An Autodesk partner website apparently made an article comparing Maya to Blender

Unity has hopped on the “diversity” bandwagon as well, and it has led to a situation where crippling regressions are found in many of the releases and where many new features have major bugs (I don’t use Unity by the way, but I do read their forums and check the coverage from gamesfromscratch).

I think FOSS like Blender and Godot is doing diversity far better than the commercial vendors. When you have a system where you try to encourage people to start committing patches, the worldwide nature of such projects mean the diversity comes to you (with no need to seek it with hiring quotas or with the pre-rejection of people for having the wrong skin color).

3 Likes

Yes. This from their website:

‘When I was at GDC back in March, I talked to several developers who were all running into the same problem: they wanted the development teams in their studios to be more diverse, particularly in terms of increasing the number of women on their teams, but they didn’t know how to make it happen.’

Personally I use UE4. Epic is utterly apolitical and doesn’t go anywhere near this SJW BS. Unity has been way behind UE4 in recent years and nonsense like this is part of the problem. The above quote is typical of so much of the rhetoric these days. Funny that we never see cries for more women in sewer maintenance, waste collection, coal mining, etc…

Exactly. A true meritocracy that doesn’t try to undo 2 million years of natural evolution with 2 generations of feminist forced social engineering.

4 Likes

Not sure it is related but it is relevant i think ;

Oh my god the cringe in this article.

While appreciate people getting all up in arms about the comparison. Some things are actually valid. Even so it does come off as passive aggressive or condescending on the article writers part. In every turn they seem to make it clear that you are an amateur if you use Blender and a Pro uses Maya. I don’t wholly agree with that but there are some half truths there.

Modeling:
They say that they have more options than Blender in-terms of modeling and that’s true to an extent. In-terms of NURBS modeling, if that’s still a thing, Maya’s tools are just better. However everything else Blender imo wins hands down.

Rendering:
That section seemed more than fair I think.

Motion Graphics, Effects and Dynamics:
Can’t really argue on this one. In-terms of all of these Maya is clearly better if we are making comparison right now. Maybe in the future Blender will have better tools here but it’s hard to compete with Maya on this front unless you are SideFX.

Extensibility:
Again Maya has Blender clearly beat on this on. Maya is a platform it can literally be whatever the TD wants it to be and it can be done all via scripts, add-ons etc. With Blender there is no plugin sdk, you have to deal with the full source code and the GPL to boot. Maya has amazing plugins from 3rd parties.

So on and so forth. Not everything is wrong but it’s peppered with a reminder throughout that Blender is just for people who do 3D on the side or not professionally. A little insulting but I mean the proof is in the pudding.

Why would a TD prefer a plug-in API to the full source? Not sure what you mean with the GPL either. GPL restrictions only come into play if they want to redistribute it. Internally, they can treat Blender as in-house software and add whatever they want, however they want.

Maya is easier to do the little drag-and-drop macro things, but I wouldn’t consider any closed source software as extensible as Open Source.

2 Likes

I just put the link since it was related to thread subject but i am an ex 3ds max user so i cannot comment on the validity of the video.

Yeah. Exactly why I brought this point up above. A robust scripting language is big plus. However, given the “Maya is for pros” overtone of the article, most studios are going to have in house devs, and tend to develop in house software. In that regard, having access to the source makes Blender 1000% more extensible than Maya. And as an added bonus, Blender using studios often make enhancements that make their way back to the trunk (And no, the GPL doesn’t require them to, as that only relates to distribution.)

1 Like

While they have staff for customizing plug ins, having people who can competently tinker inside the main program to fix problems is another level. One, I think, that is overestimated.

Not in my professional experience, and not as is evident by the companies that have already made contributions to Blender, or those lending their devs to help make improvements.

Remember, we’re talking in context of the industry, and professionals. The big (and even medium, and some small) players have the developer muscle. Many have folks that develop in house software (not plug-ins), so having access to the source is huge. That means infinite customizability and pipeline integration, rather than hastily deployed, ad-hoc, Frankensteinian tools, that are often extremely annoying to work with for the artists.

1 Like

This article reminds me of those group projects in high school, you know the one where like 3 people did all the research and did the notes for it and they decided to let the 4th lazy member who was not involved at all present it.

4 Likes

I know there were linked in connections that was asking to help them with why people prefer blender over maya. i think this is the result hahahah.

Btw,

However, you should stick to Maya if you want to get employed in the industry.

This personally has attacked me since everyone(recruiters) would ask me if i have used maya or 3ds max, and when i replied I have in the past- they never came back lol.

People are just scared to recruit someone with blender experience… i just dont know why its that scary for them.

As I said in another post: If you go into an interview with a stellar portfolio/reel, they won’t disqualify you when they find out you did everything in Blender. Talent is talent and that’s what gets you hired, not the brand of paintbrush you use.

1 Like

I know… and thats how it should be. But recruiters are not the employers in most cases. They have no idea what talent is. They just try to tick off what the employers ask in the list. if its not ticked then im on the less favorable side :sweat_smile:

I find that it’s a mixed bag, really. Recruiters are human too, and some will have their prejudices, and some lack vision (as in seeing the talent beyond the tool). There are also times when artists are being hired for crunch time, and a lead that otherwise has no prejudice about Blender might not have the time to babysit an inexperienced artist that doesn’t know the in-house pipeline.

For these reasons, I feel it’s best to master one DCC (even Blender) but at least familiarize yourself with others. If you master one DCC, learning any other is a cake walk.

1 Like

Yeah, and that’s unfortunate. You would hope that the employer would at least look at a portfolio and not just some bullet list on a recruiter’s notebook.
I have interviewed potential hires in the past and I could tell if someone had the abilities we required, but the biggest thing for me was their personality; I didn’t have final say and we sometimes hired folks who weren’t compatible with the team due to their personality. Talent was more important than software knowledge, at least in our department – I knew who could learn the software and who couldn’t.

1 Like

Because an SDK usually has a fully documented api that you can look through and all you need to worry about is your plugin. You don’t have traverse the whole code to extend what you need extended and you can sell you plugin to someone else if it’s useful enough without having to worry about the GPL. If you want to “extend” blender with anything other than a few python scripts you literally have to maintain your own branch of Blender. In Maya a plugin is a plugin I don’t really have to worry or care about the application unless there is a bug.

Just because something is open source doesn’t make it extensible. To extend Blender you have to branch the code to make any changes, you need to know the code do anything if Blender releases an update that you want to use, you have to merge your branch with no guarantee that it will work if you made significant changes to the code. Now you have to maintain different versions of Blender. With a plugin SDK I just need to know the api and what are the rules the host application wants me to follow. If the host application changes I just need to update the code in my plugin.

Maya can literally be anything you want it to be and it’s been designed that way since version 1.0. You are dead wrong if you think doing drag-and-drop macros is the extent of Maya’s extensibility. It’s extensibility is one the main factors why it became the industry standard. Just like Max became the standard for the game industry for a while because it had a full SDK for free while other 3D DCC apps would charge thousands of dollars for that kind of access.

1 Like

But isn’t that basically what python addons do in blender? At least i thought that was what was going on there…

well if you compare blender python with mel/python in maya, they are imho pretty compareable as for flexibility. But for shaders / heavy geometry operations a native c plugin is the better choice due to speed.