im wondering , as im saving up for main 3d app (blender does not do what i want and how i want it) which one of maya or max is better for , a)working with z brush b)animation and effects , to create finished short animations
Hmmm tricky question 
Both maya and max are very powerful apps and I use both of them at work.
You should download Maya PLE and 3dsmax trial and give them a spin.
I really like maya because of its Linux support and I like 3dsmax because of all it’s plugins that are out there in the market. Don’t forget about XSI as well and keep in mind that studios have a lot of in house tools and plugins that extend the capabilities of these apps.
In the end it comes down to what you prefer. All these apps will do the job…
ps Houdini rules 
cant afford all of them damn 
I have been dabbling with this same topic recently because I am needing a 3D package so I can get my ZBrush sculpts into UDK. Max seems to be the better tool over all if your main interest is games. Character Animation Toolkit seems to be a huge improvement and makes rigging very fast, as well as animation. Also, Polygon modeling is apparently better in Max and you can tell because the interface is mostly geared towards that, while Maya has a lot of NURBS modeling tools, which you don’t need for games. Here is one article I found that might help you further;
http://machinimart.com/maya-vs-3ds-max/
It’s great cause it’s a modern comparison. Many comparisons now a days tend to use older versions or just general gossip. It’s sort of like people who say Macs are better than PCs for digital art, video, and music. That’s the reputation Mac got back when they had IBM processors that were far superior to the old Intels.
Agreed, best to try the trials for both. Games companies use both Max and Maya, but I believe there are more companies using Maya…so it depends what you want to do.
I am a Max user, namely coz I’ve been using Max since it was 3DS-R3. So, at this point I am comfortable modeling in Max.
Another good thing is that Autodesk owns both, so their FBX file format will be better and better at transferring files between the two.
One thing I can add about Max now that I learned a few things is that it has some tools for retopology that Maya currently needs a separate plug-in to do, via Nex. The freeform graphite tools let you quickly retopologize a high-poly mesh that you import from ZBrush. Maybe certain pipelines are a bit similar, but for a ZBrush pipeline, sol far I am thinking that Max is better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZvhZ1OwuFk
Here is a video showing what I mean. You can’t get that in Maya without that Nex plug-in.
I think Max has been a better modeling package for a longer time. When I was learning Maya back in version 4.5, Max ran circles around it with regard to features and simple things, like chamfering a vertex or an edge. Maya has been playing catch-up with modeling for years. Perhaps Maya is amazing now for modeling but back when I was learning it Max was far superior. Maya has been really strong for animation, though.
For a brand new user (depending on your goals), I think it’s good to have familiarity with both, but use the one you find that fits your working style.
The 2011 Autodesk FBX format lets you easily transfer models (and animation, I believe) back and forth, and there’s always the reliable OBJ format which we all use for Z-Brush and other utilities for UV-Layout.
Maya seems to put a lot of emphasis on that ‘hotbox’, which I find cumberson for modeling (and annoying overall). It’s too mouse-dependent imho. I know there are customizable hotkeys and MEL script, but I just don’t like the basic structure. I also find Maya’s material editor to be a hot tangly mess, but probably coz it’s just not familiar to me. Still, some things I am not familiar with are still intuitive (like TopoGun, which I learned quickly).
Max’s poly tools have always been good…and a lot of Max artists find themselves in the unfortunate position of working at a company which insists on Maya-only…but then again I think a forward-thinking company will have floating licenses of both Max and Maya and let the experts model in the package they’ve been using for years. I think it’s highly-inefficient to take a Maya or Max (or other 3D package) expert and force him/her to use an unfamiliar (or hated) package to get what is easily imported into the programmer’s engine of choice. It’s kinda like the Painter/Photoshop debate. Nobody’s gonna care if a concept artist uses Painter instead of Photoshop…so it would be kind of pointless to insist that all concepts are created in Photoshop if Painter PSD files can be opened in either package.
At one company I worked at which was Max-based…some modelers used Lightwave…which worked out great coz they were still able to deliver in Max. An artist might prefer Blender, Modo, Maya, Lightwave, Max, XSI or even a Z-Brush/TopoGun workflow…far as I am concerned a model is a model in the end, long as it meets the requirements for rigging/animation, smoothing, poly-count, etc.
Some companies might insist that you use one or the other, but an expert in Maya or Max can easily move models to any package for rigging and animation, assuming the company doesn’t enforce one or the other simply because they don’t want to buy a couple floating licenses (or for other reasons). To me, this is not a trivial matter though, since I would rather pay for my own Max seat at a company then be forced to model in Maya.
While artists may learn both Maya and Max, I don’t think anyone will ever be equally comfortable in both, since generally artists will develop a preference (along with scripts and expensive plugins and other customization) for one or the other they use on personal projects. This is compounded by the fact that some people have legitimately owned Max or Maya for personal use for years. So, companies should be flexible with how content is modeled, assuming it all ends up correct in the end.
Bottom line: Use the tools you like and allow you to do your best work and stay inspired. This work can be complicated enough without tools you don’t like getting in the way.
Well, my point in this debate has been that the answer most commonly given by both users is “you can do the same thing with both”. It’s true, I can’t deny that, but honestly, one application can probably do things faster in some regards than the other. For instance, I was talking to some dude yesterday who doesn’t want to learn ZBrush. He says that he can do everything in Max that ZBrush does. He may be right, but why go through all that trouble? It’s clear that ZBrush speeds up the pipeline immensely in certain areas, why stick to a less efficient one. Bottom line is, both applications can deliver the same results, but it’s how you get there that matters. Max has, so far, shown me to have better tools for a ZBrush > Max > UDK pipeline.
This is true. Being ‘able’ to work out a solution in one way isn’t necessarily the best, even if the better way comes at a small purchase price for the individual/company.
You can layout UV’s in Max or Maya all day long. Now, compare that to someone using Headus UV Layout. The Headus UV Layout expert will run circles around the person doing UV’s in Max or Maya. We’re talking possibly hours difference depending on the complexity of the model. I saw this first-hand when I started using UV Layout; after I learned this utility my UV Layout time went from hours to minutes. When I showed this tool to others, well, let’s just say it sold itself. Hit ‘F’ to flatten a complicated UV shell and watch the reaction. 
Headus UV Layout (and other similar utilities) made UV’s a non-issue, even when UV’s had to be re-flattened after Z-Brush sculpting or if a model had to be changed for any reason. Now, Z-Brush has its own UV tools which are excellent as well. Imagine having to re-flatten UV’s back in Max or Maya like the old days shudder. The cost of this utility is tiny for the huge benefit it gives…which is why a lot of artists I know were buying their own copies as their ‘secret weapon’ hehe.
You can re-topologize in Z-Brush. It is possible…is it the best way? I don’t think so. Z-Brush is amazing, but when combined with external re-topology tools it’s even better. Of course, this is my personal opinion, though I think the benefit to third-party re-topology tools are demonstrable. Some might find Z-Brush’s re-topology to be the height of simplicity, but I find TopoGun to be my weapon of choice.
Either way, we all end up with our re-topology one way or another…but I think if you’re happier and more-efficient using a utility, by all means, use it. It will mean better quality work delivered faster. This is why I buy utilities and try to support these developers who make my life easier. It’s my guess that Pixologic knows this, and will probably add amazing re-topo tools in future editions of Z-Brush. 
These utilities don’t just help us directly, they indirectly improve other programs.
I think one way to slow an artist down is to insist on workflows which undermine years of practice and work (Maya vs. Max) instead of just harnessing those strengths and having a single delivery platform. Essentially, let the artist go as far in his/her normal toolset as possible before delivery. This way, you have happy artists who are using tools they have deep experience with and also use at home. Everyone wins.
Cost should never be a factor here, as floating Max/Maya licenses are pretty reasonable. Some of these utilities are so cheap artists just buy them on their own (but are reasonable for companies to buy as multiple licenses, too).
On the topic of apps I have found the rendering in c4d really quick compared to a demo of Maya using goz.Why is it that nice render results are so much more accessible in c4d?Maya just took forever rendering anything imported through Goz
Interesting topic in and of itself. I don’t understand why people don’t like the UV Master inside of ZBrush. I don’t know. I haven’t gotten to that part of the pipeline yet but I will eventually and I will want to compare it to Max.