Blender doesn't need to be legitimized.

Hi everyone. As some of you know, I run a company that makes Blender cartoons called TheoryAnimation. Before all that I worked on some cool movies, a well known game, and… some stuff that will never be well-known :\

In every situation I’ve had the chance to use all sorts of software. Sometimes the software was cheap and old, sometimes it was hacked, sometimes it was legitimate, and more often than not it was always customized or downright proprietary.

In all cases there was a learning period; in every case we did some amazing work (even if it winds up in the rental bin :D!)

That’s my point really. I was high enough in the food chain to seriously contend with VFX Supes over the use of Blender - hell on RIPD we used videos like these as reference for what ultimately would be the garage-eating vortex at the end of the movie. Some of my former Rhythm & Hues colleagues are on this board too and we all snuck in Blender where-ever we needed it. On the new 300 film I used it for modelling landscapes (though by this time RnH went bankrupt so I don’t know if it was used.) On Pi I know some clever people who used it for tracking. At this year’s SIGGRAPH we had a large number of developers from multiple studios at the Blender BOF who were curious about it’s advancements and technology.

It’s a great piece of software. Just as Maya, Max, ZBrush, Houdini and the whole myriad of 3D software out there.

Ultimately the tools don’t matter.

Why didn’t we officially use Blender on RIPD? For much the same reason as any other company will tell you. They had a pipeline that worked with artists and developers who knew how to use it. Any more friction than is already present in the pipeline could be disastrous. Plus, it takes a lot of resources to experiment with new software. Even ILM went through some big headaches moving to a Maya/Arnold pipeline for Pacific Rim; in some cases they went back to their proprietary software.

We built Theory with the idea that anyone, anywhere, could create something great. Blender gets us there. We can quickly train people if they’ve learned other software (with George) and not have to worry. Licenses are costly for a startup like ours, especially if people want to just create and not deal with headaches. Add in patches, different platforms and downloading extra tools to make it work leaves you in for a real migraine. With Blender, we’re good to go from the start. Other studios are proving this too.

Trust me, we’ll get there as a community; as movement. One day Blender will have its Oscar for Technical Achievement. I want to make that happen.

Until then, just have fun.

Great points. Was Blender actually used for anything in RIPD? Sweet movie by the way, the trailers look awesome. :slight_smile:

We did in fact sneak it in here and there! I can’t remember which specific shots but I know some compositors needed a lot of debris elements. I used it much more on the 300 sequel in environments.

Then why do you feel the need to legitimize blender?

Earning an accolade like an Oscar would be a great acknowledgement for all the developers and community involved. Legitimizing is defined as following rules or standards; not what I’m interested in at all :slight_smile:

I think it does nee to be legitimized, but that word is misleading… legitimized in this case is used, and by used we often mean by the people who make their living on the “top tier” projects while also being able to, with confidence, say “I used blender”. Legitimized is also to remove the negative stigma associated with Blender itself, and much of that can be tied to the per-conception of open source projects and often times their community.

Legitimacy then would mean all that results in more funding, development and usage thats visible within the “top tier”.

I think it needs to happen, but this can happen from just using it, being smart in how you present it and yourself as a member of the community or user group. Its about marketing Blender though work and knowledge, and less about preaching and attacking other software.

I’m sure it will happen as all the pieces start falling into place, but that doesnt mean we cannot be inactive either.

I agree with you; it is about marketing through doing great work, sharing our knowledge, and not being preachy.
I do agree too that we should be active.
But no one here should feel that Blender is some second class citizen. That’s all stigma in people’s heads:)

I use Blender for product development, archiviz, engineering concepts, advertising stills, physical sims and a whole load more, but mainly for photorealism of one kind or another.

Sometimes the client set out to find a Blender type. Sometimes they simply did not care what I used. Sometimes they wanted 3DS Max, Maya or Autodesk and looked at my portfolio, shrugged their shoulders and settled for Blender. Clients mainly want results, and are even willing to jump through one or two hoops if they get what they want.

The point is, Blender does not need validation or legitimization; it needs pros like us to mention to our clients that we used Blender in doing the job. That’s almost all.

The big issue we are having with the UI now is going to hamper this, since anyone looking at blenderartists will see a very poor signal-to-noise ratio. If Blender were so broken, we professionals would not get our work done quickly enough to turn a profit. The problem is that the overwhelming majority of noise is being generated by people whose living does not depend on learning Blender properly. And that’s fine, for hobbyists.

I think we - as people trying to attract commercial work using Blender - need to promote ourselves in an entirely separate forum. I have proposed that the Blender Network put a forum in their website, a request which they simply ignored. So, we can either try to get the Network to install a forum, or build one ourselves. It’s not exactly rocket science.

Don’t try to continue your other disastrous thread in here. I’ve already heard enough about how professional you are and how noobs are cramping your style. Anybody who’s ever gotten paid for work with blender can call themselves a professional to inflate the importance of their opinion.

As for the main topic - yes, Blender doesn’t need to be legitimized. The software speaks for itself through the work its’ community has made. If most of it is crappy, then PR and politics is not the issue there.

Great to hear, Campbell raised a good point. About the development of blender, my dreams is getting into gaming. And eventually have paid full time devs doing development on blender code. that benefits all.

Out of curiosity what point did he raise and is there a source?

Yes !

Blender doesn’t need to be conformist to be attractive. Blender has an innovative interface (at least the 1.6 - 2.4 released) and should seduce by the quality of it’s production and rendering tools. People who cry for standards should adapt (at least try) - or switch to an other package. There are many affordable 3D creation tools.

You are lowering the standard of the conversation with your ad-hominem attacks on me. If you have a logical argument, I think everyone is willing to hear it,including me. By saying that “I’ve already heard enough” you are acting petulantly, which is simply undermining any good points you might want to make, aside from being rude. Try to maintain a courteous attitude even if you disagree vehemently; this is what civilised discourse and debate is all about.

There was nothing constructive about your argument - you’re saying that since the majority of users here are hobbyists, it is detrimental to the software’s progress. Well here’s the thing - having hobbyists is completely normal. The vast majority of 3dsmax, Maya, Houdini etc. users are hobbyists too. The people who actually steer Blender’s development are not the newbies or the forum loudmouths, it’s the ones who do, who contribute. You’re presenting it as if developers are automated coding machines who fulfill the requests of any incompetent user without thinking. If only some of us professionals would get our wishes granted by those coding machines, then Blender would get better!

So what exactly do you what us to do here? Make a little elitist sub-community filled with so-called “professionals” who tell the actual contributors what to do? If you have a legitimate problem with the software, you know where the bug tracker is.

Don’t put words into my mouth. I never said that hobbyist are detrimental to progress. At least have the courtesy to quote me precisely, even if you persist in your rudeness.

Again, you are presenting your arguments as if they are what i said. Don’t make up what I said, quote me. Argue with what I actually say, not what you wished I said.

No, not at all. My argument is simple:

Is Blender’s UI broken? No. Therefore, don’t fix it. Spend the time on feature improvements/fixes/creation.

How do I know it’s not broken? Because I use every day. For most of my working day. And I’m not the only one. Ergo, Blender if fine. Ugly, yes. I’s rather have features than eye candy. Wouldn’t you?

Let’s see here:

  • Implying that newbies whining on the forum have direct control over development priorities
  • Developers are wasting time on eye candy when they should be working on “core development”
  • “Good” users are a silent minority and need to rise up, otherwise the whining users will take over the development

Is Blender’s UI broken? No. Therefore, don’t fix it. Spend the time on feature improvements/fixes/creation.

Maybe there is something broken in the UI here and there, have you done a thorough review? The fact it works well enough doesn’t mean they should halt all progress in that area. Stop telling the developers what to do. If you want something done real bad, start coding or pay someone who can. Isn’t that what professionals do?

Does Blender’s UI need to be fixed? A lot of people think so. If it needs to be fixed, is if broken?

I’m not really impressed with your semantic tricks.

Hi davida.
It would be good to promote Blender you and your colleagues show how Blender has been used in these cool movies :slight_smile:

  1. You are creating the implication.

  2. I most definitely think that spending time on the UI is a waste of time. That’s the thrust of my argument.

  3. That was humour. I apologize for that. Clearly it was too subtle.

I’m telling the devs what to do. You are putting words in my mouth yet again. I will stop discussing anything with you because you are unable to hold a civil conversation with me and you either misquote me, quote me out of context or infer something I have not said. I simply haven’t the patience, and I acknowlegde that this is a failing on my part, not yours.

My argument is not about what people think. It’s irrelevant. It’s about facts.

Now, can you prove that the UI is broken? Just because people think so, even if they are the majority, it does not make it a fact.

The closest thing we have to a fact are the result being generated. So far, they are quite impressive.