Heheh. Yeah that works for me.
I have the feeling this thread should belong to the “Off-Topic” forum…but that is just a hunch 
cheers!
Off topic is only for things not related to Blender or 3D right? Maybe there should be a “Rant” forum. I think that would be my favorite. 
Off topic is only for things not related to Blender or 3D right? Maybe there should be a “Rant” forum. I think that would be my favorite. ;)[/quote]
anyhow…I feel that talking about “putting down Blender” is kind of slight off-topic…but that is up to you to deside…well, we will see what the admins think, hehe
shh! don’t talk about ‘rants’, you-know-who will hear you!
but anyways, let’s be realistic here. let’s assume for a moment that blender is the biggest piece of crap in the world (yes, even bigger than the one i dumped a few minutes ago). if someone bothers to spend their time making a website about how terrible blender is, that makes them an even bigger loser than i am. 
It’s from Sutepri (“Scrapped Princess”) currently airing on japanese TV.
Martin
Yeah, theres a real snob who’s on the Aqsis forum alot. Not only does he bash Blender as being less than pro quality, he also bashes Blender users.
He’s real big on how Blender isn’t pro quality but Blenders been used for commecial productions for a few years now while the renderer he likes so much (Aqsis) has NEVER been used for real commercial work.
Not that I’m knocking Aqsis, it rarely works on my system but I’m not sure if thats my system or the way he uses sockets (this is the only renderer that requests internet access, the others ask for server access (in Zonealarm)).
I like the results when it does work, even better than 3 Delight.
In my quest for realistic glass I tried every freeware and shareware 3-D app I could find, and in the end I’m a Blenderhead. Are there better scanline renderers? Maybe, but I’ve never felt Blenders renderer wasn’t up to what I wanted to do, unless I needed raytracing. Which of course Aqsis and 3 Delight can’t do either.
Blender isn’t just the renderer either. No other piece of free or cheap modelling software offers all Blender does. I’ve been using Moray and Povray to do my raytracing, but find there are a lot of thing that are almost immpossible in Moray but easy in blender (like a paperclip), so I still do a lot of the building in Blender then use 3dwin to convert for Moray where I can use the material editor ( I just export the Mesh as a .dxf, use 3dwin to convert to the Moray UDO format (makes the .inc files for povray too) and import that to Moray. K3d is a more powerfull modeller (renderman spec) and has lots of neat features it too falls short of Blender.
Blender has all the features I need, armatures, keyframing, RVK’s and tons of outher stuff I still haven’t discovered. Almost anything that’s not already in blender can be scripted.
THere’s my way more than two cents worth!
:o
i know this is WAY off topic in this already off-topic post, but mazer…havnt seen that logo in awhile
Indeed, Tokabola,…this is the attitude I witnessed. I think it’s just sour grapes. Also, I would not be at all suprised if Blender comes out with an on board raytracer one of these days. Blender is here to stay, and the naysayers will one day have to eat their words, if they haven’t already. And if they haven’t they are just slow in coming around.
The quality of raytraced pictures is of course better than scanlined ones. If you look into the gallery of cgtalk.com, you have to admit that there’s a lot of stuff that is far better than anything that can be done with blender.
I have started using Yafray, but I’m not sure yet if the combination Blender+Yafray will be as good as the ‘big’ ones. I also remember that C4D has really funky particle features (Turbulence fields, wind, deflectors…). At least there is a reason for the big companies to pick a certain piece of software (which is not blender).
Yafray’s only at v 0.0.4 so don’t give up hope just yet 
nah, There’s some use for blender, like moving vertex, smoothing, subsurf and animation abilitys, But I feel limited because it can’t do the same thing that 3ds 2 or 3 does, including better rendering, after that then maybe it will get my respect.
Dr. Capone…you obviously haven’t spent very much time looking at the quality of work coming out of this program. You feel limited? Well most people feel limited to not spending $12,000 on 3DS. Your comments are baseless at best.
Not really, 3ds 2 and 3 is very cheap even cheaper if you are a student, you could get it under 200 USD including an autocad for windows and Dos. Sure it may be a downgrade but better then nothing, ofcourse there is also Now3D that can extrude along a PATH with raytracing and we are talking free here.
quality blender material eh… granted theres some good stuff, but when you compare it to major app galleries, its just not good anymore =) find me the best blender picture, and ill find you a mediocre lightwave picture, then we’ll compare
take a peek at cgtalk, or raph… youll see the limiteless limits of blender, but hey, its evolving pretty fast so just hang in there… if you would stop and compare, really take the time to compare, youd realize the animation limits, the modeling limits, the rendering limits… all that jazz
its the diehard zealous blender fans that kill me and make people want to point out flaws… we arent working with the best people, at least not yet
%|
Sorry, but that is funny. Going round CGTalk really does demonstrate that the tools make little difference, still very few people can coax results even out of things like Lightwave.
Additionally the number of people on there that slag off MAX’s scanline renderer, and the fact nearly everyone raytraces (with silly long render times I certainly couldn’t live with) and I think you’re comparing apples and oranges.
I actually find the work on CGTalk and raph 99% really dull generic tat, either photorealistic cars or sci-fi/fantasy nonsense. There’s very little imagination going on. What I saw of expose was for me a disheartening experience.
It’s all about results at the end of the day, and if you learn to work within the limits of your software (as you have to do whatever program you’re using) you can get very good results. Maybe we can’t do photorealistic rendering in Blender, but there’s plenty of other styles that you can do in it just as well as the bigger apps. It’s over ambitiousness and just using new features cos you have them (see current overuse of exaggerated GI) that will cause your pictures to age badly, whatever tools you use.
However sad this may be, it is nevertheless true. Comparing the bulk of images from the blender userbase to that of some major league applications is slightly unfair though, since there’s a higher percentage of professionals at work in the latter category. That will naturally make such a comparison a bit warped.
But, as good as Blender is, it cannot (yet) compete with the big boys. BUT (again) the fact that the majority of Blender users are young hobbyists has more impact on the look of the galleries than the purely technical shortcomings of the application.
And the fact still remains - among FREE 3D-packages, there is nothing better than Blender.
Edits: I can’t spell today…
Don’t forget. Blender is open source. For this reason, the possibilities of what you can do with it are virtually unlimited. How many programs do you know that can make that claim?
Cinema 4d 6 is available in Germany for 99€ now. I was SOOOOOOOOOOOO close before ordering it. I’m in some kind of a Blender crisis now. 