Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Blender Compared To the Major 3D Applications 296

LetterRip writes "Recently TDT 3D published a comparison of the major 3D digital content creation applications such as Maya, 3DS Max, and XSI, and of course Blender. Blender came out surprisingly well, although it definitely still has some weaknesses."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blender Compared To the Major 3D Applications

Comments Filter:
  • Personal experience (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01, 2007 @02:59AM (#20807361)
    I've 'worked' with 3d max, cinema4d and Blender.
    Cinema4d gets my vote, hands down. Great usability and very fast rendering.
    Blender talks the talk, but damn learn to walk and stop crawling.
  • by bky1701 ( 979071 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:26AM (#20807497) Homepage
    I thought the same when I started using it. Actually, you can read my complaints on their forum. The thing is, after I made the commitment that I was *going* to learn it, and after I stopped trying to do things the old 3ds ways, it started to come naturally. Now I can do far more impressive work than in 3ds, much faster.

    It's painful to LEARN, not use (though there are a few UI annoyances, like the non-standard save/load menu). I'd suggest if you really want to learn it, throw the tutorials (they often offer irrational, hard or just bad ways of doing things) and old knowledge out the window and learn it. Once you know it, you may understand why they kept the interface.
  • It's all bunk (Score:5, Interesting)

    by QuantumG ( 50515 ) <qg@biodome.org> on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:30AM (#20807509) Homepage Journal
    pushing polygons is wrong. It's a short term solution to a long term problem. Keeping to a poly budget is grunt work that should be done by the tool not by the artist. Programmers who think bitrot is bad should have a look at the "asset rot" of 3d models. The deprecation of graphics assets is so fast that it's a stretch to use the word "asset" to refer to them at all. A character model from a AAA title from six months ago has some value, to B quality games, but mostly none of them are reused.

    For 3d models to earn their name as "assets" they need to be created with infinite resolution. This is not hard. Constructive Solid Geometry [wikipedia.org] is a well understood technique for modeling and is typically used in CAD applications. An object described even at what would be considered a course level of detail of typical CSG modeling is orders of magnitude higher resolution than the typical game model. What's more, they can be incrementally improved, whereas the b-rep [wikipedia.org] that is typical for a game model today is a one shot affair.

    Today, the vast majority of CSG models are created for raytracing architectures which, although they give stunning results [yafray.org], are too slow for realtime applications such as games. Even the attempts to create realtime raytracing systems are aimed at rendering b-reps because of the opportunity to perform an acceleration stage which greatly reduces the scene complexity. B-reps are a win for realtime applications, but just because your application requires a b-rep doesn't mean artists need to get their hands dirty pushing polygons.

    Two solutions exist which can render CSG models in realtime.

    The image-based rendering algorithms with implementations (such as OpenCSG [opencsg.org]) which take advantage of z-buffer and stencil-buffer hardware in popular GPU cards. The image-based systems are more compatible than raytracing with the current 3d graphics rendering state of the art, but still require intricacies to integrate that have prevented them from appearing on the market.

    The other option is the automatic generation of a b-rep from a CSG model. This has the advantage that it requires no change to the 3d graphics rendering in games and the algorithm can be parametrically tuned to produce b-reps that are fast for different applications. For example, the same CSG model can be used to generate b-reps of different Level Of Detail for when the object is close up vs far away, or for pre-rendered applications such as cut scenes or trailers.

    It just happens to be really hard.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:31AM (#20807523)
    I think there are a lot of people who start with the closed source ones and a closed mind and from there on in the open source UIs are always "wrong". Having learning the GIMP without becoming indoctrinated into photoshop and hearing all the catatonic whinging about the GIMP UI, I somehow think that I will be fine with Blender. Sure, photoshop has more high end features, but as people say, unless you need the print colour range, there isn't actually that much difference other than the price and amount of whinging.

    Also, not only are these programs 4 stars to the industry leader 5s (and often beating them in many features), for people starting out with the blender or GIMP in highschool, 15 yrs old say, they have to factor in that blender will undergo 5 or more years of development before they hit the job market after uni. They'd be insane to learn a closed source one, which might go bust in that time, as opposed to coming into the market with 5 years of Blender and GIMP under their belt (and blender and gimp with all those new features).

    So basically if you are already in the game, keep using the industry standards photoshop and maya etc. Remember they only got the blender sourcecode in late 2002, so as much as it's improved since the first open source release it will improve again in 5 yrs. And with a larger user base and more devs, it will likely move even faster.

    Spend $30 on a good book for blender another $30 on the gimp, maybe another $30 on a python book to script both apps way further than your peers using close source stuff - go to the forums and make some good friends above and at your skill level for other advice. Then with the $1000s you were going to spend on close source edu versions and expensive manuals for them, don't forget you have to upgrade when you graduate, into something else maybe an investment account. You'll end up with better skills, better software, more friends and more money.

    Industry people your calculation is simple, to stick with your software till you feel the open source stuff is good enough for you to make a move. Simple as that. But one thing you should do is shut the fuck up discouraging other people from using it like there is a chosen way.

    It's the future ppl. kthxbye.
  • Blender UI :-( (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Orthuberra ( 1145497 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:32AM (#20807527)
    I use 3DS Max and Blender myself and I definitely have to say Blender's UI is horrible and I mean that. I don't know what the developers are thinking, but damn they need serious help in making that user interface more friendly. The only time a I use Blender is for when I do some modeling and art for open source games and mods that have and export function for Blender (such as xmesh in Vega Strike). Other than that its 3dS max for me, though from what I've seen Maya is great too. Lightwave used to be a great program, but it seems to have performed worse in this comparison than I'd have thought.

    Again, I can't stress enough what a pain Blender's UI is compared to these other programs. I normally try to recommend FOSS programs to people, but this is one of those programs I'd only recommend if the person couldn't afford one of the other programs here.
  • by deniable ( 76198 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:37AM (#20807539)
    The UI wouldn't be half as bad if they provided some decent documentation for it. As others have mentioned, the tutorials aren't a good source of help. Once you learn how to use Blender, it's pretty good, but the learning curve is really steep.

    It's been a while, so maybe they have better resources now. I'd be happy if they did.
  • Re:On the Interface (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:43AM (#20807553)
    Well the interface doesn't seem to like new users at all even if they have some 3D background. Just an example. It is common to all 3D-applications to use Z-buffers to process depth information like shadows. However even if Blender is using Z-buffers the underlying coordinates system is using Z as the axis of ordinates in front view. That gives you two Z- coordinates one pointing upwards and another one pointing from the viewpoint back into the screen if you want to manipulate shadows.

    However if you are used to it, the system works quite well, but you will run into difficulties if you want to switch to another software package.
  • by originalnih ( 709470 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @03:53AM (#20807589) Homepage
    His articles do seem to be of a singularly poor quality. It's like he goes against the slashdot grain: instead of not reading them and just hoping they're relevant, he DOES read them and only chooses articles that are useless or wildly inaccurate.

    Hint: 3DS Studio Max does NOT cost 5000 euros, it is NOT twice the price of Maya Complete. The article is a completely last-minute fabrication with little real information.
  • by Paradigm_Complex ( 968558 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @04:35AM (#20807745)
    Are you referring to TDT3D as pro open source, or Slashdot? The article isn't *by* Slashdot. Slashdot also posts articles which lambaste open source projects or often put closed source projects in a good light. While Slashdot is definitely pro open source, the general community isn't blind either. We recognize Blender has flaws. What makes us pro open source is that we are willing to give it extra weight in our personal preferences simply due to that fact. We know Firefox has some serious issues and don't ignore the fact she's putting on a little extra weight - we still love her anyways. However, considering '07 *still* wasn't the year of Linux on the desktop, we also recognize the face that others - the majority in fact - don't share our appreciation for open source, and found it pleasantly surprising how Blender still ranked up with the best of them even when it's open source-ness wasn't taken into consideration. I can tell you this much: after struggling to get used to Blender after learning 3D Modeling on Maya, *I* am surprised Blender ranked well.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01, 2007 @04:48AM (#20807805)
    As previous Max user, working on game models and animation, I have to say that I was stunned with effectiveness of Blender. Interface is a nightmare - ONLY when you encounter it for the first time (especially if you have used some other software previously). BUT, that said, if you take 2 days time by doing same of the basic tutorials, you will learn the shortcuts and way things are organized.

    Doing that, I'll have to say that my productivity is better, in magnitude of 3X, in comparison with 3DS MAX. This applies especially to 3D modeling and mapping. I could not recommend Blender more, and as conclusion - interface is great, but you will have to take (some) time to learn it (half an hour in blender, for previous MAX user, is not enough). But one day of fooling around, doing tutorials, and you will become very productive). I would not change anything if that wold change the productivity and current speed and ease of use.

    If you want to comment the UI, just take few days to explore it, do some tutorials, and you will see that this is the best (and fastest) way of doing things.
  • by solios ( 53048 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @04:50AM (#20807813) Homepage
    ... the fact is, Maya's UI sucks. 3d Studio's UI sucks. Power Animator's UI sucks. Cinema 4d's UI sucks. Rhino's UI sucks. Nendo's UI sucks. Silo's UI sucks. Softimage's UI sucks. Lightwave's UI sucks. ALL 3d application UIs suck ass until you get up on the learning curve, because all 3d applications do fundamental things differently.

    I "grew up" with 3d Studio MAX - Maya, Rhino, etc. all make my brain BLEED - not just because they're Not MAX (the way The GIMP is Not Photoshop) but because they're Not MAX the way Emacs is Not Vi.* 3d is HARD, dammit - hard to code, hard to learn. I'm picking up Silo pretty fast, but mostly because Silo seems to make it a point to do intuitively a lot of really basic things that are a massive assraping pain-in-the-ass to do in 3d Studio MAX.

    That said, I have only two complaints about blender.

    1. The open/save dialogue (as has been said elsewhere) does suck a load of flaming ass. Weapons grade Anthrax ass.

    2. Like almost all modern 3d apps, you need a three button scroll-wheeled mouse to get ANY use out of the app at all. Which makes the app unuseable if you're using an input device, with, say... two buttons [kensington.com]. While that's all fine and good, it ought to be fairly trivial to poll the bus, check for pointing devices, and pop up a nice little "FOR OPTIMAL USE PLZ ATTACH 3-BUTTON SCROLLWHEEL THINGER. [DIAGRAM WITH FUNCTIONS OUTLINED]" if inadequate hardware is detected. If Blender did this, it would put it well ahead of commercial apps for first-impression useability.

    * Pick any two apps that generate the same results but go about it using completely contradictory and counterintuitive methods. Same principle.
  • by satoshi1 ( 794000 ) <satoshi.sugardeath@net> on Monday October 01, 2007 @04:51AM (#20807825) Homepage Journal
    That's actually a lot better than I've seen most automatic translators do..
  • by Aladrin ( 926209 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @06:01AM (#20808055)
    I have never been a professional, but this exactly matches my experience.

    I wrote a program that converts TheSims models to OBJ format and back again. As part of that, I had to 'learn' a modeller and chose MilkShape3D. I say 'learn' because it took only a few minutes. I've also played with a few other modellers and they all had the same concepts, and the basic functions were all easy to find. (Add polys, move vertexes, apply textures, etc.)

    I picked up Blender because I'd heard such good things about it. I spent 2 hours trying to figure out how to apply a texture to a model, another half an hour searching the web for the info, and another hour following a tutorial step by step to figure it out. I tried again without the tut and had lost it already.

    Blender's UI is so completely anti-intuitive that it's impossible to just use, you MUST be trained. (Or self-trained.) This may be acceptable for those who never use computers and only want to use Blender, but the rest of us expect to be able to figure it out without a printed manual.

    I wonder if it's just chance that the Gimp also has tons of interface complaints?
  • standard (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sergevi ( 859358 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @06:03AM (#20808065)
    I'm an active blender's user. And i find the interface very productive too..like any other "real" blender user. However, we are in a big world and , yes, THERE IS other 3D apps over there.. People spent a lot of time learning these apps, and these apps tried to UNIFY their UI. Actually,If you do ctrl+c it does copy something . When you alt+mouse , the 3D view does something.. Well, not in blender. And that's the problem, and that's why the next version is all about the new CUSTOMISABLE UI :) Take care of blender.. it's one of the best real open source projects actually. congrats tom, you're a big guy !
  • by edwardpickman ( 965122 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @06:32AM (#20808183)
    You can learn anything but the Blender UI does suck and it is the least intuitive of the group. Lightwave is pretty straight forward for basic navigation and Maya is even easier in most ways. Maya is only difficult because it's so powerful. The main exception is Hypershade which I still find a headache to use. My rule of thumb for Maya is the hard stuff is easy and the easy stuff is hard. Things like physics are a pain in most packages but childsplay in Maya. Rigs are slow to set up but really easy to use once you put in the time. I spent days trying to figure out Blender and I never managed to get the basics down. Ya wanta see a really intuitive interface check out Modo. I got most of 103 down in two days and was doing cool stuff five minutes after I started. Since 201 it's gotten much more complicated so the learning curve is longer, not for modeling but the camera and rendering takes time. I'm not crazy about the camera set up and renderer. I find it's far more confusing than either Lightwave or Maya yet it has drastically less power and control. People rave about it but I just can't get used to it. Texturing can be a bit confusing but it mostly applies to rendering in Modo so I don't bother with it except for texture and bump maps. I've noticed other softwares slowly adopting Modo conventions and some tools unique to Modo. It's not an animator yet but it proves CG doesn't have to be UI hostile to artists. Every software needs improvement but you should be able to figure out basic navigation within the first hour with or without a manual to me to be considered in anyway intuitive. Maya and Lightwave you can figure out in five minutes and if you know Maya you pretty much know Modo navigation. I wish Lightwave would adopt that QWERTY convention. Blender will never be a contender until they fix the interface. Just saying everyone is wrong isn't productive and it certainly isn't going to get anyone to switch. If everyone except a small core of fans say the UI sucks hten guess what it probably does suck. People don't spend a small fortune on Maya as for status it's because it's powerful and intuitive to use. If I don't use it for months I can pick it back up fairly quickly. Zbrush is another one with an nonintuitive interface. If I'm away from it for a few months it takes me a couple of days to get back up to speed since it's a pain to do things like exporting maps and if you don't follow the list of steps properly the results are unuseable. The two worst interfaces in CG are Blender and Zbrush. I'd give Gamespace an honorable mention on that list for the godawful Icon based UI. The Icons mostly look like colored blobs so I wind up wasting a rediculous amount of time mousing over each one so I can see the text says. Bad idea for an interface.
  • by mcvos ( 645701 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @06:34AM (#20808185)
    But one thing you should do is shut the fuck up discouraging other people from using it like there is a chosen way.

    I have no experience with 3D modeling at all, but I'm interested in it. If Blender really is that hard to use, I want to be discouraged from using it, because I don't want to waste months trying to learn it.

    I don't mind an unintuitive interface. Vi took be about 10 minutes to get the hang of, but it was the standard editor at my university at that time, so we got a list of all the important commands and it was easy to ask someone for help. GIMP, on the other hand, I never got the hang of. Perhaps because I just started it and didn't have a good tutorial or tutor. I'm looking at thousands of buttons and have no idea what any of them do.

    So for Blender, what I'm really interested in is: is there a good tutorial that shows me the ropes? If I don't know what a button or option does, is there documentation that tells me what it does, and what that means because I don't understand the jargon at all. And if I want to do something and don't know how, is there some sort of help that explains how to do it? That is what I'm interested in: is Blender good for a newbie like me?

    And also: once I've learned it, am I more or less productive than with the alternatives? Because with the months-long learning curves that the article mentions, $800 for a more productive system is a pretty smart investment once you're out of college. I can afford $800, but I can't afford too waste months struggling with something that turns out to be too painful to use.

  • by ozmanjusri ( 601766 ) <aussie_bob@hoMOSCOWtmail.com minus city> on Monday October 01, 2007 @06:43AM (#20808213) Journal
    Background: My very first job, in the late 70's, was as a Draftsman.

    We have very similar backgrounds. I was a Surveyor in about the same era, and got into 3D modelling via mine design and surveying software (Surpac, DataMine). I started my own 3D software collection with Imagine, then Lightwave on the Amiga. I used Truespace from a coverdisk, tried C4D, and a few other packages.

    I still haven't settled into using a single tool. My collection includes Hexagon modeller, Sketchup Pro, Bryce, Cinema 4D, and yes, Blender.

    Each has their strengths. For some people, the time cost of learning the tool is higher than it's worth. It sound like that's the case for you. For me, I like being able to be productive anywhere and on any computer, and Blender on a thumb drive does that for me.

    In any case, now that I'm used to it, I find there's things I can do quicker in Blender than with the other tools

  • by sammyF70 ( 1154563 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @07:24AM (#20808377) Homepage Journal
    why was the parent modded down? I was a beta tester for C4D, which has one of the most intuitive interface around. I used Max and lightwave at times too. When I first tried Blender I recoiled in horror. Nothing made sense, So I gave up on it after 2 hours and went back to C4D. Then I started working for an open source game project and HAD to use Blender. watched some older video tutorials, took my time. after a day doing nothing else, I finally grasped the concept of the UI. That was 2 years ago. I use exclusively Blender now, both for fun and for work (though 3D is not something I do daily at work, I have to do some for TV ads regularly), and I find the UI very easy and efficient to use. It takes time to get into ( around one day to begin to get the feel for it if you're used to industry standards), and it's definitely not intuitive. but once you ~got it~, you'll have a very powerfull, efficient and free tool at hand that can compete easily with the best packages out there. The only thing to keep in mind is that efficient does not always equate to intuitive.
  • by Max Littlemore ( 1001285 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @07:48AM (#20808495)

    the interface is a crime against logic, nature and makes me revise my opinion on whether or not true Evil exists.

    Funnily enough, that's what I thought the first time I encountered vi....

    It's a shame the interface doesn't work for you. I'm not a professional graphics guy, sound is more my bag, but I used to do compositing for a living and my brother currently does 3D graphics professionally and both of us agree blender is an excellent tool - especially in terms of productivity. Once you get past the need to learn special keys and modes and such, it really is so quick to do things that take forever in other interfaces. I guess it's horses for courses.

    Just remember to run it on Linux - I don't know about OSX, but it's very slow on windows

  • Re:uphill both ways. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by paganizer ( 566360 ) <thegrove1NO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Monday October 01, 2007 @08:59AM (#20808973) Homepage Journal
    As I started out as a mechanical draftsman, Your post is not quite as sarcastic as it could have been. I've sharpened my rulers with a whetstone, used a scalpel to amend ink, and made my own Ink.
    I can use a sliderule, also.
  • Re:Blender UI :-( (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Mystery00 ( 1100379 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @11:33AM (#20810835)
    Strange, I've used Max as well, and I feel the same way about Max as you do about Blender... I wonder why that is.
  • by Nom du Keyboard ( 633989 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @12:35PM (#20811797)

    anything that was hard to learn will be even harder to forget.

    Wise insight. Like learning to ride a bicycle.

  • by LetterRip ( 30937 ) on Monday October 01, 2007 @01:26PM (#20812607)

    Comparison lists like this are very misleading. The devil is in the details. It's not about how many buzzword columns an app can check, it's about whether the app has had a userbase that has thrashed the software through years and years of real production work and had the software evolve into a powerful tool.

    The professional user base for Blender is fairly large, it is just a different target market.

    It's very easy to add a feature in a 3D app. Most interested hobbiest weekend coders could whip up most functions found in any given 3D app.

    The fluid dynamics was a number of full years of developer time. You've clearly never developed any significant feature for a 3D application.

    Whether that feature is production ready is another story.

    All of the features listed are used in production environments, the feature animation movie Plumiferos made use of pretty much every feature including fluids, cloth, the particle system, etc.

    Going by the list it would seem that something like Blender of C4D is on a par with Maya and Max. They're not. They don't have the huge in-depth expert user communities and the benefit of thousands of users pushing them to the limit day in and day out.

    Actually Maya and Max don't have that either - the number of users for the advanced features for all of the 3D applications is quite small. For fluids people will tend to switch to RealFlow, for Cloth people will tend to use Syflex

    If you're choosing a 3D app, talk to some real 3D artists who have been in the industry for years and depend on their 3D application system for their living. Don't compare checkbox lists.

    Here is what 'real 3D artists who have been in the industry for years and depend on their 3D application system for their living.' actually say

    "Blender has grown up, and fast! Today Blender rivals Maya in many ways---especially in toolsets. The interface isn't the easiest to learn, so if you choose this route you'll need to promise yourself to stick with your learning of it in order to give Blender a fair chance. Not only can Blender do NURBS, SubDs, Polygons, particle physics, and more, it also includes hair and fur tools that you'd have to pay $7k for in Maya Unlimited. Truth is, I'd personally be tempted to go the Blender route myself if not for my obsession with Pixar's RenderMan which is world's best for animation quality. But, since you don't really need that extra fine level of quality in animation that Pixar gives you, Blender may be your best choice at all.

    zaon [zaon.org]

    the post is by ZaonDude who is famous (among 3D artists) for comparison of high end 3D renderer quality.

    LetterRip

HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!

Working...