/3/ - 3DCG

[Anonymous No.610755]

I'm a blender user.

Pls sell me other 3D software that is used in the industry and why I should use it rather than blender.

[Anonymous No.610757]

>>610755
There really isn't a good reason. If you end up working for a studio that uses something else, it will be a quick transition. Basically just learning shortcuts which takes an hour or two.

[Anonymous No.610758]

>>610755
Use whatever you want. But have a decent knowledge of Maya or 3DS Max if you want to be a professional 3D monkey one day, even if you don't want to use them for your personal projects. If you will always be just a hobbyist, it matters even less what you use.

[Anonymous No.610759]

>>610757

Bullshit. Learning a whole new software takes way more time. This "your skills will translate" meme needs to stop. If you'd rather waste your time using shitty open source software it's your call. People who use real software will get hired instead of you.

[Anonymous No.610761]

>>610759
"3D artist" has to be the shittiest field of art one can get into. In no other field do people need to argue so much about the tools they use and get replaced so easily just because they don't how to use a certain software. It seems like their art is the second most important thing to a studio after their knowledge of stupid programs. Really fucking sucks that I am supposed to sacrifice everything: my comfort, speed and quality of art, just so I could use "industry standard" software that will get me a job. It's really pathetic. I hate it so much when people change their opinion on the artwork when they hear it has been created by a tools they consider "inferior".

As much as I hate /3/ for its stupid memes, I'm glad it made me realize how shitty this industry is to work in, so I'll continue doing this just as a hobby, where I can use whatever serves me best.

[Anonymous No.610762]

>>610761

I KNEW a blendlet would say this. You know why? Because you know you'll never get a job because of your software, so you comfort yourselves in saying 3d jobs suck. They don't. Working in a game studio is great, and of yourse you blendlets are literally the only ones who say it suck.

[Anonymous No.610763]

>>610761
blender quality is objectivelly inferior to what the industry tool makes.

noone seriously use blender because the industry uses better tools.

and yes, a better pencil will make a better drawing than a cheap one.

[Anonymous No.610764]

>>610762
>Because you know you'll never get a job because of your software
This proves what I said. I will never let myself become an replaceable sheep where my art gets ignored just because I use the "wrong" tools.

That being said, I never mentioned I'm using and talking about Blender, nice projection. Maya, Max and Blender are not the only software on the market, you know... You people are disgusting.

[Anonymous No.610772]

>>610763
this is false.
i argued with many people over the validity of autodesk over blender, none have given me any evidence that autodesk is superior to blender.

since you can't argue, ill argue for you.

>autodesk have the .fbx exporter, its proprietary. blender .fbx support is not bad or broken. its simply not good as autodesk's one because they reversed engineer it
>3ds max have better approach to smoothing groups than blender
>3ds max have better baking system (from what i seen)
>autodesk have full integration with arnold and vray, which is better than cycles (as to how much, we can still discuss)
>autodesk has better destruction and hair plugins
>maya has better animation toolset (this is still vague in some regards,need an animator's input on this)

i can argue for blender sake, but ill let you argue for these points, even with all of this i don't think autodesk is better than blender, since blender can compensating over those issues.

[Anonymous No.610773]

>>610759
Post your art.

[Anonymous No.610775]

>>610772
maya plugins BTFO anything blender has.

nobody uses maya alone faggot, all studios use paid plugins and workflows that BTFO blender.

[Anonymous No.610776]

>>610755
Maya and Max look much closer to the top picture than the bottom one.

One advantage with open source is that sometimes, when a user gets fed up enough with a bug, they'll write code to fix it. Autodesk has become complacent, and at this point their programs are honestly a buggy mess with outdated features.

>>610758
I've never heard of someone getting turned down because they didn't know Max/Maya. All 3d modeling packages are similar enough that learning a new one to a functional level is a matter of 1-2 weeks.

[Anonymous No.610777]

>>610775
i was referring to xgen and fumefx which are both excellent, but those are just 2 plugins in a sea of plugins.
i can easily compare them to autorig pro and hardops which are excellent too.
this comparison is quite difficult, other than chimping out like a retard - you haven't provided any arguments

[Anonymous No.610778]

>>610777
blender is a duck, it can do everything but not excell at nothing.

zbrush is simply superior for sculpting.
substance designer for materials.
substance painter for painting materials.
maya for it's animation plugins.
real flow for simulation fluids.
Vray for rendering.
Unity or unreal for real time stuff.
Nuke or after effects for compositing stuff.
Photoshop for painting 2D cartoony textures.

Blender is just overall mediocre.

[Anonymous No.610779]

>>610778
who cares? ones 2.8 hit the internet you will be left crying and mumbling like a child. this is where blender will evolve into a next-gen software, everything else will be left behind

[Anonymous No.610780]

>>610772

Its simple, really. You need proof that industry tools get the job done? Just take a look at the movie industry of the last 15 years - none of this is made with Blender.
How the fuck do you convince a major investor that you can do it with other tools?
They won't listen, they want to see proof.
You are out of the game before it even starts.
Autodesk, SideFX, Foundry, Pixology and all these companies do not need to prove their usability, they have done so repeatably and successfully. Its self-evident.
Where is the proof that Blender can do it?

The internal simulation tools suck and are totally not fit for production.
You can't import sims from Houdini because Blender doesn't read fucking OPEN VDB.
That makes it a shitshow of an VFX tool, basically it is useless except for minimal amateur stuff nobody cares for.

It is objectively worse than Maya and Max, because it is unfit for that purpose.
Alembic implementation isn't feature complete yet.
FBX import/export is fucked and yes no fault of the BF, they did their best, but its still a fact that this is a deal-breaker for many Artist.
They need it or any other format which is able to transfer this amount of data.
There isn't any valid alternative, so Blender is fucked.
Blender CANNOT compensate for those issues, it is simply not true.

[Anonymous No.610782]

>>610779
literally SEETHING

lmao

[Anonymous No.610783]

>>610780
>Blender CANNOT compensate for those issues, it is simply not true.
oh yes it can.
the fact that you can just open blender and exit with a finished product is a big deal.
all the open source films did not use any of the fancy plugins that are offered in blender-market, and they are TITS.
and we are way past those movies now.
what you need to look at is the thing blender can do, not the things that it has done.
and yes, blender is a jack of all trades. but its pretty good at what it does... you seem rather enraged there.. enjoy your 40$ a month subscription, did you get your autodesk newsletter today? LOL idiot

[Anonymous No.610784]

>>610783
blender movies are good for 2001 CGI faggot.

[Anonymous No.610785]

>>610784
i suggest you watch agent 327.. its right up there

[Anonymous No.610787]

>>610785
and it looks like an amateur cartoon from 2005.

the fucking FFVII demo from PS3 is more impressive graphically.

[Anonymous No.610789]

FUCKING GNOMON WORKSHOP DOESNT EVEN TEACH BLENDER ON THEIR COURSES.

THAT WHERE YOU KNOW BLENDER CAN ONLY DO DONUTS

LOL

[Anonymous No.610790]

>>610787
lol you are boiling with rage... go back to your quake maps kiddo, its past 11 schools starts tommarow

[Anonymous No.610791]

>>610790
I dont see blender listed here faggot.

[Anonymous No.610792]

>>610783
I want to do VFX with lots of explosions and destruction.
Please tell me how to do a scene like in this clip 3:15 minutes in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX4Z-_zCRmk

Go on, i am curious about that answer.
Also my monthly subscription amounts to ZERO, i am actually using Blender as my modelling tool, but i have no problems using other tools. I know the strengths and weakness of these tools so i choose accordingly.

[Anonymous No.610793]

>>610791
lol you don't even use gnomon. why do you care?

[Anonymous No.610794]

>>610793
>he doesn't have a cgpeers account
LOL

[Anonymous No.610795]

>>610794
?

[Anonymous No.610796]

someone please post the gif that shows two asses squirt shit on eachother, thanks

[Anonymous No.610797]

>>610796
You lazy piece of shit, why don't you do it yourself?

[Anonymous No.610798]

>>610797
Because im too busy getting sucked by your mom

[Anonymous No.610800]

My mom is dead. You have sex with dead bodies?

Also no need for that shitslinger image; i killed the thread with a truth-bomb.
None of these Blender trolls will argue against my last post >>610792
Doing so would mean they have to admit Blender is useless in that regard and they hate admitting that they are wrong.

[Anonymous No.610803]

>>610762
>Working in a game studio is great

>what is crunch?

Don’t mistake your dreams for reality.

[Anonymous No.610805]

>>610800
I cqn easily answer that. But you dont have the texhnical fidelity to understand the terms used in this context. Good night bucko

[Anonymous No.610806]

>>610789
About Gnomon, is it really good? I was curious about it since people appear to piss their pants with every mention of them, so I downloaded a course on Marvelous Designer. It was fucking atrocious, the guy rambled, giggled, fucked around, instead of teaching things properly. Pluralsight, on the contrary, did a way better job on the same topic.

If I had paid for that Gnomon crap, I’d be angry as fuck.

[Anonymous No.610807]

>>610805
You can't even write the words "can" and "technical" correctly.
Nice try. I chuckled.

[Anonymous No.610808]

>>610791
I don’t see Renderman either

[Anonymous No.610809]

>>610792
That’s amazing work. Uh, I don’t know about VFX, but isn’t Alembic supposed to allow interoperability? So, you could do that with Houdini, and push it down to Maya/Blender/Modo/whatever to render, then out of that to the compositor… you get the idea. I assume this is how things work in that field, am I right?

[Anonymous No.610810]

>>610806
Honestly, from the courses I watched, there are more bad ones than good ones. It is highly overrated IMO, no matter that great pros are creating those tuts. A good artist isn't always a good teacher and they rarely provided some top secret tips so basically a lot of the courses ended up being just lazy and with a cheap production quality. Somebody will probably disagree - disagree all you want, but I haven't learned much from Gnomon workshop.

[Anonymous No.610811]

>>610792
>please tell me how i do a AAA quality procedural destructable city with animation, fluid systems, advanced rendering
Dude. Do you honestly think any of the 10 guys browsing this forum has this kind of talent?

[Anonymous No.610813]

>>610809
Yeah this is how it works, but Alembic is for meshes and OpenVDB is for volumes.
The problem is that Blender does not read VDB from external sources (its only used for internal caches) so you can't import from Houdini, therefore you cannot render your scene in Blender.
Nobody really expects that Blender beats Houdini in Simulations, but even import is impossible. That might change in the future.
>>610811
I am on my way there.
It's a rhetorical question and i don't expect a detailed answer. Anybody with an ounce of 3D knowledge will necessarily come to the conclusion that it is impossible with Blender because the functionality to do it isn't there.

Which is the answer to the question OP was asking.
If you want to do serious VFX, stay away from Blender. (you can however use it as an modelling tool in combination with Houdini for example)

[Anonymous No.610819]

>>610755
That's a little ironic because Telsa runs on GNU/Linux

[Anonymous No.610827]

>>610779

Keep dreaming. 2.8 will be ignored by the pros just like every previous versions. faggot blendie.

[Anonymous No.610828]

>>610764
>You people are disgusting.
Not as disgusting as blender's UI.

[Anonymous No.610854]

>>610813
well its not IMPOSSIBLE like you would want to believe, its just extremely difficult to achieve in a none designated vfx software, namely blender.
this freak that's been posting shit here is looking for that ultimate validation that blender is a piece of crap, and he uses all kind of mental gymnastics to prove it.
whats funny is, he is getting into a very technical debate without knowing anything about 3D other than basic facts.

[Anonymous No.610857]

>>610755

[Anonymous No.610868]

For all the anti-Blender shitposters on here, I have a question.
As a hobbyist (I have no desire to ever get a job in 3D, my current job pays more than any job in the field.), why should I give two shits about what program I'm using?

[Anonymous No.610869]

>>610868
Because Blender is bad software, and you could achieve more with better one. The role of Blender, it puts high entry barrier for companies which would potentially want to make cheaper but still quality alternatives for autodesk software, ensuring Autodesk monopoly on the market. I.e. why bother, when there is free shit which kinda does the job, and you'll need 3ds/maya for real stuff anyway.

[Anonymous No.610870]

>>610869
but how do you know its bad? if it was so bad, wouldn't it be impossible to create anything?

[Anonymous No.610874]

>>610869
>high entry barrier
Same guy you responded to. What does this even mean? I don't think Blender is very hard to use at all, and while I was overwhelmed by its old UI design, the new one didn't really seem all that bad.
For now, I'll just assume it's because I have no point of reference, since I haven't used any other software

[Anonymous No.610877]

>>610870
>>610874
Why do you guys keep taking these idiots seriously?

[Anonymous No.610878]

Where can I obtain 3ds max lads?

[Anonymous No.610879]

>>610874
It means that it makes harder for companies to enter CGI market with their new software. There's blender, it's shit, but it's free, so no one will buy your 3D Tools Pro. I'm pretty sure Autodesk is behind blender, to eliminate competition.

>>610870
Quality of tools are determined by how long it takes you to make something with them. Blender is shit, bad UI, no support etc. The fact that you can waste 9000 hours in it and end up with something decent is not an argument.

[Anonymous No.610880]

>>610775
>nobody uses maya alone faggot
Well no one uses Blender alone either. I've seen people use Photoshop, zBrush and Substance, even external renders at times like VRay.

Even if Blender were to excell in all of those aspects >>610778 listed, I don't see why people would want to change what they know, and knowing the foundation, they'll probably ignore stuff like sculpting and leave it for 3rd parties to improve upon instead because they're too lazy to do it themselves.

[Anonymous No.610881]

>>610783
>enjoy your 40$ a month subscription
>implying he's not just pirating the programs he uses.

[Anonymous No.610882]

>>610808
Guess that means Pixar's just unimportant. Just like the Blender Foundation.

[Anonymous No.610884]

>>610880
Yeah, this is what I don't get about this Blender hate. Why the fuck do you guys compare Blender will all of those specialized programs in the first place? You could compare Max or Maya with them as well and they will also fail. If somebody uses Blender, that doesn't mean they use everything it provides. I use every industry standard tool there is, except that I model in Blender and yet somehow I'll still get BTFO by /3/fags if somebody sees mention of "Blender" in my post.

This board has been nothing but Blender vs Autodesk for the past 4+ months. It has become really, really annoying.

[Anonymous No.610885]

>>610884
The board's dying and everyone here are just pissy that their own work is complete shit. Hell, the fact that many of them don't post their work (I'm also guilty of this too, admittedly) doesn't help.

It seriously seem like outside the WIP thread, people just like hating on programs. We had someone bashing Photoshop not that long ago, so it seems more that Autofucks will just hate any and all programs that aren't Maya/3DS Max.

[Anonymous No.610886]

>>610885
>Autofucks
Don't you mean Autocucks?

[Anonymous No.610887]

>>610884
just some background on the troll.

he is a guy that wanted to render bsp maps in full AA with global illumination and ambient occlusion + hdri. so he went and tried to do that in blender and failed.
now he blames blender for everything, he even blames it for sexual abuse and bad behavior. he is completely nuts

[Anonymous No.610888]

>>610884
I can explain why people compare the whole pipeline (with all the specialized tools) with Blender.
Blender tries to do everything, and hardcore Blender-fanboys imply that Blender is better than all these specialized tools.
Its a very vocal minority of users who follow that generalist approach, mostly because of a personal affinity for FOSS products ( and a hate for commercial products).
They make the comparison with the whole pipeline and the blow-back comes immediately.
There are maybe 3 people here (4 if you count me) who could discuss software civilized without falling into meme territory and twisting the truth, the rest is trolling and shitposting (i assume because they don't know any better).

I have a similar viewpoint than you, i use Blender as a modelling tool, but i use every other specialized tool too. I defend Blender from idiots who imply Blender is garbage, but i also beat down on fanboys who are similarly delusional (but at the other end of the spectrum).

[Anonymous No.610889]

>>610888
>I have a similar viewpoint than you, i use Blender as a modelling tool, but i use every other specialized tool too. I defend Blender from idiots who imply Blender is garbage, but i also beat down on fanboys who are similarly delusional (but at the other end of the spectrum).
So we're the same. I don't like either side if it starts acting superior and insulting others.

[Anonymous No.610891]

>>610886
autocucks, autofucks, a shill's a shill regardless.

I use Blender I'm more than willing to admit the various flaws it has. I don't think i could even use the texturing, rigging or sculpting tools without specialized addons (and even then I can just use an external program for texturing).

[Anonymous No.610894]

>>610882
Guess so. That’s why there’s Renderman integration for Blender. Both serve no purpose, both accomplish nothing, both belong together.

[Anonymous No.610895]

>>610780
You're just a cuck. Like the faggots who think you need Macs to make web graphics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exAwxzhBL8w

[Anonymous No.610896]

>>610879
>It means that it makes harder for companies to enter CGI market with their new software. There's blender, it's shit, but it's free, so no one will buy your 3D Tools Pro.
This is a crappy argument, sorry. If Blender is shit, surely it won’t be difficult to come with something better that trumps it in the market. Especially considering that you get no contractual support for Blender in your pipeline, but you could get it from the alternative, newcomer software’s vendor.

[Anonymous No.610898]

>>610895
Thanks for proving my point. Its in the fucking title: "Gruntwork".
So yeah Blender can render little smoke puffs and some flowing blood.
And it actually looks quite good. Good for him to get his foot in the door.
But this stuff is baby tier VFX, could have been done in 1997.
Show me something more complex and impressive.

[Anonymous No.610916]

>>610898
He actually says Blender's compositing tools are some of the best and easiest to use, and that he doesn't understand why they're always overlooked.

https://openvisualfx.com/2016/05/11/blender-screen-replacement-marker-removal/

But keep moving goalposts like you always do.

[Anonymous No.610934]

>>610916
I am talking about fluid and smoke simulations and how Blender sucks at it.
You come and throw compositing in the mix and accuse me of moving the goalpost....
Are you fucking retarded?

[Anonymous No.610937]

>>610934
You're the retard who said Blender was useless for VFX. Compositing is a big part of VFX. The actual video editor is also incredibly much more powerful than what people expect.
Blender's simulations are not as good as Houdini's, but Maya is just deprecated trash in all areas (which is what this conversation is really about, you autocuck).

[Anonymous No.610945]

>>610937
doesn't matter there's always a better specialized software for any single task.

>compositing
Nuke or After effects.

[Anonymous No.610946]

>>610945
Yeah, just send those goalposts flying into orbit.

[Anonymous No.610966]

>>610937
>You're the retard who said Blender was useless for VFX.
For what i want to do, its useless. Simple VFX can be done in nearly every 3D DCC. Complex stuff is where the money is (and my interest, and that of every studio exec)
>Compositing is a big part of VFX.
Never denied it. Its just a different Job altogether.
>The actual video editor is also incredibly much more powerful than what people expect.
Who the fuck cares. There are specialized tools for that, also another complete different job.
>Blender's simulations are not as good as Houdini's...
Must have been tough to admit that finally. Good job!
>Maya is just deprecated trash in all areas.
Maya reads vdb unlike Blender, your argument is factual wrong.

[Anonymous No.610968]

These arguments about tools and software are always stupid. Software is always changing, your core creative and spatial compositional skills are what counts.
A lot of small studios use cinema 4d, some use blender, most big studios use autodesk suite. Being proficient at just software and specific software functionality won't get you far in the first world. Most jobs that value software proficiency over creative thinking skills are outsourced to third world studios.

[Anonymous No.610969]

>>610968
to elaborate on this if you are classicly trained as a sculptor and you learned blender to apply those skills to 3D, your background as a sculptor is much more valuable, and if your portfolio gets you a place at a studio you won't have much trouble integrating into the pipeline

[Anonymous No.610971]

>>610968
this. most software is gonna be different next year anyway

[Anonymous No.610992]

>>610937

Maya's still the best at rigging, UV mapping and animating. Blender is useless trash all around.

[Anonymous No.610994]

>>610992
Yeah, no. Maya's UV mapping is complete trash.
At rigging and animation they're exactly the same, except:
>Blender can store multiple actions in a single fbx
>Blender doesn't need to have shape keys floating around in the scene
>Blender can keyframe absolutely every value in any part of the UI
>Blender has universal hotkeys throughout all systems
>Blender is much faster
>Blender doesn't crash

The only thing Maya does better is rendering, but that's thanks to Arnold.
Blender is getting Eevee in the next version though, so that's about to change too.

[Anonymous No.610998]

>>610994
When was the last time you unwrapped something in Maya? 10 years ago?
Eevee might not even beat UE4 or Marmorset in terms of quality and you compare it to Arnold?

[Anonymous No.611005]

>>610998
>When was the last time you unwrapped something in Maya? 10 years ago?
Last month.
You need to make UVs by doing a random planar projection or something before you can even unwrap. You need to switch to "UV selection mode". There's just a bunch of redundant steps like that everywhere in Maya. Normal unwrapping is also faulty at best, and completely fucked at worst. It lacks basic functions, such as 'follow active quads".
It's just shit, man.

>Eevee might not even beat UE4 or Marmorset in terms of quality and you compare it to Arnold?
Might not, but it shows promise. At least it won't be as slow as Arnold, and run in a clumsy semi-separate program.

[Anonymous No.611006]

>>611005
How can you guys even compare that?

Shouldn't you compare Arnold with Cycles rendered view (where they both gradually reduce the noise, but are still "realtime" and responding to the viewport change) and Eevee wirth Marmoset, where you see a clear image from the beginning, and it always remains clear. I'm not knowledgeable enough to name them, but these 2 pairs are clearly working in different ways.

[Anonymous No.611012]

>>611006
cycles is not bad per se. but the lightning is tricky to get right because they haven't updated the lamps from blender internal, the light portal fix is hackish

[Anonymous No.611013]

>>611012
Doesn't Vray still use portals as well?

[Anonymous No.611014]

>>611013
every renderer should have portals by now.
but the blender portal fix is not good, at least from what i experience

[Anonymous No.611053]

>>610934
>>610992

Jesus Christ dude, learn some fucking manners.

[Anonymous No.611058]

>>610755
>Maya
Reason:
>Everything

[Anonymous No.611062]

>>610755

Tesla is practically open source, though. Tesla has shared all its technology with the whole car industry.

[Anonymous No.611068]

>>611058

Is maya any good for modeling yet?

[Anonymous No.611079]

>>611068
You can model in Blender and import it in Maya, so who cares.

[Anonymous No.611135]

>>611068

It's fine. Not nearly as good as 3ds max though (still the best 3d modeling app imo) but I'd have no problem using it to create all of my hard surface models.

[Anonymous No.611137]

>>610828
He never mentioned blender you wriggling sped

[Anonymous No.611139]

>>611137

Shut up you donut making, anvil crafting, coffee drinking blendie.

[Anonymous No.611143]

>>610755
It depends on who you work for and what software they use.

Many AAA studios use different softwares for different tasks (Maya for animation, 3DSM for architecture, Zbrush for organic modeling, etc.).