Adobe acquires Allegorithmic

I probably should clarify again. I am not necessarily advocating Vegas aa a professional go-to standard for performance or anything else.

It is buggy, crashes alot and has one nasty bug when hardware acceleration is turned on. The larger your project the more these things turn up.

Finally I realized there was a reason it was rarely turning up in comparison articles anymore. One recent “best editor of 2020” did not even mention it.

And I am still ready for a change I was just trying to explain how hard it is to switch to an editor that is much less fluid. And of course time is limited these days with managing a team and everything else. So much to learn and little time. I was not able to find a replacement so I just went back to Vegas for now.

That all said only Pro Tools has better sounding audio and features from my experience. Sound is still a number one reason to stick with Vegas. And there are no modes it all works in the same editor.

I should note I originally started using Vegas as a DAW (without MIDI) back in 2000. It had a lot of promise and it just sounded great. I updated to Vegas Video when that came out and when it matured enough I switched over from Premier. It was way ahead of it’s time for sound but never as much for video other than the consistent fliuid editor. Video eventually did start to mature under Sony. These days I don’t think it is very relevant.

Oh for example something it can’t do still is load sequences of .exr which to say is lame would be an understatement. (you have to pull a string on them in 1 frame stills and group them) Nor does it support some formats it should.

I don’t want my software trying to dictate what my workflow should be, I want it to be quick and efficient, and I’m really only going to save files in file types that I need. Not everything I do in PS gets saved as a PSD either, but Photoshop doesn’t fight me on it. A layerless file can be saved over in half a second with CTRL+S and a copy of a layered file can be saved as a png, jpg, tiff, or another file format that doesn’t require specialized software just as efficiently as saving any other copy of the file.

I regularly need to save flattened versions of WIPs as pngs or jpgs while processing images, and pretty much always need a flattened final version, and sometimes won’t know whether it’s a WIP or final draft until I’ve saved it and done something with it (used it in external software, printing, uploading it, send it to someone for approval), and I don’t see any good reason why it needs a special separate methodology from a regular save as that adds pointless complexity and time. And for some images, I may not ever need any copies of the layered file, and some won’t even have layers (though when I do, I stick to the native format instead of PS to ensure full support - after all I don’t save my odt’s as docx’s unless I’m required to submit a Word version of a document/essay).

In 3D an extra step for rendering makes sense because the original file is not an image. For a file that is already an image this isn’t true, and most image editing software works fine without it. It’s just one of those things that keeps photoshop more efficient to work in.

2 Likes

Didn’t Allegorithmic team say that they’re not going to make CC essential for their products when they were acquired by Adobe, or it was just my imagination?
Got this e-mail today.

E-mail text

firefox_1625206031

Smart move on Pilgway’s part to finally offer a lower priced, strictly painting option. That was always 3DC’s main appeal, especially back when some known Blizzard artists were showing off their work in it. A lot of potential customers were not able to justify the price for what they viewed as “just a painting app”.

This hits that niche perfectly, though hopefully not too late in the game. In fact I could see something like this working alongside Mixer/Painter, in certain circumstances.

What might still hold it back is that GUI still looks dated, which can carry with it old sentiment. Blender was able to create a strong reaction with 2.8 precisely because the visual changes were so drastic. 3DC could have used that. The Textura naming choice might not as marketable either. It’s a bit, awkward and overly used in some non related industries.

Either way, this is a great competitive move.

I’ll have to look that up, but yes they have said a lot of things to appease the angry reaction from their fan base after the “we are Adobe now” announcement . It’s the same game we see every time there is an acquisition and the dust settles. Many us know never to take what they say at face value anymore.

3 Likes

I don’t understand why you feel it takes longer or dicates your workflow. Its really just expectations of what the option that says save as does that you are fighting against. Export in gimp does all the things you expect from save as in photoshop. You really don’t use “save as” in gimp unless you want to save a version of the project under a different name.

You say you want to save a layerless file as fast as hitting ctrl + S, but you do that exactly as fast by pressing shift + ctrl + E in gimp and its just ctrl + e if you want to save changes to the last exported file.

I can sense this is all starting to get off topic. The tread is about allegorithmic being bought by adobe, but now we are talking about the best photo and video editing alternatives. We all should probably make an effort to keep this discussion on topic.

3 Likes

It looks like we’re about to have a new addition to the number of Substance Painter alternatives available to us.

3D Coat Textura

What is it? How does it work? Well, they’re not saying yet, and the videos only show off the new realtime features in base 3DCoat, but hey, it looks like it’s coming soonish.

2 Likes

It is interesting but feels a bit too-little-too-late. They know their customers more than anyone I guess, but my feeling is they are missing the mark a bit.

I think they would get more traction by just scrapping the sculpting side and keeping retopo UV and painting. In reality it is all of those features that are most attractive to me anyway.

I always think about 3D Coat in those terms and then oh, yeah, it also sculpts. Well, I won’t use that. But I could retopo uv and paint.

I think they could widen the audience to even Zbrush users that way, and thus eliminate the need to go to Blender or Maya or wherever as an go-between-to a painting app.

Not too many people are really using Zbrush for any retopo or UV - in my opinion. And if you are heavy on sculpting, how nice it would be to skip one app in the pipeline.

Another selling factor is I don’t think any other painting apps have all those features. So it just kind of fills that entire gap.

That may be what they’re doing, going by their license upgrade plans. Textura looks less like a standalone app, and more a paired back, lower cost version of 3D coat that focuses primarily on texturing and painting.

…though they’re also selling 3DCoat and Textura combined licenses, so who knows? They’re really not communicating themselves too well.

Yeah I think it seems like they are just trying to do what most other companies have already done. And it is too little too late.

They are rolling out rent to own a whole 6 years too late. Substance already tried it and decided to scrap it in favor of a straight subscription model. It must be a very complex model to manage.

Textura is also about as too late, considering, painting is the main thing 3D coat had going for it all along anyway. More like they are finally admitting people (such as me) are less willing to pay for an app that also sculpts and only use it for painting, and then maybe retopo and UV.

So from there it is about perception and value. They are not coming to the market with any new splash or anything newsworthy. It is just… oh… an alternative painting app. OK. A little cheaper but does pretty much what the other two main ones can do…

Timed well with the Adobe buying Substance. But I don’t think that is enough.

Rather than only a texture app, they should just admit that no one wants 3D C for sculpting. (sorry 3DC hardcore sculptors just being objective overall) Take that out and leave the other tools that people really need in the painting pipeline. And that is UV and Retopo.

And then market it that way.

Just my 2C. I think they would get more attention.

2 Likes

Better late than never.

I think they still have a chance to bounce back, its slim though. Right now 3DC still has the best brush engine for 3D texturing in the industry. For manually painted 3D textures, nothing comes close. Substance Painter, even with their “photoshop” brushes and upgraded engine, is still horrible for hand painting textures. Mari and 3DC are way above it in that regard.

What 3DC needs to do is focus on their weak points, which just so happen to be Substance’s strong points. Substance has a good GUI/UX, 3DC unfortunately does not. Andrew should really aim to get a good GUI/UX designer to help refresh the software. The current changes are too small to have impact imo.

Substance is strong at quickly generating textures, so a lot of the hand painted stuff ends up being generated rather than “painted”. It speeds up asset creation considerably, but at the cost where a lot of the content starts looking the same. 3DC needs to be able to do the same, with the added benefit of already having the best brush engine so far.

The node implementation that is coming with 3DC looks overly technical, and roughly designed. It needs a solid UX pass imo. Substance Painter, and even Designer (though it is technical) both managed to avoid that problem.

Finally as much as I hate to admit it, even now after becoming part of Adobe, Jerc and some the others from Allegorithmic were present on just about every forum and artist hub, pushing the software, answering questions and so forth. That had a huge impact on software adoption. 3DC lacks that, understandably due to regional and financial differences.

It still stands that a lot artist want to give Adobe the middle finger and avoid using its software, so as long as that sentiment is there, the alternatives will always have a chance at exponential growth. It just has to be on an equal or better level.

This is a tough one, because I would love for there to be a good alternative to Zbrush. There are some of us that would love to use 3DC for sculpting as well, since the brush engine has such a good feeling to it. Problem is, the sculpting (includes general workflow and interface) is just not that good compared to Zbrush.

I’d argue that they should not give up on sculpting, but rather focus first on the strengths and the primary market appeal, which is Painting/texturing.

After that reaches the best point it possibly can (on level with or surpassing expectations of current leading software), then UV/Retopo/sculpting should be addressed. Maybe even as a separate software package, that is still connected. Think Affinity Designer, Photo, Publisher and how they interconnect despite being separate.

1 Like

Cool. To be clear, I mean as far as offering the break out stand-alone app. Not to completely trash 3DCoat altogether. I mean, you bring up a good point that I forgot about 3DC which is the strength in brush painting. That gets completely lost in the noise it seems. What I am trying to say is that with the late arrival and all on the scene as a stand-alone paint app, they could do something that no other paint app does well or at all in some cases. And that is offering a solid retopo and UV workflow. I guess you could argue that in studios painters paint. And that is fair. Happens a lot at my studio. But what also happens a lot is my modelers are busy and my painting guy - who can also model and UV - has to do it. I dunno, just a thought.

Regards competition for Zbrush or being able to actually paint in an app and sculpt, this was my hope for Mudbox. But alas that has all but disappeared. I still like Mudbox a lot. Way more than Zbrush as far as a user experience, until you start sculpting… lol. Then it is back to Zbrush. I think when 3DC started doing PBR, Mudbox was dead in the water and maybe AD just tossed in the towel.

Technically, 3D Coat was the first consumer app. to do true, volume-based sculpting (before SDF sculpting was a thing). I also recall seeing videos of innovative modeling tools such as a solidify tool that could merge overlapping geometry.

The main issues they face is that Pilgeway was never a huge company (so they don’t have the R&D muscle of Pixologic and Adobe) and that they are based in the Ukraine (which has seen various cyber attacks with the intent to destroy its power grid and wreck its economy).

Finally, I would also not discount the fact that there have been countless artists calling for him to fail in his endeavor because he is outspoken about his faith (which is also a likely reason why he never shows up on general CG sites). I know that the ability to remotely deactivate a license can be seen as bad optics, but I perfectly understand his desire to not see his application say, become a platform for explicit or otherwise X-rated work.

1 Like

Somewhat related news, the Linux Foundation just announced O3DE, an Apache 2.0 open source version of Lumberyard with a new rendering engine. We (Adoobe/Substance) are founding members of the project and we’re excited to see a fully Open Source option for AAA game/experience development now available for everyone.
We’ll have more good news for the open source community later this month.

Open 3D Engine (o3de.org)

5 Likes

I wonder if some of the underlying issues with Lumberyard have been resolved. Unfortunately I lost interest in the engine a while back due to the snails pace of development and the only game (vaporware) using it is Star Citizen as far as I know.

Do you know if this means there will be a Linux version at some point? Excellent news if that is the case. :slight_smile:

Yes, there is a Linux version planned!

1 Like

Kind of a total out of left field aside here, but I decided to fire up the Gimp 3.0 beta to see how much I’d hate it, and…

…I never thought I’d say this, but it…it’s not bad. It’s faster, the interface has been cleaned up and modernized, and, get this, you can select multiple layers now. Holy crap! Oh, and the Text Tool actually lets you type on the canvas.

I just about like it now. If it had adjustment layers, I could use it without all the endless griping.

1 Like

Yup, predicted than one and thankfully narrowly escaped becoming an Adobe customer!
My next prediction is … "Adobe Acquires Pixologic".

I’d hate to be right on that one, too, but I generally am in my predictions.

Do you mean this version?

1 Like

It’s 2.99.6 officially. You can grab it here.

2 Likes