[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Rig_viking.png (171 KB, 713x781)
171 KB
171 KB PNG
Not intending to start yet another software war, but I'm relaly curios about the differences when it comes to rigging (and animating) in Maya versus Blender.
Whenever people bring up Blender, Maya people tend to reply with "but Maya's rigging and animation tools are way better". But what exactly does Maya do differently in this department?
I'm no master at rigging or animation, but both tools seem very similar to me. In my limited experience, I have come to prefer Blender because "it just works", in the sense that I don't have to pay strict attention to hirarchies.
I can simply make a rig in Blender and scale the root bone to scale the whole rig uniformly. When I make control curves, these don't have to be placed in their own special hirearchy. When I make a pose, I can copy and flip any part of it with a simple key-stroke (have to manually input inverted values in Maya for each and every bone - unless you have some sort of script, which often happens to be specific to a specific typeof rig).
So far, I just find rigging a lot more painful in Maya, and I'm wondering what the actual benefits are.
Maya also doesn't allow me to store several animations in one file, which makes it a bit clunky to use for video games where you need a lot of separate loops.
I'm pretty shit at editing curves, but here it seems Maya looks a little neater - Blender has one curve for each value on each and every bone on each and every axis, and it just turns into a massive spaghetti for me, most of the time. Is this what you mean when you talk about how Maya is "better for animation"?

Anyway, hoping for some actual answers, because I'd just like to figure out what tools are available and how to best use them.
>>
Supposedly, maya is better in that department.
but when i asked actual professionals on their opinion they said its the same thing and they don't even care enough to bring up the differences.
>>
>>665451
It's been bugging me a lot, because everyone says Maya is so much better for animation, but I can't figure out how or why, so I can't make use of it in any meaningful way.
>>
I have no idea, I never used Blender. Maya is good for rigging because of Python, in a nutshell, and the animation interface is comfy and very complete.
>>
>>665454
the differences are so deep that you will probably never have the chance to explore them unless you are 100% committed to animation.
you can't just use a tool once and say "ok this ones better" it takes time to figure out.
>>
>>665447
> I don't have to pay strict attention to hierarchies
> I'm shit at editing curves
> I don't care about having fine grained control of scaling behavior

If you don't feel limited by Blender's rigging with your flat-faced lowpoly shit without even fingers or toes feel free to stay in Blender fuckwit. Better not to have another pajeet devoid of imagination or curiosity asking shit questions Maya q&a sections. If you want to learn something try following a tutorial by Josh Sobel, or just the Marco Giordano eyelid rig. To see Maya's superiority more quickly, build a facial rig using AdvancedSkeleton's automatic setup and see how far you get recreating those kinds of features in Blender.
>>
File: oldman_comp1.png (1.57 MB, 1775x989)
1.57 MB
1.57 MB PNG
>>665456
But Blender uses python too, and open source even, so that can't really be an argument against it?

>>665458
Give me an example then, if you're an animation guru with said experience.

>>665459
Well, here comes the ignorant shitposters, as suspected.
Firstly, that model was given to everyone in my class for us to rig. I didn't make it, and I got an A on the assignment (not that that means anything).
Pic related is something I made myself. I rigged that with Blender's autorigging system (rigify) and it worked pretty okay, though the facial controls were a bit limited. I have no doubt what so ever that I could make a much more advanced rig in Blender manually.
That isn't the question I'm asking. The question is what makes Maya different? What sets it apart? Do you have an example?
Or is it just that you like the autorigging tools?
>>
>>665463
>Give me an example then, if you're an animation guru with said experience.

im not an animation guru lmao.
but i recall this guy that didn't learn neither blender or maya, he was just really good on SFM and somehow he managed to do very well in both blender and maya after the transfer.
and.. he also made money with both programs because i personally paid him to animate
>>
>>665476
That's kind of my point, though. Both Blender and Maya seems perfectly capable and yield good results in skilled hands, so what is the factor that makes Maya "better at animation"?
I mean, of course a skilled artist can make a nice painting in MS Paint, and the tools aren't always the main limitations, but I literally struggle to find any discerning differenses between Maya and Blender when it comes to animation, other than that it's easier to rig in Blender because Blender isn't so particular about hierarchies.
>>
>>665463
Typical fucking blendlet posting "this is my rig" with a still image and no results demonstrating controller actions and deformations. Look at those pitiful cg cookie tutorials that were just posted.

Go to the "pros and cons of Blender thread, start reading from this comment onward. You can stop at the point the shitty blender troll who posts all-lowercase gives up and admits Maya has a superior rigging system. >>662198

Then if you have something to say about Blender's rigging system you can post webms of your rig controller actions and show the animation workflow. I put a week of serious investment into learning Blender's system and encountered a solid brick wall of limitation where it became literally impossible to satisfy my rigging requirements using Blender. I do not speak from ignorance or a lack of experience.
>>
>>665480
Do you have an detailed idea what kind of effort goes into a character like Thanos for example up until the character is finished?
Do you know what has to be done by the animation department over the course of months?
What makes you think that you can compare the tools/techniques/demands that are required to do such an task?
>>
>>665535
I'm just saying that on the surface they seem remarkably similar. That's why I'm asking someone with actual knowledge, what the actual difference is.
You're obviously not a person with actual knowledge.
>>
>>665536
I use Blender but for a tangible answer, Maya has a better and simpler workflow for having characters pick up and put down objects.
>>
>>665547
Isn't that a matter of setting the parent influence in both programs? Blender also has a button for resetting the position at the new location built into the parent modifier.
>>
>>665521
Don't ignore this post you fucking shill. This whole thread smells like a massive troll.
>>
>>665553
Some of you Blenderians seem to have quite a paranoid attitude. I wonder what motivates it.
>>
>>665559
>blenderian
>entire post is calling op a fucking shill and asking him to take a look at the post he quoted
>>
>>665521
>I put a week of serious investment into learning Blender's system and encountered a solid brick wall of limitation
What was the brick wall?
What -specifically- were you unable to do?
>>
>>665568
That NURBS ribbon lip rig that described right in that post you fucking brainlet, it's right there written down for you exactly what I want to do but is impossible to pull off in Blender. I can't believe I've taken the bait in this terrible fucking thread yet again.
>>
>>665574
I dare you to reply to this with "What lip rig?" or some other similar low effort trolling.
>>
So many replies and none of you actually proved anything.
>>
>>665447
I use Maya and 3DS Max to rig and animate. I actually like 3DS Max because I have grown to use 3DS Max, but I can see why Maya is more liked. The rigging in Maya is literally godtier. Even moreso, the plugins that are available for use are industry standard, if you know which ones to get. Maya has saved me from paying some twat lots of money to get skin and facial rigs to work with a wrinkle system. That is a medium tier complexity that would have been near impossible in 3DSMax, and instead I got to do it and have the knowledge to do it again for a fraction of the price I'd pay some cuck in Los Angeles. As for Blender, I don't know - can you make a facial and body system that implements detailed wrinkles on the rig every time "muscles" move and limbs twist? I believe you probably could in Blender, I don't know though - I don't use it.
>>665574
I believe he's retarded, let the blendlet have his thread, anon.
>>
>>665447
>What makes Maya especially good for animation?

The first thing you'll come across is that it's skeleton creation and weight painting and skinning tools are just really clutch.
I had to learn maya at one point transitioning from max and everything about maya was just annoying and unfamiliar to me
til I started rigging in it and it was like "oh.. now I see why this is a thing, lol".

Max and Blender and the rest can do simpler game type rigs about equally well, you can in large do the very same stuff with just a little more elbow grease and annoyance.
But if you ever wanna start pushing into handling high-end stuff with advanced deformations and heavy geometry you will need Maya in your life to even make it feasible without you pulling your hair out in the process.

I never looked into blender deep enough to learn about it's scripting language so can't comment on that, but maya's script language MEL-script is running circles around maxscript.
High-end rigging is all about automation to have the motion of something drive the motion of something else so-and-so so ultimately you will need to do quite a bit of coding to make the magic happen.

I'm mainly a max guy and up til the point you start running into tasks that requires heavy scripting max and maya are very much playing in the same league.
Once you reach that wall max start turning into a hippo while maya turns into a gazelle.
>>
>>665521
>I put a week of serious investment into learning Blender's system and encountered a solid brick wall of limitation where it became literally impossible to satisfy my rigging requirements

so your requirements and standards are much higher than an inhouse studio that uses blender all the time?

>>665480
there you go friend.

http://polyknightgames.com/from-maya-to-blender-the-road-less-traveled/
>>
>>665593
Think a lot of the misunderstanding is that hobbyists don't get involved in the types of tasks that maya absolutely excels at.
Most of us are into the type of content a single person can reasonably make and it won't really become evident why maya holds the position it does
within the CGI industry til you start going into the realm of hollywood-tier type visuals.

The inhouse tools one can build for maya and integrate into that pipe means a fleet of a hundred madskill artist/tech artists can take on just about anything you throw at them.
Part of this is just simple legacy by the fact that maya grew up within the big-name studious and has been continuously built upon by the same brains that built the foundation of this entire field.

Chances are that none of this is within the scope of anything you are doing as a student or hobbyist.
If it makes more sense for you to pick up something like maya over blender ultimately has to do with what type of content you aspire towards being involved with.

Blender wasn't even around when I started learning this stuff and I've remained a max guy myself as real-time graphics is where i wound up and I already know max inside out.
But if I decided I wanted to be involved in film production, I'd make myself fluent in maya before going knocking for work for sure.
>>
>>665585
Low effort trolling.

>>665593
Yes. Every time some "studio" uses Blender for a production, what we're talking about is like half a dozen Europoor memelords willing to pull a stunt for publicity's sake. They are always admitting how difficult it is to work with such a constrained rigging and animation system in the discussion threads. The Blender foundation admits the rigging system is garbage as mentioned in the other thread. Anyone with slightly higher standards can "exceed the needs of a studio" very easily.
>>
>>665590
>can you make a facial and body system that implements detailed wrinkles on the rig every time "muscles" move and limbs twist?

You can do that in vanilla Blender:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-aWDeIb6Wk

Or you can download this free addon which makes it even easier:
https://github.com/ScottishCyclops/tensionmap

>>665591
>The first thing you'll come across is that it's skeleton creation and weight painting and skinning tools are just really clutch
Not sure what you mean with the word "clutch" here, but I assume you think it's nice?
>Max and Blender and the rest can do simpler game type rigs about equally well, you can in large do the very same stuff with just a little more elbow grease and annoyance.
I think Maya's weight painting, rigging and UV tools are really clunky, so I wonder what makes you feel this way.

>>665599
I think this is true, to some extent, but not because Maya is easier to make tools for. Blender is completely open source, and doesn't rely on an obscure scripting language like MEL, so it's certainly not harder to make stuff for Blender (just taking a look at the thousands upon thousands of Blender addons should be proof enough) - But the amount of knowledge and experience that already exists within the industry is incomparable, of course.
That's just due to the hegemony of Maya and it's prevalence in schools/industry.

>>665606
>They are always admitting how difficult it is to work with such a constrained rigging and animation system in the discussion threads
Link?
>>
>>665606
>what we're talking about is like half a dozen Europoor memelords willing to pull a stunt for publicity's sake.

their understanding of the tools is pretty deep considering they actually managed to pull this off.
don't be in a position where you think there are missing features, but its actually you that missed them. it happens all the time.
>>
>>665606
>Every time some "studio" uses Blender for a production, what we're talking about is like half a dozen Europoor memelords willing to pull a stunt for publicity's sake.

At what point does this fantasy become invalidated? Because if a Chinese studio creating a full-length feature film for theaters and Netflix isn't enough, what is?
>>
>>665974
>You can do that in vanilla Blender:
The guy in the video is a fucking mushmouth.

As for the why? Animation and Rigging were always meant to be Maya's strongest features, so obviously they're going to be the best in the business.
>>
>>666027
Well a couple of years after Maya came out it already had Lord of the Rings, Star Wars and the Matrix in the portfolio. THAT is the competition here.
Could Blender do in 2019 what Maya did over 15 years ago with the same budget?
Nobody knows, because nobody tried. That is why Blender is still unproven when it comes to huge projects, while Maya is established as the solution.
The proof is in the filmography of each program.
Maya was used on nearly all movies winning an academy award for VFX since 1997.
A couple of animated feature films and some TV VFX don't change much in the grand scheme of things.
From the perspective of Blender this might be big, but from the perspective of Maya its bread crumbs from before yesterday.
>>
>>665974
> Hurr durr GPL makes for a better development platform
This shit was already demolished in the other thread. Meme harder faggot. Or just try reading and researching before you post.

>>665984
>>666027
> Muh one Chinese studio using Blender
I wouldn't give a fuck if all of Hollywood used Blender and I was the only one using Maya. Maya is objectively superior in animation and rigging from my own personal experience with both. It's not even a close competition.
>>
>>666093
mind you, no program had the abilities of maya back in the 90's. so its not even a debate about blender anymore.
however i hear many autodesk users say that autodesk has been slacking over the past few years, especially with max.
so yeah, i understand that arnold and other big stuff is going to ship with maya and overall its defiantly worth the money that your'e paying for the subscription. but programs like c4d are catching up because the market is still wide open when it comes to cheap alternative.
i guess autodesk released the indie versions to close that gap, but its still expensive compared to the other subscriptions out there
>>
>>666124
>mind you, no program had the abilities of maya back in the 90's
cough cough SOFTIMAGE 3|D, Power Animator (Maya's predecessor running in IRIX on hideously expensive SGI machines) and 3DS MAX 1 came a couple of years before Maya
>>
>>666126
lmao if you actually look into the origins of maya it was an animating software running on msdos.
the makers of myst used it for their cutscenes.

to my understanding softimage was a better modeler in the 90's
>>
>>666127
>origins of maya it was an animating software running on msdos.
are you fucking retarded?
Power Animator on IRIX was Maya clear predecessor not DOS.
3D Studio DOS was the predeccor of 3DS Max, not Maya, fuckwit
>>
>>666127
>softimage was a better modeler in the 90's
i would say until its unfortunate death, XSI was always a better modeler than Maya.
>>
>>666124
>mind you, no program had the abilities of maya back in the 90's

The first part of this article sums up Maya pretty well: https://www.highend3d.com/maya/tutorials/modeling/nurbs/c/organic-modeling-and-animation-part-one-modelin

>The need to use multiple packages, namely Alias for modeling, SoftImage for Inverse Kinematics, Dynamation for particles and soft bodies, Renderman for rendering, and a slew of proprietary software, is a testament to the limitations to each part of the pipeline, and how expensive that pipeline is.

Holy shit that kind of pipeline fragmentation sounds like today!

>Maya may change everything, because it can do everything. That is, everything that we have been able to do to this point, but in a single working environment

Yeah that didn't last long.
>>
>>666135
most programs are migrating towards full production pipelines so that's less relevant now.
expect for vfx and compositing
>>
>>665447
blender doesn't have the rigging tools maya has
>>
>>666060
Maya was meant to be the best at many things. 15 years ago.
Now it sucks at pretty much everything.
>>
>>666162
Such as?
>>
>>666494
Here we go again... This time, without lowercase. But you know it won't make a difference, right?
>>
>>666496
So, you couldn't think of a single feature?
Noted
>>
he asks same retarded questions just like in previous troll thread and I'm starting to think the "blendlet" is real
>>
>>666497
Read above, or just go through this post and the follow-ups: >>662198
>>
>>666548
I fail to see what the benefit of that system is. Why the "normal follicles"?
Seems to serve the same purpose as a simple controller curve with a hook, and a driver for the shape key.
>>
File: mmmuh hierarchy.webm (2.49 MB, 960x530)
2.49 MB
2.49 MB WEBM
Where did they get this retarded idea about maya ""needing"" hierarchies to operate?
Is it the same running gag as "autokike owns everything you make in student loicence"?
>>
>>666556
Are you calling that a fucking rig?
You need to be specific about your hierarchies and constraints if you want to be able to do several basic things with a rig in Maya (such as scaling everything uniformly - especially with IKs).
>>
>>666580
>constraints
Are you talking about maya constraints?
>>
>>666555
The post describes a cyclical dependency which Blender is not yet capable of (though I thought that was one of the points of the new depsgraph, I don't know). The .webm doesn't really do a good job of demonstrating anything though.
>>
>>665447
blenders better



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.