And so now it is happening with Nuke

Interesting changes these days. :slight_smile:

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/nuke/non-commercial/

So far on CGTalk, the majority have a laser-like focus on a clause in the EULA that says it cannot be used during working hours.

Define ‘working hours’ then if you work from home then, apparently someone related to The Foundry says the version is intended to be used for little more than experimentation and personal learning (as in, not for serious projects whatsoever).

So in a way, it seems like they’re not going to go ahead and try to kill the Natron project before it even breaks version 1.0 by way of eliminating the userbase.

I would not take that stipulation too seriously. It is pretty clear. They don’t want you using it for work. It is non commercial. People don’t unusually do personal projects during “normal working hours”. So it is kinda redundant actually.

What this does is puts a working version in people’s hands for an extended period of time to play with and learn.

Companies are finally starting to get it. We want versions of software that showcase nearly all of the features that we can take our time to explore. 30 days trials and heavily restricted “free” versions are not enough.

I just don’t understand why companies don’t do this stuff for all of their products. Just watermark the renderings(it can be very hidden), disable exporting and embed the non-commercial software info into files when saved. Pretty much make sure that no final product can come out of the non-commercial version. The trial versions just make you not download them. They’re usually disk space heavy and very restricted. In other words: useless

Income - for some company, there are money to be made in these sector. I know that software can be copied unlike physical products, bu the thing is - there are money to be made even if the end users are not using it commercially. Just because you are not a professional golf player, it doesn’t mean you can walk into a golf shop, take a set, and just said “hey, i’m not making money out of this”.

the thing is, you are using and enjoying it: if not making your own child movie / family movie, then maybe something else. But the key thing is, you get something out of it.

I know nuke is expensive and target sector is different, but overall software industry wise, the answer is simple, there is money to be made, even from hobbyisit.

The non-commercial version of Nuke existed in the past. It is not that new.

By god, stop the effin’ open source drama already, The Foundry doesn’t even know what Natron is! Every second post you try to conjure up some imaginary war between Autodesk/Blender and now The Foundry/Natron… It really get’s tiresome and I fear it poisons the forum.

Edit: Sorry Ace if I come off that harsh but it really riles me up. No offense, I respect you as a contributing member of this community apart from this issue.

Yes but as I understand from another thread it had more restrictions. This is new (to be released in 2015) and has much less restriction.

You can’t be serious with this. I mean… Really? Making a family movie with Nuke? Using multi thousand dollar products to make some compositing that you can easily do with Apple software or even Windows Movie Maker? Also how would you even compare this with 3D? Who buys 3ds Max just to make a keyring or w/e?

Anyway you missed the point completely. Money is to be made in the Indie sector, selling Indie versions of their software and certainly not the way you described it.

What these companies are doing id following the lead of others in the industry.

http://renderman.pixar.com/view/future-of-renderman

This is something we will be seeing a lot more of.

And Blender to its credit is starting to show that other financial models can work.

There’s a Natron thread at the Modo forums, a place that is frequented by some of the top brass at The Foundry, chances are they know.

What he meant was they don’t care about it. Natron is not going to replace Nuke in studio pipelines in the nearest decade just as Autodesk is not threatened by Blender.

Threatened on the level of high-end animation tools for large studios and business? Absolutely not.

Threatened none the less in other markets, absolutely and they are keenly aware of this. And it does affect them. Largely. They are aware that people start small and work up to larger scope of careers. Not just the ED market. But each small business is a business that should be using AD products and growing with them. Even if the business fails, the individuals will take the choices with them. There is a huge market for tools that do not require Maya or other software for which Blender is just fine. This is already happening. So when a company chooses Blender, there is less of a chance they will migrate to AD software in the future. But if a company or individual artist starts with Maya LT there is much more chance they will migrate to Maya full and even possibly a suite.

Just the mere fact that there is free software that small to midsized companies and freelancers can use takes away that many seats from the competition. The number of seats that Blender takes away from the competition is fairly significant. If Blender did not exist it would mean thousands of those seats go to Autodesk, LightWave, Modo C4D and so on.

It is not about Blender against the world. It is simply market share. And any marketing exec who is worth his/her pay, knows this.

He/she also knows it is about brand awareness and coverage. Blender encroaches on both.

There is no such thing as zero effect even if small. These things mature though time. Getting people early is the key.

No software is an island and Blender shouldn’t be either. I fear that cultivating a kind of “us versus them” mentality will only hurt Blender and is in fact in the best interest of Autodesk and others. Competition is healthy and it is a good thing to discuss what other parties are doing. But Blender can stand on it’s own, adding a kind of sensationalist slant that “they’re out to get us” is not helping (even if we know they are, and I know I wouldn’t loose sleep about Autodesk stock taking a nosedive).

I would. Because I depend on them for the great tools they make and look forward the things I know they have in development for the future. There are a lot of artists and studios who would as well. And if you care about this industry at all - your peers who do this for a living and give us the great entertainment we enjoy - you would or should loose sleep over it if something bad happened to any of the makers of tools out there.

What I would not loose sleep over is if someone - anyone - actually stepped up and gave some real competition on the high end character stuff. I don’t see that happening in a large way just now. So until then it is Maya for me.

So… is there anything being done on blender’s compositor to catch up to these guys?
Just wondering…

You’re probably right Richard, if there’s anything history has taught us a sudden power vacuum most of the time turns for the worse, so I shouldn’t wish them gone. Still I a am by no means an Autodesk fan, luckily for my line of work I can get by without any of their software.