Why Blender Isn't Industry Standard

They could have used same arguments, 10 years ago.

Blender is now a standard. It is not “the” standard for Hollywood.
It does not mean that is not used by artists in big studios.
It does not mean that they never had heard about Blender.
The simple fact that nobody omits it into a discussion about “what are 3D Software applications available ?” means that it is a standard.

OK, there is not a lot of documentation about 2.8 and tutorials using 2.8 UI.
I have a piece of news for you : 2.8 UI is a WIP like 2.5 was.
2.81’s file browser is a lot different than 2.80’s one.
2.81’s Outliner is a lot different than 2.80’s one.
2.8 workflow is a WIP.
2.80 is not able to display different Collections into two 3d Viewport without creating two separated windows. You can do it in 2.81.
You have no Library Override in 2.80. You will have them in 2.81. There will be some feedback and they will probably be different in 2.82.
So, currently, people who are making tutorials, don’t expect them to be still valid in 6 months.

There will be a moment when workflow will crystallize. But It is really hard to say when because of huge amount of projects that have been launched.
When most of big concepts like everything nodes will be a reality in official release ; that would become a lot more easy to make in depth tutorials.
But currently, something like multi-object editing is new stuff for everyone in Blender community. It is hard to think about exploiting such changes, fluently ; when it is partially working or you are simply not used to it, yet.
There will be a lot of tutorials when people who knows Blender will be fluent in 2.8.
But for the moment, they are waiting for missing 2.79 features, for 2.8 original design additions, for community improvement suggestions or bugfixes.

You will not produce a tutorial about Hair Editing as long as tools to cut hair are broken.
You will not take pleasure to create a tutorial about textures with its unsatisfying UI and convoluted way of baking textures. And if you know that Pablo and Lukas have plans to improve them, you are more inclined to wait.

During 2.5x series, UI changes attracted a lot of people. But reality is that for 2.4x users, a decent workflow was only restored for 2.6x series. And after that stabilization, Blender was recognized as a standard by many people while 2.7x series. (If you are not convinced by that, just take a look to Blender youtube channel. There was already many talks at Blender Conference in 2016).
2.8 initiated another cycle. But now, the scale of Blender community is a lot different.
And if your project is ignoring several areas of Blender, you can produce an A to Z tutorial with 2.80.
At last year conference, Juma Jurabaev explained how he used Blender 2.8 without knowing lots of basics of Blender.
He made tutorials about Grease Pencil v.2 but don’t expect him to produce tutorials about motion tracking.

OK. There is not always a person teaching Blender in every art school.
But, nowadays, if you pretend yourself being an artist interested in concept art or previz ; and never had open Blender : you will probably be seen as a young, ignorant or arrogant guy.
Probably as much as if you never heard about Unity use in same domain.
If during a discussion, you say : “I open it, did not understand anything, tried to follow a tutorial, felt uncomfortable and abandon it.” : that is fine.
But if you spread an opinion about Blender without having tried it : nobody will take you, seriously.
That is the big difference between current situation and old situation that was existing, years ago.
People were just repeating opinion of their teacher without really understanding what forged that opinion.

We succeeded to invert that being most frequent behavior. Students are trying Blender and they don’t understand why it is not used everywhere. Well. Reason is simple : it is far to be perfect for every task and they still have things to learn.

But at the end, everybody have to try Blender. It is widely used. So, it became a standard.

1 Like

Let me just mention that I’ve heard from a trusted source that the ‘industry standard’ marketing efforts of Autodesk are much more comprehensive than the actual worldwide amount of officially licensed Maya and 3ds Max users. Appearances can be deceptive.

I was a 3ds Max user since the late 1990s, and was also an official Autodesk beta tester for several years, until in 2012 I had become fed up with the stalled feature innovation, the software instability and the high pricing.

After switching to Blender 2.5 it didn’t take long to discover that Blender is constructed very logically. 2.8 has made Blender more accessible to new and switching users, but it was already a powerhouse deserving to be discovered and appreciated by the masses. It’s great that Blender has now become a rapidly rising star in the 3D world.

1 Like

Their marketing efforts are working I guess. The perception can be half the battle.
Especially when you look at Blender and what the general professional perception of it has been for many years now.
But I do believe that is changing.

I wouldn’t say any software as such deserves anything. But I love how accessible Blender makes 3d for everyone! I have no love for any particular software, but I do have a love for 3d. And if we can spread that to more people, then I’ll be satisfied.

It’s great to see so much innovation coming to Blender, especially, like you say when Maya has been stale for a long time.


That’s the thing I find with Blender a lot of the time.
Many things feel like a WIP feature. And i constantly see this argument. Just wait for the next point update then it’ll be the go to 3d software.
The reality is, it will take time. It’s definitely speeding up, but still has some way to go.
It’s by no means impossible to see more adoption.

I’m very optimistic when it comes to the future of Blender, but I also think we have to be realistic about it.

1 Like

Yes exactly my thinking.
If it would happen or not I don’t know, just a thought.

To be honest I can imagine a ‘feature fatigue’ if Blender’s development pace keeps accelerating with more and more active developers who are relatively free to add tools, features and UI changes.

New features, tools and UI changes are added to the Blender alpha master builds almost every day at the moment. A stark contrast with the yearly updates of Houdini, ZBrush, 3ds Max, etcetera, introducing a maximum of about ten major new features.

It’s becoming harder to keep up with Blender’s frequent changes and additions. I’d personally like to see more structure in the additions and changes, for example with a multi-person judgement panel evaluating whether a change or addition is really worth it before having it added to the master builds, so there would be a filter, to avoid Blender users becoming oversaturated with new features and changes.

This is just my personal $0.02. :slightly_smiling_face: I’m interested to read your opinions about this, so I decided to start a new topic:

1 Like

That is not really what I tried to expose.
2.8 series is an unusual one. All parts of software are engaged into a big move.
That is a really different period that 2.7x series where users were not waiting UI changes, important workflow re-organization but just a specific feature.
I am not saying “There will be a denoiser in 2.79.”
I am saying “Nobody knows what 2.84 will look like.”

Exactly why I steered clear of it for many years from the ramparts of my castle walls on the hill of the industry. :wink:

Seriously though, the ‘industry’ sitting up and finally seeing Blender as a viable pipeline tool is fantastic for every single person that uses the program. I don’t think this can be overstated enough. Companies like Epic or Ubisoft AAA pushing tools and workflows back down the pipe and those tools getting added to branches or master is a very exciting prospect.

Not to mention the fund and number of devs has jumped by a huge amount in the last 8 months alone from this industry excitement.


https://twitter.com/Framestore/status/1192137656144142351 :smiley:


That’s a good point. The rapid new features drive excitement, but for a studio, its a bit of risk to stay up to date.

I could see a Blender LTS version being useful. New versions get all the new features, and the LTS release just receives bug fixes.

1 Like

I was just about to post this. Maybe we’ll soon see Framestore becoming a sponsor.

1 Like

With supporting of development funds from major players in the industry (NVIDIA, AMD, EPIC, UBISOFT, etc.) that the signal Blender soon will become a major player in the 3D industry.
I expect in mid-2020.

When that happens, then business rationality will work. CG companies will recalculate their expenses to pay for licenses. they prefer to use reliable software for free.

Wait and see.

Everyone knows why. Because Blender does not have industry standard shortcuts.

Now poking aside, the reason why it is not adopted widely because of old habits and custom tools integration. I think that most Blender users underestimate the experience in production proven software. The total number of Blender hours used (artist hours) in real high stress production is next to nothing compared to the total number of hours of Maya or Houdini artists hours in such productions. Obviously those Blender hours will go up over time, it is just not going as fast as the Blender community would like to see. And I doubt that messing with keymaps will fix it. When I had to learn Maya in 2000 for game work I had no choice but learn the Maya keymaps, instead of crying about it and before that I was using Lightwave (was total culture shock). Maya was new Lightwave was old, and Maya did not give a shit about what other apps put out as such standards. 20 years later Maya is still strong and Lightwave is barely holding its shaky ground.

I thought Blender was already being used in the industry ? It’s already been the primary 3D and animation hub app on several features and TV series ? I work in the industry and I use it all the time. It’s super stable and becoming more and more easy to work across other apps and into a bigger pipeline.

These things do change fast though. After a fair few years in the industry, I clearly remember when Maya surpassed Softimage and before that when Lightwave was everywhere in TV VFX. I also remember how quickly ZBrush came from nowhere and totally changed the whole workflow.

I think a lot of what has happened is that we have seen a sort of establishment group of apps and workflows remain roughy consistent for the last several years and that this has mirrored the growth of 3D industry focused collage courses and online learning.
I think this can help create this perspective that things don’t change very fast or that there is only one right way to do things. From what I have seen in past times change comes very fast and almost is upon you without realizing it.

I like these guys videos. They are very good on ZBrush workflows in particular. But they do come from a very specific part of the industry. And the creative industry’s and the creative frontiers and career opportunities opening up working with digital media and tech are far bigger that just the big Soho VFX houses. And much broader and wider in scope. 3D technology runs through almost all of the creative fields now. What exactly is this industry standard ?

I’m not going to get into any Blender vs anything else stuff. But I am recommending strongly to people just getting started in this field and wanting to work with 3D content in general that they should be learning Blender now.

A lot of the potential Blender offers is the advantage of an open source ecosystem which seems about now to really be coming into it’s own. So this partly negates the argument that says … But Blender has been around years. The speed of Blender development right now is dizzying. And the open source system has so many unique advantages. All I can imagine of the future is it’s doing to be interesting for sure. But I think events have surely moved beyond this ‘ Why is Blender not the industry standard ‘ stuff now ?

Above all I would say let’s stay open minded and focus on being as flexible and adaptable as possible.

1 Like

theres only 2 major hurdles in the way why Blender is not being used much in the gaming industry;

  1. broken undo system (everyone knows this)
  2. not the greatest performance

big companies only look at the stability and performance. Maya/Max just deliver on this much better so there is no reason for them to switch unless Blender delivers the same thing.

1 Like


Once it’s an industry standard people will look for the next new “rebel” software. Kind of like people who listen to an obscure indie band but lose interest when the singer quits in an alcohol-induced tantrum and the remaining lineup grabs a perfectly talented yet non-angsty singer and then releases their first mainstream album with an actual radio single. :wink:

1 Like

I’m not sure that’s the case. Ton has said “Blender is for Blender users”, and that the primary focus should be making Blender better for the people who currently use it. If that attracts new users, then great, but they shouldn’t be the focus.

1 Like

Now try to prove this to:
A) Animators
B) Modellers
C) Video Editors
D) Coders
E) Printers
F) …farking list goes on for People using Blender for all sorts of nonsense.

In a nutshell Blender’s success (or Goal) is the audience which they reach.

…if you can point out to me a specific crowd that should only be using Blender?.. good luck on that…

Its goal is to be for everyone (choose one from the list above).

Edit: Heck G) Scientists

Prove what? It’s not a fact, it’s a statement of intent.


You question that Blender isn’t for everyone based on Ton’s statement… yet it hasn’t changed where Blender really stands… Again, you see the broad use within the audience and Ton who himself focusses on making animated movies, it should in fact be for who exactly? “People that use Blender already” …See my list(!)

what do they think about that?
Shall they start looking for something else now?