How do you bake the physics? and do I really have to make a game to do that… if so that is not that great…
and are you meaning painting individual colors onto an existing texture.?. because I am talking about litterally drawing parts of a texture onto a mesh…
Blender has 3d projection painting, and 2d painting, and you can bake physics to IPO for animation, those are all present in the current release. If 3ds max has a plugin, you can change that to ‘plugin’ as you will see other sections have. Generally it is people who are well familiar with the software who are doing the changes to the feature sets.
LetterRip
Blender does not have projection painting, only regular 3d texture painting.
The Texturing and Painting category doesn’t make sense to me, it doesn’t say if the Node/Layer/Multi-Material/Object columns apply to painting or materials. If they apply to materials then Blender should have 3x more Yes there. And if they apply to painting, the Lightwave row is wrong because it doesn’t support painting at all.
Anyways, such comparisons don’t say much, 3d painting in Blender is nearly useless in 2.42, but still has a Yes there.
Quoted for agreement.
How do you bake the physics? and do I really have to make a game to do that… if so that is not that great…
In the top menu > Game > Record Game Physics to IPO.
You don’t have to set up a whole game of course just the essentials. I know of no physics simulation where there isn’t any parameter to set…
and are you meaning painting individual colors onto an existing texture.?. because I am talking about litterally drawing parts of a texture onto a mesh…
I’m tired.
Jean
Brecht,
I’m working on improving the comparison chart. Here is a proposal that will hopefully make it more useful - i posted the proposal at cgtalk, am pasting it here though…
I really think having a 3d comparsion chart is a good idea, but I think the yes/no that is currently used provides too little information.
http://wiki.cgsociety.org/index.php…son_of_3d_tools
What I would suggest is moving to a 5 point scale.
If on a 5 point scale
0 - doesn’t have it at all
1 - has it but work in progress that lacks significant basic functionality or has significant performance issues
2 - has it but work in progress that lacks some basic functionality or has performance issues
3 - has it and provides majority of basic functionality and reasonable performance
4 - provides some advanced functionality
5 - it provides something standout from the crowd
This would be useful for instance while Blender provides NURBS support I would currently place it as a 1 or 2, due to its lack of trimmed nurbs support, and small toolset available for working on NURBS. Or for Blenders Collada 1.4 support - I would give it a 2, since it is currently missing full animation support.
Alternatively for importers and exporters I devised a seperate rating system that allows the user to tell what features the format supports and what features of that format it supports.
I feel that the comparison table for format support needs to be much further developed, first I recommend splitting into import and export. Secondly I think we need to convey instead of straight yes/no what features of the exporter are supported and possibly whether it is considered to be ‘Good’ support. What I suggest for the 3d formats is
Geometry Uvmaps Textures Materials Rigging Constraints Morphtargets Animations
GUTMaRCMoA
and also possibly
Scene, Lights, Cameras, Particles, Physics, and other properties (although only a few formats contain such) - perhaps a score could be used to represent to the ‘level’ it is supported
so
1 - Geometry; 2 - UvMaps; 3 - Image Textures; 4 - Materials; 5 - Rigging; 6 - Constraints; 7 - Morphtargets; 8 - Animations; 9 - Scene; 10 - Lights; 11 - Cameras; 12 - Physics; 13 - Particles
If all features of the format are supported then A for all can be used perhaps. or use score over max score - so all supported for a format that has everything including partlces would be 13/13. Whereas only supporting Geometry would be 1/13. Or a format which only supports geometry, uvmaps and image textures might be 3/3.
Comments?
LetterRip
It looks pretty good, but I am getting tired and will have to look at it tomorrow…
I heard for Spiderman 2 blender was used for computer graphics so I guess it is pretty good.
For cinematics, to plan the shots and the actors marks, not special effects although it could have been and is for other movies.
But yes, Blender is pretty good.
Jean
Minor correction:
I think you mean animatics (animated storyboards for shot pre-visualization) . . . cinematics are the pre-rendered animations (or, sometimes live-action) cut scenes used in video games.
Right : thanks
Jean
Your welcome Jean.
By the way, I did notice another mistake you made:
Major correction:
But yes, Blender is Ultra-Super-Fantastic . . . and will soon dominate the world of CGI! 
Seriously though . . . as one who has used high-end apps as well as some of the other free ones, Blender stands out as unique. It rivals the big boys in functionality & quality, and surpasses the little guys with it’s depth & flexibility.
I’m a software fanboy by no means (motto: use what works & use it well). But even with it’s quirks & shortcomings, Blender is in a class by itself . . . better than the ‘free’ apps, and freer than the ‘better’ ones! It’s improving at an amazing rate, and it’s developer/user community is awesome.
That being said . . . TURN ON YOUR BLENDER & MIX IT UP! 
The problem with Blender is that there are so few professional studios which are using it.
Of course Blender is free and not a bad tool but especially the NURBS sux and workflow and renderer is slow and disappointing!
If I would have the money for Softimage, Cinema 4D or Maya I would prefer these apps. 
I wonder if there is a way to show blender is a top notch program brecause to me Blender is the bes(im not just saying that because it is the only apps. I’ve ever used).
Creative_MB02,
workflow is slow in what respects and renderer is slow for what type of renders?
Company2,
the best way to show blender as a ‘top notch program’ is to make high quality content with it.
LetterRip
Give it my best shot
I think the best way to do this is for more movies like Elephants Dream.
Although to REALLY shocase it’s power, I think a scifi action movie would be great for Blender; like a Stargate type thing with a big space battle and such.
Characters led and rigged in Blender, and Zbrush-like detail added with the soon-coming SharpConstruct tools. w00t!
Only for Pre-vis and such, as in the screenshot shown, it was an old version with the old interface Blender 2.42 can go well beyond the use back then now.
This topic should be move to “Other Software” place in forum…
Yeah I myself can’t wait until they come out with a new version of Blender.