Re: MAYA <> XSI

[Adam Sale <adamsale(at)shaw.ca>]

geo uv's and textures are fine as long as the shader networks aren't more complex than

some of my Maya students bring their boned characters in via crosswalk and use XSI as a weighting environment, and if they only require rotation keyframes, the fk null hierarchy thats brought across in place of the bones will suffice, but getting IK and constraints across is still problematic with the off the shelf solution..Shapes work well back and forth,

 

cameras work ok for the most part, though you do have to fudge with pixel ratio to match things up.

 

Crosswalk is slowly getting there, but by no means a seamless solution

 

I would say to you that you are safe getting your guy or gal to model and UV in Maya, and perhaps even creating shape targets but anything other than phong and Blinns with a spec and diffuse map will not come over properly.

 

and shapes are far easier to create and manage in xsi anyways...

 

Adam

----- Original Message -----
From: Eriya Ito <eriya.ito@grapecity.com>
Date: Friday, February 8, 2008 6:51 pm
Subject: MAYA <> XSI
To: XSI@Softimage.COM

> I'm not sure if this is the right place to be talking about this...
>
>  
>
> What do you guys say about the data sharing (export/import)
> between Maya
> and XSI?
>
> I've heard that models and to some extent, textures are pretty much
> smooth but the animation,
>
> rigging, actions, simulation, shaders, etc. are not that recommending.
>
>  
>
> We're basically all XSI production here but the next CG guy
> coming is a
> *M* fan and just
>
> would not want to 'promote' to XSI. I tho't I'd come up with a
> specificlist of problems and reasons
>
> of why we don't want two platforms here.
>
>  
>
> Thanks all,
>
> Eriya
>
>