Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software

Blender Community Rescues Sources 220

Posted by CowboyNeal from the take-the-power-back dept.
Christoffer Green writes "Today the Blender funding campaign went through the 100k limit, sufficient now to pay for the ransom fee needed to make Blender Open Sourced. The Blender Foundation aims to have the deal signed before October 1, do a pre-release for donating members only at October 5, organize a Blender Conference in Amsterdam October 11-12-13, and make the official CVS release on October 13 for everyone. This doesn't mean that you should stop donating though. The foundation still depends on your contributions to cover costs that have been made."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blender Community Rescues Sources More

Blender Community Rescues Sources

Comments Filter:

  • A small buffer is already there (Score:3, Interesting)

    by VladDrac ( 15111 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @09:27AM (#4211870) Homepage
    as far as I can see, E100K has actually been paid. Another E8455 is 'pending', so they already should have some funds for their expenses.

    Great news!
    • Well, some expenses (like running the website) are ongoing, though. That buffer'll keep 'em for a bit, but we probably should drop some change into the till now and then to keep them going.

      • Re:expenses (Score:2, Informative)

        by GigsVT ( 208848 )
        That buffer may not exist. The "Pending" were people that said they were going to pay, but were supposedly waiting on their Pay Pal account to go through. Ton is cancelling all pending transactions that are more than 4 weeks old. I wouldn't be surprised if that $8000 turned out to be more like $1000.
    • The company who owns blender burned what, E10mil?, in the last 2 years... on what? I still remember the loudmouth directing the company telling everybody who wanted to hear it that blender would be so profitable... What did he do with all the funds he raised? Will the people who invested in the company be thrilled the source is sold for 100K? I don't think so.

      Besides, blender the product, is ok, but the interface is so darn goofy it takes a hell of a lot of time to get used to it, especially when you compare it to the big boys in 3D world: 3DSMax, lightwave and Maya
      • It is the investors that wanted the sources to be opensourced for 100k.

        The source has not been sold. It has been made opensourced.
      • And you're saying the interfaces for 3DXMax, LW, and Maya AREN'T goofy?!

      • Re:I still wonder where the millions went though (Score:5, Insightful)

        by WWWWolf ( 2428 ) <wwwwolf@iki.fi> on Saturday September 07, 2002 @10:14AM (#4211988) Homepage
        Besides, blender the product, is ok, but the interface is so darn goofy it takes a hell of a lot of time to get used to it, especially when you compare it to the big boys in 3D world: 3DSMax, lightwave and Maya

        And me, been raised in Blender (because I can't afford the "big boys" - sorry, I haven't really done the usual "get the warez if you're a student, buy the program if you do actual work" thing), found the other modellers clumsy, and can't see why people think Blender is "complicated" (yeah, takes a bit to get used to, but after that it's a dream to use). Sort of like when I got raised in GIMP and can't understand a) why people with Photoshop background can't understand GIMP and b) why people regard Photoshop so highly, GIMP sure has better interface (if not that big feature set, though).

        So let me repeat: Blender has a wonderful interface once you get the hang of it. Smooth enough for my needs, anyway, and I actually get work done in it. I don't like the renderer, though - I hope the work will start to implement more export formats and/or interfacing with other renderers (Renderman support would be pretty neat).

        It's a matter of choice of profession, I suppose. =)

        • There are already scripts to use other rendering engines.

          See this -

          http://www.janw.gothere.uk.com/export.html#usage [uk.com]

          and for some pics of various renderers from the same site -

          http://www.janw.gothere.uk.com/exportmesh.html [uk.com]


          And I also saw a while ago on the NaN site that Blender 2.26 (Publisher only maybe not that it matters any more) was supposed to support renderman rendering directly but the link is broken now (since the NaN site is closed).
        • I hope the work will start to implement more export formats and/or interfacing with other renderers (Renderman support would be pretty neat).

          A few weeks back they were discussing import and export. XML is basically going to happen, so it shouldn't be to hard to either translate that or just pitch into the development to make sure it speaks the same (or close enough) XML dialect as the renderer of your choice.

          The existing binary format is very small and fast, but also very much a hack. If you could invent something that was still small and fast, yet consistent and flexible enough to implement all of the new stuff they're planning after the stable/free release, you'd make a hero of yourself.

          Using the format of other editors or renderers may involve IP deadfalls, but if you can safely adapt a good file format, that would be fine.
      • Whenever you mention Blender to someone, they will give you one of two responses:
        a. anyone who has taken time to learn it will say its awesome
        b. anyone else will say something like "what the hell do all these buttons do?"
        Can you think of any program whose UI isn't confusing the first few times you try it?
        • Can you think of any program whose UI isn't confusing the first few times you try it?

          Well, there is a text adventure called "Pick Up The Phone Booth And Die [spatch.net]"... The user interface is mostly obvious if you bother to read the title of the game. Great fun! Actual winning of the game probably needs some concentration, though.

        • Can you think of any program whose UI isn't confusing the first few times you try it?
          The problem with Blenders interface is that it stays confusing even for the third and fourth time you try it. Without a reference manuel or lots of tutorial website, there is basically zero change that ever will get used to the interface. Most interfaces you can learn just by playing around with them, you can't do that with Blender (zero tooltips, zero reaction when you press a button, most functionality only accessible via mode-sensitive keyboard shortcuts). You can get the job done with Blenders interfaces and it has some nice ideas, but there is still quite huge room for improvments (not only on the interface site, but also on the functionality site, I still miss boolean operations).
        • a. anyone who has taken time to learn it will say its awesome

          This is a gross generalization, and quite inaccurate at that. I've used Blender for about three years, and just because I've learned to tolerate and navigate around its weaknesses, I'd hardly call it awesome. It has some good qualities, but it also suffers from some weaknesses that are sorely in need of improvement. I've gotten to the point where I'll shelf Blender for a while, start to wonder why I haven't been using it, jump back into it, and quickly be reminded of everything about it that makes modeling and rendering a much bigger pain in the ass than it needs to be.
        • Blenders back end is amazing, but the interface is based upon enabling a slow and inefficient style of modelling that is no longer usable for comercial production.

          It has many things that commercial packages do not have. What it lacks is predominantly in the interface. Yes I have used it, and much more advanced (and expensive) packages.

          It needs to move away from the three orthographic views for modelling, one perspectival view for visualisation mode of design, where people use ten moves in three windows to achieve what should have happened in one move with ABSOLUTE ACCURACY using object snaps. The people who do this in front of me, then tell me that they are saving time. They continue to say this when they are in living hell later on when they need to use boolean operations or anything advanced with their mess of a model. I would find it funny, were it not for the human tragedy (DON'T THINK THAT'S A JOKE)

          In order to move away from this interface mode, Blender will need to separate the viewport from the active plane (the co-ordinate system being used for input and editing of objects) and implement GOOD snapping for endpoints, midpoints and center points as an ABSOLUTE MINIMUM. snap to face ,x/y/z/xy/yz/xz separation of input, etc would be good too. This and the ability to save and easily modify these active planes (for input) would make blender much more powerful and allow work to be done in a single perspectival window (maybe with small orthographic views for newbies who don't dream in wireframe and can't see it in perspective)

          The other enhancement NEEDED is an improved HEIRACHICAL layer structure. The present collection of little buttons that pass for a layer structure are humerous if you don't actually try to use them. A layer structure with grouping, toggleable visability, snapability, selectability and lock status is part of modelling. If this could be used to facilitate object selection, apply heirachic object propeties according to group membership, and be extended to transparently allow for the division of the project into blocks (separate files, I think this is practically done) that could be used simultaneously by a range of designers on different tasks, then Blender would be up there with some of the best editors in existence. (Moving the configuration stuff into dialogs and/or running it vertically would help the interface a lot too. The basic layout of the buttons is very pixel hungry)

          These things are not big additions compared to the amazing stuff already in there, but I haven't seen and no doubt wouldn't understand the code involved. I know nothing about it's language and the developers have been too defensive about their interface to be worth approaching.

          To be the worst nightmare of EVERY commercial 3D/4D modelling/rendering program around, here are some non interface related suggestions:

          It should improve the granularity of it's sub-object editing. Selection, deletion and insertion of points, lines, curves, faces, subfaces, control points etc, and their simultaneous selection at a range of levels (select different points, lines, faces and objects and move them with a single operation.:-) This will bring blender up to spec with some of the most efficient and intuitive modelling tools around.

          To take a leaf from some of the work in development at microstation (I am not from microstation. Sorry microstation, you should have continued your support for Linux) They are working on some seriously cool new tools that TOTALLY BLEW MY MIND. I would leave unix forever for this.

          Ready, They are working on something like a GUI integrated development environment for the back end scripting of models as part of the standard modelling tools, so that you can use a GUI to tell a point to remain at the ... I need pictures. Code the point/control point location as an equation taking things like remaining tangential to this point, and maintaining a right angle between these two sections and remaining within a certain part of the length of this line in a way that is dynamically updatable. Do that and make it stable and easy to learn and the modelling world will stop and praise you!

          Anyway that's probably long enough.
      • (* I still remember the loudmouth directing the company telling everybody who wanted to hear it that blender would be so profitable... *)

        Where can we read about the *real* history of the company, not just the official version? Sounds like an interesting tale.

  • So, this means what? (Score:3, Informative)

    by SlamMan ( 221834 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @09:28AM (#4211871)
    So, blender is what? I gather its some product that we're buying from its stockholders. I've got to say, its a really neat idea, buying off a broduct to make it open source.

    • Re:So, this means what? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Angry White Guy ( 521337 ) <CaptainBurly[AT]goodbadmovies.com> on Saturday September 07, 2002 @09:32AM (#4211880)
      From the website : Blender is a cross plaform 3D creation suite, allowing fully integrated modeling, animation, rendering, post production and interactive 3D creation and playback. We are in the process of bringing back the old Blender product website. For the time being check www.elysiun.com [elysiun.com] for more info.
    • If you had actually spent 5 minutes and READ the blender pages, you would have learned its a multiplatform 3d grapics tool.

      During your short read you could have even downloaded the last 'free' version in binary format ( its under 2mb ).. and SEEN what the fuss is about.. Or looked at tons of images..

      Geesh. suppose you want everything spoon fed...

    • Re:So, this means what? (Score:5, Informative)

      by rknop ( 240417 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @09:40AM (#4211904) Homepage

      So, blender is what?

      It's a powerful 3d modelling/rendering/animation package. It's really quite impressive. You can download a binary version gratis now. (It's not the very latest version, but close; donating members get access to the latest released binary.)

      A good full-featured 3d modelleing/rendering package was something that IMHO open source lacked and needed. Blender 3d fits the bill perfectly. Go to www.blender3d.com to learn more and to get the currently available binary.

      (Wings 3d is another 3d modelling pacakge, which isn't as far along, but which shows a whole lot of promise. I'm pretty sure Wings 3d is also free software.)

      -Rob

      • What is the publisher peice that is not included? I see the builder -- looks like a slick little app -- but I did not see anything about the publisher stuff, other than it is not included.

        • When Blender is released under the new license, version 3.25 will be made available for download, and if I'm not mistaken, it will be the "Publisher" version. I'm not sure they'll even continue to differentiate between "publisher" and "creator" since the reason for this distinction (paid licenses) will no longer be valid.

      • It's OK if you can get past a UI that sports some major weaknesses. If people are expecting a typical "desktop" app (a la Qt or GTK), they'll be sorely disappointed. I am hoping the open source community insists that Blender shed the constraints imposed by certain aspects its current UI in favor of something that is more functional. It's not all bad, but what isn't good really tends to impose some major problems.

        Wings3D, on the other hand, has a much better grip on the usability issue, and I really hope development continues unabated by the recent Blender announcement. Ditch the text entry stuff though- especially for saving files and the like.
        • (* It's OK if you can get past a UI that sports some major weaknesses. *)

          I have been fiddling with it of late, and found the UI quite frustrating. There is a saying that you have to either have a good UI or good documentation. One can make up for the other more or less. However, blender has neither.

          It took me forever to figure out how to add another node to a spline and I still haven't got animation paths to connect to their influence targets.

          Although good keyboard shortcuts are nice (it is quite keyboard-centric), what it really needs is to augment that with "show all properties or operations possible on thing X". Rollover descriptions are lacking on some icons also.

          Blender has a lot of good features, but finding and using them is a bear right now.

          I have switched to POV for the time being. It has much better documentation, even though you have to manually do a lot of stuff yourself. (Perhaps no UI is better than a poor one?)

          BTW, what if the source code is a mess? Has anybody looked at it yet?
      • A good full-featured 3d modelleing/rendering package was something that IMHO open source lacked and needed. Blender 3d fits the bill perfectly.

        blender hardly fits the bill perfectly... You talk as if a 3d modelling/animation package is equivalent to a web browser and without it, mom wouldn't transfer over to Linux. That is obviously a load of crap. Blender is a highly specialized piece of software that less than 1% of the computing population would ever even download and run... and as such, it doesn't compare well to the commercial offerings that Windows has. Of course, a lot of the high end software such as Maya and Softimage is already being offered on Linux, but until the companies that release those pieces of software start actually updating and supporting them as fast as they do the Windows version instead of just giving Linux something that's 3 versions behind without any support and only for Redhat X, maybe I'll think of switching over. As it stands, though, Blender is a mediocre 3d package and only fits the bill if you're a wannabe modeller/animator who needs something really cheap to get started... and that's not a bad market at all but far from the credit you give it. And yes, I've seen great artwork coming from Blender, but I've also seen great artwork coming from POVRay and 3D Studio 4 for DOS. It's the artist who is creating the art, not the paint and brush, but that doesn't mean you have to always hang on to your crappy brush.
        • (* it doesn't compare well to the commercial offerings that Windows has. Of course, a lot of the high end software such as Maya and Softimage is already being offered on Linux *)

          What specificly would you like added/fixed in Blender to make it more competative? (besides a friendlier interface)

          BTW, Maya is something like 5 grand a pop IIRC.
          • What specificly would you like added/fixed in Blender to make it more competative? (besides a friendlier interface) BTW, Maya is something like 5 grand a pop IIRC. The Blender site is being restructured or something so they don't have much info on the latest greatest features of Blender, but the question is much like asking "How can I make truespace [caligari.com] like maya [aliaswavefront.com]. I don't see many examples of Blender animation so I assume the animation tools are lacking. How bout adding full IK/FK support with easy skinning? A dope sheet editor to mess around with keyframes? A graph editor? BTW, I don't know if any of this is currently there since I haven't looked at Blender in awhile so I'm just talking about what's generally important for me. Also, you can't just dismiss a friendlier interface - that's the NUMBER ONE thing that Blender developers should be working on. In ANY art based application, if you want actual artists using your software instead of software engineers and hobbyists, you have to make it practically invisible... this is ESPECIALLY true for something as complicated as a 3d modelling/animation package since there's enough to learn about working in a 3d environment itself without having to futz around with the interface of the program you're using. If I can't figure out how to rotate and pan and zoom around the 3d space in the first 5 min of opening the software without resorting to a tutorial (and this is after some experience using 3d software), then the interface is no good. Also, Maya used to be around 17 grand a pop or so and people still bought it. When you're making 30 grand off of each project, 5 grand for your software isn't much. I'm not telling people to go rushing out to buy Maya, just making a point that high end software is an investment.
        • Blender is a highly specialized piece of software that less than 1% of the computing population would ever even download and run.

          Yes. Just like Apache, ftpd, sshd or LaTeX.

          Of course, a lot of the high end software such as Maya and Softimage is already being offered on Linux,

          But there is no free tool which I could use to make 3D objects for my game.
          • Yes. Just like Apache, ftpd, sshd or LaTeX.

            Except Apache, ftpd, sshd and LaTeX do some things better than their commercial counterparts... I can't say the same for Blender.

            But there is no free tool which I could use to make 3D objects for my game.

            did you stop reading at those quotes? I stated that Blender is useful for hobbyists and amateurs looking for some place to start but it won't win any converts so therefore it isn't part of a niche that "needed to be filled."
    • So, blender is what?


      A sensible man's 3d Studio Max

    • Re:So, this means what? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Elbereth ( 58257 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @10:18AM (#4211996) Journal
      From the website:

      "After the campaign
      • Blender's sources will be opened under the GNU GPL.
      • No costs, site access and Membership will become gratis, and open for everyone.
      • Membership will be still required for some community services, like access to CVS, forums, etc.
      • Other services might be offered without Memerbership, open for everyone.
      • Details on the services will be made available later."

      So, it looks like the source code will be GPL. That's good. However, you won't be able to access the CVS without paying. That's bad. They might let you have access to other services. That's good. But there are no promises, and there are no details. That's bad.

      This doesn't look like any open source project I've ever seen. I don't remember ever having to pay to access the linux kernel CVS. Hmmm. Well, I don't really care, anyways. I don't use 3D programs. I'm just trolling.

      • Re:So, this means what? (Score:2, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        "Membership will become gratis" and "Membership will be still required for ... access to CVS" does sound a lot like CVS access will be free but not anonymous (at least pseudonymous).
      • Membership will become gratis
        Membership will be still required for some community services, like access to CVS, forums, etc.
        you won't be able to access the CVS without paying
        w000! 1 w15# 1 w4z 4z L1t3r4+3 4z j00!
      • "Site membership will be gratis".

        Gratis being an olde word meaning 'Free'.
      • You cut, you paste, you don't read.

        You need to be a member to get access to the CVS. The text you posted says it's free to become a member, and the opportunity is open to everyone. Jeez.
      • I don't remember ever having to pay to access the linux kernel CVS.
        It's either because you never cared about kernel development (in which case you should probably should stick with released versions), or because your memory is faulting (or you would remember how much you have paid, and what software is used to manage the Linux kernel).

      • As long as they give you the source after you buy the software, they are not in violation. So, requiring payment before you can access CVS is perfectly acceptable under the GPL. Strange but true. I bet even RMS would agree with my interpretation. This is one of those times where free doesn't mean gratis--the GPL was never intended to imply gratis, it just works out that way 99.999...% of the time.

  • Tend? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Larkfellow ( 265776 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @09:36AM (#4211891) Homepage
    Hopefully this will be a tend of things to come. Esentially this will allow for more users in the future, on more platforms. It even allows the possibility of selling the compiled project with the helpful additions from the OpenSource communitity, with the exception of making sure that the source is still available (under GPL).
    • I think that it will be great that as a community, we will be able to improve this software... Even better is that we can *include* it in Linux distributions.

      This gives everyone access to an excellent 3D tool. My biggest hope is that the UI becomes a little bit easier to use.

      This tool could revolutionize cross-platform 3D graphics design.
      • Not only that, I think that it may also give larger companies who use 3D graphics design frequently, an incentive to switch to linux. Lower operating cost = greater profits.

        Further steps like this will certianly bring Linux into more business environments.

        That and just the oppisite as well too, with Blender becoming a free tool for everybody to use, we may see the rise of more 3D graphics in the future, heralding who knows what just yet.

    • Re:Tend? (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Maybe it will be a trend too. :)
  • Congratulations Blender!

    I take it that there are at the moment no viable 3D rendering programs for Linux but that will change with the OS release of Blender.

    What other software categories are still missing or are clearly inferior to the commercial/Windows versions?

    Could this become a (potentially bad) habit?
    • To comment on your senseless troll: blender is not the only 3D rendering app for linux.
      Take Maya for instance, i think even your wannabee-OS supports it. Yes, it costs cold hard cash, and thats why freeing Blender is a Good Thing(tm), as it brings even more great software and derivatives under the GPL freedom. You might be happy with your pirated software, but we like our source, free. No hard feelings.

      What we still miss? Hmm, we could use a few viruses or security holes. Maybe your latest-and-greatest KillemAll FPS. But seriously, we have better things to do =)

    • Re:Any other software Linux lacks? (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Pro music production!

      Products like Cubase, Logic and ProTools dominate the professional studio recording arena.

      The pro-quality sequencers, samplers, soft-synths and DSP audio processors that exist for Mac/Win don't have any peer in the OSS world AFAIK.

      Apple has a slight edge at the moment but I'm sure they are loosing the plot - i.e. with their acquisition of Emagic (Logic) and their arrogant and high-handed decision to cease development of Logic for Windows (leaving many angry pro studio users in the lurch).

      Software like Cubase, ProTools etc. is massive and complex. Many hundreds of man years have gone into them. Can the OSS community really offer a viable alternative?

      • Re:Any other software Linux lacks? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by paulbd ( 118132 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @11:09AM (#4212156) Homepage

        yes, and in fact the OSS community (in this case, myself and a small handful of others) already do!

        ardour [sf.net] is my own contribution to this issue.

        3 years of full-time unpaid labor, funded by income from amazon.com, tested in a commercial recording studio, aimed squarely at the high end market with low end costs.

        its massive, its complex, its very very very hard for a novice to build, its only available from CVS at this time. do you think it will get better? you'd better believe it! package releases coming up within 6 weeks, v1.0 hopefully within 12 weeks.


        • It's awesome to see this. I may have a need for something like this at some point in the near future. BTW...for those interested, the Hammerfall card on the web site will set you back about $600, which isn't bad, considering the cost of a multichannel mixer/recording rig.
      • I had not heard of Apple buying this Emagic company and then announcing that they would discontinue their Windows version of the product, but in the special effects industry Apple made big waves by buying Nothing Real and discontinuing their Shake compositing software for Windows (and probably for Linux, though they have not said yet). The negative reaction was similar to what you describe.

        Has Apple done this in any other fields? Is this a good or really stupid strategy?

    • Great question! Viruses? Heh. OK, seriously...:
      DVD-Video creation.

      From capture to encoding to muxing the bits together with navigation, and burning. There are many such tools available for Windows.

      I know `dvdrtools` works at burning pure-data DVD's, but to burn DVD Video you have all these other steps before it, and the toolchain does not exist in Linux.

      DVD Video is an area that will lag on Linux for a LOooong time? Why? Because the software comes FREE with DVD-Recorders, so there's an incentive to dual-boot. If you don't like that gratis authoring package, many people will (like it or not) grab DVD Maestro or something, off Gnutella or Kazaa networks.

      So there is not enough DVD authoring on Linux: not for commercial packages (if there is even one DVD suite on Linux, it certainly ain't sub-$500), and not for the glory of being the first GPL toolchain. The specs are scarce, development is hard and it's too much for one developer looking to provide us with a solution, no matter how much glory there is in doing so. It's a brutal, team-based development project spanning several domains of expertise.

      I'm glad to see this succeed, and I'd like to see this new type of "market" compete with both commercial software, and the pure-free stuff we already enjoy. The competition will give us what we need, and may the best team win!

    • CAD!

      Linux is terribly lacking good CAD software, let alone Free CAD software. Please see my CAD Pages [mindspring.com] for the full scoop. (BTW, if anybody is interested in starting a serious Free Software CAD project, please contact me!)

  • 100k is a bit expensive (Score:5, Funny)

    by cioxx ( 456323 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @09:43AM (#4211913) Homepage

    I could swear, these things cost much less than that [espenergy.com]
  • So, that means I can go back to linux and stop using my warez 3D programs? Heh.

    Now all that is left is to convert those files...

  • Cool, (Score:2, Funny)

    by ImaLamer ( 260199 )
    I always thought the remarks that robot made were witty and funny.

    Now that we get to tweak with him I hope we can do some really cool things and find out what the heck he really keeps in that chest of his.

    Well, now we'll all get a look under his 'hood'.

    Oh, wait, you mean Blender that 3D modeling program... shit what do we want that for?

    Get the robot instead!

  • hmm (Score:2)

    by MenTaLguY ( 5483 )
    I think I know the first thing I'm going to do when the source gets released -- fix all those bizzare GUI widgets.

    The "click on this side of the button to increase the value, click on the other side to decrease, and drag to change smoothly" (all on a standard-looking button) is really dumb.

    I'm not sure the method for using it should change that much, but it could at least seriously use some visual affordances.
  • I wouldn't know what to do with blender but I understand many of you would. I have to say I'm quite impressed by the swiftness of this code rescue. makes you think we're not all just trying to get free stuff. perhaps this will lead people to do the same in future instances for money-calls. This shows it can be done.

    • The way I see it, there were plenty of people willing to pay for Blender (including myself), but many (including myself) who were a bit aprehensive about the lack of attention to certain aspects of its functionality (the modeling/rendering side). Now that it will be open source, this is no longer an issue.
  • .... to making all software open source for the betterment of mankind.... :D

  • After trying to use Blender for some work in my Multimedia class this summer, I must say it's UI needs either (a) ALOT of work, or (b) some decent documentation created. Scouring the web for hours for vague tutorials that touch on one aspect at a time of what you are trying to do, having google constantly open alongside so you can do searches on how to do the simplest actions, this is just not an option for most people. I know some people have argued that the key combos are easy after you learn them, but without someone to TEACH them to you they are almost impossible to learn.

    That being said, I would like to endorse KPovModler [azweb.de] for people looking to do some 3D graphics with a decent interface. It does what it does well, and was simple to pick up and use.

    • I admit blender is hard to use. It has a steep learning curve, indeed. But if you want to find the documentation, you're going to have to pay for it. You can get the blender manual at amazon for about $50. If you want to learn blender, you really need it.
    • After trying to use Blender for some work in my Multimedia class this summer, I must say it's UI needs either (a) ALOT of work,

      The workflow is good, but with respect to certain aspects of the UI, I agree. Yep. Totally.
  • Remove the chain in that image awwready. It's 'Free'd.

  • 100k (Score:2, Insightful)

    by t_allardyce ( 48447 )
    The ironic thing is, some commercial software actually costs that much! sometimes just for one license. Its amazing how much money people will pay if they think its going to work better (and if their company is writing the cheque :)

  • Another GPL conversion recently completed (Score:4, Informative)

    by Rick Richardson ( 87058 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @11:23AM (#4212219) Homepage

    Just thought I'd mention that due to a generous money donation by a private sponsor, the LinuxTrade [0catch.com] software was converted to the GPL on 08/30/02.

    This is a great trend, IMHO.

  • Blender in action (Score:2, Informative)

    by noodlez84 ( 416138 )
    If you interested in what Blender can do (as I was), check out the galleries [elysiun.com].

    I was pleasantly surprised. I'm sure you will be too. :)

    Actually, just seeing the galleries [elysiun.com] makes me what to donate some money.
    • Wow... very impressive stuff. Too bad most of us are computer nerds and not serious artists. I'm pretty sure i could not advance much farther than the textured rock. But at least the software will be free so i can play with it without a large cash layout.


  • It took me a bit of googling to find it, but what NaN did here seems similar to the Street Performer Protocol [firstmonday.dk]. I've often wondered whether or not something along those lines would work from an open-source perspective (i.e. "I've got this game, and I'll GPL it if I get $X"). It's nice to see that, apparently, it can.



    Of course, Blender is relatively well known and had the benefit of being freely available in the beer sense. Starting something from scratch using this model might be a bit more difficult.

  • So who get's the T-Shirt? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Nutcase ( 86887 ) on Saturday September 07, 2002 @11:50AM (#4212312) Homepage Journal
    Promises [slashdot.org] are not easily forgotten. Who is the lucky person who gets the T-shirt?
  • And all because of my $15 donation! ;-)

    Seriously, I would have donated more if I wasn't broke from spending money on my wedding...

    Anyway, this is excellent news. Hopefully Blender will prove good enough so that I don't have to shell out $3k for 3dsmax in the near future.

    I'm going to make another contribution now that I'm not broke, please join me if you plan on using Blender.

    • And all because of my $15 donation! ;-)
      Hey, I donated $10. Tell you what, I'll split it with you 40/60. You can keep the binary Tuesday through Friday, and I get it Saturday through Monday.

      Congratulations to everyone who made this possible. Not only is Blender a valuable product in its own right, but it puts us one step closer to some serious open-source gaming.
  • Is to use this as the modeler and integrate solidworks functionality.

    The open source world could really use a fully functional CAD/CAM package, too :D

  • They have got to get a better name. "Blender" sounds like a virus that scrambles files.

    Suggestions: Vertexasour, 3Diggit, Rendon, Rendall, Renderex, Animatrix, Vectron, PenguinSeer, Envisionator.....

  • Blender interface and feature set. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by |_uke ( 158930 ) <thealterself@hotmail. c o m> on Saturday September 07, 2002 @02:28PM (#4212857) Homepage Journal
    A lot of people have been talking about the usability of the Blender interface.

    Now obviously I am not the first one to admit that it's not incredibly strait forward. Usually if I have taken some time away from blender, it takes me a while to get back into the groove of things.

    However, one thing I have noticed. Once you actually DO get used to the interface, everything starts to feel natural. You stop thinking about how you use its features... you just USE them.

    Blender is not your typical mouse interface. To use blender properly you need both hands.

    However... is starting to get a bit dated compared to the many of the other 3d modelers out there. But this is why we are getting the source!

    I hope a lot of the people who actually DO work with the source, understand just how uniquely useful the interface actually can be.

    A good in-program tutorial would probably go a LONG way toward the usability problem. I should be able to say... I wish to perform this task... show me how to do it!

    Now someone mentioned the widgets being a little weird... Yes I agree that's true. Take up too much space? They are 3d widgets! Zoom out some. (Although yes, you do waste some space on the sides when you do this... =/)

    I actually kind of like how the widgets work. If you need to set an absolute value, shift click and enter the value you really wanted.

    Again, I hope that when blender actually does end up being hacked to pieces (think mozilla)... that the developers take into consideration that quite a few of the interface features actually do work... and are fairly comfortable to use.

    So yes... Blender is starting to show its age. But think of it this way, right now Blender is kind of like Netscape 4.x. Give the community a year or two with the source, and you might just see some amazing things done with it.

    Now... I'm probably not the first one to think that Mozilla was over engineered. Although I hope the same thing won't happen to blender... Mozilla eventually did turn out alright. And who hasn't been accused of over engineering? I know I have =)
  • People ranting about Blenders GUI don't know what they're talking about and usually don't know much about 3D - or Blender, for that matter.
    While the learning curve is steep, once one has grasped it, everything falls into place and Blender becomes the 3D Workplace you'll never want to miss.
    In fact Blender has one of the most sophisticated GUIs out there. Its workspace management is unmatched, the OO structure using GL for rendering the controls is elegant and fast and the shortcuts are countless but still manage to be intutive.
    Unlike the utterly senseless habit of the OSS community of tearing everything apart in zillion little windows like Gimp of Sodipody - what a shame. A strategy thats absolutely wrong for these kind of programms.
    • People raving about Blenders GUI don't know what they're talking about and usually don't know much about 3D - or professional 3D modelling tools for that matter. They think that tools like 3D Studio are some kind of benchmark. I agree that Blender is more advanced in some ways than lower end tools like 3D Studio, but it is designed to facilitate an archaic approach to modelling that is simply not scalable above quite small and very simple objects.

      In fact Blender has a simple low end GUIs. Its workspace management is an area in which it's notably poor, the OO structure using GL for rendering the controls is elegant and fast and the shortcuts are countless but should be easily configurable/personalisable.

      It could benifit greatly from breaking the pseudo pallettes up into pallettes that can be easily launched with keystrokes. Loosing pixel space for a pallette that you used three minuites ago is insane, and loosing it in the vertical axis is just stupid. An argument could be made for running a strip vertically in the modelling window instead of horizontally (like the object heirachy). Many systems do this and it works MUCH better. The current system makes it a bit hard to use three or four monitors, but unlike other systems, this cluster of an interface NEEDS a couple of screens on which to sprawl.

      [slashdot.org]
      I refer you to my earlier statements to explain what I feel blender needs to come up to spec.
      • I really don't know what your talking about. Are we talking about the same Programm? What is it that Blender supposedly can't handle large models? We all know Blenders booleans suck - but large models?
        Ok, it lacks certain features, but now where on earth is the Programm that beats Blenders unique interface to being a reference for how things can be streamlined?
        Missing configuration of shortcuts? That's not a reason to overthrough the whole thing. That can easyly be added on. And what makes you think you could actually improve restricted 2D Workspace Management beyond the one other detail of Blender that maybe needs finetuning? How do you toggle Screens and active-window-fullscreen in *your* 3D package? Telepathy?
        Don't get me wrong: Blender needs improvement. But improvement of the *existing* interface and feature set, such like: Object view sort grid (you say better herachy in the other post), proximity alignment (u call it "snapping"), undo (this shure is some bizar odity of B., I'll give you that), spline import, better rendering and some rough edges of the button layout. These are *all* things that don't interfere with Blenders existing philosophy of the GUI.
        I really don't get your point and calling 3DSMax a "low end 3D tool" dosn't help it. I don't like those wannabees thinking 3DSM is the cream of the crop just like you I guess - but gee wiz, "low end tool"...- that's leaning a bit far out, don't you think?

        Are we talking past one another?

Slashdot Top Deals

No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.

Close