. its your personal work flow and taste that determine which tool set and style you like.

    modeling uses a very simple tool set. its about 95% artistic ability which makes a good modeler imo. and sculpting is about the same.
  • David Wakelin
    I was taught Maya at College, - to study Games Design & Max at University to study Games Design...

    I can achieve equally good results in both; only difference is really ease of use - depending really on which layout you prefer haha.

    The only good option I prefer in Max rather then Maya is the ability to draw on my seams for my UVW Mapping. - Maya can probably achieve this with a plugin or 3rd party app like Roadkill.

    - Oh and possibly the ease of rendering with a daylight time system;

    but again... theres probably a 3rd party app I'm unaware of that does this - and yet I still prefer to use model in Maya and import into Max :P

    You've clearly P-sed a few people off with your arrogance :\ - not a smart move on polycount - haha the crits are harsh enough!
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    David Wakelin: Sorry if I came over as arrogant, I truly didnt want to sound that way but no one could really give me a solid answer in the past. Maybe i am just to blind to see the amazing work in Maya that is out there, or maybe its just that most people on Polycount use Max, idk. I guess I will look into 3ds max a little bit more and see what I can achieve there :D
  • David Wakelin
    I use Maya Primarily... I would choose it any day over max - but not for performance literally just that's more the program I'm used to :)
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    I think it's clear that OP did not intend to insult any software package. His language is colorful (in rant mode), his stance is one of uncertainty, and makes it clear that he's just expressing his personal impression, which you would be hard pressed to call arrogant.
    gray wrote: »
    modeling uses a very simple tool set.
    I respect anyone's personal choice of restricting themselves to a small subset of the tools available, but that doesn't necessarily bear a lot of relevance to the topic.

    I assume from your reply that you use Maya and perhaps feel your baby is under attack or, by extension, that your decision to stick with Maya is under attack. That kind of attachment is normal, but doesn't contribute to an objective discussion. There are those of us who have zero attachment to any software package and make decisions based on cold, hard fact. Nobody is saying that you personally have made a poor choice. In fact, a great deal of people using Max aren't even touching its advanced functions (hell, they don't even change the default keyboard shortcuts), in which case Max is a terrible choice of software. Untapped potential holds no advantages.

    Tools matter a great deal, which is such an obvious statement that I feel silly for making it. The majority of posts on this board revolve around tools, their use and development. People go to great effort to write MEL versions of max functionality and maxscript versions of Maya functionality, as well as continually developing and improving tools, for a reason. I'm certain you would not claim ll that effort to be for naught and further development of tools holds a insignificant role in the industry.
    gray wrote: »
    its about 95% artistic ability which makes a good modeler imo.

    Tools determine your potential peak efficiency, which has nothing whatsoever to do with artistic ability.

    You're welcome to demonstrate how you would make the below asset (see jpeg) using only the "very simple tool set" (as you put it) which is shared across the major 3d apps, without spending a great deal more time than the few clicks shown below. Naturally such a toolset does not enable a fully non-destructible workflow as in the example, but let's allow for that.

    I predict that here will be no such demonstration, but instead either more text (trying to validate avoiding the demonstration), no reply, or (optimistically) an acknowledgement of my basic and obvious point.

    I just personally find it silly how people on a 3d-art board make big claims in text (talk is cheap) without backing them up with demonstrations and images. This is not directed at you, gray, but at a common long-running theme. As soon as someone is asked to validate their claims, they disappear or go all aggro. Disheartening.

    I also find brand or product attachment quite disheartening. It's like those X-box versus playstation arguments on youtube built on no other basis than "I use this one, so it's either better or as good as the other one)". I used Maya until I got tired of writing MEL scripts for basic functionality. Ideally it should be possible to talk objectively about pros and cons.
    per128_rope01.jpg
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    Thanks for your insight. I have to say to my knowledge is not as quik to make a little spline shape like u have there, since in maya one would have to extrude a cylinder or like a spline circle along the the splines that make up the coil, which would add a couple of steps and probably bring some problems or hick-ups along the way. Thats one of the things i really admire about 3ds max, you just have much more options for each tool; options that are actually relevant to the thing that you are creating, modeling wise(like i am talking about all those fancy sliders). Maya is much more manual- somtimes I enjoy that, but sometimes it just really fusturates me. Like for example I dont think its possible ,unless i am missing somthing, to simply extrude an edge inwards to create creases or intrusions. The way i do it in Maya: I bevel the edge, extrude it inwards and then merge the oposing vertices(Which can take quiet some time depending on how long the crease should be. feels almost like manual labor LOL ...). In max you would just select the edge and hit extrude.
    I have to admit i am kinda "emotionally" bound(just like you said) to Maya which probably brought me into this situation.

    Also one thing kinda made me think, somthing i wish yuo could clear up for me:
    I used Maya until I got tired of writing MEL scripts for basic functionality.

    I dont quiet understand what u mean by basic fuctionallity.... Do you mean that opposed to the functionallity present in max or in general?

    Anyways thanks alot, you all truly helped me :D
  • passerby
    Offline / Send Message
    passerby polycounter lvl 8
    how about less time talking more time learning, both apps are usefull to know, so not wasted time to learn, than you can choose what suits your work style.
  • aajohnny
    Offline / Send Message
    aajohnny polycounter lvl 8
    ^
    It doesn't really matter who uses what program, it all matters on YOU. Whatever really suits you and whatever you work with better. Test out the programs and see what is better in your own eyes, not ours. If you really want to model something specific in each other the program and see what tools you like and dislike in each other the software or what seemed to work better for it. A lot of good suggestions, just try um out for yourself.
  • Racer445
    Offline / Send Message
    Racer445 polycounter lvl 10
    i only use milkshape
  • Barbarian
    Offline / Send Message
    Barbarian polycounter lvl 8
    I've used Max and Maya. I focus almost entirely on Maya now. The only thing Max has that I'd like to see in Maya is the shell modifier. I also learned MEL and that helps a lot with plug-ins and other scripting. I do a lot of physics and dynamcics animation and Maya doesn't require FumeFX, etc.
  • gray
    @perna
    hey slow down man! :) i hope you don't think anything i said was directed to your posts. i was addressing the OP only with my post.


    i'm a modeler/sculptor. and it may seem odd to belittle modeling by saying that it uses a simple tool set. but looking at the whole pipeline from modeling to rigging, animation, effects, dynamics, rendering etc. imo at the technical level the tools that we use cutting and rearranging edges and faces and moving verts around of some winged edge polygon data structure are rather simple tools compared to a full blown IK animation system or skinning and deformation system, or participial and dynamic system, or a physically accurate ray trace renderer .

    i suppose that has nothing to do with the work it self. and programming modeling tools is tricky to get right and have a good fast workflow.

    also i have used max and maya in production for modeling and like them both. and would use either depending on the studio choice. altho i do use maya for my own work. the rigging and deformation tools for creatures are more robust imo, i have done some creature td work in that regard. so i guess that keeps me in maya for the most part.

    --some more history...

    i think that max had an edge for poly modeling for quite a while because maya and the film pipeline was based around nurbs for quite a few years. but once subdivision surfaces were invented by pixar for prman we cound use polygons to get a perfect limit surface for rendering then all hell broke louses and we could get rid of the nurbs YAY!!!! and model with the polygon goodness.

    --end history

    probably around maya8-9 they really started to beef up the poly tools in maya. and they have refined those tools over a few versions. the added a proper soft selection like max has. all the box modeling edge tools for a good box modeling work flow are there. and they work on fairly dense meshes. so it really is a matter of personal preference now. the tools work a bit different in both packages but do the same functions at about the same speed. so i think the time has passed when max had much better tools then maya.

    as for the rope example its a nice technique. i'm not going argue whether its "simple" or not. that is to subjective to pin down. i suppose your point is that procedural modeling is not as simple as, say organic modeling with a box modeling style. which is true i will concede that. but its still rather simple compare to all the other tool sets and areas i mentioned. non linear deformed have been around for a long long time, sames with splines and latices. probably over 20 years for all that stuff.

    if you want to look at procedural modeling complexity then we can look to the work that is done in houdini. i have seen extremely complicated stuff done in that package but i would not consider that modeling. thats sort of work does not come out of the modeling department. that sort of stuff usually includes particles systems, physics and lots of math and at the end you generate some procedural polygons that look like ivy vines or tress and stuff like that. making a procedural pile of rope is probably trivial in houdini . people who do that sort of procedural modeling in generally don't work in the models department.
  • roosterMAP
    Offline / Send Message
    roosterMAP polycounter lvl 9
    The best artists can make badass stuff regardless of the package. At the end of the day, these tools are just that. Tools.
    Just switch to 3ds max if you think it'll give u an edge.
  • kakapoopie
    Take a look at Modo too...I've used Max Maya and Modo and find it to be most 'fun' to model with.
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    gray: Oops, Sorry, I see you were just giving OP some balancing information and not responding to me.


    There's a semantic challenge as you make vague use of the word "simple", especially when comparing unrelated disciplines (is piano "simpler" than guitar? It's impossible to debate; the question must be rephrased. Are modeling tools "simpler" than animation tools? Impossible to debate as well as irrelevant).

    The 3d data set is extremely simple. There are extremely few operations that can be performed directly on that data. Thisf can account for simplicity. However, the chaotic nature of the data, and lack of analytic ability requires continued development of increasingly complex high-level tools.

    You repeat the claim that I originally objected to:
    gray wrote: »
    so it really is a matter of personal preference now. the tools work a bit different in both packages but do the same functions at about the same speed. so i think the time has passed when max had much better tools then maya.

    From my earlier post:
    perna wrote: »
    the modifier panel, with all its secondary functions and interoperability with instancing, referencing, parameter linking, and so on, which gives the app mad CAD-like powers, which is a great benefit, a great time saver for hard-surface modeling and unique to 3ds

    Modo has innovative and unique modeling tools. Max has innovative and unique modeling tools. Maya has basic modeling tools and no significant innovation in this department.

    All you wrote after "non linear deformed" seems off-tangent; not sure if you want a response to any of that.

    I would be happy to see someone demonstrate significant areas of hard-surface modeling in which Max does not outperform Maya. It's easy to just make claims. I find it ironic how people on the board will talk and talk instead of demonstrating their points visually; and they're supposed to be artists! :D

    We could compare workflows for making small objects that present the typical hard-surface (weapons, machines, vehicles, robots, anything sci-fi, anything mechanical) modeling challenges. Unless there have been major developments in Maya that I'm not aware of, Max is going to outperform it quite easily. Following are some good examples of such objects. Surely time won't be an issue, as some of them will take less time than making a few posts here. Well, if you use 3ds, anywya :D (Sorry, that was cheap, just couldn't help myself)
    A4.jpgInaltator%20telescop.jpgserie3-250x250.jpgsmart_printer.jpgUCABL011600_04_L.jpgpppwme_3345_856789424.jpg17-64-thickbox.jpgfile271_2009712175330.gifimg9585_20766.jpgStraight_bevel_gear_milling_cutter.jpg
  • gray
    @perna
    no worries mate/dude which ever they use in your part of the golobe. :)

    honestly i don't want to argue about max vs maya vs xyz modeling tools. nor do i want to argue about procedural or hard surface or even organic modeling. or what is simple or not.

    i think its great that your fired up about max modeling tools. it looks like your working on some scripts etc, doing some interesting hard surface work. thats good maybe you can post some of you techniques and process. id like to see it. i'm sure most people would rather read that then watch us flame this thread into a burnt pile of pig poop and burn down half the board and kill all the wildlife! :thumbup:

    i care about modeling tools probably as much as you do. and at certain points i have gotten serious about my opinions. but not so much at the moment. i do stand by my posts but thats about as far as it goes for now. also i'm far more interested in organics and sculpting then hard surface ploy modeling. so we are essentially concerned with different aspects of the tool sets in general.


    to the OP, @CyberGameArts

    i think if there is one thing you can take from this thread you started is that people care very much about there personal overflows and software of choice. because of that fact you should rely on your own judgment and what you want to use and think is the best for your work flow as it develops. rather then take other peoples opinions as facts and fallow what they tell you. in the long run that will get you to the most productive tools for you and probably make you much happier also. i would take the time to learn both max and maya modeling tools if your serious about modeling. and honestly every modeling software you can try. that how you really learn whats what. by being able to compare the different tools in the different packages and know which tools are the best. most people are to lazy tot do all that tho! :) it's a lot more work for sure.
  • GeeDave
    also i'm far more interested in organics and sculpting then hard surface ploy modeling. so we are essentially concerned with different aspects of the tool sets in general.

    I'm not entirely sure that's correct, Perna (not that I need to defend the guy) simply appears to be sticking to the topic of the thread, which is the preference in softwares for hard-surface modelling... with, a slight deviation I suppose into just general modelling techniques, I'd say he's 'argued' his case very well, to the point of banishing the notion of "personal preference" in reply to the OP. So unless someone with a deep knowledge of Maya can come along and provide a counter that stretches outside of "I like it because I know it" then I'd say we've got ourselves a clear winner.

    Yeeee haw.

    (good thread by the way)
  • Kon Artist
    Offline / Send Message
    Kon Artist polycounter lvl 6
    Though I'd give one of these things a try. Modeled in Maya in about an hour (maybe a little less). I would like to know about how long it takes to modeled sometime like this is Max.

    If one package or tool gets you to the end with the same or better results quicker then it's probably a better tool for the job. Anyways, I think I'm going to give this thing a go tomorrow (later today) in ZBrush and see how fast I can do it.

    hard_ex_01.jpg
  • gray
    @GeeDave

    unfortunately it only takes 2 for a flame war. anyone who wants to argue there tool set at this point is throwing a match into the can of petrol weather that is there intention or not. i don't want any part of that business. been there done that. and i hope no one else does that.

    perna makes some good points and cares about his tools thats a good thing. modelers should be serious about there tools.

    but it is entirely subjective and personal preference which is the "best". there is the highest level of work done in all these packages, all the artists that do that work get the right to tell you which is the "best" tool set and work flow. one might have a really cool tool. but so does the other one. etc. once you get use to a tool set you can really do some damage. but i have gone through that in a few packages. where you get to a point where you feel so fluid with the tools if feels like nothing could be better then your work flow and using other software feels like total garbage.

    the best you can do is prove to yourself that for yourself you have found the best work flow and tool set. that is, unless you have derived a mathematical proof, in which case i would love to read it before you send it off to the science journals and do your presentation at SIGGRAPH. :\
  • GeeDave
    The notion of personal preference has ceased to exist for this specific topic.

    Proficiency in softwares is of course going to play a big part for people who are already proficient, but since OP is likely not uber-pro in either, I see no reason why someone shouldn't be able to give him some info about why learning one over the other would be beneficial.

    Perna's point (from what I assume) is that if OP is looking to get into hard-surface modelling, and has a choice between learning Max or Maya, it makes sense to go with Max, and he's explained why. The only way to provide a counter debate is to talk about why Maya would be a better choice, this isn't a flame war, it's not about opinion, it's about tools to get the job done with the least amount of effort and (ideally) allowance for iterations (non-destructive workflows)

    Basically, this is the point that this thread has reached:
    - Can Max and Maya both do this? Yes
    - Can proficient users in either do this easily enough? Yes
    - What would a noob be better off learning for this? Max

    I think the one thing everyone can agree on is that the OP should try both, and decide for himself, but as it stands the argument for using Max is:
    3ds first and foremost has the modifier panel, with all its secondary functions and interoperability with instancing, referencing, parameter linking, and so on, which gives the app mad CAD-like powers, which is a great benefit, a great time saver for hard-surface modeling and unique to 3ds (though blender is making headway - go blender!).

    + everything else Perna has taken the time to write up.

    And the argument for using Maya is:
    for modeling at this point there is really no excuses or examples you can make to show one is superior to the other. its your personal work flow and taste that determine which tool set and style you like.

    + everyone else talking about personal preference.

    Perna has provided examples and 'excuses' for why Max would be superior in this instance. I'd genuinely love to read more about why someone thinks Maya should take the biscuit, but nobody has yet to stretch beyond "personal preference" for the counter.
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    Kon: Awesome man, really appreciate the contribution. The key though is to show the steps involved as opposed to the completion time, to demonstrate the tool rather than the person using it. I'll see about taking time after work to model out that same shape in Max and record the process.

    At least for the purpose of this thread, and most game-art, sculpted hard-surface won't be very relevant. The moment your art director or client asks you to make modifications on a sculpted model, you're screwed.

    gray, with regards to your last post, I'm unsure why you think a discussion of pros and cons must be taunting and warring as opposed to healthy, productive, and a good way to help people make informed decisions. Considering that even the more innocent of internet forum topics often dissolve into flames within a few posts, I only observe people being unusually civilized in this thread and as such don't see the cause for concern.

    I didn't ask you for a demonstration in the hope that I could rub the results in your face, or something similarly infantile, but because of the educational outcome, for us and everyone reading.

    gray wrote: »
    but it is entirely subjective and personal preference which is the "best".

    Well, now it gets into semantics again. The fact that you can have an opinion about a quality does not make that quality a matter of opinion. Let's not be intellectually disingenuous here. To state the obvious: You can objectively measure the extent to which different tools fulfill given criteria. That result would indeed be the "mathematical proof" you requested of GeeDave. There's nothing silly about that notion, as seem to be indicated by the quip about Siggraph. Please excuse me if I've misunderstood your intent.


    You have made a very solid point; It's fruitless to discuss subjective opinion. I agree, and even more fruitless discussing subjectivity itself, so let's try to keep it focused on what can actually be demonstrated and measured.

    gray, a rhetorical question: wouldn't it be more correct for you to say something like "with my personal knowledge of 3ds Max, I'm unable to get more efficient results out of it than out of Maya, which may be due to my lack of familiarity with the potential of 3ds."? Because what you seem to be saying is "I know for a fact that Max and Maya are equal in terms of modeling efficiency (although I'm not willing to demonstrate this claim nor acknowledge that there is a rational, unbiased process for making such demonstrations)". Forgive the pointed language, I just want to make my understanding clear and mean no disrespect.
  • gray
    @perna

    its great that your serious about this but i find the idea that the "best" modeling tool set can be determined through casual discussion and ad hock examples by a group of highly partial modelers on a polycount thread a bit silly. whos the judge ? essentially everyone defends there work flow and choice of tools regardless of there experience level, its all valid opinion, nothing gets proven and people disagree and eventually get nasty.


    "The fact that you can have an opinion about a quality does not make that quality a matter of opinion"

    essentially having an opinion about quality means that its precisely a matter of opinion and nothing more. which is the best the i-phone or android? whats the best renderer v-ray or mental ray? the fact that the criteria for your decision is simply your opinion almost by definition makes the proof your opinion. its simple circular logic. somewhat boring to listen to and definitely nothing approaching scientific or even analytic thinking. essentially you have 2 choices if you want to proceed and "try" to find some objective comparison between modeling tool sets.

    one common way, which is as close as you can get to real data about peoples "opinion" is to simply do a survey. then you can determine based on you sample population what is the "best" etc. that is precisely why surveys are done because human opinions in themselves have no analytically measurable data in them.

    the second way would be to devise some sort of study and benchmark of the tools themselves. in order to do that you would first have to develop a criteria with which you could measure and compare specific tools in various packages. you would also have to have a set of benchmarks which you could run across all the tools to collect your data. all of the parties involved would have to agree on the criteria and benchmarks. then you could plausibly get some analytic data for your study and have a basis to make objective comparisons based on the data.


    the only other option i can think of that might be convincing would be to get together a few people who know all the tools extremely well have them do an informal review of the various tool sets. that would not really prove anything but it would be good information for people to have. they could use that to help them decide what the best was for them.


    essentially my opinion is that max and maya are about equal now for poly modeling and i would not think twice about modeling hard surface or organics in either package. they both get the job done and have nice tool sets. there is no "best" modeling tool set. you can't really prove that sort of thing because there is no definitive proof that can be reached in matters of opinion. im not going to dick around in a thread and try to prove or disprove who has the best tools. its silly. if you want to post more examples of your work flow id love to see them but i don't take that as much proof of anything except that you possibly have a good work flow and have come up with some cool techniques.

    if your really serious i would love to see some people do a detailed review of all the modeling tools and if there is any tools that one package has that really stand out they can be precisely noted. and hopeful coded for the other applications so everybody can have the best tool set available between the different developers.


    @geedave

    you do realize that i or anyone else can simply say that the modifier panel slows down there work flow and is a negative for the max tool set and that is a totally valid counter argument. and so on and so on.

    these sort of threads are vigorous but unconvincing.
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    gray: I'm sorry; I can't quite follow your last post. It seems to intellectualize into obscurity a simple concept: providing demonstrable information to help others decide between or get familiar with the two apps.

    You ignore that the major differences in hard-surface capabilities between Maya and Max have already been pointed out several times, and yet you accuse others of being partial, mock our efforts to help someone, make snide remarks and employ the use of several linguistic devices to obscure meaning and reason. Also, while you ridicule the idea of deciding on the "best" app, you are the only person in this entire thread who has used that word (and a great many times at that). You are also the only person who seems emotionally charged. Maybe something hit a nerve with you and got you defensive. If it was me, I'm sorry; it was never my intention to attack anything or anyone, but to contribute constructively.

    With respect, I'd rather not travel further down this arm of the discussion and prefer to get back on-topic.
    gray wrote: »
    @geedave
    you do realize that i or anyone else can simply say that the modifier panel slows down there work flow and is a negative for the max tool set and that is a totally valid counter argument. and so on and so on.

    Incorrect. That would not be an argument, but an unsubstantiated claim.
  • gray
    ---@perna

    if you want to be analytical and objective possibly even productive comparing tools i gave you some ideas in my previous post.

    im not going to get into any max vs maya sword fighting. i don't think anyone is much interested in that sort of thing. most of the posts have been to the effect that it is a personal preference and that is the reality for most and i think that should be respected.

    so best of luck with this one. i hope its beneficial and productive for you. im quite happy i did not get into any of the silly tired old arguments or dog anyones software of choice or tools.
  • GeeDave
    Gray, why do you think this is a sword fight? It's been explained a few times now that this should be about actually comparing the relevant tools, something that people don't do very often, but while you seem happy to respond with great length and effort, you're not responding with anything relevant. (neither am I, to be honest)

    From what I can gather, your ideas for reaching an answer are what Perna is trying to achieve, he got the ball rolling and nobody has responded. Except for you I mean, on the personal preference train, and me, on the interested in a debate without really participating in it train.

    Nobody is 'dogging' on software from what I can see, and that isn't what this thread is about. Where are you getting this from?

    I've often splurted out the "It's the artists choice" in response to questions like these, but this time, on a specific modelling topic there has to be a more beneficial choice for a newcomer, and I commend Perna for breaking the mould and trying to actually get an answer, but it's all a bit pointless without topical opposition.

    Which is the only reason I'm responding, as I'm not knowledgeable enough with Maya to provide a counter, but I really, really want someone around here to get back on topic.
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    Racer445 wrote: »
    i only use milkshape
    yeah right........... :D
  • Racer445
    Offline / Send Message
    Racer445 polycounter lvl 10
    oh yeah sorry i only use zbrush now because ITS THE FUTURE AND USES NEXT GENERATION AAA TECHNIQUES WHICH WILL REPLACE MAX AND MAYA

    i use the death to box modeling workflow

    [ame=" MP5-K in ZBrush 4 - YouTube[/ame]

    UGHHHHHHH
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    Racer445 wrote: »
    oh yeah sorry i only use zbrush now because ITS THE FUTURE AND USES NEXT GENERATION AAA TECHNIQUES WHICH WILL REPLACE MAX AND MAYA

    i use the death to box modeling workflow

    Sculpting MP5-K in ZBrush 4 - YouTube

    UGHHHHHHH

    :poly142:
  • pior
    Offline / Send Message
    pior insane polycounter
    Hahaha I love how that gun sculpting video opens up with a close-up view of totally screwed up reflections :D Looks cool for a rough-in or for a small 3D print ... but there is no way this would work in a game.

    Regarding the mechanical examples posted by Per earlier ... I'll troll a little by saying that some (not all) of them could be made in minutes or even less in MOI3D (awesome nurbs modelling program). I might just do one later haha.

    Unfortunately not everybody understands the concept of a non-linear approach to modeling (ie the stack/"edit parameters later" approach). So maybe there is a need to clarify that ?

    Also Per - I love you.
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    @ GeeDave:
    I actually not a total noob. I have done some hardsurface stuff in Maya before(maybe good compared to what u guys can do):
    2s7gnjn.png









    fdflv.png

    AS you see see there i have some what of expierience.... The reason why i made this post tho was that that when i look through the polycount post i rarly see amazing work done in Maya, whcih makes me think that i could achieve so much more using 3ds max. Like someone pointed out, Mayas tool arnt really innovative, whereas Max seems to finds new ways to make me say "i wish Maya had that." everytime. After reading all the helpful advice everybody has been giving me, I decided that i jump back into max and just try to get faster and more efficient in it. The main reason why i sticked to Maya production wise, was becuase i was was just faster in it (love the hotbox):D

    Again thanks to everyone, you have all helped me alot :D
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    Also as u might see by my models..... they are not very complex.... I truly think Maya isnt layout for super detailed work such as this (made in max):
    Grimlock2012HP.jpg


    IDK if its just me or Maya but I am always scared to model complex things(this might sound extremly noobish and childish) but I think the root of the problem is that I feel like Maya restricts me in that way, and I kinda hope that 3ds max will kinda take that "fear" away from me (lol i feel like this is gonna turn into phsycology thread soon :P)
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    Racer445 wrote: »
    oh yeah sorry i only use zbrush now because ITS THE FUTURE AND USES NEXT GENERATION AAA TECHNIQUES WHICH WILL REPLACE MAX AND MAYA

    i use the death to box modeling workflow

    Sculpting MP5-K in ZBrush 4 - YouTube

    UGHHHHHHH


    cool... would love to see some work from you soon using that techinque... I am sure itll be amazing :D
  • Racer445
    Offline / Send Message
    Racer445 polycounter lvl 10
    im dying over here
  • CyberGameArts
    Offline / Send Message
    CyberGameArts polycounter lvl 6
    Racer445 wrote: »
    im dying over here


    LOL LOL i am guessing that it was a joke then LOL Great that i made u laugh tho :D just like u did me, in ur tuts LOL
  • poopipe
    Offline / Send Message
    poopipe ngon master
    To pretty much reiterate what perna (among others has stated)

    Max will in most cases allow you to complete a common modelling task in less clicks/gestures/actions

    some common modelling actions being...
    eg. connecting some verts with an edge, separating a selection of faces from the body of a mesh, bridging the gap between a pair of edges, creating new polies by extending existing geometry and so on.

    The above is quantifiable and is about the only way of comparing the two packages because everything else is entirely subjective.
  • pior
    Offline / Send Message
    pior insane polycounter
    Poopipe : true, but to an extent all that can be scripted into any app. What Per is (mostly) talking about is the non destructive aspect of modeling in Max.

    But it's certainly is true that even simple modeling tasks (even the ones possible in both programs) generate less errors in Max than in Maya. If you ask any *honest* artist familiar with both apps and not caring about personal preference it becomes obvious that when it comes to modeling, Maya is overall glitchier, generates more stuff like double faces, freezes more and so on. Now you will always find people claiming that its the user fault. It obviously isn't the case - these are all problems coming from unrefined tool design on the Maya side.
  • MrOneTwo
    Offline / Send Message
    MrOneTwo polycounter lvl 8
    I actually find more and more examples of people who create great, jaw dropping art and they don't give a flyyying fuck which software is the best for this task.

    Snefer bakes normal maps in Modo... crazy but he creates some sick stuff.

    Everyone should try at least few apps and work in the one he likes best. If one day he stumbles upon something worth checking out in other app he should check that out! Modelling app isn't a religion and you can learn more than one.

    I love messing with the tools but they are just tools.
  • perna
    Offline / Send Message
    perna quad damage
    poopie, I generally think that's one of the weaker aspects of Max. Silo and XSI have some cool stuff in that regard, but overall I don't know of an app that stands out as nailing this.Luckily it's relatively easy to script such things: Relevant thread (keyword search smartfunctions)


    Poly-editing apps are, as a whole, shamefully underdeveloped. I have a writeup coming, analyzing all the major (and some smaller) 3d apps using a simple test with one of the most basic functions there are, and the results will most likely surprise you.

    MrOneTwo wrote: »
    I actually find more and more examples of people who create great, jaw dropping art and they don't give a flyyying fuck which software is the best for this task.

    That premise is entirely flawed.
    • Potential for great-looking art relies primarily on the person's artistic capabilities.
    • Potential for efficiency and quality of technical construction relies primarily on the tools.
  • Noors
    Offline / Send Message
    Noors polycounter lvl 10
    From memory, Maya has an historic, kinda like the modifier pile, no ? + everything nodal. I don't see where max is less linear. I could also argue that the more you stack modifiers, the more chance you get that your model gets corrupted. So in the end, i tend to collapse when satisfied and keep .max copies in case i need to go back.

    I had to switch from Maya to Max at some point for a new job. To me, the longest part isn't to learn which button to push, it's to learn the weaknesses of your soft and all possible workarounds so that you aren't limited by technic.
13
Sign In or Register to comment.