What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

General discussion about 3D DCC and other topics
Bullit
Moderator
Posts: 2621
Joined: 24 May 2012, 09:44

What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Bullit » 11 Mar 2014, 16:19

Of course it needs an assessment to check if an interface change is feasible, that the core can load thousands of objects , that the viewport is fast enough.

If none of this is inviable then many studios and people can join and drive a Blender fork either with work or hiring.

I have no hurry like some, i even think some will come back to Softimage for a while since the current competition picture is less than enticing.

User avatar
dewf
Posts: 18
Joined: 20 Apr 2013, 11:51
Location: Texas

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by dewf » 11 Mar 2014, 20:50

I posted this on the mailing list earlier:
I had an idea the other day: what if we crowdfunded a LOT of money -- $5-10 million, say. And (once raised), offer to buy Softimage outright from Autodesk. If they pass it will be held in trust and used to pay for a small army of full-time developers to add functionality to Blender, such as an ICE clone, an improved user interface, FE Splice support, Redshift integration, etc.

Either way it'd be a boon to the Softimage community long-term.

(I should clarify that if AD allowed the purchase, then SI would be made open source, with its own Blender Foundation equivalent)

User avatar
Hirazi Blue
Administrator
Posts: 5107
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 12:15

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Hirazi Blue » 11 Mar 2014, 23:15

At this point I'd prefer Blender to simply start following some basic UI and workflow rules. That would help tremendously. And open sourcing Softimage is out of the question, I'm afraid, just like selling it to a different company: The numbers you mention are way too low to be realistic (remember they bought it for approximately 35 million dollar), but above all Autodesk will never go for it, for the same reason they won't sell it to some other company. Autodesk is not in the habit of instating competition. They'd rather bury what they got than potentially be bitten in the behind by software they formerly owned...
$-)
Stay safe, sane & healthy!

User avatar
dewf
Posts: 18
Joined: 20 Apr 2013, 11:51
Location: Texas

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by dewf » 12 Mar 2014, 01:54

I think the numbers I mentioned would be too low *IF* the intent was for another company to purchase it and begin selling it commercially, as a competitor to Autodesk. Clearly that would not happen for any reasonable amount.

But if the aim is only to have it open sourced, and further for Autodesk to be able to keep their patents (agreeing not to enforce them against the open source project) -- AND by threatening to spend all the money hiring full-time programmers to add competitive functionality to Blender if Autodesk won't sell -- then in that case, I suspect they'd be willing to part with it for far less. Because that COULD be a serious competitor to their products in a few years...

And don't forget that Microsoft paid $130 million for it, vs. $35M for Avid's sale to Autodesk. It's certainly not getting any more expensive with age :)

The reason I don't think it's realistic is that the collective Softimage community seems unlikely to organize itself with enough efficiency to make something like this happen. Granted, everybody is still grieving and upset, but thus far I see no indication of any interest in forming a large group comprised of all the major SI studios and freelancers, to present a unified front to Autodesk to better control how it plays out. Just a bunch of "waaaaah don't do this, Autodesk! Please?"

Because really this is an unprecedented opportunity to take control of Softimage and take its development to the next level. But everybody's acting like Autodesk is infinitely powerful and incapable of negotiation. We just have to speak their language ($$$$) ...

User avatar
Tenshi
Posts: 12
Joined: 14 Jun 2009, 21:36
Location: CL

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Tenshi » 12 Mar 2014, 09:08

Agreed.

Everybody is doing things in their own ways; we need a big voice that can reunite all Softimage users; or a possible "buyer", that users can support.
Now, it seems like everybody its surrender to Autodesk will, like if it was a god or something. If everybody keep saying they kill Softimage only because "it's business", well let's do something in the same way; offer them choices and money.
It's simple.

User avatar
Hirazi Blue
Administrator
Posts: 5107
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 12:15

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Hirazi Blue » 12 Mar 2014, 11:10

dewf wrote:The reason I don't think it's realistic is that the collective Softimage community seems unlikely to organize itself with enough efficiency to make something like this happen. Granted, everybody is still grieving and upset, but thus far I see no indication of any interest in forming a large group comprised of all the major SI studios and freelancers, to present a unified front to Autodesk to better control how it plays out. Just a bunch of "waaaaah don't do this, Autodesk! Please?"
The problem here would seem to be that the different parties in this (big studios/small shops/freelancers and the odd hobbyist) have very different concerns/goals/stakes in going forward. But I agree the user base is way too divided on this. Even the Mailing List currently has reached no consensus what to do/try next, resulting in the spawning of a number of ideas/initiatives without real general backing.
PS - The fact that there still is a great divide between the Mailing List and the rest of the web (i.e. the si-community) doesn't help any either.
:(
Stay safe, sane & healthy!

Shenan
Posts: 14
Joined: 04 Mar 2014, 17:16

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Shenan » 12 Mar 2014, 16:55

Hirazi Blue wrote:The problem here would seem to be that the different parties in this (big studios/small shops/freelancers and the odd hobbyist) have very different concerns/goals/stakes in going forward.
First time posting. Why do Softimage hobbyists have to be odd? It's the best 3D software, after all. ;)
But I agree the user base is way too divided on this. Even the Mailing List currently has reached no consensus what to do/try next, resulting in the spawning of a number of ideas/initiatives without real general backing.
PS - The fact that there still is a great divide between the Mailing List and the rest of the web (i.e. the si-community) doesn't help any either.
:(
I think one of the things that is odd about Softimage is how relatively obscure it appears to be on the web. It's a fantastic software and lots of people and companies are producing fantastic work with it, but I don't hear much about it in general CG forums, CG news, etc. I think part of this is down to Autodesk's lack of marketing and promotion, but like you alluded above, it seems like the Softimage community has never seemed to me to have been very engaged online. I wonder if this was at least partially responsible for the appearance of it being in decline. I seem to see more people evangelizing Modo, Cinema4d, Blender, heck, maybe even Lightwave, than Softimage. Why is that?

Regarding Blender, after this situation with Autodesk, I'm planning to become a full-on supporter of blender, giving money and time as I can to help it grow. It may not be perfect for everyone right now, but the way I look at it is that it's the best hope we have in the long term, not only to avoid Autodesk's machinations, but also to avoid the vagaries of commercial software, especially in this very peculiar field. The thing about commercial software is that any of them you choose (Autodesk stuff or Modo, Houdini, Fabric Engine, Cinema4d, etc) can be EOL at any minute (don't we know it), or sold to Adobe, Apple, or Autodesk.

Imagine if every Softimage user started donating regularly to Blender. They accept automatic monthly donations to their development fund, and have a fundraising campaign going on right now for their new open movie, this time a feature, which also results in big strides in development. Imagine if we even made a Softimage-Blender fund to hire one or more full-time Blender developers to work on items of importance to the Softimage community specifically. Blender would grow faster, and possibly in a fashion that Softimage users would appreciate. Also, this wouldn't mean that anyone would have to abandon commercial software immediately. You can keep using it to take care of business, but also plant the seeds for a stable future where the core of your business doesn't have to rely on commercial software that is here today and gone tomorrow.

Anyway, I've probably said to much for my first post. I hope I don't get kicked out. #-o
Moderator edit: no worries, seems like a perfect first post to me ;) - HB

IslandDreamer
Posts: 58
Joined: 08 Jun 2009, 19:57

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by IslandDreamer » 12 Mar 2014, 19:46

I would support any effort to bring more of a Softimage "skin" to Blender's cryptic UI. I've tried at various times through the years to get my head around Blender's interaction model and I simply can't do it.

But rather than just throw money at Blender.org, maybe it makes more sense for individual Softimage users to form a collective (perhaps through SI-Community) and for that group to make the Blender donation. The amount donated will be much larger and should command much greater attention.

Or perhaps Blender development could be forked and enterprising Softimage devs could work their magic. (Easy for me to suggest, as I'm not a coder).

Shenan
Posts: 14
Joined: 04 Mar 2014, 17:16

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Shenan » 12 Mar 2014, 20:24

Island, try the most recent versions, particularly the new 2.70 release candidate, which has a few new UI improvements. Also, consider doing some of the settings changes that some folks recommend to users of other software coming to Blender, like changing selection to left mouse, changing the viewport rotation style from trackball to turntable, etc. I don't have a link right now, but I'm sure you can find these types of threads and posts by doing a search.

And yes, pooling donations could also add weight to requests, but be aware that Blender devs and leadership have their own particular vision for the software that may not match yours or those of Softimage users in general. However, they seem to consider any well-researched requests whose benefits are clearly explained, as long as it wouldn't require changing the code so drastically that it would not be feasible for the amount of benefit. The existing community itself also has to be considered. Many of them have "grown up" in the 3D field in Blender, so I've seen them be very resistant to changes if they can't see a clear benefit compared to how they have been using the software.

In short, for any requests, be sure to make a really good and clear case for how it would significantly improve Blender, regardless of if it makes it more similar to Softimage or any other software. A request to make it more similar to X or Y software usually falls on deaf ears, but suggestions for clear improvements are definitely taken into consideration, as resources permit.

Sil3
Posts: 54
Joined: 09 Jun 2009, 23:17

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Sil3 » 12 Mar 2014, 20:51

IslandDreamer wrote:
But rather than just throw money at Blender.org, maybe it makes more sense for individual Softimage users to form a collective (perhaps through SI-Community) and for that group to make the Blender donation. The amount donated will be much larger and should command much greater attention.

Or perhaps Blender development could be forked and enterprising Softimage devs could work their magic. (Easy for me to suggest, as I'm not a coder).
I Support the collective donation, it would had another weight in their decision, or else it would simply be donating to something that would probably never be like we wanted/need.

I had also though of, if Blender is opensource how hard it is to pick it up and start changing it to necessity? Im also not a coder and dont know if its even possible, but its seems to be possible with all the Linux variations out there where the user then chooses wich one he can use.

User avatar
Hirazi Blue
Administrator
Posts: 5107
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 12:15

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Hirazi Blue » 12 Mar 2014, 20:54

Sorry to be such a buzzkill: The Blender Foundation has so far successfully and blatantly ignored all cries for a workflow experience that better matches the rest of the industry (and has done so for many years), so what exactly makes you think you can convince them otherwise all of a sudden?
Stay safe, sane & healthy!

Shenan
Posts: 14
Joined: 04 Mar 2014, 17:16

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Shenan » 12 Mar 2014, 21:10

Hirazi Blue wrote:Sorry to be such a buzzkill: The Blender Foundation has so far successfully and blatantly ignored all cries for a workflow experience that better matches the rest of the industry (and has done so for many years), so what exactly makes you think you can convince them otherwise all of a sudden?
Hi Hirazi, can you give some examples? I'm not a Blender expert and don't hang out in their community very often, but what I have seen is that there is a mix of requests that are well-received and others that aren't. I imagine that changing the workflow for their thousands of existing users to satisfy potential users without a really compelling, practical reason to do so would be a non-starter, and I can understand why (bird in the hand, vs. bird in the bush). It can definitely be a heavy task to convince the community and the organization to adopt changes, but it can and has been done (ex: the major UI overhaul that happened with 2.50).

User avatar
dewf
Posts: 18
Joined: 20 Apr 2013, 11:51
Location: Texas

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by dewf » 12 Mar 2014, 22:14

May I make a slight amendment to your all's suggestion?

Form a post-Softimage collective to raise funds, yes, but instead of donating directly to the Blender Foundation (where our influence will be questionable and might even be resented by existing users), hire our own team of full-time/part-time programmers to make the changes WE want to Blender. Some changes might require a fork (new UI etc), but other things could and should go back into the main branch for all to appreciate (integration for mental ray/Redshift/Fabric, ICE clone, etc).

That is why I suggested the funds should be raised with the intention of making a serious (but lowball) offer to Autodesk, and if they refuse to open up SI, spend all the money raised on Blender development as described above. Make Blender a force to be reckoned with, and make Autodesk sorry they didn't take the offer.

luceric
Posts: 1251
Joined: 22 Jun 2009, 00:08

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by luceric » 12 Mar 2014, 23:26

The first release of blender was in 1995. Nineteen years ago. I got a CD Rom with Blender at siggraph in 1998. Even back then there was already a promise that the next version of blender would have a UI revamp that would make everyone happy. Same with GIMP. But you'll always hear people pontificate to you that the team is listening and they're just about to do make everything already in the next one, that open source is awesome and either just as good or way more advanced. One of the project on the roadmap for Blender 2.7 is a minimal move to OpenGL 2.1. That's only a hint of how much old shit there is under there.

Shenan
Posts: 14
Joined: 04 Mar 2014, 17:16

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Shenan » 12 Mar 2014, 23:55

Valid points, Luc. Open source software does have different philosophy, responsibilities, outlook, audience, and resources than commercial software.

They only recently have reached 6 full-time developers, with I believe 4 or so more part-time ones. So you can see why they would want to prioritize on things that most of their existing community demands. And the community itself can be very broad and varied, which can bring its own complications. For example, I recently saw someone suggest that Blender can't just eliminate support for old hardware the same way that commercial software can, because they need to keep the software viable for some theoretical kid in a developing country who doesn't have the funds to get new hardware. I'm not sure that that actually goes into the decision-making of the Blender Foundation, but I imagine that it is something that they have to consider.

How about my other question though - why didn't Softimage gain more market share in the time it has been around? The users are lamenting the fact that this great piece of software has no peer in the market currently. Any theories on why the general 3D market didn't get that message?

User avatar
Draise
Posts: 891
Joined: 09 Oct 2012, 20:48
Skype: ondraise
Location: Colombia

Re: What about Softimaging Blender? SoftBlender?

Post by Draise » 13 Mar 2014, 07:41

Expensive product; not marketed well; if known, there was strong competition within the same company (so logically why go for the "underdog") to justify it, etc etc.

It was a locked away Cinderella.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests