Concessions

Sounds like someone needs to upgrade from 1.32. You’re saying that everything in the last release was bugfixes? Riiiiiiiiight. And yes, you are bashing Blender.

You have got to be kidding. Granted, Blender is not in the same league as Maya or 3dsMax, but it is adding features at an incredible pace.

Max’s yearly release is a joke. They keep trying to bolt on new features without touching the core. As a result, Max has turned into this ghastly frankenstein of a 3D program with “new features” that are buggy as hell because they won’t fix the damn bugs in the core. There are bugs still present in Max that have been there since version 3.0! Such is the way of life at Autodesk. They buy up software and replace actual development with developing “features” that are a joke. This way they can spend less money on development and get a nice cash flow from the yearly “updates”. Can you tell I’m fed up with Max? They seem to do this with all the products they buy up. I remember when Discreet had some awsome video tools. Since they’ve been bought be Autodesk, they’ve carved everything up into smaller pieces so they can make more money, and the actual functionality hasn’t changed much, despite the yearly “updates”.

This is why everybody was so pissed off when Autodesk bought Maya…

Blender devs have no issues with tackling real problems and changing the core functionality, because even though it is hard to do and time consuming, the payoffs are huge. Just look at how big the changes have been with every version since it was open-sourced.

Sigh Oh well… Looks like it’s a flame war now.

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/7909/lockdoa9.gif

I hope not. I agree with everything Fish said. Blender is being updated very, very quickly and much more than 3ds max. Max is probably on its way out for the same reasons Fish said (one down :slight_smile: )

edited by me in order to avoid offense

Well, since you are getting personal now, read my name properly…
To the others who at least used some form of logical arguments, granted Autodesk is a greedy company with way overpriced software. I’m certainly no fan. Unfortunately, for anyone that want to use 3d software in a productive environment, Blender is simply too limited. In my field, architectural viz (and I have mentioned this many times before), Blender is just not there. Why bother with features like hair, etc, when they still have not gotten basic stuff like snapping, the ability to read (not create) common dxf format?
And by the way, I do have 2.42, which was released quite a few months ago. When will the next release be available? From what I’ve read, none of the above mentioned features will be in the next release either.

And I’ll stop you right there. Right now, blender is making amazing advances, but not in your field. Archviz is both (a) a big market, and (b) very boring to those not in archviz. Unless you pickup some coding skills yourself, or make convincing arguments that the updates you need will benefit the larger community of blender uses, its not gonna happen.

How is dxf support gonna help Joe Blender make a short film like elephants dream? How is snapping gonna help plumiferos?

If Elephants Dream is all that Blender about, then stop calling it a 3d app, or compare it to something as professional as Maya or Max. The features that I mentioned could actually be very well used for many other applications other then architecture.
If you’d bother to look around a little, you will see that Blender has been used for architectural work before, and that the artists involved admitted about it being particularly cumbersome to use, due to the lack of these features.
As to your argument about archviz being boring, really…

Here i have to say:

EBOW3D IS RIGHT

I’m doing architectural visualisations, too. And Snapping is such a big feature, when it comes to Architecture. It’s not that look-a-like, like in a character, here you have to be able to get a point onto a point, and a wall directly at the end of another wall, not +/- 1unit or so… Maya has one of the best Snappings, I’ve ever used, and quiet often, I miss it, so I go back to Maya, just because of the ecact, cleaner Modelling.

I also agree with the bad *.dxf-import…

Hahaha , you guys are funny , really …

Yes ebow3D is right , there’s some function that missing in blender , so what ?
You’re gonna cry for ever since they’ll make the way in blender ? do you know patience ?
If you have maya or 3ds , go and use it , and be happy with it.
The developer know that these function missing , there’s no reason to cryin’ again n’ again (to me , that’s what you’re doing , and that’s proving that you like blender too).

And yes he’s wrong when he said that blender development is slower than the others software , clearly , like someone else said , there’s almost 3 release of blender per year , with real improvement (specially with the latest releases) .
And blablablabla …:rolleyes: .

Anyway …

Peace :slight_smile: .

Sheesh, what a raft of junque!

I don’t do archviz so I don’t care about that stuff. Plenty of other people do, they can use something other than Blender, then, until that functionality shows up (or not). Accurate snapping would be useful for other things but in my case (at least) it’s not a showstopper. DXF import… I couldn’t care less, honestly. As long as I can get OBJ files in from Silo I’m happy.

I’m far more interested in a complete and robust particle system, since my interest is more in the VFX end than modelling/texturing. Enhancements to the compositing and materials system would be nice as well (I wish I could get my Darktrees working reliably, for instance).

Blender seems pretty decent for what I need right now, if my needs exceed what Blender can do, I’ll get XSI Foundation (reasonably affordable for an indie/freelancer at US$495). I’d rather spend the money on something else, but if my business takes off I’ll get whatever I need to keep it moving (being painfully pragmatic, here).

I’d love to make a living using Blender, but if I can’t, oh well, I’ll move on and not spend too much precious forum bandwidth complaining about it!!

Sorry ebow3d, didnt mean to offend you. Youve got a point, Blender is not good for Architectural anything, a fairly large issue, But no one is(nor should be) comparing it to the major(and overpriced) software apps/companies(If it sounded like I was, thats not what I meant). I agree with you completely on some points, not so much on some others.
Again, I apologize
Drew
PS edited that comment

snapping is coming… (sigh) there is a developer working on it, and if you really want to help, join the funboard and help him with suggestions about what you want for an interface, not by whinging unconstructively on blenderartists about how it’s never gonna happen. if it comes out and the snapping isn’t what you wanted it to be, please don’t whine! that’s only your fault for being too lazy to give proper feedback / advice to the developer.
PS targetting developement isn’t “unprofessional” it is quite normal, and really the best thing- especially if you have limited resources or want to avoid a frankenstein interface. there are quite a few specialty 3d applications, like rhino, PMG, Maya (yes maya! it’s a film industry app primarily, not an arch viz tool) etc.
concessions is kind of a lame duck idea, since I think most of the thing people are “conceding” - micropolys, ngons, snapping, improved ui, etc. are actually in the works, or planned for a future release. I wouldn’t be surprised if all of them are in blender a year from now.
remember, it’s the developers who are adding these features, but we can help them with bug reports, feedback, good feature requests (well thought out, detailed, with comparison to other tools and how they do it) and even by stating what we do, often the developer has a better idea of how to accomplish that than we do. And funboard is a good place to do that. (it’s one of the blender mailing lists)
oh yeah, and don’t be rude to the hand that feeds you (code) :wink:

Personally, I think Blender might want to re-think it’s version naming scheme. A 3 digit version number is overkill. Most professional applications (range from OS to maya to games)* uses a single, or at most two digit code. For me, ‘2.42a’ screams beta! for some reason. What’s with opensource application and their rediculously long version numbers?

Given how fas blender matures, i believe dropping the last digit is a wise move. Blender 2.5, blender 2.6, etc… it’s easier to remember for beginners and just seems more polished than blender 2.43a…

Anyone with me on this?

I’m not sure where you heard that ‘nobody wants to touch it’, but I can tell you it’s false. What people need to understand is that N-Gons are not a trivial task, and there are certain constraints that any possible system must satisfy first before being considered suitable for inclusion in Blender. Furthermore even if Blenders modeler were rewritten to deal with N-Gons, there would be a huge amount of work needed to integrate it properly with other parts of blender.

Cheers,
Xarf

I don’t see how elephants dream means blender isn’t 3d app. The reverse in fact. It shows that everything you need to make a 10 minute short is available in the package, just as ‘bingo’ showed maya was capable when it was released.

Now if you’re comparing blender to autodesk VIZ/autocad/autodesk-studio, then true, it doesn’t compare. But thats a whole different arena, and its a different argument, and what I was getting at with the big-and-boring statement.

Programmers work for 2 main reasons, money, or interest. Archviz is massively profitable, so autodesk can find hundreds of programmers and pay them well to work on dxf import, snapping, and whatever other features archviz types need.

Now if autodesk suddenly vanished and made autocad open source, how many of those coders do you think would keep working on it? How many of them would happily keep working for free? Does it interest them?

The entertainment/vfx side of 3d is a different matter. The number of open source 3d tools (like blender), tools for game engine development, and all related fields proves that there’s a strong interest there, regardless of money. Even in supposedly profitable post-houses and software companies, the margins are very slim. No-one gets into 3d for the money. The fact that autodesk could easily buy both discreet AND alias speaks volumes for archviz vs entertainment.

I don’t doubt that snapping and improved dxf import would be useful. But you don’t have to convince me. You have to convince a programmer. If you want to PAY a programmer to work on dxf and snapping, great, no doubt they’ll happily take your money, and you’ll get your feature. But if you’re just yelling a lot and saying ‘I need it, therefore you should go work on it’, why should they bother? Whats in it for them? Does it interest them?

this is rediculous. Locked.

everyone stop being such fanboys, and realise that the Pro market is “where blender should be aiming”

And all the pros, realise that for the price of expensive software, you could infact “fund” the development of snapping (for example) get a few pros together, with $200 each and you have yourself a willing coder to stick in your features.

just stop with the arguing already.

Alltaken