Not to much in my opinion. Blender lack many critical function.
We lack of build-in PBR shaders, that are compatible with main game engines and with cycle
PBR vieport rendering (we now have ancient rendering method in my opinion the worst in the industry)
We lack PBR default shaders for cycles, to Quick and easy prototype your materials.
We need to have PBR materials workflow similar to subsbstance painter/designer or ndo ddo.
The painting in Blender is dated. Mainly because the viewport rendering method is ancient.
Kinnect, ps4 eye motion capture similar to http://brekel.com
to make animation easy.
In my opinion Ton is right man on the right place.
But Blender should take course toward game industry.
I think, that blender should be equally game creation asset software, some Hollywood fairytale wish tool.
GPL is worst license I ever seen, not only by economical reason but also by its viral nature. Blender should be free for non-commercial use, and low budget companies. But it should be priced for all big pocket companies.
It was a shame that when whole code was refactor upon the jump from 2.4 to 2.5, the license stay GPL.
(Despite all content creation tools like UV, Sculpt, Modeling, etc…)Right now blender don’t have any decent, modern game asset creation tools, pipeline, toolset
That’s why Maya LT will be selling like hot buns. And real Indie devs (devs who earn money and can pay for tools), not some hobbyists, will spend their money to Autodesk gladly.
100% Agree Wee need PBR/PAINTING/Kinnect Easy Animating features on yesterday. Not some hair Hollywood projects and next boring foundation movie.
BF should work for real money, not playing in a Hollywod Movie Studio. BF should be managed in similar way to Blur studio or Platige Image. For commercial purpose and for real money with focus on blender.
Maybe it’s time to re-license blender with this blender 3.0 core rewrite?
Did you read the rest of the paragraph? The reason I ask is because it contained far more than just those three words (and never suggesting that FOSS is the superior option here).
FOSS is nice, but unless you’re an idealist, you’ll find that it will almost be impossible for any application in that segment to surpass its commercial counterpart once you do the math on the availability of resources. (the only way really is if the commercial vendor becomes complacent due to its clout in the respective market and starts minimizing resources for R&D).
Also, there’s recently been a development fund grant that will give Blender a new ‘viewport’ renderer that will allow for extensive use of custom GLSL code (which will also enable the creation of a PBR system).
Finally, the 2.5 refactor would not have allowed for Blender to move away from the GPL, as it was basically a rewrite of the event system and a new interface (which covers only a fraction of Blender’s codebase).
Yes i read, and I agree, with the rest of your paragraph, i Just don’t agree that in general all FOSS is “nice”.
The cycles is pbr renerer, yet we don’t have any official templates/shaders like pbr shader in mantra in houdini.
I am talking here not about features/capabilities in blender. I am talking about support them officially by BF, by building official templates by BF on top of those features.
And painting…
And lack of Color temperature, where it is just one simple function to add… Byt first they will have to ofcourese
correct the Bug in converting HSV to RGB where
H=0, S=0 V=.769
is incorrect value in
RGB(.553, .553, .553)
And pls tellm me how can I be pbr correct if even colors are always off…
I not agree,
not then, not now, not ever is not best direction to take any changes…
These companies have realized that there is a market for lower price versions, partly because open source projects can’t get their standards up to acceptable level. Yet in a way Blender is taking some customers away from commercial market, because Blender is enough for specific type of projects. Still I think the distance between full versions of commercial 3D software and open source projects like Blender is quite big in more than one way. I believe there would be market space in between with decent software of price range 500-1000€ without too many limitations of Lite style programs.
I agree, but the price today is lower than 500-1000. Houdini Indie cost 199 right now.
Full featured packages costs around 1000 like modo, lightwave.
Blender in my opinion can be definitely compared directly to maya and other stuff. All of them are 3d packages, blender too.
So we not living in a vacuum. Especially if the Autodesk throwing the LT versions with subscription planes.
I am very astonished how good BF managed blender. I admire Ton for what he done for blender, but
I not always have the same opinion on different matters.
I just think… blender is full of features, but he has even more missing opportunities to build on top of those features.
And in my opinion add-ons system is not that good solution… Especially with overpriced irrelevant little add-ons, growing like a mushrooms after rain, every day, every day…
Back in the SGI days the prices were insane and we are blessed with the low prices of today. Nothing to speak of really. If you make money doing business with Maya the price is not that much and if you make money using Blender then yay. I think the whole discussion is so micro-detail-focused. The prices and the availability of tools we have both commercial and open source today is huge. Blender is not missing the Indie Boat period. It has it strength and value in the pipeline. I always ask for Y-up but that is most for convenience in my Houdini, Zbrush, Maya pipeline but it is not a showstopper just a little some some I´d like to see. Other than that Blender has come a long way and again it is not missing out on the Indie market.
Yeah I agree and will take it further. That in reality, Blender was the one app that was here, when the “indie” thing kind of sprung up. I watched this happen as a freelancer using Blender. (I now also use Maya XSI and so on).
But for a while, about 2 years I’d say, there was no movement on the part of commercial packages. And now in the last 2 years or so there has been this explosion that has kind of peaked with these game engine battles this year at GDC 2015.
My estimate as to what happened was that this indie market just sprang up and Blender was here. No one was acknowledging it. And finally it started to register and companies now all over are talking about indie.
So in truth Blender was the first app to be embraced by the indie market and Maya LT is Autodesk’s answer to this problem.
It is a simple problem. If you have any large number of potential users lost to a market, it does not have to be huge, but it is a percentage of the market, you have to respond. And that is what they have done.
Now of course Blender has always had issues. But for a lot of people it is just fine. And this creates healthy competition. It is quite possible that without the mobile app and other indie game markets springing up and the coincidence with OSS such as Blender we would not be seeing the things we are now. In short this is a response to years of this happening already. And Bender was already there.
Development is moving and more changes are ahead. Will be an interesting 2 years ahead I think.
Being new to all of this (6 months maybe), I think Blender has been an excellent way for me to learn the concepts without having to invest all that money and find out it is something that I do not like doing. I would love to work with Maya if it makes things easier but I don’t want to invest that amount of money at this time until I determine it is something I want to do and I have already invested a lot of money already. I have a version of Animation Master that is sitting on a shelf for like 10 years because I did not have time (at that time) to learn all of the nuances of the application and now I don’t think I could use it even if I wanted to unless I paid to upgrade it, so that was $300 shot. Since I write code for my real job, forcing myself to spend all of my free time to learning this has been a wee bit exhausting, but it is certainly fun. If I find that it is actually profitable I would certainly invest in whatever tool that saves me the most time and effort, just not at this point in time. Seems like now I spend more time watching tutorials then actually creating something…
Good thread though, I was curious how others thought!
100% Agree Wee need PBR/PAINTING/Kinnect Easy Animating features on yesterday. Not some hair Hollywood projects and next boring foundation movie.
Yo dawg, you underestimate the importance of having a good hair system. Do you know how irritating it is to make hair? Have you ever used Maya’s buggy Xgen? Dear god, making decent looking hair on a character for an animation can be a big pain in the butt. I don’t have money to shell out for Yeti and Barbershop is completely out of the question. I fully applaud the BF in their taking on this problem. There really aren’t many hair alternatives for free if at all.
Doesn’t Gooseberry also work on improving other features? Such as rigging? Or the outliner (I believe they mentioned improvements to it as well as an asset manager)? Which is really important? Calling the film boring is also quite a cynical outlook on the film considering it hasn’t really been seen yet.
PBR will happen once they get the new Viewport implemented into it. This is helpful both in games and in films. Also, everyone seems to think Blender is aiming for big hollywood movie studios, but the reality is that Ad agencies and TV production studios are a huge chunk of the market and are just as viable to blender just as indie game studios are. In my opinion anyway.
BF I think is making the right choices when it comes to targeting markets, sure Indie Games are big but Advertisements/Tv production are huge as well. I doubt they will ignore both markets. And it’s not like the tools developed for each market can’t be used for either as well.
Blender is slowly getting there, Maya will always have it’s usage and even some VFX companies still use Softimage despite it being killed by Autodesk. Axel also made a very good point, the teams on the programs in Autodesk aren’t giant teams of hundreds. I have a friend who works at Autodesk and by the sounds of it there aren’t a huge amount of people working on one of their programs (not going to name the App for the sake of my friends jahb).
Blender is definitely going to make it’s way into the market more and more from my point of view. This discussion about Maya LT vs Blender is really pointless. Like I mentioned earlier: They all have their pros and cons, but nothing is completely better than the other.
PS: BF, please don’t forget about improving Render Passes and Compositing related functions. Compositing is basically the life blood for TV and Ad agencies.
The big problem with Blender is that it does lots of stuff marginally well and not an awful lot really well. We are horrifically spoiled when compared to most FOSS stuff, which, frankly, is mostly garbage. The problem is that one mans ‘essential’ stuff is essential, but to someone else its just fluff.
I’d love to say that they need to focus on FBX, normals and other game stuff. But then that is ignoring all the stuff that the film makers need to do their job.
Maybe Blender needs to just pare down a little. Loose the game engine (who actually uses it outside the small Blender community?) and focus on one or two disciplines which it can excel at and can chuck it’s paid devs at to really make a big difference in Blender.
I’ve been looking at Maya LT as it offers pretty much everything I need. It even has a great viewport rendering so I could make the odd openGL rendered movie if I ever had the time to.
Yeah, getting the full version of either Maya or Max would be great for some things, but 3k for soft? LOL, no.
