Check out this thread:
Iâm âarch-viz adjacentâ, working primarily with technical models from elsewhere rather than solely designed in Blender or other visualization software. The BIG falldown (for me) of Blender is difficulty bringing in technical models. As opposed to 3DSMAX being able to work directly with DWG, Inventor, and Revit content without having to step through several intermediate formats. And before anybody starts shouting â⌠but the cost!â Iâll point out 3DSMAX is included in most of the Autodesk collection licenses.
1 Like
I think the closest thing to 3ds max 3d paint object is the paid addon Asset Sketcher but i didnât test it yet and i donât think there is a demo version.
The addon also have painting with physic but i am not sure how solid it is.
In 3ds max 3d paint the amount of work i was able to speed up where amazing, thing like trees and any objects i could paint according to all axis + random.
2 Likes
Usually, âsoftware license costsâ are simply amortized as fixed costs of the project and passed right on to the consumer. If you benefit most from what a proprietary product gives you â such as the ease of manipulating technical models as mentioned in dgorsmanâs post above â that alone might be business justification to pay their price.
Nobody can question what Blender is doing and has already done â Blender is a professional product now. But the fact that it has no license-fees is only one part of the equation. It has to be "soup to nuts, what works best for your organization and for what you are doing?" If that means that you can avoid license fees, goody for you. But if it doesnât, pass 'em on.
Iâm quite sure that companies like Autodesk are âfeeling the heat from Blender,â because they are no longer the only ways to do 3D graphics and thereâs nothing they can do about it. There is no legal way to âbuy it out and shut it down.â All that they can do is to parcel-out well defined market segments where their product is superior, and sell to those markets, knowing that in some cases they are selling against something that isnât sold at all.
1 Like
Unfortunately, the only real solution is for Blender to get new tools to help the arch-vis people. The license would mean the I/O issue is unfixable even if you fork Blender.
We do have that addon that allows you to make objects commonly associated with buildings at least (but Blender is still weak in really allowing for accurate measurements to be done easily).
1 Like
When I still worked for an archviz company that used Max, almost everyone there was asking me to teach them Blender because Max was just giving endless headaches. Not to mention the fact that almost none of the software used at that company was legitimately licensed. I actually had to put my foot down and insist that they buy ForestPack because the illegitimate one was making life impossible. Thankfully now that Iâm freelancing with Blender I donât have those issues.
I was watching several Houdini videos and a lot of the comments were people saying that with Houdini and Blender 2.8 they didnât need any other 3D software. With Newtek recently being bought out, itâs worth remembering that Lightwave was once one of the giants in the mid-level 3D space, and where are they now? This is a field that can easily be disrupted by new technology, and if you donât evolve, you die.
1 Like
âŚLooks like â*.blendâ files will become industry standard soon, haha.
âŚwould love that 
1 Like
I donât know what is the craziest : Comments on the video, or the video itself 
Seriously :
Even the framerate improvements shows a worst result in 2020 version than 2019 version, have they even had a single look on the video they are posting ? ^^
cra-zy ^^
3 Likes
Is that actually worse performance or just that 2020 has an accurate reading while 2019 was displaying it incorrectly? Either way it doesnât look good. Either way I think the video was rather horribly put together. For example, the section talking about the chamfer modifier has a very ugly bevel displayed prominently. It just feels so amateur all round.
2 Likes
CGSocietyâs thread meanwhile has a lot of activity from an Autodesk employee who claims there is nothing wrong with Maxâs development scene.
https://forums.cgsociety.org/t/3ds-max-2020/2050827
He defends the release by saying that Max actually has a full team of skilled developers and what customers are seeing is just a few months worth of work, then adding that 3D is simply hard to develop for. The issue is that weâve seen the Blender and Houdini devs. do quite a bit more in that time period compared to what is seen in the video.
Wow! What? I mean⌠boy, oh boyâŚ
âŚLetâs hope the Blender Devs never hire an ex-3DS-Max coder.
This is shocking. I first thought this was April fools gone wrong.
This can not be realâŚ
Could be truth. Max was Discreetâs before being purchased. Only Max developers know how messy the spaghetti code is. Especially considering they add code from plug-ins bought by autodesk, and also they have to carry a lot of unused workflow, legacy stuff- like Arnold, ribbon, thinking particles. Blender may be faster in development for 2.8, but they also got rid of internal render and game engine in the process.
2 Likes
Yep, and 3D Studio Max was already based on the even older 3D Studio for MS-DOS (early 1990s). The last few years I worked with Max felt like working with a bad old version of Windows: layer upon layer of patches to fix dated legacy code. I got really tired of Max becoming unstable after working with it for a while, and sooner or later a crash would follow.
Having said this, I do still miss some Max tools every now and then. The Max spline tools are excellent, it has a higher number of useful modifiers for non-destructive modeling than Blender (XForm, UVW Map, Face extrude, etc.), I loved the non-destructive primitives at the start of the modifier stack, and the way modifiers automatically had their own pivot and manipulation cage, in stead of having to manually add an Empty and assign it to a modifier, like in Blender.
3 Likes
3ds max⌠the business model⌠the interface⌠modelling tools⌠the whole ux⌠a lot is very bad imo but the raw viewport performance compared blender is really much superior.
Maybe a bad kind of advertising here in the vid, but comparing the raw viewport performance with blender: Max viewport is much faster and capable of handling thousands of objects and much hichger polycount then blender! This is not possibe in blender yet. Try it for yourself. If you got big scenes with thousand of objects, selections becomes a nightmare, while in max its still fast.
Since years i am asking for better raw viewport performance in blender but i feel nothing really improves here and now in b28 its much worse even slower than in b279 exspecially in edit modes its horrible slow atm. I dont care about good shading and fancy light preview features if iam not even able to work with big scenes just viewing geo in simple solid mode.
I think Max introduced the nitorus viewport in 2011, and it was very buggy and slow compared to the old dx one before, which was blazing fast using quadro performance drivers⌠First version without glitches for me was 2018. So it might take some time to fix this in b28 to. Hopefully some magic will happen and blender gets on par hereâŚ
btw a precices and correct fps counter would be good thing for blender to.
1 Like
That was pretty much my experience. When Max2.0 came out, my workflow was already a mess to overcome crashes. Breaking scenes, just to render elements separatelly, and combining all of them in Combustion, with workarounds that today would make anyone laugh⌠Max 3.0 was even worse, and Iâve used it just for a couple of months⌠Loading times were huge, simple operations were stalling, and eventually everything would crash.
1 Like
Recognizable. My worst nightmare was working on a Max scene while the working RAM had unnoticeably become corrupted, causing your saved .max files to become mangled without you knowing it, only to discover during the next Max session that the last three of your five incremental saves could not be opened. And that was in a time before cloud services were available, so you couldnât resort to a file version history.
1 Like
Me too. I ducked out at a similar time. No regrets at all. Less crashes too.
2 Likes
Thank Metin but i already saw it and asset sketcher is the closest thing to 3ds max geometry painting and as a bonus you have physic painting.
1 Like
This is funny. Arnold is one of the most powerful production proven renderers in the world, and Thinking Particles is far superior to any particle tools in Blender.
1 Like
You are correct, I think I messed up my sentence. They add code from plug-ins they bought like Arnold, ribbon, TP and they also need to maintain legacy or obsolete code. Blender and C4d on the other hand, they donât look back when they clean up the house.