Re: OT: Digital Fusion v Shake

[Sylvain Moreau <sylvain.moreau(at)videotron.ca>]

Tim



Just to clarify things, I am not working for Softimage. I am an independent 
freelance artist. I wrote the mail about "removing the OT from this thread" 
because the thread was flagged OT when, really, it should not be. In my 
experience the FXtree can do 90% of all comp jobs and I am always curious 
about the last 30%...



Now who put back the OT in the title?



syl



p.s. I did work for Softimage a few years ago. I spent four years writing 
the technical specifications for XSI. I can tell you that logging feature 
requests with Softimage is the right thing to do if you want your ideas 
included in XSI. Don't hesitate to send the same request again every few 
months. The formula to judge the validity of a new feature is complex but 
looks a bit like this:

(what the users need + what the managers want + what the programmers feel) * 
(the number of similar requests - the age of the requests) + (the weather in 
Montreal / the quality of the food served for lunch + 2)



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim Leydecker" <BauerOink(at)gmx.de>
To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Digital Fusion v Shake


> This is another email for Sylvain,
>
> I´ll log a feature request later today (e.g. probably tommorow)
> at Alias, to revisit the *.rla/rpf support for Maya (G-Buffers, all 
> that...)
> as well as incorporate ways of importing/exporting Cameras with
> the Combustion/Flame/Inferno line of it´s mothercompany Autodesk.
>
> It is expectable that there will be a tighter interchangeability between
> 3DS Max based products, the compositing range of products, Maya
> and Motionbuilder anyway...
>
> I´ll also ask them to have a look at supporting XSI more, either by
> further expanding the capabilities of the *.fbx format or *.dotXSI.
>
> It guess it would be an advantage to their entire range of products
> (Autodesk´s) if people could throw layers/passes or even scenes
> and objects from XSI at Maya/Max/Compositing, with access to
> custom framebuffers, materialchannels, blind data.
>
> The same applies to interchanging animation data from Cameras
> backrounds, tracking, characteranimation.
>
> I´ll also put a bit of pressure on them by linking to Andy Nicholas:
> http://www.andynicholas.com/article.php?subject=0&n=13
>
> I can imagine a link between Max/Maya and Combustion/Flame/+
> would be just as desireable as a link between XSI an Digital 
> Fusion/FXTree.
>
> Cheers
>
> tim
>
> P.S: This is not meant to start a flame war, it´s about integration and
> broadening up range of tools to pick from when building a pipeline.
> Which should be open and extendable instead of locked to one vendor.
> IMHO.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "kim aldis" <kim(at)cg-soup.com>
> To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:13 AM
> Subject: RE: OT: Digital Fusion v Shake
>
>
> > DS. Now there's a hugely underestimated application.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
> > > [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Raffaele Fragapane
> > > Sent: 31-January-2006 06:37
> > > To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> > > Subject: Re: OT: Digital Fusion v Shake
> > >
> > > the nodes grouping thing you talk about is also present, and
> > > better implemented then in USAnimation, in AVID|DS (although
> > > it was born with a different purpose)
> > >
> > > in DS you can group nodes and actually even render them as a
> > > cache, so that if you modify the tree before that branch it
> > > will read the images cache instead of re-rendering the whole branch.
> > >
> > > it's also possible in Houdini's halo I believe (without the
> > > caching), where you can group nodes into one and create a
> > > CHOP to wrap them it with an interface that only exposes the
> > > input and output channels you want to use
> > >
> > > it's not particularly new, and it's such an intuitive and
> > > logical way to work that I'm still surprised this kind of
> > > feature isn't a standard in every nodal comp app by now.
> > >
> > >  ******************************
> > > |     Raffaele Fragapane       |
> > > |     Rising Sun Pictures      |
> > > | "Remember, TD is for TopDog" |
> > >  ******************************
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Greg Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree on basic nodes, if you can replicate the functionality of a
> > > > big node with that of a simple nodes, you have that
> > > flexible level of
> > > > abstraction. I have to say though, after getting more exposure to
> > > > compositing in general, one of the most interesting
> > > concepts in tree
> > > > organization came from the most unlikely of places. When I
> > > worked for
> > > > Disney, we used USAnimation for compositing, a sub-par
> > > compositor for
> > > > sure, but the way it orginized its networks was cool. It worked in
> > > > multiple levels of networks where in your root tree, a
> > > subtree would
> > > > be represented as a single node, as you clicked in that
> > > node, it would
> > > > open up that subtree. Reminds me of how windows explorer works.
> > > > Granted it doesn't give you the ghestalt of having every
> > > component on
> > > > one layer, but if a simple and clean flow is really important. That
> > > > feature seems pretty nifty!
> > > >
> > > > Just thought I add my nonsensical ADD banter :-p
> > > >
> > > > Greg
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following
> > > text in body:
> > > unsubscribe xsi
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in 
> > body:
> > unsubscribe xsi
>
>
> ---
> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
> unsubscribe xsi 



---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi