Lol this is the only high quality full length movie made by blender ,i say again the only one,
Now you want to know what kind of animation movie produced by Maya?
Lol this is the only high quality full length movie made by blender ,i say again the only one,
thank you for your reply
I too work parallel with maya but I lack experience
I would like to know why you find maya better than blender
What about Tangent’s first film using Blender, Ozzy?!?
To describe all the benefits of maya vs blender, I need to make a very long list. In addition, I am not a Maya user. I used maya only a few times at work.
I can only list what I know.
Fast viewport - more geometry, more objects, materials and shaders.
DirectX in viewport - is the same as EEVEE, but already in 2012 I guess.
Multiple objects editing & unwrapping.
Hard Mesh addon.
A huge number of tools for unvraping, packing uvs, UDIMs.
A huge number of add-ons (best in industry) for the simulation of solids, liquids, gases, crowds, hairs and particles. The result of their work, you can see in the summer blockbusters.
External renders - Vray, Corona, Octane, Maxwel, Renderman etc. - all of them with very good integration.
These features have been in Maya for many years.
I want to remind you that this is just what I know.
sorry for my english
If you want to keep your job, you should drop it. The ONLY areas where Blender can claim to compete with or beat Maya are general modeling, sculpting, and texturing (and even that’s iffy in its current state with UDIM still lacking official support in Blender). Blender CAN do many of the things that Maya can do, but most of the time it doesn’t do them nearly as well, especially when you start needing stable sim tools or advanced add-ons. And trying to talk any current Arnold user into switching to Cycles is a non-starter.
Don’t confuse this post with being unduly harsh to Blender, but in the real world, there are bills to pay and peoples’ paychecks and livelihoods hanging in the balance, and NO responsible tech lead for a production company (who isn’t trying to make some kind of philosophical statement) should pick Blender as their one-and-only tool in its current state. And to add to that, as an artist, you are severely limiting your marketability by not expanding your skill set. Never aim to be a “Software X” artist. Aim to be an artist who can thrive with any tool.
Have to disagree as a former Arnold user. Cycles is easier to grasp and use than Arnold since Principled BSDF node were introduced.
I just want to balance @m9105826 and @so3Datel comments :
Of course Maya ( and his plugins ) is way much powerful than blender, and many blockbuster use them, to a point where it gets very difficult (or impossible) to achieve the same result in blender.
But if you’re a small company , not doing high-end projects, Blender can be a very valid option.
ATM it’s really suited for that and correct me if I’m wrong but blender seems to have faster workflows and is simpler in many areas.
Having the “best” software doesn’t mean it’s more efficient in every cases.
Would the fastest car ever will be the best option for your everyday needs ?
So @musticide , if you’re still trying to convince your boss, maybe do a really case study, and make a complete project out of blender and see if it works better in your cases.
Arnold now has a principled shader (Standard Surface) and its process is much easier.
No it is not.
Also i think that @m9105826 did not argue about ease of use, but ability of the renderer and quality of the end product.
Arnold has such a good reputation that some customers who don’t know shit about 3d demanding that their work should be done with Arnold.
If you’re not using Arnold, you’re not getting the job. Simple as that.
i don’t understand why people like to compare cycles with arnold or blender with maya in the first place…Arnold has a big company behind it and a dedicated team working 24/7 and selling it as an end product to big companies while cycles has one main developer with some help from the community but limited resources and probably doesn’t work on it all time. for a non-commercial product is a damn impressive.
You don’t understand it?
Its obvious: they are both DCCs / Renderers. Of course they get compared.
What i don’t understand is why it has to be a either/or decision.
Instead of arguing against Maya i would argue for Blender in addition. Nobody stops you from using both and combine the best of both worlds.
The fact that Blender is Open Source makes it the ideal software to use in addition to whatever you have to use.
And yes cycles is damn impressive, one man show or not.
BUT if i would have to choose between spending money on a commercial license or work longer to get to the same result, i choose the former. Time is Money.
In an commercial environment people HAVE to make these decisions and that includes comparisons and other cost calculations.
i think my phrasing was not on point, because true big studios use many softwares in their production which adds a a reasonable amount that’s why some of them are starting to use blender for more specific task while other integrate it completely in their workflow like goodbye kansas,Barnstorm VFX and tangent animation, which they found out using blender/cycles is not only useful in their work but also benefits them from saving tons of money and having their own small dev team helps them with gov tax credits.
Another thing in the mix is the fact that software in a studio environment is not usually the software we have available. This is true for Maya as well as Blender. The entire selling point of Maya in the beginning was how extensible it was. All the companies I am aware of (and have worked with) use a modified version of Blender or a modified Blender tool. The new Pichipoy rigify tool - that made it into official Blender - is a great example. Also Blenrig 5, which started as an inhouse tool. The guys that made Next Gen used their own tool for animation and rigging that they developed in-house. To my knowledge this tool and the other improvements to cloth and hair have not yet made it into Blender official.
Probably the main difference between Blender off-the-shelf and Maya off-the-shelf, is that Maya has far more robust tools for advanced features such as dynamics and particularly character cloth. (not to mention animation) So out of the gate you are already at a different level with Maya.
But as soon as you start comparing work of “large studios”, you are really not comparing apples to apples since they all use highly modified versions and plugins or develop their own tools. Pixar and Disney being two of the largest.
I 100% agree with you on this. It can absolutely be a valid option, but these discussions are never about “Is Blender an option?”. Look at the OP. The issue was him trying to convince his boss that “Blender is better”. And, frankly in the vast majority of cases, it isn’t better when one takes into account one’s time costing money.
Frankly, the Blender community is pretty damned unique in how they react to that. Go onto Polycount, CGTalk, etc and users of Maya, 3DS, C4D, etc have no hassles with cost/benefit analyses of their time vs cost of plugins/addons/external tools. They may not be able to afford them, but they will happily accept that they are better for the job in question.
I think as you said the issue lies in “better” , which can always be proven wrong :
Is sketchup better than maya ? I’m sure we can find a way or a situation where the answer is yes.
I work on animation series, last one was a very tight budget and we obviously didn’t need all the bang and whistles that best plugins can offers. To us blender was perfect.
We could deliver 26*5mn episodes right on time with a very good quality for that kind of budgets.
The estimation cost for all Maya and Redshift licences was about €20 000, we can save that and invest on better hardware and more artist time on the project itself.
So is blender better for all project ? obviously not, but for us it was great, I don’t see why we had to work with another software.
Not to mention that we use blender VSE for shot management, so we can create , access and render all shots from the VSE and always have the episode we’re working on at hand, which in our situation saves us a lot of time and help us a lot in the creative process. You can look at an old projects I’ve worked on which is based on the same workflow ( that as evolved a lot since then ) here : Transformice Cartoon Series
And if you want to look at the project I’m talking about, you can see one episode here :
Of course, it’s quite simple, not the best project ever… but we are quite proud of it given the time and budget constraints we had . And at no point we feel that blender wasn’t the right tool for that.
I’m convinced that one strength of blender is to have a fast workflow and it can do a lot of things, but sadly you can’t take it’s functionalities as far as best softwares can do. As said earlier , when I say “valid” it means I think in some cases it can totally do the job that Maya can do.
Maya and 3DS can do much complex projects, also they have the reputation to crash often, and their plugins aren’t always compatible. So if you don’t need all that power, maybe blender could be “better” for your projects …
i agree, but things are changing and will take time…however blender now has a big studio like tangent Animation using it exclusively, and they made Next Gen 95% (the talk will be revealing how) also the cloth and hair improvements have been put into 2.8 u are missing…also the CEO/COO Ken Zorniak and Jeff Bell have expressed that development they do in-house will be shared with BF and it’s up to them to decide how to make it into the master…of course they have the rights to decide what should be shared or not.
in my humble opinon i think 2.8 will be a game changer in the future it’s shaping up to be one of the best DCCs out there and the BF is doing some interesting and cool things, like for instance the new Development fund 2.0 (released today) which will boost it even more,
and this comes from a long time maya user.
Absolutely we can, architecture for which Sketchup was designed.
There is a maxim I was taught when quoting for software development that carries over into graphics work. That maxim is that there are three axes to a project - getting it done quickly, getting it done cheaply, and getting it done well… but the client can only choose two of the three.
I think, in regards to software choice, that maxim can usually be applied as well. Cheap, fast, powerful - choose two. Blender I think gives you two… in a roundabout fashion. The cheap option is obvious, but when it comes to fast & powerful… you only get half of each. It can be fast, but where features are missing - you have to engage clunky workarounds. It can be powerful… but if the feature is missing, you’re out of luck because the option of third-party, closed source add-ons is not available to breach the gap.
Where Blender has it’s current niche is exactly where you seem to have landed with your animation series - in areas where initial investment in the expensive tools is expressly not an option. When the “cheap” axis is the most important and you have yet to purchase the more expensive tools - Blender is “better” than any tool that costs you thousands to start with. Once you get past that investment issue (such as in the studio the OP was discussing) - Blender’s value starts to fall.
Another factor people forget to cost in is time. Sure people toss around phrases like time is money. And this is easy to understand how this applies to a company. Salaries and rent etc.
But how many individual freelance artists calculate what time costs them? Does not matter what your pay arrangements are or even if you are doing this as a hobby. It costs you a fairly fixed amount just to exist and stay healthy to work or play.
And the end goal is either going to be the satisfaction of a job well done or money or both.
So you take a month of frustration trying to learn and wramgle a bad tool and get a so so result if at all. That is not only wasted time but also money to live.
Then there is your tolerance level. How tenacious are you? I will wager that if you are looking for good professional and competitive results that your patience level has limits and it won’t be long before you say F this.
Then there is the final quality of results. If you care at all you will notice your moral drops. Another factor.
Keeping your moral up means working swiftly and smoothly. When things are too slow and frustrating your interest drops and this affects your work.
Then there is your creative level. And understanding what it takes to keep yourself creatively happy and healthy.
Tools that bog you down in technical difficulty zaps your creative energy becauae you find yourself using that creative brain power to solve problems instead of creating.
All these things add up to the finished work. And even if that finished work is only for satisfaction, it will suffer. And if it means pleasing clients and keeping yourself hired you wount last long.
This is exactly why i feel that in my case blender is a better option
Since our systems aren’t that great they can’t handle maya
It keeps crashing and when it does work most often than not it is really slow
The files get corrupted and there are errors and problems all the time
Blender on the other hand is made to run on almost any system
It has a fast modelling workflow and also doesn’t crash that often (on the scale that we work on)
But then most software these days is not perpetual but you have to pay on a yearly basis. I just checked and Max or Maya for example costs almost 2000€ per year. The same is true for renderers like VRay which is 340€ per node per year. You´ll probably want more like 10 nodes, so that is another 3400€ per year. Or you have to utilize expensive render services which you might have to do anyways because 10 nodes isn´t all that much.
So you never really “get past that investment issue”.