What 3d/graphics software would you rec...

[Joe Carney]

XSI's greatest strength is also it's biggest weakness and that is their encapsulated business model. They provide all the tools you need... There's hardly any third-party anything to go along with XSI. Also, if the full set of tools become necessary - hair/fur, fluids, cloth, rigid-body FX, etc.. Then XSI becomes very costly to maintain and to a small 1 or 2 man operation this can be an issue if they're not using it on a very regular basis.

Jeff, I appreciate your candor. I was down to XSI base or Lightwave. The reason I didn't choose XSI was as you stated, their business model and poor third party support. It's also why I finally left Animation Master. I forgot to mention LWs' new lens accurate rendering was also important.

Haven't ruled out an XSI/LW combo once I get up to speed on LW. For the short term, hair is not an issue for me. FBX, OpenEXR (via plug in) and Collada import/export are.

Looked at PMG as a shortcut way to do animation. I especially like the easy to use puddle/melt tool. I heard they too are working on a new version (over at cgtalk).

Also have AE 7 and am looking at Fusion or Nuke. For some reason the node based approach to VFX clicks better with me than layer based. Nothing against AE cause it can do "most" of what Fusion and Nuke can.

Not really interested in Toxic, but if you use Maya or Max that could be a great tool for you, since they reduced the price to under 4K without the Oracle back end (announced at Siggraph).
If one can't afford Modo, I encourage people to check out the modelling and sculpting tools in Blender. You can export to just about all of the popular formats except FBX (they think the license violates their mandate).

btw, Autodesk announced they are purchasing Mudbox.

Jeff..Once I get my render farm set up I check out that utility.

 

[Peter Karlsson]

I didnt say Mel scripting was an issue. Without Mel, Maya would be a dead end.. There is so many small bugs in that application, that you need to fix yourself with scripts its unbelievable.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Maya can be very powerful in the hands of a single user -- I've seen some remarkable results with it from 1 & 2 man operations. I think it comes down to each person deciding what they need for their application. Maya is a very good choice, even for a single artist, if a lot of scripting and data viz is part of the regiment. If you're not comfortable with scripting or don't really have much programming in your background, then Maya probably isn't for you.

Having used Maya and Max (and XSI) in a pipeline and person who does write scripts every other day the problem I have with Maya is I have to write scripts for all manner of things that *should* be included. If I'm writing a script I want it to extend the functionality for something I'm doing not to fill in a massive gaping whole in the feature set that should be integrated.

Personally I've found XSI's 'scripting' very limited. They expose a lot of deep functionality but very little interface hooks. Very frustrating.

 

[Albert Cheng]

The reason why Maya is the industry standard is because it is essentially a toolbox that you can use to customize the application to whatever task and way your company requires. It is more difficult to use effectively for the one man band unless you are technically minded but it's top notch for those with resources to dedicate. The plus side of learning Maya is having a skillset that is more marketable. I know Lightwave experts who have a hard time finding work in that regard.

I would also recommend Modo. I think they are growing very rapidly and I'm sure that it will be a full featured 3D package in time that will have all the bells and whistles.

 

[Priyesh P.]

It is not true that xsi is a closed system and inaffordable. Several new Plugins and new support for external renderers were announced at siggraph. The new packaging scheme of "xsi essentials" brings cloth and hair sim for 3000 $. And they were highend, not those crappy ones of Maya. BTW, the only innovation of Autodesk in the past few years was the version number. The latest features of Max and Maya? Their Versioning of Max 2008 and Maya 2008. Wow...

 

[laguun]

any good animator can produce -outstanding- results with any of the mayor packages , and it doesnt have to be an actual version.

max, xsi, maya, houdini etc all have strong and weak sides. each one is inferior to one of the others in many relevant aspects. i happen to prefer 3ds max, but use alias and si as well. However, after more than 10 years animating, i rarely animate in the last 5 years or so.

the most important things to consider when buying 3D animation software:
its the indian, who makes the difference, not the arrow.
A stradivari doesn´t make the musician.

 

[Priyesh P.]

any good animator can produce -outstanding- results with any of the mayor packages , and it doesnt have to be an actual version.

the most important things to consider when buying 3D animation software:
its the indian, who makes the difference, not the arrow.
A stradivari doesn´t make the musician.

Jan, that's right, but here's is a little difference. Things like cameras, instruments, tools etc. are so standarized you can immediately start working. But I see huge inconsistencies in the area of 3D. Maya is the most bulky and unintuitive package I've ever seen. It's gui is so ugly that it is an insult for artists to work with, not speaking of the $ yo've to shell out for it. With Autodesk, right now you're likely going to step into a dead end. The only innovations at them were new version numbers.

XSI, moreover, gives you lowest price of entry with 500 bucks.

But given it's smooth workflow and tremendous speed, the coming superstar could be theoretically Modo. Unfortunately they're lightyears from having a full package and, given the upcoming "moondust" system of XSI, I see hard times for a little startup like Luxology to keep track with the others. They've reached version 3 but still no full, bone animation system.

 

[laguun]

Jan, that's right, but here's is a little difference. Things like cameras, instruments, tools etc. are so standarized you can immediately start working. But I see huge inconsistencies in the area of 3D.

true.
however, once one mastered its third, fourth, fifth... package, it gets easier to swap the application.

Maya is the most bulky and unintuitive package I've ever seen. It's gui is so ugly that it is an insult for artists to work with, not speaking of the $ yo've to shell out for it.

100.000s of artists disagree and say the same thing about softimage xsi.
i disagree with both views.

especially compared to the 3d packages i started with (in the late 80ties), maya, max and xsi are -all- awesome.
And with the old, complicated packages outstanding results have been produced.

We meet people with strong preferences for any of the packages. However, any of the packages is fantastic.

With Autodesk, right now you're likely going to step into a dead end. The only innovations at them were new version numbers.

I disagree. Autodesk is by far the market leader.

There have been many powerful upgrades of their softwares, year by year. Their userbase is huge - and happy for most of them.

XSI, moreover, gives you lowest price of entry with 500 bucks.

excellent price!
I never looked more precisely at the 500 euro version - is it very crippled or pretty powerful?

But given it's smooth workflow and tremendous speed, the coming superstar could be theoretically Modo. Unfortunately they're lightyears from having a full package and, given the upcoming "moondust" system of XSI, I see hard times for a little startup like Luxology to keep track with the others. They've reached version 3 but still no full, bone animation system.

max, maya, houdini and xsi have a good >90% share of the pro market - and i dont see that changing within this decade.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

We meet people with strong preferences for any of the packages. However, any of the packages is fantastic.

Yes. If any of them were really that bad, people would quit using them. Especially with 3DS Max and now Maya being under Autodesk control and their licensing scheme that disallows resale.

I disagree. Autodesk is by far the market leader.

Well, sure they are... Now that they have two of the leading software packages in-house. I also think it safe to assume that the two softwares will converge at some point. Or they will become vastly different over the next few years to serve different market segments.

excellent price!
I never looked more precisely at the 500 euro version - is it very crippled or pretty powerful?

Yes it is a great price. XSI Foundation at $500 is too limited for my needs, but all the primary software system is there and it's a great place for beginners to start and a great package for those who don't need all the fluff like cloth, fluids, hair, etc..

max, maya, houdini and xsi have a good >90% share of the pro market - and i dont see that changing within this decade.

Don't forget Lightwave... It has a larger share of the market than Houdini, so does Cinema4D. There's several others out there too like Mirai and Shade. Shade is the #1 selling 3D software in Japan and a huge seller in China. Lightwave is also huge in Japan and the Asian markets.

 

[Priyesh P.]

The popularity of Maya is based around it's time of intruduction (1998) where it's featureset and workflow were quite astounding. Nearly everything else sucked in contrast. And everyone who wants to get a job in 3D needs to learn Maya. I'm currently in the situation that I'm hired to time and animate cameras for a graphics package - and their main (or only) package is Maya. Fortunately I only need to learn the cameras and motion graph editor. The company's owners (directors of nike & adidas campaigns) told me directly that they hate it, but unfortunately it became the defacto standard.

OK, now I'll conclude it this way: If you want a package for yourself, take XSI, but to get into the industry - please become a pro in Maya or/and Max.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

OK, now I'll conclude it this way: If you want a package for yourself, take XSI, but to get into the industry - please become a pro in Maya or/and Max.

Actually, IMHO if you master one of the newer, or "higher-end" applications, you are most likely worth more on the marketplace. It's CHEAPER for me to hire a MAYA artist than someone with bad ass chops on HOUDINI, NATURAL MOTION's ENDORPHIN, MASSIVE, REAL FLOW - which ... by the way ... if you ROCK on any of these - email me your info off-line ... always looking for ROCKSTAR gun-for-hires ...

I would skip the MILLIONS OF HOURS it takes to learn Maya - FYI Cinema 4D is SUPER EASY to learn - MODO for modeling for sure ...

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I know Atmosphere and Zoic are always on the lookout for great Lightwave artists because there are so few.

 

[Priyesh P.]

I know Atmosphere and Zoic are always on the lookout for great Lightwave artists because there are so few.

yeah, since it takes so much time to master the workarounds, pitfalls and plugins. lw is great for modelling and graphics but animating organic stuff takes nearly ten times the effort over let's say xsi, main issues resulting from the rigging system.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I dunno... LW's rigging and animation tools are pretty simple and not much different than anyone else. It used to be that way back in the old days, but since v6.5 (and really 7.0) it isn't bad at all. But I'll agree that some are still better and XSI is one of them.

I didn't realize that there was high demand for ace users of REAL FLOW and Massive. Massive isn't that hard to use -- it's tedious to get good looking crowds and arrangements that look natural though. I haven't used REAL FLOW in about 2 years, but I used to be pretty good with it. I don't currently own my own license though... I'll be checking it out again shortly as I'm about to bid a project that will use it.

 

[Joe Carney]

One of the reasons Maya is popular is they have a PLE version. You can spend time learning the basics without spending a dime. 30 day trials are more for pros it seems, not beginners.

I ended up going witt LightWave based on several months research.

The reason I'm leaning toward Fusion over Nuke...PLE version I can take my time, learn, screwup, no time pressure.

Same goes for Vue.

The new pricing for XSI is not a price cut, they simply added the cost of Shave and Haircut to the 1995.00 Essentials price. Have to admit that's a great combo for high end character animation.

I purchased LightWave via the compaion software priceing. If you have AE, Premiere PRo, Photoshop...legal registered versions, you can get the full LW 9.2 with printed docs for 595.00, pdf docs for 495. That basically will pay for getting FPrime and keep it at or under 1K. The sidegrade price isn't supposed to include the 400.00 free training stuff. So add 50.00 USD for the "Essential Lightwave v9 book" if you're a newbie.

 

[Joe Carney]

yeah, since it takes so much time to master the workarounds, pitfalls and plugins. lw is great for modelling and graphics but animating organic stuff takes nearly ten times the effort over let's say xsi, main issues resulting from the rigging system.

LW has a long history with various broadcast scifi productions. These people know LW inside and out.
As a hard body modeler (with dynamics included) it excels. Space ships, architecture, explosions, ray beams...just about anything but character animation are what those guys are looking for. They rarely have the budget or time to add in full blown character animation, regardless of software.

 

[Jim Hoffman]

The PLE versions offer a great way to experience these programs without the major time crunch. I can already see that this seems more like a combo platter scenario... IE modeling in MODO with some help from zbrush/mudbox and then somewhere else for animation.. maybe Vue Infinite for some outdoor landscape work...

Does anyone want to go into some detail about animation and what you like/don't about some of the packages... maybe a better way to say it is strengths and weaknesses.

Also- can anyone recommend any publications be it book/magazine/online that breaks down SFX work / compositing involving CG ... like a real nuts and bolts with real world examples... small shop possibilities... anything that can shed light on this side of the biz.

Thanks - you all are very helpful and I appreciate it.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

You know Nuke has a PLE edition as well right?

In my mind at this point... despite all of the debates raging in the 3D world (because everybody is practically the same with a different interface)... the live action compositing race is over. Nuke hands down no question in my mind is the superior architecture.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'll have to look into Nuke. I keep meaning too, but never get around to playing with it.

I just keep limping along with Shake, it serves my needs (for now), but I know I'll have to give it up at some point and I don't know if/when Apple releases its successor if that will be the answer. Before Shake, I used DFX+ and was going to buy into Fusion, but then I switched to editing with FCP and tried Shake, and liked it.

 

[Priyesh P.]

I don't know if/when Apple releases its successor if that will be the answer.

Hi Jeff. I heard some bad things about this. Maybe only rumors, but the last things I've heard was, that the crew doesn't exist anymore.