Just curious, why nobody mension Houdini for this king of work ? with H14 out now and Engine it's pretty domn powerfull !
Anyway, First post here, let say it, i really don't get all these sheeps flowing along Autodesk, Maya or Max just because it's standard... Are we artist or not ? are we forced to use the AB pencil just because it sells more, can we just jump off the ship ?? Go Go Blender, Go Go Modo, Go Go Houdini, Go Go Softimage (Oups thanks you Autodesk) ;-) !
I use what works for me; Max, Photoshop, 3Dcoat, Zbrush. I'd be a sheep if I used another application just because I'm supposed to dislike Autodesk.
I'll learn Modo if I have time to do it, it seems interesting. A few artists use it at our studio, it doesn't integrate 100% into our pipeline though, requiring the need for Max.
Just curious, why nobody mension Houdini for this king of work ? with H14 out now and Engine it's pretty domn powerfull !
Going Houdini way is not as easy as jumping from Maya to Max or vice versa. That's not just modeling workflow and command names that changes. You have to sacrifice a lot more virgins to make it work . Despite what many people will tell you (probably those that touched only SOPs), you need to know programming to fully understand and use Houdini. Art and programming not very often comes together.
I know couple Maya guys that eat their teeth on Houdini, despite having no problems with Maya.
Just a curious question, since Blender and MODO have been talked about more recently
How flexible are pipelines now days, now I know this will be different from company to company but is there a general trend for companies to have a more flexible pipeline than they used to?
Robeomega, it's not a bad question at all. It really depends on the studio. Some studios have a very diverse pipeline. Others, not so much (and don't bother asking to use what you like). Usually there is at least one monolithic application used to push assets to engine -usually Maya or Max - and artists on the team are generally expected to know and use that application for final content. Some studios are cool with artists using whatever as long as the final content (the content that is shared across the team, is checked into source control, etc.) is in the official pipeline application (Maya, Max or whatever the studio uses).
You also have to factor in studio culture, software budgets, management knowledge (a lot of producers have no experience or knowledge about the various software packages) age of the studio, what mood the IT department is in that day, etc. So, it's hard to say. At the very minimum, you can almost bank on a studio relying heavily on Max or Maya for general-modeling and for animation with Zbrush as the more dominant sculpting package (followed by Mudbox and maybe some 3DCoat). Photoshop still is king when it comes to textures, but Allegorithmic tools are gaining ground.
Hey guys - just before this disappears into the endless void of older posts I wanted to ask, has anyone been using their own license of Modo at a studio which primarily uses Max/Maya? How is it seen using your own software for work, has this been a problem for you?
Torch, I've noticed a change over the years. Seemed like studios were a lot more open to using personal tools back in the salad days. I didn't have a problem using my own Modo license until about four, maybe five, years ago. I got approval from my lead to use my own Modo license with no questions asked and was a happy camper for a few years. Then one day, the company policy where I was at literally changed overnight and I had to remove my installation, request the company get me a copy of Modo, etc. Big hassle. I got it, but then when it came time for upgrades, had to start the whole request process all over.
A few years later I started some on-site contract work. Asked if I needed anything and when I said it would be great to use Modo, got a resounding "No." When I asked about using some other, less expensive tools and my own Modo license, "Emphatic NO!" Oh well. Maya it was for me, then.
Which leads me to my own personal philosophy: If you plan on being a studio guy or gal, better keep those Maya/Max skills sharp. I was so dependent on Modo that when using it was no longer an option, I was flopping around like a carp on dry land for the first week or so until I revived my Autodesk brain cells.
A)Is modo not typically used in a studio pipeline?
B)Is modo essentially Maya + Zbrush?
A) Really depends on the studio. I don't know of too many studios where Modo would be thought of as the dominant tool. Maybe id Software? Seemed like it was used heavily for Rage, if I recall correctly. Modo is mostly a supplemental tool used by artists who favor its toolset/modeling-UVing paradigm.
Well, Modo is Modo - but the 'Maya + Zbrush' label has a little stickiness. It has a lot in common with Maya and Max *now*, but it started out primarily as a fast and affordable high-quality subdivision surface modeler with its own take on sculpting. Other functionality like animation, particles, etc. came along with new releases over its now decade-ish life. I haven't used the latest two releases, but the sculpting really didn't seem to be on par with Zbrush - although you could do some cool things with the sculpting tools. Sculpting might actually be much improved now...I can't really say since I'm still using Modo 601.
Would Modo be worth exploring even though Zbrush along with Maya/max seem to be more industry standard?
So this is just my opinion and, well, I love Modo - really, truly love it. So I admit right up front I'm biased. It's a great tool - really awesome and forward-thinking in so many ways. So, short answer: Yeah it's totally worth exploring and mastering. But I would get those Maya and Max and Zbrush skills in the zone first, simply because of their dominance in the industry. Honestly, I believe having great Maya and Max skills will open more doors for you. You will be expected to know Maya *and* Max these days for the studio jobs that are out there. If you get your foot in the door somewhere, you might be required to do an art test in Maya or Max with no wiggle room for using another tool (like Modo).
Zbrush, definitely. Get the Zbrush stuff squared-away, too. Zbrush is about to level up to a whole new zone of cool with R7. Your competition will be blowing people away with it, so you'll need to be able to go toe-to-toe with them.
Modo is still an outlier. And it's not perfect either. It is significantly behind Maya in the character animation department, although it continues to improve greatly with each version. Even if it eventually is a better animation tool, it will be hard for it to displace Maya because of the 15+ year head-start Maya has on it (with 15+ years of very specific, awesome scripts developed by brilliant TDs, etc.). Max, too, for that matter - although less so in terms of animation.
I would get Maya/Max/Zbrush squared-away first, then double-down on Modo. Do what a lot of people do: Learn the bread-and-butter stuff, then fold in Modo as your secret weapon.
If you're after a studio position, definitely get the hang of Max or Maya. Most studios will use one of those as their primary tool. There aren't a ton of studios that use MODO as their main 3D app. Mostly because it's animation tools can't quite take on the big guns from Autodesk, and they've also had several years to embed themselves into existing pipelines.
Although places with engines that are more geared towards FBX assets might be more agnostic as to what app is used to create them.
There are s few studios that make use of it more heavily, though; ID, Valve, Massive, etc... even there I think Maya tends to be the main application.
That said, I use MODO every day in a Max-centric pipeline, although it tends to be a one way process (i.e. lots of MODO -> Max, but very little Max -> MODO). Modeling and UVing is just a lot easier, as well as baking out various masks and channels for texturing. Replicators, too.
How flexible are pipelines now days, now I know this will be different from company to company but is there a general trend for companies to have a more flexible pipeline than they used to?
In my current role of Outsource Manager, I've noticed that most outsource vendors are quite flexible regarding tool pipelines. Most are fine with client requests to deliver assets via Max, or Maya, or even Modo. They usually have their favorite tools they use, but it's not a big problem moving the assets over to whatever the client uses at the end of the process.
This makes me think that it wouldn't be super hard for most development studios to have a flexible pipeline. However, it's rather helpful to have most or all assets at the development studio be created in the same software, so that work can be handed off to other team members easily. Also, often it's a fair amount of extra work for the tools department to have to support multiple software packages, so sometimes that results in a studio insisting that everything be exported from a single software package.
Many years ago, it was very common for development studios to only support one software package. I think these days it's more common that studios allow artists to use whatever they prefer. That is certainly not always the case, however. It's mixed.
Pipeline wise, I see no reason restricting modeling to a software. In my studio, the pipeline integration begins at the rigging step where most things will be in Maya. And then again near the end there are fx, and the fx team use billions of software which was really painful to keep them all working on render farm.
How does the actualy industry respond to each program ? is MODO popular at game dev's studios ? If someone comes in with great modo experience does a company usually have max / modo or something ?
How does the actualy industry respond to each program ? is MODO popular at game dev's studios ? If someone comes in with great modo experience does a company usually have max / modo or something ?
Its growing in use... I think its highly dependent on the studio whether or not they will have or allow Modo in house.
At the top of my head... Gearbox, Id Soft, Valve... have/use some Modo. Would be interesting to see a larger list of places.
I think alot of studios will keep max/maya as their primary production software for some more time, but more and more studios let their artists use their tools of choice since it's getting increasingly easier to exchange files. For example, while years ago your game engine might only have offered an export plugin for max, nowadays all engines accept a regular fbx file.
I really want to try it, but even if I do learn it and love it I'm worried that I wont be able to apply it at a studio i get a job at so that knowledge goes to waste
I really want to try it, but even if I do learn it and love it I'm worried that I wont be able to apply it at a studio i get a job at so that knowledge goes to waste
Understandable, but as long as you know how to use maya or max on the side, you should be safe. Plus, the only way to get modo to spread is if more artist start using it.
Understandable, but as long as you know how to use maya or max on the side, you should be safe. Plus, the only way to get modo to spread is if more artist start using it.
Not likely. A massive crap ton of people use Blender, but that doesn't see use in large studios.
Pretty sure the reasons why Autodesk tools dominate the industry are fairly distinct from proliferation or even the effectiveness of the tools.
Not likely. A massive crap ton of people use Blender, but that doesn't see use in large studios.
Not really equatable due to various factors associated with Blender, including but not limited to its licensing model and the lack of proper product support.
There is a certain truth to successful commercial software... and thats that it has to be used. If someone wants to use Modo but doesnt know if it will be used in a studio, and holds off because of that worry, then Modo will never take off. The more people use it, bring it with them into studios, have it showing up on resumes, pumping out content, the more it starts to generate appeal in adoption or allowance of usage.
Thankfully artist are adopting it, even if its for their own personal work at home...and its slowly having an impact across the board.
The Foundry sends people out to game studios to try and sell them on the idea of Modo and Mari; I always got the feeling (based on complaints) that the Blender Foundation cares more about film than games.
There is no anti open source conspiracy, the studios I've been at have used plenty of open source software.
I really want to try it, but even if I do learn it and love it I'm worried that I wont be able to apply it at a studio i get a job at so that knowledge goes to waste
Even if your animation team use Maya, it's no problem at all how you start your model. Just have to make sure at the end that the model import fine into Maya.
My studio used to try evaluate Blender as our animation software but the idea was dropped due to lack of experts and lack of referencing at that time. Another big problem is that we couldn't find and out source Blender rigger, like, at all.
Replies
Anyway, First post here, let say it, i really don't get all these sheeps flowing along Autodesk, Maya or Max just because it's standard... Are we artist or not ? are we forced to use the AB pencil just because it sells more, can we just jump off the ship ?? Go Go Blender, Go Go Modo, Go Go Houdini, Go Go Softimage (Oups thanks you Autodesk) ;-) !
I'll learn Modo if I have time to do it, it seems interesting. A few artists use it at our studio, it doesn't integrate 100% into our pipeline though, requiring the need for Max.
Going Houdini way is not as easy as jumping from Maya to Max or vice versa. That's not just modeling workflow and command names that changes. You have to sacrifice a lot more virgins to make it work
I know couple Maya guys that eat their teeth on Houdini, despite having no problems with Maya.
How flexible are pipelines now days, now I know this will be different from company to company but is there a general trend for companies to have a more flexible pipeline than they used to?
Sorry if this is a bad question.
You also have to factor in studio culture, software budgets, management knowledge (a lot of producers have no experience or knowledge about the various software packages) age of the studio, what mood the IT department is in that day, etc. So, it's hard to say. At the very minimum, you can almost bank on a studio relying heavily on Max or Maya for general-modeling and for animation with Zbrush as the more dominant sculpting package (followed by Mudbox and maybe some 3DCoat). Photoshop still is king when it comes to textures, but Allegorithmic tools are gaining ground.
Torch, I've noticed a change over the years. Seemed like studios were a lot more open to using personal tools back in the salad days. I didn't have a problem using my own Modo license until about four, maybe five, years ago. I got approval from my lead to use my own Modo license with no questions asked and was a happy camper for a few years. Then one day, the company policy where I was at literally changed overnight and I had to remove my installation, request the company get me a copy of Modo, etc. Big hassle. I got it, but then when it came time for upgrades, had to start the whole request process all over.
A few years later I started some on-site contract work. Asked if I needed anything and when I said it would be great to use Modo, got a resounding "No." When I asked about using some other, less expensive tools and my own Modo license, "Emphatic NO!" Oh well. Maya it was for me, then.
Which leads me to my own personal philosophy: If you plan on being a studio guy or gal, better keep those Maya/Max skills sharp. I was so dependent on Modo that when using it was no longer an option, I was flopping around like a carp on dry land for the first week or so until I revived my Autodesk brain cells.
So there's my small anecdote for you.
B)Is modo essentially Maya + Zbrush?
A) Really depends on the studio. I don't know of too many studios where Modo would be thought of as the dominant tool. Maybe id Software? Seemed like it was used heavily for Rage, if I recall correctly. Modo is mostly a supplemental tool used by artists who favor its toolset/modeling-UVing paradigm.
So this is just my opinion and, well, I love Modo - really, truly love it. So I admit right up front I'm biased. It's a great tool - really awesome and forward-thinking in so many ways. So, short answer: Yeah it's totally worth exploring and mastering. But I would get those Maya and Max and Zbrush skills in the zone first, simply because of their dominance in the industry. Honestly, I believe having great Maya and Max skills will open more doors for you. You will be expected to know Maya *and* Max these days for the studio jobs that are out there. If you get your foot in the door somewhere, you might be required to do an art test in Maya or Max with no wiggle room for using another tool (like Modo).
Zbrush, definitely. Get the Zbrush stuff squared-away, too. Zbrush is about to level up to a whole new zone of cool with R7. Your competition will be blowing people away with it, so you'll need to be able to go toe-to-toe with them.
Modo is still an outlier. And it's not perfect either. It is significantly behind Maya in the character animation department, although it continues to improve greatly with each version. Even if it eventually is a better animation tool, it will be hard for it to displace Maya because of the 15+ year head-start Maya has on it (with 15+ years of very specific, awesome scripts developed by brilliant TDs, etc.). Max, too, for that matter - although less so in terms of animation.
I would get Maya/Max/Zbrush squared-away first, then double-down on Modo. Do what a lot of people do: Learn the bread-and-butter stuff, then fold in Modo as your secret weapon.
If you're after a studio position, definitely get the hang of Max or Maya. Most studios will use one of those as their primary tool. There aren't a ton of studios that use MODO as their main 3D app. Mostly because it's animation tools can't quite take on the big guns from Autodesk, and they've also had several years to embed themselves into existing pipelines.
Although places with engines that are more geared towards FBX assets might be more agnostic as to what app is used to create them.
There are s few studios that make use of it more heavily, though; ID, Valve, Massive, etc... even there I think Maya tends to be the main application.
That said, I use MODO every day in a Max-centric pipeline, although it tends to be a one way process (i.e. lots of MODO -> Max, but very little Max -> MODO). Modeling and UVing is just a lot easier, as well as baking out various masks and channels for texturing. Replicators, too.
In my current role of Outsource Manager, I've noticed that most outsource vendors are quite flexible regarding tool pipelines. Most are fine with client requests to deliver assets via Max, or Maya, or even Modo. They usually have their favorite tools they use, but it's not a big problem moving the assets over to whatever the client uses at the end of the process.
This makes me think that it wouldn't be super hard for most development studios to have a flexible pipeline. However, it's rather helpful to have most or all assets at the development studio be created in the same software, so that work can be handed off to other team members easily. Also, often it's a fair amount of extra work for the tools department to have to support multiple software packages, so sometimes that results in a studio insisting that everything be exported from a single software package.
Many years ago, it was very common for development studios to only support one software package. I think these days it's more common that studios allow artists to use whatever they prefer. That is certainly not always the case, however. It's mixed.
Pipeline wise, I see no reason restricting modeling to a software. In my studio, the pipeline integration begins at the rigging step where most things will be in Maya. And then again near the end there are fx, and the fx team use billions of software which was really painful to keep them all working on render farm.
But if you have time, you can try them all and pick the best one you like.
Its growing in use... I think its highly dependent on the studio whether or not they will have or allow Modo in house.
At the top of my head... Gearbox, Id Soft, Valve... have/use some Modo. Would be interesting to see a larger list of places.
Understandable, but as long as you know how to use maya or max on the side, you should be safe. Plus, the only way to get modo to spread is if more artist start using it.
Pretty sure the reasons why Autodesk tools dominate the industry are fairly distinct from proliferation or even the effectiveness of the tools.
Not really equatable due to various factors associated with Blender, including but not limited to its licensing model and the lack of proper product support.
There is a certain truth to successful commercial software... and thats that it has to be used. If someone wants to use Modo but doesnt know if it will be used in a studio, and holds off because of that worry, then Modo will never take off. The more people use it, bring it with them into studios, have it showing up on resumes, pumping out content, the more it starts to generate appeal in adoption or allowance of usage.
Thankfully artist are adopting it, even if its for their own personal work at home...and its slowly having an impact across the board.
There is no anti open source conspiracy, the studios I've been at have used plenty of open source software.
Even if your animation team use Maya, it's no problem at all how you start your model. Just have to make sure at the end that the model import fine into Maya.
My studio used to try evaluate Blender as our animation software but the idea was dropped due to lack of experts and lack of referencing at that time. Another big problem is that we couldn't find and out source Blender rigger, like, at all.