Mudbox bought out!

[industripop]

Sorry if this has already been posted:
http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?id=9931455&siteID=123112

[cannedmushrooms]

Thats VERY good news AUTODESK always pulls through on updates after they took over Maya it really did get improved Very Fast and Timely. (did I mention Fast and Timely) (I think I mentioned "always pulls through") hmmmm
anyway
Thanks for that info.

[zerodean]

Wow.

Well, that certainly solves some people's problems.

It may cause others...but it's an interesting turn of events. MudBox 2 is going to be quite interesting.

[eldee.s]

Thats VERY good news AUTODESK always pulls through on updatesIn that case, pixologic nees to get bought out by Autodesk, Skymatter was already good at putting out regular updates :lol:

Just kidding aurick, don't lock this thread! :p

Anyway, yeah this is good news for me personally since I use Max, Mudbox, and Zbrush. Mudbox is a permanent part of my workflow because it's the only sculpting app that lets you sculpt with tangent symmetry (seriously, not everybody likes sculpting in a T-pose). With autodesk behind the wheel, maybe we'll see things like FBX support, maya and max scene file support, seamless material integration, etc. Pixologic's only serious competitor just flexed a major muscle.

[bicc39]

Shame Daz didn't buy it.
We could have gotten the program for 1.99.
Maybe in a few months.
( Hexagon 2 needs a little sister )

[garycrump]

I am concerned. Do you still think we will be getting 3.1 soon?

[Big Pixoling]

Pixologic obviously needs good competition.

[wayniac]

And with Autodesk acquiring Skymatter, they are about to get it. Think of the amount of money that is about to get funneled into the R&D of Mudbox.

[bicc39]

And with Autodesk acquiring Skymatter, they are about to get it. Think of the amount of money that is about to get funneled into the R&D of Mudbox.

Or information sucked out of Mudbox and channeled into Max
and/or Maya.
I still get it sooner or later for 1.99

[bicc39]

"V" you might be able to sell to Autodesk.
( or if you can't render, model, or animate, sell to DAZ as a
companion to Amapi )

[PrayingMantis]

Im curious to know if Autodesk has done a proposition about buying Zbrush before they did with Skymatter.

[Big Pixoling]

Im curious to know if Autodesk has done a proposition about buying Zbrush before they did with Skymatter.
Good question.
I would think mudbox fits better with their product line.

[-WOODY-]

Sheesh, Autodesk is becoming the "EA Games" of the 3D modeling app world.

[mocaw]

You people who think the sky(matter) is falling are just plain silly. A big bloated company buys Mudbox- a previously small and nibble company called skymatter use to run the show, and what is going to happen? You're so right- Autodesk bought MB because they secretly have a team who can make it better! Yeah right!

Under your guys theory we'd all be using motion builder to animate...oh wait we're still not!

No mater what features mudbox had, apparently it was either publicly owned OR it wasn't doing so hot profit wise. No mater what the critics say- if the bottom line sucks...time to sell it off. Look for WETA to have a boost in profits!

On the upside- I hope Autodesk develops it fine- ZB needs a little competition. Lets not forget though this is VERY different than Autodesks acquisition of Alias. Maya is the market leader in its segment- STILL. Mudbox...well it's behind ZB by far in terms of market penetration etc. AND it has to share the spoils with Silo and MODO. Not quite the same thing as them getting Maya is it?

I see this actually HURTING autodesk shares in the long run AND setting Mudbox technology development behind as they ax employees and shift things around!

I say it's a momentary plus for pixologic not a negative.

[mocaw]

Sheesh, Autodesk is becoming the "EA Games" of the 3D modeling app world.Funny- UBISOFT, the second largest publisher (which EA tried to agressivly buy out) seems to use ZB!

[zeke3d]

This is all just forum member speculation, but Id like to hear everyone else’s thoughts. A while back they picked up maya, and no leaps and bounds in my opinion where made to ether it or 3dsmax, no cross-pollination etc, so I wouldn’t expect to see any immediate change in mud box software. I think agility and smallness are good for a company if it want to iterate faster and push the envelope more often.

[3dioot]

I agree. While its probably unnecesary to say this on zbrush forums i think this seals mudbox's fate. Zbrush is the way to go now. As you said they have done nothing drastic to maya or max and their prices (also talking subscription prices on autocad for example) are just way too high. I find this a real shame. Maybe skymatter didnt believe in themselves anymore?

3dioot

[zeke3d]

"Maybe skymatter didnt believe in themselves anymore?"



Yeah, I came to that conclusion quickly, after z3 launched my guess is they felt a decade behind what pixologic was able to do. Seeing the success and potential, and un ignorability for modeling that feels like painting or sculpting is something that giants like Autodesk could no longer ignore. I can see them wanting to get their hands in the cookie jar and the recently brought to its knees mudbox make a reasonable choice. Wouldn’t surprise me if they had gone to pixol with somekind of deal before skymatter.

[a13x]

Honestly, I think that Skymatter made a HUGE mistake. Autodesk is really killing off all of its apps. They just released Max and Maya 2008, with what, two new enhancements each? Mudbox will just be either butchered and shoved into both apps, or will just sit in the corner of their R&D labs gathering dust.

Autodesk has really dissapointed me, and I know a LOT of others. Mudbox really had some potential. Now it's going to be just another novelty app. that's never going to gain in any meaningfull features.

[-WOODY-]

Personally I thought MubBox was waayy tooo expensive anyway. They probably weren't doing very well in sales becuase of it. I noticed that when it first came out that you had to meet strengent criteria to buy their scaled down version. When I went to their site the last time, they changed the lower cost version to that of "non commercial use".

I could have told them that it cost too much, duh. It doesn't even come close to what ZBrush does and ZBrush costs less.

It will be interesting to see what Autodesk does with it.

[mocaw]

... But hey! Maybe they are about to buy some other company - check out with them quick and sell them some priceless advice before those potato heads do another mistake.
:lol: Hey I just like to "speculate" like any other person in a "free" market economy. :lol:

[mocaw]

It just had to be it wasn't selling well enough if they gave it over. What did they buy them for?

There is a lot of noise on the displacement painting signal these days with ZB, MODO, Silo, and Hexagon being around in addition to MB. So much the better for the company almost everyone knows and trusts on the topic and so much the worse for the future holders of MB!

Maybe I was over stating in before when I said that it would actually hurt Autodesk shares, but I doubt it will help them. As I've stated else where- they bought Maya when it was the "industry standard" for its market segment (and still is in many respects), the same is not true for MB.

The funny thing is that there are a lot of users who almost strictly will not buy and autodesk product if they can help it for a number of reasons- so this again is a gain for ZB!

[zeke3d]

true, also on a darker note, it could be possible for them to improve mb to play nicer with max, and maya, and infact somehow take aspects of mb, and put them in both. and perhaps make the support for how zb handles things less important to them or even disregard or misimplement to force people to use their app and snuff our zb. A little on the conspiracy theorists side I know. But ponder that over your next cup of coffee.

[Andrew RaZ]

oh wow, where have i heard this before?

was it when Autodesk acquired Discreet and 3D Studio Max, and Max ceased to be a good program for any serious artist, and now nobody uses it because it's so horrible?

when Poser changed hands, and faded into the winds to become obscure? (not the most 'honorable' example, i know, but it needs saying)

or was it when Autodesk aquired Alias, and subsequently threw Maya development to the wind, thereby not resulting in the often demanded interface improvements, speed increases, and various other boons to the existance of artists everywhere?

but no, the harbingers of doom have named the next victim of fate and capitalist economics: Mudbox.

i'm all against huge uncaring conglomerate corporations and all, but i'd really like to see where it's written that being bought by another company is bad for business. Autodesk buying Mudbox means nothing in and of itself.

[beeek]

A while back they picked up maya, and no leaps and bounds in my opinion where made to ether it or 3dsmax.
Amen.

I'd like to see the integration of 3dsMax, Maya, Poser, Zbrush, Photoshop, Apophysis, MojoWorld, Groboto, XenoDream and WorldMachine into a single application.

R.I.P. MudBox :td:

[mocaw]

It's convenient for you to forget about programs like lightscape and motionbuilder...

Doom no...just RIP!

Maya is a different story- they'd have been complete idiots to kill it or just watch it fade...

Does that mean anything is off the table either way though? NO.

[beeek]

It's convenient for you to forget about programs like lightscape and motionbuilder...No offense to any omitted app intended.

I could have listed quite a few others, but thought it might be overkill...

[Atwooki]

Originally quoted by zeke3d

Wouldn’t surprise me if they had gone to pixol with somekind of deal before skymatter.Healthy bit of insight there ;)

Ofer to Autodesk? (the dinosaur collective of node-based procedural softs?)

NO WAY ;)

[mocaw]

No offense to any omitted app intended.

I could have listed quite a few others, but thought it might be overkill...Sorry, we posted at almost the same time- my post was aimed at Andrew RaZ's post...not yours!

[Aeneas]

I'm glad it's Mudbox, and not ZBrush.
But then again: MB looked like an extension to Maya from the start.

Remember how Skymatter was going to charge for the update? How only full license people with gold support could get the update for free? Their mentality was already Autodesk, so I guess it'll be a good symbiosis.

I wish the succes, but personally I prefer ZBrush. By far!

[rossco1111]

Need to clear the air here. As much as Autodesk are the current Empirical conquerors of various areas of the software world they wouldn't buy Mudbox unless they intended to turn it to profit, or to integrate it somehow into their current softwares.

Someone said that it wouldn't help them any??? Why buy it then???? :o That would lack any business sense at all.

Current speculation is that Max an Maya will be taken to version 10/11 and then will be replaced by one all conquering program, which undoubtedly will either incorporate Mudbox or integrate with it.

People are always ridiculing Max simply because it is owned by Autodesk. How many people have actually used it?? Max has served me well over the last 10 years and I assume that it will continue to serve me.

And with regard as to 'what this means to Pixologic?' : It means some competition. We are all aware of the power of ZB3 and the current gap between it and Mudbox, but think about it....... if Autodesk keep Mudbox operational after its acquisition; think of the financial backing it now has.

Sorry if I went on a rant, but its early and I've not had coffee or a smoke break yet :evil: , and I'm sick of folk slating Max....... thats all for now. :p

[Nolan_R]

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?id=9931455&siteID=123112

Discuss...

[MrCreighton]

Yeh, as someone who has used Max since the bad old days, I'd have to observe that its poor reputation is not entirely deserved. Whilst I've switched to XSI for the most part, Max really excels in the "quick and dirty" jobs where you've gotta get it done fast. Particle systems are much better than XSI, and Brazil and vRay are really sweet renderers. There are some problems with Max's architecture, but I'd very happily have a licence on hand for personal use if I could justify the purchase.

[Carsten Lind]

definately something cool in store for the merger of Max and Maya, that is bound to happen..

[tonytrout]

I see a huge potentiaL for Mudbox with Maya. With big R&D behind it I see serious competition for ZB. The pace of development in ZB has been so slow that another year will be a change in leadership in sculpting programs. I for one am still waiting for a decent Maya mouse navigation in ZB. How hard can it be? Maybe Pixologic hear its customers now ,, maybe not.

[tonytrout]

Well bless my socks, I see 3.1 is out, maybe they heard after all :eek:

[RAMWolff]

Shame Daz didn't buy it.
We could have gotten the program for 1.99.
Maybe in a few months.
( Hexagon 2 needs a little sister )LOL. You are so evil!!! I would have LOVED that myself being a PC member at DAZ!! Oh well. I like ZBrush better anyways!!! :D

[Randy_Riley]

The best thing that ever happened for zbrush users was when mudbox came out. Much like back in the day when there was Maya and Max always clashing heads. They would totally ripping each other off on cool new features (and inciting many Nerdgasims at SIGGRAPH). Case in point on improvements after Mudbox.
1) Now there are layers
2)Now there are subtools
3) Now there is a gradient background (I'm not really sure why they ripped that off)
4)Now there is selective subdivision on only part of a mesh (at least its in the documentation I haven't actually done it yet)
5) They actually came out with a new (:rolleyes: beta) version.
6) ? No maya hotkeys. That actually suprises me though maybe with the 3.1 hotkey editor it can be done.

Don't get me wrong I'm totally a zbrush guy and think once it gets more stable will be the greatest thing ever in CG modeling. Like someone once said, "Good artist copy and great artist steal."

I don't think Autodesk is going to RIP mudbox. Just as they haven't RIPed Motion Builder but have just seeminly started to work out the kinks with making there products compatable. I'm not sure how motion builder has evolved (I don't use it) though being at SIGGRAPH they are definatlly still pushing people to buy it and showing how there working out the compatibility bugs. Maybe it's just wishful thinking but I hope that they make some improvements in it so zbrush can take the best of them. Ultimatly that may have to wait a couple of years when Maya and Max will surely merge and it gets thrown in the mix.

[SalmonGod]

I still dont understand why people compare ZBrush and Mudbox so much... Mudbox is only a sculpting program and it only compares (mildly) to ZBrush in the sculpting arena

people seem to often forget that sculpting is only (in my mind) roughly 1/3 of what zbrush is built for and capable of

the only two features I have ever heard anybody claim Mudbox to have over zbrush are the Maya style navigation and tangent symmetry... I find it really really hard to believe that those two features justify buying a whole nother (more expensive) program which leaves behind the 2.5D painting, texturing, rendering, transposing, materials, re-topologizing, customizing, movie-recording, billion polygons, and above all pixologic's awesome generosity and interaction with their customers

I can see Mudbox being something interesting if they find a way to integrate it smoothly into Max or Maya or the inevitable superbeast merging of softwares... but I'll believe it when I see it... and it's looked to me like development always slows to a crawl in the midst of mergers, so I doubt I'll see it for quite a while

[jinchoung]

but the biggest professional interest in zbrush is for its ability to sculpt hires onto 3d meshes.

frankly, most modelers are truly IRRITATED by zbrush's other features because they invariably get in the way.

the app has a legacy a paint program... not as a 3d program and while i can totally understand why many cherish zbrush for it's unique character and ability to make really unique images quickly, for others, it really does just get in the way.

zb is a pit stop before maya (or lightwave, xsi, etc.)

i always thought that zb could benefit tremendously from acknowledging this fact and making a different interface tailored for sculpting 3d modelers.... and it seems that with the latest revisions, this is coming to pass.

that's good.

---------------------------------------------------------------

as for mudbox acquisition, i think autodesk will bring quality and discipline... but at a STEEP PRICE.

very few of maya or max's point releases are free.

so for those who don't have limitless supplies of money, you get the worst of all worlds - FREQUENT UPGRADES. PAID UPGRADES. EXPENSIVE UPGRADES.

i do a very focused analysis of what software i can afford to buy. i take into account not only purchase price but TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP including price and frequency of upgrades.

mudbox failed in their initial release according to my metric. i have no doubt that it will become worse after the autodesk acq.

but gladly, i am a proud new zb3.1 owner since siggy and have a hiroshi "dots" sculpture (10 of 10!) to prove it. turns out that zbrush passes my affordability metric!

woo hoo!

sculpting time for me!

jin

[jinchoung]

i'm NOT advocating taking anything away.

i'm just telling you that for most of us who come from modeling from programs like maya, max, lightwave, nendo, etc, we aren't here primarily for the paint program aspect.

i want to make and work with MODELS... not a canvas.

but, as i said, i totally understand those who like that aspect of zb.

anyhoo, it is an issue that pixologic created by trying to cater to both crowds.

all they need to do is create an interface that is aimed at one crowd or the other (which they are starting to do) (and similar to dreamweaver [artist interface or programmer interface]) and the same program can be all to all people.

anyway, this is why people compare zb to mudbox... because they don't really care about the other aspects of zb.

jin

[jinchoung]

oh,

and ask any 3d modeler familiar with using max, maya, etc....

the analogy of WORD with CHARTS is NOT AT ALL AKIN to the situation between zbrush and 3d modeling.

it is not just that there are other windows and options that allow for painting on a canvas.... the entire program and all of its conventions betray a workflow that is ALIEN (yes, that strong) to most 3d modelers.

anyhoo, the question was asked. this is the answer.

but the interface is becoming MUCH more friendly to the modelers (i would bet that this is as a result of clients like ilm, ubisoft, and many users) while retaining its canvas creation properties so it seems like pixologic is navigating the dangerous waters well.

jin

[spaceboy412]

I wasn't aware that there was an universal interface that everyone except zbrush used.:rolleyes:

[jinchoung]

maybe it's your perpetually rolling eyes that prevent you from seeing clearly.

jin

[jinchoung]

zaphod,

again, it is not the overload that i am saying is the problem. it is the, as you said, "nonstandard" nature of the interface.

worst thing for me was the "pick up/drop" workflow and that my model is a tool. this works PERFECTLY for a program where your EMPHASIS is the canvas and you only want to doodle around a little bit for a polymesh that is merely a COMPONENT of the painting.

this is BAD for a person whose ENTIRE FOCUS is the polymesh. and the fact that you can ACCIDENTALLY DROP your model.... that is not a natural workflow for 3d modelers.

this is what i mean that the very essence of the program is alien to "traditional" 3d modeler.

anyway, if you're not intimately familiar with other 3d modeling paradigms, you may not understand what i'm getting at... but i am not saying that there is problem with MORE per se.
-----------------------------------------------------
the new interface has little touches like allowing you to start with a polymesh (most likely a sphere for creators) and then you start off in a mode that is familiar to 3d modelers.

sure, you could accidentally drop your model but the new interface seems to make concessions for the 3d modeler... especially 3.1.

jin

p.s. ctrl-click-release ctrl-drag.... worst.... interface... idea... ever.... seriously.... wtf?! there are other option keys! this is something that has always made me want to punch my screen.

[jinchoung]

also,

it took me a VERY long time to realize that ROTATING THE MODEL is how you're supposed to work.

THIS IS ANATHEMA to 3d modelers!

you leave your model as centered and orthogonal as possible and you only ever rotate around YOUR VIEW - never the model.

again, something that is alien to traditional 3d modelers.

and perhaps it is incorrect to say "interface" only that is alien. it is the philosophy? the main emphasis of the program? anyway, in many ways, we can tell that this is not a program that was designed originally to do 3d and for 3d modelers, this has been an issue.

jin

[SalmonGod]

I was introduced to ZBrush as a modeler and it only garnered my interest as a new and unique way to model... but now that I've experimented with every aspect of the program and understand the way it works and the concepts behind it, I see the sculpting as the secondary aspect of the program

2.5D is the basic underlying concept of ZBrush, and it is originally that concept which allowed detailed, brush-based 3d sculpting in the first place... I think the 3d sculpting was implemented as a more intuitive manner of 2.5D painting... instead of trying to paint 3d images in 2d space (which just isnt intuitive), you can sculpt objects like clay with the 2.5D tools and then construct your 2.5D images piece by piece

personally, I fell in love with this idea when it finally clicked with me... it's the most beautifully unique and powerful concept in digital art since the invention of layers

after hanging around here and reading stuff from the older ZBrush veterans, playing with the older interfaces, and studying the way zbrush evolved from these concepts, it seems to me that zbrush's integration into full 3d workflows was kind of incidental... and dont get me wrong... it's awesome... but I'm starting to share the opinion with a few of the older zbrushers around here, that it's a shame pixologic is under so much pressure to cut their roots and focus entirely on the full 3d side of things

the only thing that disappointed me when 3.0 was released was the complete lack of any new 2.5D features... it's 100% sculpting upgrades... and it's all awesome stuff... but it's just sad to see that original spark of genius getting left behind...

that root is what makes ZBrush different, and still more powerful, than anything else... sure other programs are starting to catch on and explore the sculpting feature, but they're only exploring a side-effect of the original 2.5D concept, which is why I cannot consider them even comparable... they're spelunking a single cave in an entire world that pixologic opened up and I hope people see that and stop trying to pressure them into trapping themselves in that cave as well with threats of competition

so what if someone else claims that cave - there's a whole world to conquer

[SalmonGod]

I dont understand the problem people have with the interface... it takes a little getting used to, but really... what is the fundamental difference between rotating your model or rotating your view around the model?... I can open up maya and rotate around my model, and then open up zbrush and rotate my model and you know what?... it looks like exactly the same thing on my screen!

the alt+click movement is wonderful... it's all the movement in the program summarized in a single key which your finger never has to leave... that's convenience like nothing else... why do something with 4 keys when you can do it with 1?

and dropping the model shouldnt even be an issue because you don't lose it... it's still right there in the tool menu exactly the way it was when you dropped it, and it should even be already selected for you... ctrl+n, click-and-drag... you're back to work

I just dont understand how somebody can look at Maya, Max, etc, and then look at ZBrush... and then say that ZBrush's interface is difficult... my only assumption is that when you're used to clutter, you get confused when it's cleaned up

[spaceboy412]

salmongod "the only thing that disappointed me when 3.0 was released was the complete lack of any new 2.5D features... it's 100% sculpting upgrades... and it's all awesome stuff... but it's just sad to see that original spark of genius getting left behind..."

I totally agree with this statement, i was very saddend to not see any updates to the 2.5 features, lighting/rendering etc.

jindoung"maybe it's your perpetually rolling eyes that prevent you from seeing clearly."
what're you twelve?

[jinchoung]

HAHAHAAHAHAHA!

"what're you 12?"

SAYS THE GUY USING THE ROLLING EYES EMOTICON!

HAHAHAHA!

says the guy who can't find an opposing viewpoint without being snide.

ha!

you reap what you sow buddy.

jin

[SalmonGod]

ok you have to admit that was kind of obnoxious... the rolling eyes may have betrayed a bit of condescension from spaceboy, but nothing like the above post or the 'not seeing clearly' comment which I read as direct insults... I would hate to see this degrade any further

this happens to be the only forum I've ever witnessed completely clean of flaming, and I'd love for it to stay that way

[Bonecradle]

... what is the fundamental difference between rotating your model or rotating your view around the model?... I can open up maya and rotate around my model, and then open up zbrush and rotate my model and you know what?... it looks like exactly the same thing on my screen!I think I disagree, but in a good way :)

It doesn't look like exactly the same thing and that is because ZBrush has been designed for sculpting.

There's a reason sculptors use sculpting stands with rotating platforms. It's so you can spin the sculpture and really see the form because of the changing lighting over the surface. That's what you get in ZB when you spin the object.

In the other software during 'normal' navigation you change the view and not the object, so the position of the object relative to the light(s) does not change. You therefore don't get the play of light over the surface that is so important for checking form. You can of course move a light to do this, but when sculpting, who wants to constantly switch back and forth between selecting a light and the sculpted object? The other software also place a premium on retaining orientation for the purposes of deformation operations, hence the need to preferably move the view and not the object.

I think that is the fundamental difference.

[marcus_civis]

OK guys, please leave the personal comments out of it. Discussions of this sort are great so long as they stay on topic - but nothing is gained when they start to generate heat.

Thanks,

[marcus_civis]

"...personal comments?"

How can I specify my view of any kind of software by leaving out my personal view?

All right, what I meant was 'personal attacks' on other ZBC users (as earlier in this thread). I was trying to be gentle.

[lemonnado]

I'm selling my Mudbox Pro license for 500$. That's 150$ below the list price. It's a great product, I'm just not using it enough to give it shelf space.
License Transfer is arranged.
Cheers
Lemo

[marcus_civis]

@ MC
Please, help me out in pointing me to any "attack" I've done during the length of this thread?

Gentle is my middle name, so ...?

Zaphod, I wasn't directing my comment at you. I apologize if it seemed that way.

[marcus_civis]

:D
could not have imagined it otherwise - one reason for me to think it would have been better to adress such things right from the start to the right person - "unvague" things, kind of.

Yes, it's rather too easy to be misunderstood!

[Barleycorn]

By absorbing any competition, this Behemoth called Autodesk or Discreet is not going to make things better, they are reducing our range of choice and also reducing the quality of product by lowering the bar. THAT is what happens in a monopoly, no incentive to spend on development. Those predicting a fusion of Max and Maya, I hate to say it but they are two different products, Maya doesn't need anything that max has... Max is just like Lightwave, they keep cramming new 3rd party plugins into it and send that off as an upgrade. Maya is a step up from Max but probably a step below Houdini and Softimage. After using Maya for sometime, I have to say the interface was a bit old and there appeared to be an unfinished integration of mental ray. Financial realities have forced Houdini and XSI to get a bit more realistic about pricing but where will that leave Maya and Max and Lightwave? Mudbox and Zbrush can be moved between all these apps just fine right now. Just my thoughts.

[Ashleysparling]

all I can say is Motion blur in mudbox. What are they thinking. I want to see my model not have it in motion. !!!!!! :confused:

[lemonnado]

all I can say is Motion blur in mudbox. What are they thinking. I want to see my model not have it in motion. !!!!!! :confused:

That's funny..... Yes, unbuyable... I made the decision NOT to upgrade because of 'issues' like that. Seems a corporate committee is now deciding about mudbox and not some gifted entrepreneurs.

And Adobe, unfortunately, has become the same. The products are increasingly unusable and miss the point more and more while offering little less then a polished corporate fassade from which even the simplest support request is deflected like that desperate call to the local phone company for some billing questions. I love the personal way Pixologic helps and how cool 3DBrush reacts as well. Others can go to heck imho...

Lemo

[Chamelion]

Ashleysparling, what do you mean motion blur? You have to check settings of your video card...
Mudbox works fine...theres no problem with blur...

[spaceboy412]

um, i think he's saying how is motion blur going to help in modeling.

[fx81]

LOL there is no motion blur.
it has realtime tone mapping, depth of field and ambient occlusion.

[lemonnado]

LOL there is no motion blur.
it has realtime tone mapping, depth of field and ambient occlusion.
Of course not.... but I had a severe attack of motion blur when I saw the upgrade price....
Lemo

[fx81]

Of course not.... but I had a severe attack of motion blur when I saw the upgrade price....
Lemoi know what you mean :D

i get the same feeling everytime i do something in zbrush.

the price reflects how Mudbox is targeted towards the professionls and not the hobbyists. but i am dissapointed that they discontinued the basic version which was half the price.

[lemonnado]

I am, well intended, to use Mudbox commercially. But commercial users also have to see where the money goes. And per functionality.... it's not worth the upgrade price to us. And yes, the low end version was a nice gimmick. But commercially not viable for them I guess. I'd say they took the cost for the development, slapped a profit on it, then divided that through the number of expected sales and that's the figure we are looking at. Nothing wrong with that, just not connected to the feature set of the app IMHO. But that's only my way to look at it. I am sure there is someone out there for whom that app fit's like a glove and who is happy as a clam using it. We like ZB, others turn green looking at the UI and complexity... We all have our fav's.

Lemo