Slashdot Mirror
Blender Community Rescues Sources
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."
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!
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.
Mod point free since 2001
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).
-- Never monkey with another Monkey's monkey
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.
DNA just wants to be free...
I could swear, these things cost much less than that
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
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.
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?
For an example, click here.
Call (206) 338-5780 COLLECT for information about a genuine BA, BS, MA, MS, MBA, or Ph.D.
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!
Get your Unix fortune now!
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.
DNA just wants to be free...
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.
-
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 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.
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!
yes, and in fact the OSS community (in this case, myself and a small handful of others) already do!
ardour 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.
Remove the chain in that image awwready. It's 'Free'd.
My photolog
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 :)
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Just thought I'd mention that due to a generous money donation by a private sponsor, the LinuxTrade software was converted to the GPL on 08/30/02.
This is a great trend, IMHO.
If you interested in what Blender can do (as I was), check out the galleries.
:)
I was pleasantly surprised. I'm sure you will be too.
Actually, just seeing the galleries makes me what to donate some money.
Has Apple done this in any other fields? Is this a good or really stupid strategy?
It took me a bit of googling to find it, but what NaN did here seems similar to the Street Performer Protocol. 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.
-Denor
Promises are not easily forgotten. Who is the lucky person who gets the T-shirt?
Anyway, given that it hasn't even reached v1.0 at this time, no its not yet ready for general professional use. But it will be. Some studio users are experimenting with it already, however.
Actually Blender is a bit like vi: there's two major modes, toggled with TAB key, the modes for editing objects at large and another to edit the objects themselves. And, of course, a lot of obscure BUT some say logical key combos. It rules. (Though I'm still more like an XEmacs person. Not in Blender's case though.)
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.
The open source world could really use a fully functional CAD/CAM package, too :D
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
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.
,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)
... 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!
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
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
Anyway that's probably long enough.
No warranty of any kind is offered as to the quality of this post.
What it really needs IMO to suppliment its keyboard commands is things like:
1. List *all* actions and properties of something when you right-click on it (or a similar convention). This way to don't have to memorize each and every one (at least not up front).
2. Have some mini-wizards for some of the trickier tasks. For example, if you create a curve that you want to use as an animation path curve, you could right click on it to see the options (see above), and one of the options could be "make this an animation curve". If you select that option, then it could then ask you to select any objects that you want linked to that curve (so that they can move on the curve). The selection can be in the form of a drop-down list with all the objects that are linkable. (Of course, if you don't name your objects well, then a visual selection may be preferred. But I would be happy with a drop-down list, AKA "select box" in HTML-speak.)
Table-ized A.I.
I dunno! Say i'm in London/Amsterdam/NYC, where are you? Let's say I'm recording a 'hard to get together' session at 08.00 GMT tomorrow. Where will you be if your software 'shits it' and I need you to help me?
Based on his previous post, I suspect that he will be on the other end of the phone talking to you when that happens. This is, of course, assuming that you have entered into a support contract with him, just like any other support contract that you may require or desire.
One advantage of dealing with someone like him ("If you need me, here is my cell phone number") is that you get to talk to the actual developer who really knows what's going on under the hood. How many times will you get to talk to the person who actually wrote whatever part of, say, MS Windows that is giving you problems when you call their tech support line?
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
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.....
Table-ized A.I.
Nah, you have viruses... Even metamorphic ones at that. See: http://www.virusbtn.com/magazine/archives/200207/e tap.xml
Score:-1, Funny
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 =)
Luke
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.
CAD!
Linux is terribly lacking good CAD software, let alone Free CAD software. Please see my CAD Pages for the full scoop. (BTW, if anybody is interested in starting a serious Free Software CAD project, please contact me!)
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
Support will start at $5K/year. For that, you will get dedicated 24/7 service from a set of the developers, accessed via a single number. you will have to run ardour on a system we build for you; if you run it on your own system, support will cost more. if this bothers you, consider that protools for windows is certified for only a single intel-based system, built and sold by IBM. run it on any other system, and there is NO support available.
let me know when you want to sign the contract. i suggest you at least wait till version 1.0 comes out, but don't let that stop you.
Documentation may, nor may not, form part of the strategy for generating revenue with Ardour, just as it does with Blender (the online Blender manuals are basically inadequate - as this /. thread notes, you really need to buy the book for $50).
if this irritates you, consider that i've spent $35K or more on studio infrastructure to support the development of Ardour, and worked full time without pay on it for about three years. if you can come up with better schemes for generating a revenue stream from my work (other than prebuilt systems), please let me know.
some kind of manual will probably appear online in the future, but right now we are still debating exactly which internal objects to expose in the UI, and so it would be a bit premature to go and write a full manual.
i just read your comments on kuro5hin. they're a little off-base. first of all, i suspect you've never used protools, which is the dominant tool in the commercial studio world. protools has a pretty decent manual which the ardour README points to as a way to get started with the concepts if nothing else. but the concepts in protools are not that close to those in soundfile editors and trackers. if thats the way you expect a DAW to work, you're ignoring 8-10 years of history and development of these programs and the experience of studio users.
I wonder if 'blender' means something interesting in norwegien, being that the Netherlands are the alleged origin of the software.
Table-ized A.I.
As far as I know, neither Steinberg nor Emagic support DXi. You can use DXi plugins via an adaptor such as the one FXpansion sells.
Yes, I know how many people beat up ProTools because it was audio only. It still went on to rule the industry. Give Ardour some time, and we'll see what happens. The program hasn't even reached v1.0 yet, has managed to get the state claimed to take many man-years of development with about 3, and a first response is "it doesn't support MIDI yet!". what can i offer you that will encourage you?
If you think my responses are "defensive, knee-jerks", then you should read some of the stuff on the ProTools and Nuendo web sites. I'm relaying to you the perspective of people who work on the software side of the DAW world. You, as a user or potential user, don't like what we have to say. That's OK, but that doesn't make us defensive. DXi is a bunch of crap and most audio developers agree; VST is encumbered by a license that makes it hard to use with GPL'ed software. ProTools was audio only. I am being defensive, or do you not like the facts?
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.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
A genuine apology on SlashDot! Not the slightest tongue-in-cheek, no barbs, no shred of kickback or resentment. +1 Astonishing! (-: Woo-hoo! :-)
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
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.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
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.
I refer you to my earlier statements to explain what I feel blender needs to come up to spec.
No warranty of any kind is offered as to the quality of this post.
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?
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca