Does Blender have a “Distortion Shader” for UV squashing and stretching like shown in 3Dcoat or Maya now??
You can view squash/stretch directly in the UV editor, not sure that you can view it on model though.
Well the argument seems to be that if Blender can use newer code and newer surfacing technology (like something similar to T-splines), that what a new developer should go for.
With Nurbana’s code being from the 90’s, it brings in some skepticism on whether you can even extend that to make use of the latest advancements in nurbs modeling, Blender might do better if someone wrote a completely new system just for Blender that will make for an easy process to introduce the latest techniques.
Is NURBS worth the effort though? What are the use cases where polygon modelling and Catmull-Clark don’t cut it? Other than interoperability of course. Can these be solved by just adding better/more polygon modelling tools?
nurbs do have advantages for modelling cars and other design objects that are precise but still have some curvature.
If they arent worth it, then keep them as they are at least.
And there is still software out there that focuses on nurbs as an important part of it’s tool set.
Hidden Maya poligonal improvements. I dare to say takes some ideas from Blender.
absolutely my thougts…
That’s impressive. I haven’t seen Maya in years, but back circa-2007, it was pretty grim. That shader system is fantastic. Too bad Autodesk is owned by Satan.
I’m being totally serious. Look at their Wikipedia page. Under Key People it lists Satan.
I am very surprised no one has really mentioned Bifrost to any great extent. I read an article about it around when 2014 came out or so. Based on that, it may well be extremely impressive, beautiful even. That it’s integrated straight into Maya out of the box is interesting. Very, very cool. Naiad, the basis for Bifrost, was used for (I think) most of the liquid simulation on Avatar. If I remember correctly Bifrost was being developed to also be able to simulate other phenomena in addition to liquids. Definitely various sorts of fluid simulation, I’m not sure about particles.
Very cool.
Bifrost is Naiad. Autodesk just renamed it for whatever reason (personally I think that “Bifrost” sounds super-lame compared to “Naiad”)
All impressive, must admit. But how many of this tools work without issues? I like the new modelling tools, are all NEX plugin based (and sometime improved), and the issue is this, Maya, like 3dsm, is a Frankenstein software, a massive, old, full of legacy code software. This is a commercial release with a commercial presentation, they don’t talk about bugs and/or possible problem with the new tool.
Developing Maya must be a nightmare. Luceric, an ex-XSI developers and now into Maya team affirm with a team of 5 to 10 developers probably can be done only maintenance (he said so in a discussion on the recent softimage dismiss), so probably the team behind maya is very large (more than 20 full time developers). Also, how many time a new Maya release impress people like this one? I guess one time every three years. Blender usually doing by steps every release (so every 3/4 months)
If you want in blender something like Maya, donate as much as possible, buy DVDs and books from Blender Store and support with a monthly donation (or support Blender open movie). Maya cost 4000 euros and around 1000 euro per year in subscription (I’m not sure about subscription cost), If every of us donate 200 € per year to BF I bet blender foundation will do better than maya.
Also, I find ridicules (without offence) the statement about blender must stop to catch professional users. Blender must improve and trying to catch professional users, or will remain forever a toy for amateurs (and even amateurs/hobbyists can use maya student version fro free or rent it)
I am wondering why they renamed a fluid sim from, if I recall correctly, an anicient greek sea entity to a norse rainbow bridge to valhalla. I dunno, there’s nothing about rainbows that scream fluid sim to me. Caustics maybe, but not fluid sim.
every year is the same… shiny features bad implemented that people simply wont use because too buggy or heavy.
Every year I remember again and again why I do 99% of my job in Blender and move to Maya only because I need to save a .mb file for the riggers.
Hi guys, this is my first post here, but I wanted to tell you this:
Im a Maya (also 3dMax, Modo, Motionbuilder) user. Ive started learning Blender few days ago, after years of walking around it and gasping how “one day I will learn you”.
I love it. Im literally IN LOVE with it! Blender has so many amazing small features and many great ones that I was stunned. I couldnt believe it`s still free.
I love the interface which was the main reason I couldnt go further in before. I want to learn it all even tho I dont need to professionally, I want to stay here and I want to contribute (recurring donation set;) ).
Don`t forget how amazing this software is even without the amount of resources Autodesk has.
That`s all I wanted to tell you now 
I totaly agree. Im also Maya user, and start learning blender since 2.67. Its amazing software for artist and all soft from Autodesk its typical commercial production - they dont make soft for user but for money. About year ago Ive almost everything done with maya and zbrush. Now I stack with blender totaly - mostly this forum and websites with free tutors its enough to learn blender and make stunning images with cycles in less than one month.
Sort of. Bifrost is (or was intended to be) Naiad with alterations and a variety of interesting features. I can’t remember the details though. The name is a bit silly though.
Regarding Bifrost. When I first saw a demonstration with the fluid sim, I was really impressed and thought “Wow I’d love to have something like that in Blender”
But apparently you don’t get Bifrost with all bells and whistles in Maya
What’s not in Maya 2015? A fair amount actually – in this release of Bifröst there is no viscus fluids or surface tension, no smoke or plume style gas sims, no foam and spray (other than what one can do via a workaround), as noted no multi-machine rendering and there is no access to the underlying procedural graph.
While a user cannot access the procedural graph it is actually what the team are using under the hood – ‘in the shadows’ – editing and seeing the graph just does not have a GUI yet. What a user could fully expect is that Autodesk will make this one of the first things to appear in later releases, and Mistry confirms that engineers are working in this area now. As a user I want this since without it I cannot make or edit my own nodes, something Naiad users in particular will want to do.
Here is the full link to the article. So it’s the typical sham package from Autodesk. That is nothing what they prominently mention on their website, or in any of their presentation videos.
Blender shouldn’t abandon to seduce the professionals, that’s why it is a good and serisous software that CAN BE USED in a professionnal manner.
Poeple often forget that besides the big animation and game studios, there’s a huge market that uses CG’s. Those productions can’t afford 5 licences of Maya each year, so what do they do?? Some use both, Blender and other ones for specific tasks that Blender can’t do. I know a company that uses Blender most of the time, in fact the more they can use it, the better it is and they growing up well. Pixar, ILM, Dreamworks etc. are just maybe 1% of the studios present in the world. You don’t need to compete with the giants, you just have to be clever and find a niche, but that doesn’t mean you’re weak.
This is classic - with soft is better 
I’m no uber-pro, but I earn money from doing 3d stuff in blender. I also started 3d school while ago, and learning maya - I’m sorry, but before I went to school, I thought that I will be learning “wow-hi-tech-costing lots of money-program”, and all will be only better in maya. I’m not a hardcore blend user (not a 10 years experience, old habbits or routes), and right now, as a newbe to maya I say that maya… sucks.
I know, I suck at maya - yes, that’s true. But man, blender is pro, stable, functional soft, with many useful features. It’s more logical, it’s node system (cycles,compositing) is waaaay over maya node system (almost no of my teachers know how it works and why). I’ll have to explore more to trully compare, but I can do so many things inside blender without using other programs.
To illustrate you what I’m talking about: I’m showing my teachers things/options/features in blender and ask, how can I do it in maya. Often I hear: you can’t, you have to do this-this-and-this, to make this effect. Simple solidify mod, local rotations, cycles viewport render, compositor, grab system (little thing that you can grab obj, type axis and value it’s friking briliant) etc. Probably there is lot’s of stuff that blender can’t do, and maya can, but rigth now - I don’t see them or I don’t see hudge gap between. Or even more: blender can be more sufficient in many tasks.
I also show teachers my things I do in blender, and last time I’ve heard: “That’s nice stuff. Too bad that industry doent’s use blender.” I show them blender showreel, and they say: “that was done in blender??”. Students around I show blender are interested in learning blender.
This is my participation in blender community. Right now, with expenses for the school I can’t donate for blender, but I will sooner or later.
Open-source soft is the future.
They only gap I see is in houdini and “others”. Nodes-system-all-the-way! Hope blender will go that route.
YIKES! That node editor looks like a mess to me. Blender’s feels MUCH cleaner, particularly when opening up groups.