6+ years of max here, started using blender a year and a half ago, never looked back and haven't used max for anything serious since. There are some things that Maya and Max do better than Blender even in the 2.75 release, but the list is growing very short indeed
Been trying really really hard to to prepare for my educational license of Maya runrunning out, but rotating on an axis in Maya mode is basically impossible
Have you tried one of the many Maya-style navigation configurations? It's more useful than the Maya preset which tries to replace too many hotkeys but not as foreign as Blender's default navigation.
Turns out i was wrong about what my problem is,i have it on the blender preset as well. It's that you can't click on the rotate circle thing when trying to rotate on an axis unless your doing it from a certain side. Else itll just try to select, and it's infuriating
I highly recommend using the axis hotkeys instead. Blender's manipulators can be pretty fiddly so most people just turn them off and press x y and z to constrain to axis.
Re earlier question, do you really turn them off? Once turned off there's no visual representation of the pivot point. Seems worth leaving them on for that.
Re earlier question, do you really turn them off? Once turned off there's no visual representation of the pivot point. Seems worth leaving them on for that.
I never turn them off but i almost never use them for rotation. When i rotate things most of the time i press r. Or r 90. Or r 180. Restricting it to an axis is also quick with blenders method so once you get used to using keys for manipulating objects it becomes much faster than every other program I have worked with.
Yeah agreed, when I work in a program that forces me to use them like unity it gives me headaches if I have to do it for too long, people keep saying turn them off in blender but seems a bit too extreme, just wondering if I'm missing something.
Re earlier question, do you really turn them off? Once turned off there's no visual representation of the pivot point. Seems worth leaving them on for that.
I've worked with the program long enough that I know what the pivots will do in my soul. If I'm using a custom orientation of some sort I will of course turn the manipulator back on as I've only used them a couple of times.
It's not like it's hard to toggle it on and off. (Ctrl Space) But I leave them off most of the time.
I don't think this question should've been asked in the original blender thread.
It's a specific question, looking for specific responses. And there has been a lot of discussion generated from a separate thread that would not have been had in the blender thread (note the wider variety of users).
Also, for Alt + S, is not extrude along individual normals, it's scale along individual normals - which will only work after you've extruded / inset a face.
Alt-E opens the extrude menu, and extrude face individually is the same as inset and then scale on individual normals (just in one operation)
So the users saying use Alt-S are not wrong, their method is for after the user has extruded.
Also, there are a lot of methods discussed for blender coming from specific apps, and there is space for people to ask question of how do they do x in blender, that maya/max did.
It's interesting to see the modo hate in here, much less why Chimp gave it away but hes always been a polarizing figure on the modo forums. Guess I shouldnt be surprised. I'm pretty much in agreement with Warren M. on the state of 901 at launch. With both 701 and 801 I rarely had a crash if at all, so 901 came as a surprise to me in terms of its instability.
I get it though, we are not stupid but neither are they. The company was for sale and they were making a lot of extreme changes, including moving over to Qt and adding new advanced viewport. Being bound to an annual release cycle, lots of big changes and having your company up for sale... they tried to play their best hand that was in their interest. While not always good for the consumer, at least I can understand it and in their shoes probably be tempted to do the same thing. So far with SP1, which came out 2 months later... no crashes. Great performance.
My transition has been from Maya to Blender to Modo. I still have Blender installed and participate in their forums, but my daily driver is Modo and there are a lot of good reasons for it. There are also a lot of good reasons why Blender isnt right at the moment... and it doesnt have to do with what blender is capable of but more of what its not capable of and who is leading the development direction.
Blender has some serious perks, but the fact remains the Blender Foundation is simply more interested in experimental pixaresq film making than games, they dont really seem to show much interest or even feel included in the large CG landscape... so you end up getting a kind of bubble thats separated from everyone else. Theres no real transparency on where the funding goes either and they have continuously shown that they can make proposals, get people hyped, say what they will do and then never do it. Usually the first generates a lot of donations the second makes people jaded. I just cant trust the BF/BI, and thats the hardest part in all of this. They flip flop more than a fish out of water, personal interest trump professional interest.
For months they said they would work on the UI, a new keymap, even colored wireframes and every time theres an excuse that theres either no time, or they got put on another project, or that Ton doesnt like it for some arbitrary reason. Its not a very user centric process. You can see the latest blog post from Ton regarding the move to a more annual release cycle because they cant keep on top of their claims.
On top of that, what Blender cannot do is get around their licensing model. It has pros, but also cons. The cons make it so it can never really have substance support or that the upcoming fabric engine 2 (which I believe is going to be a pretty big game changer long term) will not see blender as an option.
Modo, as a commercial product offers a type of stability that you dont find in blender, that is development stability and management stability. To me that is far more important than the potential for the software to crash on rare occasions. So with Modo you do get the 3rd party perks, the fabric engines, the sustances, the sheer fact they have to keep their customers happy and the incentive that goes along with it. You have the fact that big studios and publishers like EA and Bethesda/Zenimax will be calling Modo/Foundry employees over to showcase the product or give feedback in return... that will never happen with Blender (at least at this rate). Modo offers a clear and straightforward workflow and pipeline... model, uv, retopo, bake...ect its streamlined, powerful...and extremely clear in that razer sharp focus.
So with all that said, Blender is a great piece of software. I am glad it exist and I will gladly keep supporting it but at the same time a heavy dose of reality needs to kick in and the pros of it being GPL and free for users to use also comes with some severe cons. Knowing the cons, their management issues everything... needs to weigh against the benefits. If a user can over come those cons and feel fine, then all the more power to them.
Its up to the user to find out whats more valuable to them and their art...and at least with Blender's high accessibility, its not like you really ever lose it. It can always be present on any workstation you use, regardless if you actually rely on it or not.
So yeah, the post above is exactly why I no longer even comment on Modo. I wouldn't want to be a polarizing figure, geez. And Dataday, I'm not initiating a conversation with you, so please continue sharing your opinions, but leave me out of it.
Yes, I moved from a Maya-centric workflow to one using Blender as I was no longer employed by a company willing to pony up their license fees (not that I blamed them). For the most part, I am a software developer that dabbles (sometimes successfully, sometimes not) in the over-crowded "indie bottom-feeder" niche. It doesn't pay the bills (boring mobile app development does that), but it does break even overall.
For what it's worth, my opinions bear close resemblance to DataDay's. Blender is both more stable (in general) than other software I've used (Maya, Modo, & 3DSMax) but also does less than they do in a number of areas. Modelling is reasonable now, sculpting is pretty good for not being zBrush, and Cycles is improving every day... but animation is a pain, the learning curve is incredibly steep, and one needs to accept it is a tool/toy for the Blender Foundation/Institute first & foremost (i.e. they're use-cases & preference control development - not that of the average user).
The Blender Foundation/Institute is very focused on their internal "open movies" gig. The chairman of the organisation likes making movies and Blender initially started as internal software for an animation studio he co-founded some twenty-five years ago. As such, a great deal of the paid-for development focus goes into what is needed for the next film he is working on. Which does result in some great improvements over time, but if you're looking for a focus outside Pixar-esque animations, you're fighting an uphill battle.
The Blender Foundation/Institute issue is actually pretty sad because I honestly see a lot of potential in the application on top of where it is already very good. Take the coloured wireframes example DataDay mentioned. That is functionality that has been implemented multiple times, the last time by a guy I would consider the best (or equal-best) developer the Blender Foundation has on their payroll... but it got vetoed because the Blender Foundation chairman doesn't like that it doesn't meet his (more complicated) idea he had ten years ago. Instead there are now two guys working on a much more complex replacement and they still won't commit to it having the simple functionality of a user being able to specify a given colour for a given mesh. This issue extends from things as simple as hotkeys all the way up to financial transparency in regards to donations (e.g. donations through Steam funding movies rather than game content tools).
Whilst not as influential to the world in general, amongst those donating to support the Blender Foundation/Institute, Ton Roosendaal (the chairman of all things Blender) is kind of like Steve Jobs. You're either in the cult or you're not. Inside the "reality distortion field", things like right-click to select, left-click to place a universal pivot point, and spreading the simple translate/scale/rotate hotkeys across the keyboard ("we don't need no steenkin' home row!") all make perfect sense. Anyone not inside the bubble pointing out some of the absurdities gets shunned quite strongly. The community basically exploded a couple of years back when a lot of the usually silent folks rallied around a well-known Blender tutor pointing out the follies of some UI decisions. It was not pretty.
All of that to one side though, if you are working from home &/or independently - Blender is good software & worthwhile including in your toolbox (especially if strapped for cash!). Where it is good, it is pretty solid and (more importantly) quite stable. Where it is bad... you need to look elsewhere for a solution and cannot just wait for them to get around to it. If you are making & moving static models around, this isn't a big deal. Model in Blender, export to OBJ, handle however you like in other software. If you are trying to move rigs &/or animations around - you're in a bind and I'd recommend looking elsewhere (even for things as simple as exporting FBX to UE4).
That's always been the impression I've gotten of Blender's community, but I was never really invested enough to look into it. After Pior's suggestions, I've found that I quite prefer it to Maya, for the most part.
It'd be nice if the software could be forked without all the copyleft BS coming along for the ride. Blender's a solid platform, but if its dev community's really that insular, I think new stewardship may be in order if it's to actually be a viable major player in the games industry over the long term.
@Blond sorry for asking here Blond. It's just that whenever I had question, this thread seems to pop up to the front page I'll bookmark the other thread.
It'd be nice if the software could be forked without all the copyleft BS coming along for the ride. Blender's a solid platform, but if its dev community's really that insular, I think new stewardship may be in order if it's to actually be a viable major player in the games industry over the long term.
Realistically speaking - that's never going to happen. The development community for Blender is quite small, tend to reside within the "reality distortion field" of Blender's BDFL*, and the vast majority are strong proponents of the copyleft license (to the point where they've stated they're not interested in legal methods of allowing non-copyleft plugins).
Forks need a reasonable base of developers to last longer than a few weeks, need money to push development beyond basic changes, and the current leadership have no intentions whatsoever of stepping aside to give new blood a run at it. Like it or lump it, the Blender Foundation & Blender Institute (with their common board plus chairman) are going to be controlling Blender development for the foreseeable future. This is not to stir up trouble or angst about said control, just being realistic about it.
This idea that the blender developers are insular and that bugs take a very long time to be fixed is ignorant. I have reported multiple bugs and gotten responses quickly everytime, one of my friends who codes addons for blender has gotten coding bugs fixed within hours of telling the devs about it. They are constantly lurking on the blender irc. People think that they don't listen to ideas because a lot of the ideas that are brought to them are irrational. The best example of that is when blenderguru came out with an entire freakin redesign of the UI and all his followers rode his bandwagon. None of them took into consideration how long it would take for them to code an entire redesign and it made the blender devs look like they don't care about peoples opinions. In reality they are constantly working to distribute their efforts into actually making the tools run more efficiently instead of looking pretty.
@polygons:
With all due respect, no-one seems to be saying that bugs take a very long time to fix. They are, however, pointing out that deliberate design decisions take a long time (& generally a large amount of community outrage) to change. Right-click select is backward when taken in context of pretty much every other graphics app in existence. That is still the default, and it is not because people haven't tried to change it - it's just the leadership's preference.
As for the "ignorance" about the idea Blender developers "insular", we'll have to agree to disagree. My opinion on the matter comes from discussing issues with them, developing patches with/for them, and watching how developers that do not fall into line are ignored, shunned, and sometimes even mocked for their difference of opinion.
It is improving but a simple review of how often changes Ton doesn't like get committed into trunk (i.e. the distribution version of the code) is demonstrative of how accepting the developer leadership is of outside ideas.
People think that they don't listen to ideas because a lot of the ideas that are brought to them are irrational.
No. People know that regardless of whether or not ideas are listened to (& even acted upon / implemented), they must make it past the "Ton Veto" before they have any chance of being merged into Blender. If he doesn't like something, regardless of how much the community does, it doesn't go in there. Not really a discussion for this thread though.
The best example of that is when blenderguru came out with an entire freakin redesign of the UI and all his followers rode his bandwagon.
His redesign was fatally flawed and most people acknowledged that upfront. The reasons for his redesign, however, were widely supported. Especially by those using the software for more than the occasional hobbyist playground.
More importantly, due to Andrew Price's stand (& the support it received), some of these issues are going to be addressed. Left-click select is going to become the default. The default keyboard shortcuts are going to be designed around the concept of a home-row. And so on. Features that are the cornerstone of most (successful) 3D applications but have been stymied in Blender for over a decade.
These changes are to be applauded but one cannot ignore the fact the required a months long @#$%-fight in the community to get even grudging acceptance from the powers that be.
I thought I saw someone complain about them not fixing bugs but that might have been in another thread. anyway, I agree with you that some of blenders default settings should be changed but I seem to disagree with how important that is because in my perspective it is trivial. I realize your underlying message with that point was that the devs are stubborn but as you've stated we disagree about that.
As I mentioned before I think that their time is better distributed creating new tools and making the tools they already have work better. Based on their actions. It seems they do as well. You seem to have very different opinions on the subject than I do so there is not much else to say.
So yeah, the post above is exactly why I no longer even comment on Modo. I wouldn't want to be a polarizing figure, geez. And Dataday, I'm not initiating a conversation with you, so please continue sharing your opinions, but leave me out of it.
If you want to be left out of it, I'm a bit curious as to why you felt the need to respond with that.
Regardless, I say polarizing because its a matter of fact you are. You say things that absolutely contradict your wants or complaints... for example here.. "I'm not initiating a conversation with you" yet you are "initiating a conversation" with your response. Or when you told the Modo developers to just ignore the game development sector, even though your primary complaints were for more game dev. It takes a really odd bird to say two conflicting things all the time. I just simply dont understand you, no hard feelings about it.
I got it, you gave away your license and made another user very happy. Nothing wrong with that, just a question of the logic used in doing so based on your commentary. It becomes a polarizing act.
My hope is now that you have moved over to Blender, that you will give them more constructive feedback than that found on the modo forums and hopefully are willing to put money toward the development of your newly chosen tool. In other words, I hope it becomes a positive rather than the negative I am used to seeing on the modo forums.
Its a good thing to see more people adopt Blender if they feel dissatisfied with the alternatives, but I also hope it turns into something to help the blender development rather than result in the same "im mad, stop making game dev stuff because you dont do it good enough" kind of response. Thats my only (personal) concern.
Cheers.
PS if you want to have a serious discussion about it, from a modo to former modo user standpoint, send me a PM. I don't bite.
DataDay, I don't wish to discuss anything with you, I think I was clear about that. You are entitled to your opinions, and feel free to carry on about Modo and blender, but leave me out of it. That's a fair request.
DataDay, I don't wish to discuss anything with you, I think I was clear about that. You are entitled to your opinions, and feel free to carry on about Modo and blender, but leave me out of it. That's a fair request.
Thats fine, I will actively ignore you from now on, but please dont forget the "point" of a forum. If you actively participate in it and say "hey thats me" (calling attention to yourself) and thus commentary about your actions, it leaves room for people to discuss such actions. You cant logically participate on such a level and yet get bent out of shape when people respond on the same level you chose (emphasis on chose) to participate in via public forum. Its not necessarily "fair" to offer input or response and yet not allow any in return. Again, why I dont understand you... so much contradiction.
I however will honor your wish and just outright ignore you. If it bothers you past this point, again send me a PM. Pretty easy. I'm pretty civil.
From what I've seen, there's seem to be 2 major direction of thinking in the Blender community.
There are those what started 3D with it, are used and comfortable with the UI, the control scheme, are in love with the software, they constantly praise Ton and applaud every new release of the software.
Then there are those who used other softwares and apps before Blender and now that they're switching to it, they wanna change the whole concept of the software because ''It's the not the way I used to do it with the other apps''..
I don't like neither of them.
The first are blind fan boys who only swear on Blender (and some of them really think, it's the best software ever on the market, capable of anything (thing doesn't even have muscle simulation yet!!)) They're so attached to their free open source software they won't let anyone criticize it or try to change things..
Basically fan boys...
The seconds are annoying because they look like lazy people which don't wanna take the time to learn the software properly, try to understand the logic, the concept and design behind it. They constantly pester against the UI (which is one of best user friendly UI out there if you customize it enough , I'll post a screen later on of mine), they also are always criticizing the control scheme, when in my opinion, think it's perfectly fine and intuitive. Just because they're so used to their ancient software they don't wanna change their mindset to use a new one.
As a generalist who've used MAYA, XSI, I've taken the time to appreciate it for what is.
It's not an AAA software (as of now) and it's probably not ready to be properly established into big budget hollywood movie pipeline that's for sure (unless some programmers heavily tweak it) but for personal or indie projects, it's the way to go.
For example, Autodesk will try to do with MAYA LT or the indie community, Blender will always do it better.
I've seen alot of people on the Blender forums, who ONLY use Blender and that's really not good. You should always at least try to have a big pipeline ready software in your set of skills (MAYA. MAX, MODO).:)
But, I also think professional 3D artists should also learn Blender, so they have this ''side-tool'' personal open-source app that is not dependent on Buisness and corportaion managements (nobody wants to see another XSI story again).
In the end, most of you guys are modelers, and simple meshes and 3D models are flexible and easy to transfer from one apps to another, you really shouldn't feel limited in using Blender, especially since EVERYTHING Maya can do in the modeling field, BLender does it ( I know because i've checked every one fot them.
I'm talking about modeling as as in strict quad mesh editing here, not nurbs or vertex normal tweaking (but all of these are always found throughout users add-ons or later upgrades).
However, complications comes generally with other software centric-tools like Animation or Rigging.
I'm rigging a character right now inside of Blender and even though I've done some wonders, some simple stuff gives me headache, it's really rough if your knowledge of Python is limited).
I haven't done animation yet but I fear it, I haven't heard alot of good things about it. Plus,I've seen lots of great pictures and static images of Blender, which means, modeling, texturing and rendering is great, but I've seen seldom good animations with it (even the Sintel movie was atrocious to see in terms of good animation).
Go on the Blender Forums, you'll see lots of amazing renders..But when it comes to Animated characters? Eeh...
''This is a proposal for work focus on blender.org for the coming year.
I’ve written this because we keep missing bigger development targets – we don’t have enough time for larger projects. Instead too much time goes to releases, bug fixing, reviews, maintenance and support topics. The bug and patch tracker duties are keeping the best of our developers away from their own targets. As a result we then don’t have time for design docs, for planning, logs and in-depth sessions with the module teams, and have no time for the artists who are involved to make sure we’re well aligned and know what to do. I think everyone has noticed that we’re floating too much, things are not clear. Where are we heading? Who does what, and how do we decide on things?
So – it’s time to act and gather the troops to refocus and get back energy, to maximize involvement from everyone who’s active in blender.org and make sure Blender can survive for many more years. —– Blender 2.8 – Workflow release —–
Just like for 2.5, the proposal would be to take a bigger leap to a bigger release by not releasing for a year. The 2.76 release then would be the last ‘real’ version we do until 2.80 somewhere in 2016.
Obviously, for the crucial fixes and smaller (stable) features we can do update releases 2.77, 2.78 and 2.79.
Topics to finish for 2.8 could be:
UI work: wrap up Python configurability project, make Workflow based configuring possible
Proof of concept: the stripped “Blender 101″ for high school kids.
Viewport project, including a PBR quality engine/editor that could replace BI and GE render.
A better designed integration of physics simulation in Blender
Invite the GE team to rethink game logic editing, to use viewport and new physics
Don’t add the half finished Gooseberry targets but take the time needed to code it well:
Particle nodes, hair nodes, simulation nodes, modifier nodes…
Asset managing and browsing, linking, references, external files in general.
Integration in non Blender pipelines.
Practical considerations:
Move development to special 2.8 branch(es)
Module teams are empowered to cleanup quite radically and get rid of legacy code.
The 2.8 series is allowed to be not 100% compatible with 2.7x. (Physics, particles, games).
Spend time on organizing ourselves better, agreed designs should lead to more empowerment.
And some core principles to agree on:
We reconfirm and where needed update the 2.5 spec docs.
Stick to existing Blender data structures and code design for as much as possible.
Make Blender ready to survive until 2020, but…
… start collecting the list of bigger redesign issues we need to for a 3.0 project
Bring back the fun in Blender coding!
The code.blender.org article for the roadmap of 2014-2015 is still valid in my opinion. We just need to take a break of 9-12 months now, to make it work for real. Blender 2.8 Workflow Sprint
In the coming months we can discuss and review the plans and make sure we’re 100% aligned on the 2.8 targets and for other work during the coming years. We should also meet and have good feedback sessions on it. So I propose to use the Blender Conference in October as a deadline, and organize a workshop in the week before.
Four days of workshops and design sessions, in the week before Blender Conference.
Travel and hotel covered for by BF (and Dev Fund, or a new fund raiser?)
We should try to get someone from every (active, involved) module team on board. Also key user/contributors have to be on board. But it’s also more efficient to keep it compact.
Proposal: we do this invitation-only: First we invite the 5 most active contributors of past years. Together they then invite persons more, until we have 12 (?) people.
Sprint sessions can be in parallel too – UI, Viewport, Physics, etc. Let’s make it public as good as possible.
The Sprint results get presented and reviewed during further on sessions during the Blender Conference.
Seven years ago, back in 2008, we also took a break for more than a year, to get the 2.5 project started up. It was a very exciting period where a lot of new things were possible and could happen, even though we didn’t finish everything… it gave us quite a solid foundation to build on, attracting a lot of new developers and great features.
I realize we have to be realistic now, not everything will be possible. But we also shouldn’t stop dreaming up a good future for Blender. Let’s take a break from our demanding release cycle, rethink it all, but not for too long. Let’s cherish what we agree on and enjoy the freedom of a configurable workflow that will enable you to do what you think is best… for making 3d art, games, film and animation!
-Ton- ''
Taken from the Blender official forums. to those who say the guy is close minded.
I don't agree. I feel he just doesn't wanna do what all the other big guys do. I have no problem with that as long as it's working efficient.
I have never tried out blender, so I don't have an opinion about it. Before MODO I had been using 3ds max for over 14 years, along with a slew of other programs in the mix like many of you.
I'm not here to start a war between software choices or add fuel to the fire. I honestly wish we could have productive conversations where we celebrate how these tools have helped us to achieve the visions we all have as artists and designers.
We have special relationships with the software we use on a daily basis, either for personal reasons, technical features or just because we like the way they get us from point a to b.
Making the move from max to MODO has been an eye opening experience and not simply because I started with Luxology and now work at The Foundry. I should give blender a fair spin sometime. Max will always hold a special place in my heart, but MODO is an amazing evolution in the asset creation process in my opinion.
I still have a ways to go in order to be at the level of proficiency with MODO to get where I was with max, but I know that with hard work, determination and guidance/support from others that I will get there. My life has been going through a lot of changes since moving out to the bay area and I'm finally coming back to the seed that made me passionate about computer graphics in the first place, which is a medium for me to tell stories to anyone who wishes to experience them.
feel he just doesn't wanna do what all the other big guys do. I have no problem with that as long as it's working efficient.
I have no problems with that either as long as it's working efficiently.
That's the problem though. When Ton's ideas or preferences clash with a more efficient means of accomplishing a task or come through a feature he doesn't like - efficiency loses out and there isn't much one can do about it.
I can go into examples if you like (though I'd prefer another thread or even forum for that), but I feel there is a characterisation in this thread that those who disagree with Ton's decisions are doing so for petty reasons. That's not so.
It is possible for a man (& a team) to do great things whilst also being close-minded about others. Ton (& the Blender development team) have put together some great software. It'd just be good if the leadership understood that being different for difference's sake is counter-productive.
I'd be curious to find out about those who also did the reverse, which is move at one point from Blender to commercial applications. This subject was mentioned briefly by Andrew Price at one point, with the suggestion that whats not talked about are the people who leave blender as opposed to move over to it.
The setup that nervouschimp mentions in post #46 is my setup.
I have been mostly on Max+VRay and Maya+VRay pipelines. But never modeled in either of those 2, I had used Silo for a looong time.
Had tried out Blender numerous times throughout the years, but it was just way too awkward. Anyway, some 3 yrs ago I started customizing it to try and replicate the Silo click efficiency. I'm happy where I got it, in the last year I had never had the need/wish to go for Silo.
It's probably been 2 years that I ask to have Blender on my box at any studio I go. That is my go to tool for content creation. It's become a real Swiss Army Knife tool for me.
The thing is, Blender out of the box is very (VERY) awkward. Personally I would never use it. And as mentioned the leadership behind Blender do exhibit some very close minded approach to development. The mistakes they made/make are so outrageous that they stick out mad. To be fair, they have done SO MANY things right as well (they did manage to create a platform that became my preferred tool).
So yeah, it'd be super-great if the Blender leadership were not locked in their bubble, and were more open for feedback. But hey it'd be great if Silo's development were not cut short, or rocket3d-Clay, XSI, if Wings3D had better development, if Max and Maya had any love in the modeling/workflow department, or if Modo wasn't a click fest. It'd be cool
I see a lot of the Blender potential actually in the community, there are so many Addons that fix/enhance the craziness that is Blender. The problem is one needs quite an in-depth knowledge of Blender, it's Input Editor, and community Addons in order to be able to customize it. And that is way more than one could ask from a general user.
For anyone who tried Blender and thought it's crazy, or those coming from other appz willing to give it a go, why not try my setup that nervouschimp mentioned. I'm pretty sure it will make you feel at home instantly.
I'd be curious to find out about those who also did the reverse, which is move at one point from Blender to commercial applications. This subject was mentioned briefly by Andrew Price at one point, with the suggestion that whats not talked about are the people who leave blender as opposed to move over to it.
I think there's plenty of people that do that. A lot of people try Blender because of the fact that it's free and then I think when they are financially doing better or hit a frustrating point with Blender they decide it's time to invest in a commercial package. Whether that's right or not is up for debate.
My frustration with Blender is that because it's open-source there is a real expectation for users to fix and create features. I got tired of asking about how to do something with Blender to get told, "oh, Bob wrote a plugin that takes care of that- here's a link". Then, I go to the link and find out that Bob had his code broken and doesn't have any interest in updating it anymore and it quit working 4 months ago. That's not the kind of thing you can deal with in a typical production setting and it's frustrating even if you're just using it as a hobbyist or student.
edit: I also have often wondered if we'll ever see someone fork the Blender code and create another version that takes a different approach to the UI etc.
Hi flat-D thank you for your thread. I've been referred numerous time to your customization.
A bit question. I heard Silo recently released an update. Have you checked it out? Do you think it's back to be a usable modeling tool with that update?
Hi flat-D thank you for your thread. I've been referred numerous time to your customization.
A bit question. I heard Silo recently released an update. Have you checked it out? Do you think it's back to be a usable modeling tool with that update?
I'm not him (obviously) but Silo was updated and supposedly another update is coming this summer sometime. And there is some sort of roadmap for further development.
Hi flat-D thank you for your thread. I've been referred numerous time to your customization.
A bit question. I heard Silo recently released an update. Have you checked it out? Do you think it's back to be a usable modeling tool with that update?
Yeah, I've tried it. It wasn't much of an update really, just ported it to 64bit. But it also got some new bugs, I had reported them but never got a response from NC, and they never fixed them. Went back to Silo 2.2b (32bit) from 4-6 years ago, that one is more stable.
I can't see what NC could do, even if they had interest to develop Silo further, to spark any real interest from my end. Blender is so far ahead. I'll point a couple of things here as comparison.
- Pie Menus
- Superior Sculpting
Actually there is 3 Sculpting Modes:
- MutliRes Sculpting (Like ZBrush and Mudbox ... and Silo)
- Dyntopo (Like Sculptris and 3DCoat LiveClay)
- Sculpting on a Poly Mesh. This has a super handy workflow that you can't get in any other app as far as I know. You can drop a Subdivision Surface Modifier on a Mesh - so you can see in realtime how it looks subdivided. But when you sculpt on it - you affect only the base mesh! This is a very useful feature when poly-modeling.
- You have blendShapes/MorphTargets (in Blender called ShapeKeys)
- Pretty solid Modifier Stack
- Vertex Groups
- Superior Vieport Object Display Modes (good variety of them). This is especially pronounced when doing re-topo
- Some of the best retopo tools out there
- Superior Snapping, coupled with the ShrinkWrap Modifier
- Layers
- Built-in Viewport Reference Planes
- FBX Export
- Preserves Object Pivot Point, Location, Rotation and Scale (Compared to Silo that loses Orientation info as soon as you execute a rotation of an object)
- Blender > Max . Instances get carried over
- Cycles
That's just to name a very few, where the focus was on content creation. And frankly, even the poly tools are better.
So the only thing that Silo excels over Blender is the Learning Curve (way flatter/better), and ease of customization. And, ofcourse, the Defaults (state of the app when first installed).
And Silo is Zen, in terms of app design, much like Sculptris, but that does not hold much merit any more.
I would still recommend Silo over Blender to someone just learning to model. Or Sculptris over Blender for sculpting.
Although I feel Blender is stronger in both those areas over those 2 Appz, it's just that the learning curve is way steeper, and is not good for beginners.
There are tons of programs professionals are already using to compensate the flaws of their DCC Applications shortcomings.
This whole debate about who needs to use program X to compensate flaw y is in every program, and its age old.
A professional just uses the tool which gets him to the result the fastest or most comfortable way, simple as that.
As a matter of fact, some programs only started to exist because of that.
worked in the past and will work in the future;
want a special feature? give money to specific developers and you will get those features successfully implemented.
The FBX modernisation in Blender was funded through this method of giving money to a specific developer.
Ask the code maintainers if they want to collect money for your wished feature X and gather enough people which want to fund the same feature.
Important thing to keep in mind;
Don´t make a thread for around 5 sites or worse even more sites,
instead make it quick so it doesn´t get on peoples nerves.
i'm in the process of moving to blender (coming from max). i love the configurability of the UI. always have been more of a mirai/nendo fanboy in terms of interaction and am happy to be able to finally merge that style with marking menu's and functionality familiar from max/maya with the modifier stack thrown in. best of all worlds, combined.
moving is taking me a long time because not only am i still required to work in max for paid projects, i am also very specific about how i want things to behave so to figure out how to tame UI elements and hotkeys and cover all the functionality i'm used to plus take advantage of blender-specific features is pretty involved.
additionally because the default blender settings are just so out of this world bat shit crazy alien to me that i have to get rid of them entirely to maintain sanity, pretty much. developed by and for the lizard people originally? but i'm getting there.
FWIW, the UI Team (most of whom are at one remove from the Blender Foundation) are working on improving some of the "bat-sh%t crazy decisions" in the user interface. Standard LMB style selection of objects (click, drag-box, etc) is going to become default, there is going to be a home-row for the common operations, etc. The revamp is not getting (any?) priority from the Blender Foundation many outside the "Blender bubble" think it deserves, but it is making headway despite that.
Whilst not a final map, the below keymap is the kind of thing that we can expect from the new defaults when they get around to finishing it. Perhaps not everyone's cup'o'tea but nowhere near as bass-ackwards as it is now.
@BTolputt what's the chance of Blender Foundation accepting this new key map?
Well, it is being designed by people under the leadership of the blender foundation... unfortunately they aren't on it fulltime: https://developer.blender.org/T37417
Replies
https://www.google.com/search?q=blender+maya+navigation+configuration&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
When I extrude faces separately, is there a way to scale them in their own local space at once??
In Maya it'd look like this.
Can't figure out how to do the same in Blender.
I've worked with the program long enough that I know what the pivots will do in my soul. If I'm using a custom orientation of some sort I will of course turn the manipulator back on as I've only used them a couple of times.
It's not like it's hard to toggle it on and off. (Ctrl Space) But I leave them off most of the time.
Just select a face and the hit ''Alt+E''
You will see an option to extrude face individualy.
Also, ask these on the official thread plz.
Ps: Alt+S is to extrude face along their individuals normals.
Let's keep this one alive.
It's a specific question, looking for specific responses. And there has been a lot of discussion generated from a separate thread that would not have been had in the blender thread (note the wider variety of users).
Also, for Alt + S, is not extrude along individual normals, it's scale along individual normals - which will only work after you've extruded / inset a face.
Alt-E opens the extrude menu, and extrude face individually is the same as inset and then scale on individual normals (just in one operation)
So the users saying use Alt-S are not wrong, their method is for after the user has extruded.
Also, there are a lot of methods discussed for blender coming from specific apps, and there is space for people to ask question of how do they do x in blender, that maya/max did.
I get it though, we are not stupid but neither are they. The company was for sale and they were making a lot of extreme changes, including moving over to Qt and adding new advanced viewport. Being bound to an annual release cycle, lots of big changes and having your company up for sale... they tried to play their best hand that was in their interest. While not always good for the consumer, at least I can understand it and in their shoes probably be tempted to do the same thing. So far with SP1, which came out 2 months later... no crashes. Great performance.
My transition has been from Maya to Blender to Modo. I still have Blender installed and participate in their forums, but my daily driver is Modo and there are a lot of good reasons for it. There are also a lot of good reasons why Blender isnt right at the moment... and it doesnt have to do with what blender is capable of but more of what its not capable of and who is leading the development direction.
Blender has some serious perks, but the fact remains the Blender Foundation is simply more interested in experimental pixaresq film making than games, they dont really seem to show much interest or even feel included in the large CG landscape... so you end up getting a kind of bubble thats separated from everyone else. Theres no real transparency on where the funding goes either and they have continuously shown that they can make proposals, get people hyped, say what they will do and then never do it. Usually the first generates a lot of donations the second makes people jaded. I just cant trust the BF/BI, and thats the hardest part in all of this. They flip flop more than a fish out of water, personal interest trump professional interest.
For months they said they would work on the UI, a new keymap, even colored wireframes and every time theres an excuse that theres either no time, or they got put on another project, or that Ton doesnt like it for some arbitrary reason. Its not a very user centric process. You can see the latest blog post from Ton regarding the move to a more annual release cycle because they cant keep on top of their claims.
On top of that, what Blender cannot do is get around their licensing model. It has pros, but also cons. The cons make it so it can never really have substance support or that the upcoming fabric engine 2 (which I believe is going to be a pretty big game changer long term) will not see blender as an option.
Modo, as a commercial product offers a type of stability that you dont find in blender, that is development stability and management stability. To me that is far more important than the potential for the software to crash on rare occasions. So with Modo you do get the 3rd party perks, the fabric engines, the sustances, the sheer fact they have to keep their customers happy and the incentive that goes along with it. You have the fact that big studios and publishers like EA and Bethesda/Zenimax will be calling Modo/Foundry employees over to showcase the product or give feedback in return... that will never happen with Blender (at least at this rate). Modo offers a clear and straightforward workflow and pipeline... model, uv, retopo, bake...ect its streamlined, powerful...and extremely clear in that razer sharp focus.
So with all that said, Blender is a great piece of software. I am glad it exist and I will gladly keep supporting it but at the same time a heavy dose of reality needs to kick in and the pros of it being GPL and free for users to use also comes with some severe cons. Knowing the cons, their management issues everything... needs to weigh against the benefits. If a user can over come those cons and feel fine, then all the more power to them.
Its up to the user to find out whats more valuable to them and their art...and at least with Blender's high accessibility, its not like you really ever lose it. It can always be present on any workstation you use, regardless if you actually rely on it or not.
For what it's worth, my opinions bear close resemblance to DataDay's. Blender is both more stable (in general) than other software I've used (Maya, Modo, & 3DSMax) but also does less than they do in a number of areas. Modelling is reasonable now, sculpting is pretty good for not being zBrush, and Cycles is improving every day... but animation is a pain, the learning curve is incredibly steep, and one needs to accept it is a tool/toy for the Blender Foundation/Institute first & foremost (i.e. they're use-cases & preference control development - not that of the average user).
The Blender Foundation/Institute is very focused on their internal "open movies" gig. The chairman of the organisation likes making movies and Blender initially started as internal software for an animation studio he co-founded some twenty-five years ago. As such, a great deal of the paid-for development focus goes into what is needed for the next film he is working on. Which does result in some great improvements over time, but if you're looking for a focus outside Pixar-esque animations, you're fighting an uphill battle.
The Blender Foundation/Institute issue is actually pretty sad because I honestly see a lot of potential in the application on top of where it is already very good. Take the coloured wireframes example DataDay mentioned. That is functionality that has been implemented multiple times, the last time by a guy I would consider the best (or equal-best) developer the Blender Foundation has on their payroll... but it got vetoed because the Blender Foundation chairman doesn't like that it doesn't meet his (more complicated) idea he had ten years ago. Instead there are now two guys working on a much more complex replacement and they still won't commit to it having the simple functionality of a user being able to specify a given colour for a given mesh. This issue extends from things as simple as hotkeys all the way up to financial transparency in regards to donations (e.g. donations through Steam funding movies rather than game content tools).
Whilst not as influential to the world in general, amongst those donating to support the Blender Foundation/Institute, Ton Roosendaal (the chairman of all things Blender) is kind of like Steve Jobs. You're either in the cult or you're not. Inside the "reality distortion field", things like right-click to select, left-click to place a universal pivot point, and spreading the simple translate/scale/rotate hotkeys across the keyboard ("we don't need no steenkin' home row!") all make perfect sense. Anyone not inside the bubble pointing out some of the absurdities gets shunned quite strongly. The community basically exploded a couple of years back when a lot of the usually silent folks rallied around a well-known Blender tutor pointing out the follies of some UI decisions. It was not pretty.
All of that to one side though, if you are working from home &/or independently - Blender is good software & worthwhile including in your toolbox (especially if strapped for cash!). Where it is good, it is pretty solid and (more importantly) quite stable. Where it is bad... you need to look elsewhere for a solution and cannot just wait for them to get around to it. If you are making & moving static models around, this isn't a big deal. Model in Blender, export to OBJ, handle however you like in other software. If you are trying to move rigs &/or animations around - you're in a bind and I'd recommend looking elsewhere (even for things as simple as exporting FBX to UE4).
It'd be nice if the software could be forked without all the copyleft BS coming along for the ride. Blender's a solid platform, but if its dev community's really that insular, I think new stewardship may be in order if it's to actually be a viable major player in the games industry over the long term.
Realistically speaking - that's never going to happen. The development community for Blender is quite small, tend to reside within the "reality distortion field" of Blender's BDFL*, and the vast majority are strong proponents of the copyleft license (to the point where they've stated they're not interested in legal methods of allowing non-copyleft plugins).
Forks need a reasonable base of developers to last longer than a few weeks, need money to push development beyond basic changes, and the current leadership have no intentions whatsoever of stepping aside to give new blood a run at it. Like it or lump it, the Blender Foundation & Blender Institute (with their common board plus chairman) are going to be controlling Blender development for the foreseeable future. This is not to stir up trouble or angst about said control, just being realistic about it.
--
* Benevolent Dictator For Life
With all due respect, no-one seems to be saying that bugs take a very long time to fix. They are, however, pointing out that deliberate design decisions take a long time (& generally a large amount of community outrage) to change. Right-click select is backward when taken in context of pretty much every other graphics app in existence. That is still the default, and it is not because people haven't tried to change it - it's just the leadership's preference.
As for the "ignorance" about the idea Blender developers "insular", we'll have to agree to disagree. My opinion on the matter comes from discussing issues with them, developing patches with/for them, and watching how developers that do not fall into line are ignored, shunned, and sometimes even mocked for their difference of opinion.
It is improving but a simple review of how often changes Ton doesn't like get committed into trunk (i.e. the distribution version of the code) is demonstrative of how accepting the developer leadership is of outside ideas.
No. People know that regardless of whether or not ideas are listened to (& even acted upon / implemented), they must make it past the "Ton Veto" before they have any chance of being merged into Blender. If he doesn't like something, regardless of how much the community does, it doesn't go in there. Not really a discussion for this thread though.
His redesign was fatally flawed and most people acknowledged that upfront. The reasons for his redesign, however, were widely supported. Especially by those using the software for more than the occasional hobbyist playground.
More importantly, due to Andrew Price's stand (& the support it received), some of these issues are going to be addressed. Left-click select is going to become the default. The default keyboard shortcuts are going to be designed around the concept of a home-row. And so on. Features that are the cornerstone of most (successful) 3D applications but have been stymied in Blender for over a decade.
These changes are to be applauded but one cannot ignore the fact the required a months long @#$%-fight in the community to get even grudging acceptance from the powers that be.
As I mentioned before I think that their time is better distributed creating new tools and making the tools they already have work better. Based on their actions. It seems they do as well. You seem to have very different opinions on the subject than I do so there is not much else to say.
- full 3D suite for making art which plummeted my interest for student versions of the competition.
- Blender can be used in a pipeline as a glue program, works in a pipeline with Substance Painter/Designer, ZBrush, 3Dcoat, Akeytsu, Marmoset/UE4 etc
- Community - plethora of tutorials, a true melting pot of help.
- getting more glimpse into the development
- fast and very much alive development with quick bugfixes.
- freelancers and small studios get taken seriously.
If you want to be left out of it, I'm a bit curious as to why you felt the need to respond with that.
Regardless, I say polarizing because its a matter of fact you are. You say things that absolutely contradict your wants or complaints... for example here.. "I'm not initiating a conversation with you" yet you are "initiating a conversation" with your response. Or when you told the Modo developers to just ignore the game development sector, even though your primary complaints were for more game dev. It takes a really odd bird to say two conflicting things all the time. I just simply dont understand you, no hard feelings about it.
I got it, you gave away your license and made another user very happy. Nothing wrong with that, just a question of the logic used in doing so based on your commentary. It becomes a polarizing act.
My hope is now that you have moved over to Blender, that you will give them more constructive feedback than that found on the modo forums and hopefully are willing to put money toward the development of your newly chosen tool. In other words, I hope it becomes a positive rather than the negative I am used to seeing on the modo forums.
Its a good thing to see more people adopt Blender if they feel dissatisfied with the alternatives, but I also hope it turns into something to help the blender development rather than result in the same "im mad, stop making game dev stuff because you dont do it good enough" kind of response. Thats my only (personal) concern.
Cheers.
PS if you want to have a serious discussion about it, from a modo to former modo user standpoint, send me a PM. I don't bite.
Thats fine, I will actively ignore you from now on, but please dont forget the "point" of a forum. If you actively participate in it and say "hey thats me" (calling attention to yourself) and thus commentary about your actions, it leaves room for people to discuss such actions. You cant logically participate on such a level and yet get bent out of shape when people respond on the same level you chose (emphasis on chose) to participate in via public forum. Its not necessarily "fair" to offer input or response and yet not allow any in return. Again, why I dont understand you... so much contradiction.
I however will honor your wish and just outright ignore you. If it bothers you past this point, again send me a PM. Pretty easy. I'm pretty civil.
There are those what started 3D with it, are used and comfortable with the UI, the control scheme, are in love with the software, they constantly praise Ton and applaud every new release of the software.
Then there are those who used other softwares and apps before Blender and now that they're switching to it, they wanna change the whole concept of the software because ''It's the not the way I used to do it with the other apps''..
I don't like neither of them.
The first are blind fan boys who only swear on Blender (and some of them really think, it's the best software ever on the market, capable of anything (thing doesn't even have muscle simulation yet!!)) They're so attached to their free open source software they won't let anyone criticize it or try to change things..
Basically fan boys...
The seconds are annoying because they look like lazy people which don't wanna take the time to learn the software properly, try to understand the logic, the concept and design behind it. They constantly pester against the UI (which is one of best user friendly UI out there if you customize it enough , I'll post a screen later on of mine), they also are always criticizing the control scheme, when in my opinion, think it's perfectly fine and intuitive. Just because they're so used to their ancient software they don't wanna change their mindset to use a new one.
As a generalist who've used MAYA, XSI, I've taken the time to appreciate it for what is.
It's not an AAA software (as of now) and it's probably not ready to be properly established into big budget hollywood movie pipeline that's for sure (unless some programmers heavily tweak it) but for personal or indie projects, it's the way to go.
For example, Autodesk will try to do with MAYA LT or the indie community, Blender will always do it better.
I've seen alot of people on the Blender forums, who ONLY use Blender and that's really not good. You should always at least try to have a big pipeline ready software in your set of skills (MAYA. MAX, MODO).:)
But, I also think professional 3D artists should also learn Blender, so they have this ''side-tool'' personal open-source app that is not dependent on Buisness and corportaion managements (nobody wants to see another XSI story again).
In the end, most of you guys are modelers, and simple meshes and 3D models are flexible and easy to transfer from one apps to another, you really shouldn't feel limited in using Blender, especially since EVERYTHING Maya can do in the modeling field, BLender does it ( I know because i've checked every one fot them.
I'm talking about modeling as as in strict quad mesh editing here, not nurbs or vertex normal tweaking (but all of these are always found throughout users add-ons or later upgrades).
However, complications comes generally with other software centric-tools like Animation or Rigging.
I'm rigging a character right now inside of Blender and even though I've done some wonders, some simple stuff gives me headache, it's really rough if your knowledge of Python is limited).
I haven't done animation yet but I fear it, I haven't heard alot of good things about it. Plus,I've seen lots of great pictures and static images of Blender, which means, modeling, texturing and rendering is great, but I've seen seldom good animations with it (even the Sintel movie was atrocious to see in terms of good animation).
Go on the Blender Forums, you'll see lots of amazing renders..But when it comes to Animated characters? Eeh...
''This is a proposal for work focus on blender.org for the coming year.
I’ve written this because we keep missing bigger development targets – we don’t have enough time for larger projects. Instead too much time goes to releases, bug fixing, reviews, maintenance and support topics. The bug and patch tracker duties are keeping the best of our developers away from their own targets. As a result we then don’t have time for design docs, for planning, logs and in-depth sessions with the module teams, and have no time for the artists who are involved to make sure we’re well aligned and know what to do. I think everyone has noticed that we’re floating too much, things are not clear. Where are we heading? Who does what, and how do we decide on things?
So – it’s time to act and gather the troops to refocus and get back energy, to maximize involvement from everyone who’s active in blender.org and make sure Blender can survive for many more years.
—– Blender 2.8 – Workflow release —–
Just like for 2.5, the proposal would be to take a bigger leap to a bigger release by not releasing for a year. The 2.76 release then would be the last ‘real’ version we do until 2.80 somewhere in 2016.
Obviously, for the crucial fixes and smaller (stable) features we can do update releases 2.77, 2.78 and 2.79.
Topics to finish for 2.8 could be:
Proof of concept: the stripped “Blender 101″ for high school kids.
Particle nodes, hair nodes, simulation nodes, modifier nodes…
Practical considerations:
And some core principles to agree on:
… start collecting the list of bigger redesign issues we need to for a 3.0 project
The code.blender.org article for the roadmap of 2014-2015 is still valid in my opinion. We just need to take a break of 9-12 months now, to make it work for real.
Blender 2.8 Workflow Sprint
In the coming months we can discuss and review the plans and make sure we’re 100% aligned on the 2.8 targets and for other work during the coming years. We should also meet and have good feedback sessions on it. So I propose to use the Blender Conference in October as a deadline, and organize a workshop in the week before.
Seven years ago, back in 2008, we also took a break for more than a year, to get the 2.5 project started up. It was a very exciting period where a lot of new things were possible and could happen, even though we didn’t finish everything… it gave us quite a solid foundation to build on, attracting a lot of new developers and great features.
I realize we have to be realistic now, not everything will be possible. But we also shouldn’t stop dreaming up a good future for Blender. Let’s take a break from our demanding release cycle, rethink it all, but not for too long. Let’s cherish what we agree on and enjoy the freedom of a configurable workflow that will enable you to do what you think is best… for making 3d art, games, film and animation!
-Ton- ''
Taken from the Blender official forums. to those who say the guy is close minded.
I don't agree. I feel he just doesn't wanna do what all the other big guys do. I have no problem with that as long as it's working efficient.
I have never tried out blender, so I don't have an opinion about it. Before MODO I had been using 3ds max for over 14 years, along with a slew of other programs in the mix like many of you.
I'm not here to start a war between software choices or add fuel to the fire. I honestly wish we could have productive conversations where we celebrate how these tools have helped us to achieve the visions we all have as artists and designers.
We have special relationships with the software we use on a daily basis, either for personal reasons, technical features or just because we like the way they get us from point a to b.
Making the move from max to MODO has been an eye opening experience and not simply because I started with Luxology and now work at The Foundry. I should give blender a fair spin sometime. Max will always hold a special place in my heart, but MODO is an amazing evolution in the asset creation process in my opinion.
I still have a ways to go in order to be at the level of proficiency with MODO to get where I was with max, but I know that with hard work, determination and guidance/support from others that I will get there. My life has been going through a lot of changes since moving out to the bay area and I'm finally coming back to the seed that made me passionate about computer graphics in the first place, which is a medium for me to tell stories to anyone who wishes to experience them.
I salute you creators...
BladeEvolence out!
I have no problems with that either as long as it's working efficiently.
That's the problem though. When Ton's ideas or preferences clash with a more efficient means of accomplishing a task or come through a feature he doesn't like - efficiency loses out and there isn't much one can do about it.
I can go into examples if you like (though I'd prefer another thread or even forum for that), but I feel there is a characterisation in this thread that those who disagree with Ton's decisions are doing so for petty reasons. That's not so.
It is possible for a man (& a team) to do great things whilst also being close-minded about others. Ton (& the Blender development team) have put together some great software. It'd just be good if the leadership understood that being different for difference's sake is counter-productive.
I have been mostly on Max+VRay and Maya+VRay pipelines. But never modeled in either of those 2, I had used Silo for a looong time.
Had tried out Blender numerous times throughout the years, but it was just way too awkward. Anyway, some 3 yrs ago I started customizing it to try and replicate the Silo click efficiency. I'm happy where I got it, in the last year I had never had the need/wish to go for Silo.
It's probably been 2 years that I ask to have Blender on my box at any studio I go. That is my go to tool for content creation. It's become a real Swiss Army Knife tool for me.
The thing is, Blender out of the box is very (VERY) awkward. Personally I would never use it. And as mentioned the leadership behind Blender do exhibit some very close minded approach to development. The mistakes they made/make are so outrageous that they stick out mad. To be fair, they have done SO MANY things right as well (they did manage to create a platform that became my preferred tool).
So yeah, it'd be super-great if the Blender leadership were not locked in their bubble, and were more open for feedback. But hey it'd be great if Silo's development were not cut short, or rocket3d-Clay, XSI, if Wings3D had better development, if Max and Maya had any love in the modeling/workflow department, or if Modo wasn't a click fest. It'd be cool
I see a lot of the Blender potential actually in the community, there are so many Addons that fix/enhance the craziness that is Blender. The problem is one needs quite an in-depth knowledge of Blender, it's Input Editor, and community Addons in order to be able to customize it. And that is way more than one could ask from a general user.
For anyone who tried Blender and thought it's crazy, or those coming from other appz willing to give it a go, why not try my setup that nervouschimp mentioned. I'm pretty sure it will make you feel at home instantly.
It's pretty well documented on the page at BA. Grab it there:
Custom Blender Setup | Silo/Maya - esque
I think there's plenty of people that do that. A lot of people try Blender because of the fact that it's free and then I think when they are financially doing better or hit a frustrating point with Blender they decide it's time to invest in a commercial package. Whether that's right or not is up for debate.
My frustration with Blender is that because it's open-source there is a real expectation for users to fix and create features. I got tired of asking about how to do something with Blender to get told, "oh, Bob wrote a plugin that takes care of that- here's a link". Then, I go to the link and find out that Bob had his code broken and doesn't have any interest in updating it anymore and it quit working 4 months ago. That's not the kind of thing you can deal with in a typical production setting and it's frustrating even if you're just using it as a hobbyist or student.
edit: I also have often wondered if we'll ever see someone fork the Blender code and create another version that takes a different approach to the UI etc.
A bit question. I heard Silo recently released an update. Have you checked it out? Do you think it's back to be a usable modeling tool with that update?
I'm not him (obviously) but Silo was updated and supposedly another update is coming this summer sometime. And there is some sort of roadmap for further development.
I still use it.
Source: http://forums.cgsociety.org/showpost.php?p=8053029&postcount=65
Yeah, I've tried it. It wasn't much of an update really, just ported it to 64bit. But it also got some new bugs, I had reported them but never got a response from NC, and they never fixed them. Went back to Silo 2.2b (32bit) from 4-6 years ago, that one is more stable.
I can't see what NC could do, even if they had interest to develop Silo further, to spark any real interest from my end. Blender is so far ahead. I'll point a couple of things here as comparison.
- Pie Menus
- Superior Sculpting
- MutliRes Sculpting (Like ZBrush and Mudbox ... and Silo)
- Dyntopo (Like Sculptris and 3DCoat LiveClay)
- Sculpting on a Poly Mesh. This has a super handy workflow that you can't get in any other app as far as I know. You can drop a Subdivision Surface Modifier on a Mesh - so you can see in realtime how it looks subdivided. But when you sculpt on it - you affect only the base mesh! This is a very useful feature when poly-modeling.
- Pretty solid Modifier Stack
- Vertex Groups
- Superior Vieport Object Display Modes (good variety of them). This is especially pronounced when doing re-topo
- Some of the best retopo tools out there
- Superior Snapping, coupled with the ShrinkWrap Modifier
- Layers
- Built-in Viewport Reference Planes
- FBX Export
- Blender > Max . Instances get carried over
That's just to name a very few, where the focus was on content creation. And frankly, even the poly tools are better.
So the only thing that Silo excels over Blender is the Learning Curve (way flatter/better), and ease of customization. And, ofcourse, the Defaults (state of the app when first installed).
And Silo is Zen, in terms of app design, much like Sculptris, but that does not hold much merit any more.
I would still recommend Silo over Blender to someone just learning to model. Or Sculptris over Blender for sculpting.
Although I feel Blender is stronger in both those areas over those 2 Appz, it's just that the learning curve is way steeper, and is not good for beginners.
This whole debate about who needs to use program X to compensate flaw y is in every program, and its age old.
A professional just uses the tool which gets him to the result the fastest or most comfortable way, simple as that.
As a matter of fact, some programs only started to exist because of that.
worked in the past and will work in the future;
want a special feature? give money to specific developers and you will get those features successfully implemented.
The FBX modernisation in Blender was funded through this method of giving money to a specific developer.
Ask the code maintainers if they want to collect money for your wished feature X and gather enough people which want to fund the same feature.
Important thing to keep in mind;
Don´t make a thread for around 5 sites or worse even more sites,
instead make it quick so it doesn´t get on peoples nerves.
moving is taking me a long time because not only am i still required to work in max for paid projects, i am also very specific about how i want things to behave so to figure out how to tame UI elements and hotkeys and cover all the functionality i'm used to plus take advantage of blender-specific features is pretty involved.
additionally because the default blender settings are just so out of this world bat shit crazy alien to me that i have to get rid of them entirely to maintain sanity, pretty much. developed by and for the lizard people originally? but i'm getting there.
Whilst not a final map, the below keymap is the kind of thing that we can expect from the new defaults when they get around to finishing it. Perhaps not everyone's cup'o'tea but nowhere near as bass-ackwards as it is now.
Hell yes, I didn't even think of that.