Jump to content



Stick your finger in it.

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 throb36


    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 196 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago
  • Interests:Cheese

Posted 31 May 2012 - 03:23 PM

Any thoughts on why Blender isn't used more often for pro/studio work? In some aspects, it seems to have more features (fluid sim) than other 3D applications. And it's free.

#2 anothername


    Mograph Deity

  • Members
  • 867 posts

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:06 PM

Yeah the learning curve seems a bit steeper than C4D but still tons of great features and free.

I know one freelancer who uses it all the time and loves that no matter what studio he is freelancing at he can always run his application of choice and isn't slowed down by being forced to use a 3D app he isn't familiar with, which works as long as you aren't part of a bigger pipeline or required by the studio to work in their standard package.

My guess would be a lot of it comes down to marketing, awareness and perception. It's not usually the artists who make the purchasing decisions and I'm sure a lot of studios want the security (or perceived security) of using a product from an established company.

#3 Mylenium


    Eats, sleeps, drinks MoGraph

  • Members
  • 1,609 posts
  • Location:Leipzig, Germany
  • Interests:cycling, music, Sci-Fi

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:29 PM

Any thoughts on why Blender isn't used more often for pro/studio work? In some aspects, it seems to have more features (fluid sim) than other 3D applications. And it's free.

The UI still takes a lot of getting used to, even though it has gotten better over the years. That aside, personally the biggest hold-up for me is the lack of integration. Many features are the kind of "looks good on paper" thing where you then end up frustrated when it doesn't go together with your favorite other feature. That fluid stuff is one such example - getting it to interact with something can make you pull your hair out as you will have to establish a separate collision object most of the time and then need to figure out how to make it move with your hero object. Same for other dynamics. I'm sure it all can be learned in due time, but fast approaching my forties, my brain can only handle so much and I prefer the simplicity of C4D still, despite it being equally quirky or lacking in some departments...

[Pour Mylène, ange sur terre]

#4 Guest_Sao_Bento_*

  • Guests

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:34 PM

The cost of doing business consists of much more than purchasing software. Something as complex as 3D requires a lot of training, constructing a pipeline around the core software, writing custom tools, having trained up support staff, etc. A big company spending tons of money to configure themselves around something like Blender would be taking a huge risk.

#5 tezuka


    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 150 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 31 May 2012 - 04:37 PM

I tried it's particle system, it's very powerful and fun to use. The upcoming open movie project "mango" will show the packages vfx capabilities - very impressive: http://mango.blender.org/. The inbuilt compositor is great too. I used the fluid particle system recently on a gig, exported the particles in the mdd format and imported them into c4d with riptide pro. Went very smoothly.

I guess the professional userbase isn't that high as it seems. Also I wouldn't recommend doing mograph with it. There is no real toolset for it. Doing type work is the horror and the overall handling of settings can be awkward coming from c4d for example. For example, one can't set values for two different objects at the same time. If you are used to work with shortcuts you can do your stuff blazingly fast. I like where Blender is heading, give it 2 to 3 years and you will see a lot of sim stuff incorporated into pro work.

Edited by tezuka, 31 May 2012 - 05:12 PM.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users