I have never tried blender but i hear a lot of good things. if you could have any software for free as a hobbyist or in production would you still use blender? why/why not?
I pirate all my shit, it's all already free.Blender needs to fix their fucking UI/UX. It's a capable program, but absolute AIDS to use.
>>653126yeah thats what im worried about. the UI does seem a bit shit. I work in Max during the day but i want to try something else for personal projects.
>>653124>if you could have any software for free as a hobbyist or in production would you still use blender? why/why not?Yeah, i used cracked 3dsmax for years until i went with blender. I could have any software "for free" from the start. Max has a lot of features, but it's like an obese man with diabetes - the core of it is still Win9x stuff from the 90s, it takes ages to start up, it crashes all the time, and all the good stuff are last-minute stitch jobs for some former plugin that's hidden in a menu somewhere.Blender starts up in less than 5 seconds, it's portable, there's no DRM, rarely crashes, the UI is more customizable than both Max or Maya (which autodesk fanboys are unaware of). More recently the rendering features have become on par with the expensive stuff. I think a lot of people on here are assmad that Blender is getting so good but they'd have to invest a good year of learning in order to reap the benefits.
>>653151>it crashes all the time, and all the good stuff are last-minute stitch jobs for some former plugin that's hidden in a menu somewhere."3D Studio MAX" oldfag here, it wasn't like that before Autodesk took complete control of development. 3ds used to be a thing of beauty and efficiency, now it's just about pilling features onto the old code base. You can do stunning things with it, but it's a shadow of its former self.
I would use XSI / Softimage and revive it because it has by far the most potential and was killed off because MUH (((INDUSTRY)))
>>653160I started out with r3, it was pretty good until version 9, which is around the time where i quit. Both Kinetix and Discreet were under Autodesk ownership so i wouldn't say that it suddenly became bad when they dropped the Discreet name.Most of its problems go back more than a decade and have been piling on since then. Blender on the other hand is being completely overhauled for the second or third time now, which is something Autodesk would never risk doing. Their plan is to just keep the thing going until they run it into the ground.
>>653151>they'd have to invest a good year of learning in order to reap the benefits.That is wildly inaccurate. Using a good course, getting the hang of Blender well enough to work can be done in two weeks, give or take. Assuming, of course, extensive experience with other software. It's not like Blender comes with a paradigm shift, it's just a different interface.
>>653168>It's not like Blender comes with a paradigm shift, it's just a different interface.actually its not up to AAA standards. This is a fact.
>>653126I gotta say that 2.8's UI is great. I'm a Maya user but I'm using blender more and more thanks to 2.8.
>>653171You're free to present the proof to back up your fact. With xsi/maya background and regularly working with game hero props, I haven't really seen anything missing in blender that would compromise quality of results. UV optimization toolkit is pretty narrow by default but just the install-included addons make up for that.
>>653185The proof's in the work, it hasnt been used except for shitty backwater amazon webseries
>>653185>regularly working with game hero propsI don't think a lot of people will dispute that Blender is good enough for most gamedev tasks, even hero props. But trying to go beyond that is where Blender starts to show its (current) limitations.
>>653190There are still people who use Silo 3D in the industry. Are you going to argue Silo 3D is a capable program?
>>653191what do you mean beyond that exactly? what can commercial software do that blender cant specifically?
why is the program size so small? Maya and Max take up gigs of space-why is that?
>>653230Are you baiting or is that an honest question?
>>653231>Maya and Max take up gigs of space-why is that?More functionality on the base install.
>>653232its an honest question because I have never used blender. I use max daily, used Maya in CG school and had my own license for modo which I dont feel like renewing. I want to find out if its worth investing weeks of my time learning new interface etc.
>>653231The added content bloats the size. Bare bone 3ds and Maya are comparatively tiny.
>>653247so you need gigs of addons in blender for proper functionality?
>>653243For a basic case: lack of proper FBX support. For a complex case: you can't instance a crowd directly from cached geo on disk, assigning shader variants randomly. And a plethora of in-between shortcomings.Blender holds some promise of becoming a decent contender for feature-level production in the coming years, but as of now it's quite limited. If you already have previous experience with professional packages I wouldn't bother, except maybe for the modelling aspect, in which Blender is quite good. Even though the viewport performance may bite you in the ass, if they haven't solved that for 2.8.
>>653124It is incredibly convenient to have everything in one program, no need to switch back and forth, no need to learn different workflows, also runs on linux so yeah.>>653231>Maya and Max take up gigs of space-why is that?Mostly materials and bloat. The programs and software don't actually occupy a lot of space, but the textures and shit do.Blener ships without a single raster texture in it, only some procedural materials.>>653233>More functionality on the base install.Lol scrub, blender can model, sculpt, has two renderers, 2d animation tools and a video editor anll in one. You would need like 6 specialized software packeages to match that.
>>653262>lack of proper FBX supportKronos Group are going to kill FBX anyway. they are developing a FOSS model standard with more features in partnership with Epic and Unity. So fuck Autojews
>>653126This. I learned Maya and C4D on my own, but to this day I can't figure out fucking Blender. I might give 2.8 a go but I don't see myself using it
>>653247any ideas how to debloat 3dsmax - its taking way to much space.
>>653262Thanks. I might jump back into Maya. its been 2 years since I used it last but Im sick of 3ds max
>>653262>lack of proper FBX supportOh wow, I didn't know that
>>653185 <- that was me>>653191>>653301>>653262Thanks for the answers. I mostly work in asset creation and we use Houdini beyond that for more complex specialized tasks.
>>653323For the longest time Blender couldn't import FBX files because muh GPL. Some programs also didn't like the FBX files Blender exported. Someone else had to code up a new FBX import/exporter without having to rely on Autodick's license-incompatible libraries. For the first few years the new importer was essentially useless as it didn't support armatures and animations, nowadays that's been fixed but it's still very picky about what FBX version it can import.
>>653456Man that's fucked up. Even fucking Daz can work with FBX.Didn't they also had some issues with smooth UVs?
>>653456They could have used Autodesk's SDK, and there wouldn't have been any compatibility issues. What is more, Blender could have been by now a typical component (in the modeling stage) of most professional pipelines.
>>653532Something about GPL or whatever made Ton reeee at the idea, hence they tried to reverse-engineer it instead to "make it fully compliant with the licencing :)"
>>653456>>653537There's alot of libraries that aren't GPL friendly that are pretty standard between all the commercial 3d packages. The GPL will always be a source of pain for the Blender foundation.
>>653537>>653542In this case, IIRC, Ton's interpretation of Autodesk's FBX SDK terms wasn't even correct, so Blender could have used the SDK if they wanted to. It was discussed on this board some time ago, but I don't remember the precise details.
>>653542>The GPL will always be a source of pain for the Blender foundation.Well, they released Cycles under Apache 2.0, and there is even a proprietary version of Cycles for Cinema4D, so I don't really understand the Foundation's agenda regarding licenses.
>>653124I think Eevee is pretty cool and would like to see a similar feature in other software.
There is no point at all to use blender over Maya/Max
>>653659it seems easier to model in than those two.
>>653681OH NO NO NO NO AAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA
>>653689maya's ui just feels fucked. max even moreso. it's like shit is under 10 window tabs or ribbons before you can use it. imagine 10 clicks per fucking bevel or extrude. it's absurd.
>>653690>imagine 10 clicks per fucking bevel or extrudeThis is what the typical Blendlet believes.
>>653126I honestly don't understand this. I've never had any problems with blender's UI, but I couldn't for the life of me figure out 3Ds Max.
>>653693Because for some reason people don't understand that they grow used to the interfaces they learned with and will have obvious difficulty accustoming to others. You started with Blender, of course you'd find other programs obtuse. They started with Maya/Max, of course they'd find other programs obtuse. It's the same thing across all the fields. You started with Logic, you'd have difficulty using Reason. You started with Premiere, it's gonna be hard to use Final Cut. Hell, you (probably) started speaking with English, it'll take a while to become fluent in Russian. And people just like to complain for the sake of complaining, really.
>>653698that's....thats not how it works. Blender is obtuse. Maya isn't. One is better than the other.
>>653690Wow are you fucking stupid?
>>653698>started with Blender when I was younger >hated the UI >hated rigging, too fucking stupid >years later, start again with Max/Maya>picked up the UI in no time >understood rigging, it finally made sense in Maya>found Maya a much better software, even with all its flaws Yeah, it's totally the others' fault, it's not that Blender is fucking horrible.
>>653700I just said I don't like Maya so no.
>>653707The exception doesn't make the rule. I started with Maya and years later switched to blender and imo they're both fine. Tried 3Ds Max a few times but it just didn't click like the other two did.
>>653714MAX is strange because it really shines when you're modeling / editing an object with the modifier stack, but everything else is clunky and weird. Kind of like how ZBrush is really good when you're sculpting on a single subtool but everything else you have to do is clunky and weird.
>>653699And that's not the point I was making. I understand Blender's shortcomings in its UI, how it's virtually different from every other program. Whether or not the program is *actually* obtuse is another discussion. It's how others *perceive* it as obtuse is what I'm talking about here.It's the program you grew up with, to put it in other terms. For example, I use Blender. I can use it just fine. I don't have any issues with the UI, maybe some muscle memory errors here and there when I jump across programs. I was just trying to explain this whole argument people keep having and misunderstanding about why some people hate and why others don't mind Blender's UI. Not fighting for the fact that Blender's UI isn't flawed.
Holy fucking shit, are all of you Blender haters really this brain dead?>hurr durr shit UI!1!!1!My fucking god, get over it. Have you ever heard of "User Preferences"? No? Then go fuck yourselves. Incapable sub human retards. It's File-User Preferences. Look into it
last time i checked (1 second ago) as soon as you open Blender on the splash screen you can with one click change the UI interaction to mimic Maya or 3ds max. But even better then that you can open this thing called "User Preferences" and set it up how ever you heart desires
>>653164>Blender on the other hand is being completely overhauledBut who excactly is doing the overhauling and dev work with Blender?Programmers ? Engineers ? Amateurs ? Is it a democracy what features are getting in and which will be rejected and how they will be implemented ?
>>656329Internal dev team. Same team that started Blender in the first place.>Is it a democracy what features are getting in and which will be rejected and how they will be implemented ?No one has a clue. Things are just added and removed seemingly without much community support.
>>656329>Programmers ? Engineers ? Amateurs ?yes>Is it a democracy what features are getting in and which will be rejected and how they will be implemented ?yes, some of it is democratic, some is not.
>>656329It's a FOSS community effort, with a focused dev team that's doing the core development supported by the users. Also much more addon devs that are doing various interesting things.
>>656329>Is it a democracy what features are getting in and which will be rejected and how they will be implemented ?a big part of the development is headlines and bringing in more companies to invest in blender.its funny that they behave like a corporation but that's exactly what BF is.i know that improving the core tools is more important than new stuff. but you also have to think about from a business perspective. blender needs to survive as a pseudo-commercial product
>>656336>blender needs to survive as a pseudo-commercial productThis. The first time it went bankrupt, the community bought it. But if they go down now, who will rescue them?
>>656337The first time Blender went bankrupt, it went GPL. If Blender Foundation goes bankrupt, the GPL version will still exist for an eternity ready for anyone to pickup and continue the work.
>>656338>anyone >inb4 Autodesk picks it up and develops their own cucked derivate, running blenders reputation into the ground forever.
>>656341LOL not even Autodesk can ruin this POS software
>>656341>Autodesk picks it up and develops a FOSS software that eventually out competes Maya out of the market
>>656344>Autodesk forks Blender and starts improving it like crazy, switching to a business model based on providing support and custom features to big studios
>>656357>implying autodesk won't just shut it down like they did with softimage
>>656360You can't shut down GPL
>>656360I was going to say they wouldn't be able to do that because of copyright, but I looked into the source repository and, apparently, the whole of Blender is copyrighted to the Blender Foundation. So the Foundation can actually sell Blender, turn it proprietary, or do whatever the fuck else they want.Imagine, all those contributions... just gone... like tears in rain.
>>656364You can't just change software licenses on whim, especially when the GPL meme is involved.
>>656357Despite all the hate blendlets have for them, autodesk would actually improve the software instead of coming up with useless shit like grease pencil and nintendo eevee.
>>656394gpl forces the current installations of blender (found on the web) to be open.but lets say for example autodesk releases 2.8 stable with 20$ monthly fee like they do with maya.and to make that lucrative, they would throw in a bunch of addons from the market into blender.
>>656394You can, if you own the copyright. The Blender Foundation, apparently, owns the copyright to the entire codebase of Blender, and so they can turn their license (for current and new releases) to whatever they want, even 100% proprietary, subscription-based SaaS Autodesk-like crap.
>>656344>blender is buried in the same grave with softimage.>now its just a tool for nostalgiafags just like what happened with softimage
>>653124i have tried both sidesmax/maya are pretty fucked in terms of ui and feelingblender is much more intuitive and easier to use. you do need to download some addons thoughon that note using zbrush feels terrible as well but its functionality is so much greater than its competitors that you don't really have a choice