Slashdot Mirror


Blender 2.42 Has Been Released

bartv writes "Blender 2.42 has been released. It features an impressive list of new features for professional users. The most important improvements are: a new render pipeline, node editors for compositing and materials, support for anisotropic materials, improved fluid simulation and new character animation tools. Most of these features are the result of the production of Elephants Dream, the first Open Movie. During this project, Blender's lead developer Ton Roosendaal was coding the features that were required by the artists to produce their movie."

166 comments

  1. I'd like to see more. by suso · · Score: 3, Insightful

    See, the best invention really is neccesity. They should try to make a movie every year or two.

    1. Re:I'd like to see more. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      See, the best invention really is neccesity. They should try to make a movie every year or two.

      Why not offer a short-film contest, similar to the POV still-image rendering contests (see http://hof.povray.org/ )

      (BTW, I think you are missing a "mother"........above.)

    2. Re:I'd like to see more. by ramunasg · · Score: 1

      Main developers where involved in "Elephants Dream" production, this way they could see what features of software designers were in need. They could do fast prototyping of new ideas and test their usefulness in films development :)

    3. Re:I'd like to see more. by LocoMan · · Score: 1

      Well, there's the 10 second club: ( http://www.10secondclub.net/ ), basically a monthly animation contest around a 10 second sound clip, meant to mimic actual production (where a character animator is given a single scene to animate). I do remember some blender users winning some of the rounds sometime ago. Haven't been following it much lately, but to give an idea of the quality of the competition, sometime ago I saw an ad looking for animators to work on Blue Sky (IIRC, it was about a year or more ago... Blue Sky are the guys behind the Ice Ages and Robots movies, BTW) and it said to look for the latest winners of the 10 second club to see the kind of quality of animation they wanted to see on demo reels.

    4. Re:I'd like to see more. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Necessity is the mother of invention" does not imply that necessity itself is an invention. Necessity is not an invention. It is the need that causes invention. Without need (necesity) there would be no incentive to invent solutions. However the need itself is in no way an invention.

  2. Bite my shiny metal ass! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey, I read that as Bender!

    1. Re:Bite my shiny metal ass! by suckmysav · · Score: 1

      Congratulations

      --
      "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
    2. Re:Bite my shiny metal ass! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That should be "Bite my shiny anisotrophically rendered metal ass!"

  3. What have they done for the UI? by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The UI was natoriously difficult the last time I tried Blender. I agree that there may be a method to the madness, but why not have a mode for those who want instant gratification by using "expected" conventions? It could increase interest and hobbyists. I realize that some don't like watching impatient newbies infesting forums and fan sites, but if you want a product to survive, you need new blood. Today's snot-nosed newbie may be tomarrow's programmer for a great new feature.

    1. Re:What have they done for the UI? by gihan_ripper · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Having spent many many hours playing with Blender, I can say that the UI is not the major hurdle. It takes at most one hour of sustained effort to get to grips with the UI — the main problem is actually doing creative things once you've mastered it. 'Modelling', the art of constructing 3D structures out of mere electrons is the most time-consuming part of the process. My advice is to steer clear of Blender, unless you find that your WoW addiction still leaves you with time to kill.

      --
      Phoenix, Boston, Little Rock, see a pattern?
    2. Re:What have they done for the UI? by SB_SamuraiSam · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've tried Maya (evaluation), 3DS Max (cad), AutoCad and Friends (cad), etc. They all have very different interfaces. These are the few that would seem to define "convention," yet they are totally different. They are also hardly within the "hobbyist" price range. Blender is well within the hobbyist price range, has some decent, free documentation. The "getting started" range of documentation is actually quite good.

      Not to mention people are free to, for example, fork the project and make it how they wish.

      If you watch "The Making of" for Elephants Dream, you'll see that they looked plenty productive and the new node compositing (think Shake) looks down-right sick!

    3. Re:What have they done for the UI? by SB_SamuraiSam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wait, what? Steer clear from Blender or 3D modeling in general?

    4. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      > The UI was natoriously difficult the last time I tried Blender.

      Try it now -- it's much better. The old keyboard-driven model still works, and the menu panels are still kind of weird, but now most major functions have a visible button or menu entry, the "spin buttons" have arrows that indicate that fact, and there are now actual handles on each axis you can see and grab. In short it's not any stranger than maya or softimage now, just slightly different.

      And it's still incredibly fast.

    5. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Snowy_Duck · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Suprisingly enough the majority of our new users actualy are these 'snot-nosed newbies'. It seems older people just don't have the drive to learn something new...and probably the fact that they can afford professional software. Building a seperate UI would require a massive undertaking on the part of our few coders, who are already busy enough trying to keep up with today's 3D application needs. Besides, we have a great community who would be willing to help you with any problems you have.

    6. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the UI is no more difficult than Maya or lightwave. All of these kinds of apps are simply really stinking hard to use to begin with because of the complexity you are looking at.

      The only things I find annoying about the UI was that if you accidentally clicked in the tools fram and tried to use your scroll wheel you can mess up the ui location and size. Everything else is pretty darn useable for the amount fo power thay hand you.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wait, why was this modded insightful? No evidence is offered, just a vague comment that 3D modeling is time-consuming and therefore stay away from Blender? Gimme a break.

    8. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my experience with Blender, Pro/ENGINEER, and Autocad, Blender isn't all that bad. It's just that it's designed to be productive once a person really gets into making models. If that wasn't the case, the movie would have never been made. It's the same way with Pro/E--people design whole cars/airplanes/whatever in that thing while newbies trip over making simple parts. People make entire careers out of being good at CAD, so the newbies just need to understand that they can't be professionals overnight.

    9. Re:What have they done for the UI? by gihan_ripper · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. I was going for a Funny mod, but I guess the moderators were on crack again.

      Seriously though, I found that Blender ate up my life when I was using it. It can be very addictive to create and manipulate your own virtual world.

      --
      Phoenix, Boston, Little Rock, see a pattern?
    10. Re:What have they done for the UI? by joshier · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have modelled in the past, and this poster above is nothing but a liar. You don't model from "electrons".. you model from vertexes, points and edges. You then use a smoothing tag to estimate a curv over the points, inwhich you can add more detail by adding more points.

      Blenders UI isn't great for a total newbie I agree, but that's not to say it's hard. I thought 3ds maxes interface was hard at first compared to maxon cinema 4d, but I got used to that.

      There's also lots of video tutorials for blender which is brilliant. and yeah, the above poster should in no-way of been modded "insightful"

    11. Re:What have they done for the UI? by gihan_ripper · · Score: 1

      That's pretty funny. But you do model from electrons. Ultimately you're shifting electrons around inside your computer when you make things in Blender. The same as when you write a document in Word (or OpenOffice) or make a post on Slashdot. I was using figurative language, but I see that my figure of speech was entirely lost on you :(

      --
      Phoenix, Boston, Little Rock, see a pattern?
    12. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dudes who tell us Blender isn't harder than Maya or XSI are the ones who never did any real 3D work.

      Maya, Cinema4D and XSI interfaces are the most intuitives, the feeling with them is very good. 3dsmax and Lightwave interface are a little worse, to compare. Blender is the king of the BAD, VERY FUCKING BAD UI.

    13. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Every time I see a comment like this, I refer people to this link.

    14. Re:What have they done for the UI? by podperson · · Score: 1

      Actually Maya, Max, and Cinema4D seem to be converging UI-wise. A lot of third party tools have been borrowing their UIs from Maya and Max.

      Blender and Lightwave are odd men out.

    15. Re:What have they done for the UI? by westlake · · Score: 1
      the main problem is actually doing creative things once you've mastered it.

      You started me thinking about programs like Terragen, Poser, and Pixar's "Universal Man."

      Tools which help an artist to remain productive and focused on what he does best. Character animation, for example, is a form of acting and demands a very different set of skills than those needed for the basic construction of the model.

    16. Re:What have they done for the UI? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      " It seems older people just don't have the drive to learn something new...and probably the fact that they can afford professional software"

      Maybe. Or maybe it's that those using it are gunning for a job in the industry and they have to use the tools the professionals do. This isn't elitism or anything like that. It's about pipeline. One major major major problem with 3D apps is that they do not talk to each other very nicely. Getting a model from Lightwave to Maya, for example, is a huge pain in the ass. These little hiccups can be very disruptive when working with a team on a deadline.

      If the goal is to get Blender out to the studios, what they'll have to do is provide some functionality that is unique to them. If they provided some modelling tools that were seriously hard to ignore (like Z-Brush did...), then the time would be spent bringing them into the mix.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    17. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Got to say I've used heavily Playmation/Animation Master, Lightwave and Maya. I've also tinkered with several others. I found the interface to Blender to be a raging pain and not worth the effort. If you're a starving student Animation Master sells for $300 and is an extremely powerful animator. For character work it's better than Lightwave. If you want to factor in your time dealing with a nasty learning curve it's cheaper than Blender. Lightwave may seem like the bargin in the pro end but if you can swing it Maya has easily 10X the power at twice the price. I'd give it the highest marks for per dollar value in the pro realm. Basic Maya doesn't include things like hair and water dynamics but most of what you need is there and you can get Shave and a Haircut for hair for around $600. The sense of accomplishment should come from the final product not mastering a rather unfriendly interface. Maya probably has the least conventional interface but it's easy to use. I can set up a bouncing ball on a flat plane in under a minute in Maya and tweak the settings in seconds to adjust surface friction and bounce. Try that with another software. Rigs are time consuming to set up but the characters virtually animate themselves once you go through the trouble to set them up properly. Editing animations is childsplay and dynamtics are the simpliest I've seen to set. The one thing I will say is my rule of thumb with Maya is the hard stuff is easy but the easy stuff is hard. Basically what I tend to find is easy in other packages tends to be a pain in Maya but the stuff that is impossible or really tough to set up in most packages is laughably easy in Maya. It's a lot to learn but worth the effort. If you haven't got the time or money and just want to animate characters check out Animation Master. Incredibly powerful for the money.

      I had seriously looked at Blender to use for a CG feature but it was lacking a lot of what I needed and it just wasn't cost effect. Yes free doesn't mean cheaper. Visually Elephant Dreams was interesting but it pales next to what Maya and Mental Ray can do. Even Animation Master can blow it away character wise and I'd even say render wise and I'm not a big fan of Animation Master's renderer. I'm hoping Blender will turn into a viable tool but they have to give up on this our interface is superior attitude. Zbrush has that same issue. It isn't intuitive just because you say so. It's the users that have to be able to figure it out not the programmer who designed it. Modo 103 had the best interface for a 3D software I had ever seen. 201 is a step back as far as being intuitive. I struggled for hours with Blender and couldn't figure even the most basic things. To me it was the least intuitive of all the interfaces I'd seen. It's a nice idea and I wish it well. Personally I just bought a second copy of Maya last month and I'm thrilled with the purchase. Worth every dime.

    18. Re:What have they done for the UI? by montibbalt · · Score: 1

      The dudes who tell us that Blender had a "very fucking bad" UI are the ones who are too retarded to understand how it makes sense. All they see is a cluster of buttons.. I've tried trials of other software, only to come right back to Blender. Also don't tell me I've never done any real 3D work; I'm going to school for it. I'm going to dislike having to use 3DSM (which, incidentally, sound's like "BDSM" to someone who doesn't know what you're saying) I love never having to take my hand off the keyboard or the mouse. And most mice have 3 buttons (or 2 and a click wheel) now do it's not much of a problem anymore. Seriously, try this new Blender. You'll be impressed at how far it's come, considering no one is getting paid to develop it like those other programs. This is done in people's free time... pretty much, the money from their e-shop and donations covers server costs, I'm guessing.

    19. Re:What have they done for the UI? by aichpvee · · Score: 1

      There actually is a pretty good method to Blender's "madness", definitely a lot more so than with some of the more recent insanity introduced in The Gimp (I'm thinking particularly of having to hold shift to get a new layer without the layer size dialog). Not that I've used Blender much, but I ran through some interface tutorial on it once and it actually seemed kind of nice in a weird way.

      I'm not exactly sure what "expected conventions" is supposed to mean. If you mean like 3DS Max that'd be horrible (two years on that at school was two years too long) and hardly what I would expect. If you meant like Maya, that'd be sweet. But there'd be other people who woulnd't expect that, and probably a couple of fools who hate it.

      They should provide a way to customize the camera though.

      --
      The Farewell Tour II
    20. Re:What have they done for the UI? by labratuk · · Score: 1

      This isn't an app aimed at people who will give up after ten minutes. It's aimed at people who do 3D all day every day. The UI is designed for them. It's designed for speed.

      If you want something 'easy to pick up', I'm sure you can find something in the aisles of Target called something generic like 3D Extra Designer Pro. And you can wow us with the spinning animated gifs you make.

      That's not to say there aren't some fixes needed in the UI. (Mostly due to a feature not having been updated to the new paradigm)

      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    21. Re:What have they done for the UI? by symbolic · · Score: 1

      I think I can assure you that Blender is having no trouble at *all* in the survival department. Yes, it is difficult to master at first. The UI is always evolving, but no matter how you slice it, high-quality 3D is quite difficult no matter how many dialogs and buttons and you pile on top of it. That's just the nature of the beast. For people that need software that has been dumbed down, there's always Poser and others like it.

    22. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Implicate · · Score: 1

      I think the "convention" would be in toggling around and moving objects. If you hold alt + left, right, or middle mouse button, it allows you to move, rotate, or zoom your view. It is that way in maya and cinema 4d. In Blender and ZBrush it is totally different. I do like ZBrush now that I got used to it, but I am not happy with blender.

    23. Re:What have they done for the UI? by symbolic · · Score: 2

      I found the interface to Blender to be a raging pain and not worth the effort. If you're a starving student Animation Master sells for $300

      I'd save my money. I bought A:M quite a few years ago, and abruptly stopped supporting it when the ego-maniacal moderator of their mailing list kicked a bunch of members - some of them quite well known in the A:M community - for complaining about bugs in the software that were causing some serious stability problems. I was one of those that got kicked, and I haven't looked back since. There are a number of upgrades I could have purchased by now, but I just couldn't see continuing to support an effort in which someone's fragile ego is so firmly entrenched.

    24. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SHUT YOUR SHITHOLE dude, you never did any real world work, like you said, you are *GOING* to *SCHOOL*, you don't know shit about 3d packages and you are telling us we are too stupid to understand blender ? man, get a life, and a job.

      Also, 3dsmax doesn't have a GOOD ui. It's barely usable, better than blender, but not the best. Lightwave is barely usable too.
      Just one great point about 3dsmax is it's very good low poly modeling, the thing that made 3dsmax the reference for the game studios.

      The best UI are from Maya, XSI, Cinema4d, much more usable than your average 3d package.

    25. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Eideewt · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's probably easier for new users than users transitioning from other packages. No habits to unlearn.

    26. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Eideewt · · Score: 1

      Blender's interface isn't intuitive, but I've found it to be pretty quick, especially for mesh editing. The keystrokes are easy to use once you get the hang of them.

    27. Re:What have they done for the UI? by EntropyEngine · · Score: 1

      The UI is almost unintelligible. Sort of makes me think the guys partnered with Macromedia for the front-end development work...

    28. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Really! So the 3+ years I used lightwave were all in my imagination. Wow. I have some damn vivid dreams then.

      I suggest you come back to reality, you have been in your 3d worlds way too long to think that Maya or Lightwave specifically are "intuitive"

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    29. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for proving that you dont to crap in 3d you poser. (HA! I made a funny! you probably are one of those losers that use poser to get your human forms you 3rd rate hack!)

      Nice to see some 12 year old kid here thinking he knows anything trying to Bullshit real pros and amaters in the industry.

      I know that you have not created anything near the level of what is in the blender gallery, let alone what others in the "amateur" sector have done.

      BTW mister know nothing. the difference between an amateur and a pro is selling ONE of your works. I created CG for a Tv commercial with blender that has aired on 8 channels in prime time. What is in your portfolio?

      I origionally was treating you like an adult, but it's obvious you are a little kid trying to act big here.

      go away little boy, this place is for adults to play.

      By the way pissant. Here is something I did in 2001 when I was playing around with POVRAY, something that zero talent hacks like you dismiss right away.. It's far better than the best you created.

      city-pov

      I am pretty sure you could not create anything without your precious tools that do most of the work for you. I bet you live on using pre-existing objects and other peoples work.

    30. Re:What have they done for the UI? by schon · · Score: 1

      the UI is no more difficult than Maya or lightwave. All of these kinds of apps are simply really stinking hard to use to begin with because of the complexity you are looking at.

      Gotta say I disagree. Just because something is complex doesn't mean that it can't be presented in a simple fashion.

      I've used many, many 3D programs, from Sculpt-Animate-4D through Caligari, Imagine, Lightwave, Milkscape, and many others. Blender has the worst interface I've ever used. Caligari was second-worst (even with the instructional videotape that came in the box.) The easiest was Lightwave.

    31. Re:What have they done for the UI? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      In Blender rotation is a single-button affair. MMB rotates, shift and ctrl work as modifiers. I don't think having to press alt to rotate the view is a good idea.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    32. Re:What have they done for the UI? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Modeling knowledge is transferable between applications and most companies will hire you even if you don't know their app as long as you're good enough. I've seen plenty of artists being hired and having to learn a new application afterwards (usually a switch between Max and Maya).

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    33. Re:What have they done for the UI? by dghcasp · · Score: 1
      I think you're missing the point.

      One of the main problems with blender is its learning curve. Yes, they're are manuals, and web pages, but it many cases, they refer to an earlier version of Blender (e.g. Blender X - 0.02). Every dot release, the UI changes. Not all of it, but enough that if you're trying to figure it out from an old manual or page, you spend a lot of time going "but there IS no such button!"

      OBDisclaimer: This is from personal experience. I was curious about 3D apps, and tried to learn blender, but got too frustrated with "this panel looks nothing like that page" and just plain "why?" I ended up buying SoftImage/XSI and a commercial training DVD.

    34. Re:What have they done for the UI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a fake and i know this, because, i already knew the work of Gilles Tran and you linked "Wet Bird", made with Poser, you shithead.

      Google for the making of "Wet Bird" then tell me how you need pre-existing objets to do your work, like for the character, the cars, building, fire hydrant.. or not, because, well, you're NOT gilles tran.

    35. Re:What have they done for the UI? by NaeRey · · Score: 1

      Well I started with Blender3D because it was free, and as a hobby I had no way of spending ~3.000 dollars for some software I might never use (30-day-free-trial... did it exist?).
      I read a few tutorials, watched Beard's videoTutorials... seemed hard, but then when I clicked on the -gallery- at blender3d.org I just HAD to learn blender..
      Well after a week I was making my own little wonders(nothing compared to teh masterz).
      A week ago I finally managed to try out 3dsMAX8. Took me half an hour to install it (compared to blender's ~10second install). Then another 5minutes loading (slow laptop.. but blender goes relatively fast).. well the UI is a lot worse IMHO, the shortcut keys are ~weird (in blender it's easy to remember. B=boxSelect. S=size. x=remove (ctrl-x=cut in everything). E=extrude....
      On maya7 it's pretty strange too. IIRC, q=size,w=move,e=somethingelse...

      I think Blender is a real good place to start, especially if you are on a low budget. The online tutorials (Blender:Noob to Pro, Blender3D:Go Pro!, video tutorials, and especially with the ongoing Summer Of Documentation) are many, and the community is very friendly. There's not THAT many plugins as in 3ds, but it's really easy to do if you know Python (which is t00-EZ to learn).

  4. Just maybe by suso · · Score: 2, Funny

    but why not have a mode for those who want instant gratification by using "expected" conventions

    Maybe its because those that want instant gratification only end up making shiny metal spheres on checkerboard planes.

    1. Re:Just maybe by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Maybe its because those that want instant gratification only end up making shiny metal spheres on checkerboard planes.

      And when they get board of that, they then may try the productive UI.

    2. Re:Just maybe by SharkJumper · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ah! You're familiar with my work!

    3. Re:Just maybe by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Working with spheres and checkered planes is a great way to learn the very basics of primitive shapes, shading, and materials. What would you suggest as a first step for someone learning a new GUI and workflow? Creating a full-motion feature film?

      And, if someone just wants to fool around with raytracing rather than producing a professional animation, what the heck is wrong with doing just that?

      Blender's GUI is totally different from other 3D apps I've used. I used to play with Truespace a lot (created elaborate landscapes, mainly canyons and riverbeds, and flythroughs), I've done some real work in Bryce and Maya (I didn't have to pay for Maya, an acquaintance has it and I just had to do a still splash screen), and the workflow for those apps are similar enough that if you feel comfortable in one you pick the others right up. The difference between, say, TrueSpace and Bryce is like comparing Photoshop with Paint Shop Pro. Yes, they're different but similar enough to know right away which tool does what. (FWIW, I've done only very, very small projects in 3D, but have enough appreciation for what it takes to be impressed by The Elephants Dream, and what ILM must have had to go through to make the Star Wars flicks just blows my mind).

      Comparing the other 3D apps to Blender is like comparing Photoshop to The Gimp - the workflow is different, the menus are different, the tools are different. You need to un-learn Photoshop habits to become productive in The Gimp. Blender is so different that you need to unlearn a lot. BTW, if you check forums and mailing lists for Blender, you'll see that there are folks who have stated the same; if you come from another app, you have to un-learn those and it can be more difficult to pick up Blender's workflow, but if you don't know other 3D apps and start from scratch, it may be easier to pick up.

      I've been wanting to play with Blender more for quite a while, but my ATI cards don't cooperate. :(

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    4. Re:Just maybe by sakusha · · Score: 0
      Comparing the other 3D apps to Blender is like comparing Photoshop to The Gimp - the workflow is different, the menus are different, the tools are different. You need to un-learn Photoshop habits to become productive in The Gimp.

      Yeah, with Gimp, you need to unlearn habits like using CMYK, using accurate mode conversions, color management, etc. You know, the stuff that means the difference between amateurs and professionals.

      This is a big reason why nobody takes open source seriously: amateurs who know nothing about actual professional work environments, declaring some primitive open source software as equivalent to the top-end industry-standard proprietary software package. If Blender was all that good, pro animators would be using it instead of paying big bucks for Maya Unlimited.

      Open source has its place in the workflow. I went to a Maya seminar about 5 years ago, I think it was the v3.5 launch, that featured some student animators who coordinated all their work through custom open source apps. I forget the specific details, but they set up an Apache/Linux/PHP web server with a message board to coordinate work assignments, used a version control package to coordinate changes to the models, and wrote their own PHP-based render farm management. I was pretty impressed, managing dozens of students with little pieces of a major project. But the modeling and animation was done solely in Maya.
    5. Re:Just maybe by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      This is a big reason why nobody takes open source seriously


      I call BS on that. LOTS of companies (and individuals) take open source very, very seriously. Industrial Light & Magic uses open source tools, WETA Digital uses open source tools. Hell, Disney spoonsred the WINE-project to get Photoshop to run on Linux through WINE, so they obviously take open source very seriously, why else would they want to run Photoshop on Linux, instead of Windows or Mac?. And then we have those zillion non-CGI related companies that use open source for various tasks. About 70% of the top 500 supercomputers run on Linux! And here you are saying that NOBODY takes open source seriously? Hell, it's quite obvious that even Microsoft takes open source seriously!

      Seriously: Are you a retard or something? Do you have ANY idea what you are talking about?
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    6. Re:Just maybe by sakusha · · Score: 1

      Apparently you stopped reading when my critical remark made your head explode. I clearly described how open source has a role in animation workflows. It just hasn't got any role in the major apps that do the real work. You said it yourself, Disney tried to get Photoshop running under WINE, rather than trying to get GIMP to replace Photoshop.

      The power players in professional animation are serious pro development shops, Autodesk (Maya, 3DS, Flame, Inferno, MotionBuilder etc.) Pixar (Renderman), Avid (XSI), Apple (Shake), 2d3 (boujou), d2 (Nuke) etc etc. None of these apps are open source.

    7. Re:Just maybe by 10Ghz · · Score: 1
      Apparently you stopped reading when my critical remark made your head explode. I clearly described how open source has a role in animation workflows.


      Open source in various different forms is widely used in CGI. That is a fact. And if no-one takes open source seriously, why did Disny insist on running Photoshop on open source OS? Clearly they do take open source seriously, even though the actual app might be closed.

      And you quite clearly said that "nobody takes open source seriously". Well, since we already have a film (Elephants Dream) that is made with open source tools, I think that it's safe to say that your claim is BS.
      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    8. Re:Just maybe by Peganthyrus · · Score: 1

      If it's running on top of Linux boxes instead of Windows, that's one less Windows license they had to buy. Multiply it by however many machines they have, and you might be talking real money - enough to pay a staff coder or two to keep WINE working.

      Also I'm not sure, but I think their custom ink-and-paint system runs on Linux. So you might well have a situation where people have that on their secondary desk*, and sometimes need to use Photoshop. Dual-booting is a pain in the ass.

      *the primary desk of course being an animator's desk, with an animation disc and cubbies for lots of paper - people have experimented with paperless animation, but sometimes you just need to grab a crayon or something and scrawl out super-crude roughs!

      --
      egypt urnash minimal art.
    9. Re:Just maybe by yoyhed · · Score: 1

      Man, you're completely missing his argument. He wasn't attacking open source in general; in fact, he commended its ability to coordinate those students' projects (of course, once you saw anything negative about open source, I'm sure you stopped reading and started writing a zealous reply, so maybe you didn't see that).

      He was commenting on open source's role in professional artistic applications, not in general (specifically open source APPLICATIONS, not OPERATING SYSTEMS, which you're so zealously defending). I don't think he meant "nobody" takes OSS seriously, maybe just most professionals in the field.

      And honestly, your whole Disney argument falls through because it supports his original argument: they wanted PHOTOSHOP running on Linux, which clearly has an OSS alternative. Why? Professionals need PROFESSIONAL tools, and GIMP doesn't cut it for every application these companies use Photoshop for.

      Both your replies are completely missing his point, and clinging to the literal meaning of one phrase he wrote. Not every negative statement about something is an attack on it as a whole.

      --
      WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
  5. Elephants? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    are the result of the production of Elephants Dream, the first Open Movie.

    Uh, the *last* thing I want to see is a Replublican's wetdream :-)

    1. Re:Elephants? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... the liberal has a dirty mind ...

    2. Re:Elephants? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the conservative doesn't???

      hmmm

      okay : \

    3. Re:Elephants? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a liberal is someone who has a dirty mind and acts on it, not repressing it.

      a conservative is someone who has a dirty mind and not only tries to repress it, but tries to prevent others from acting on their free will as well. And of course, the conservative ends up acting on it just the same.

      If you think it's just Democrats who bonk their interns you are waaay naive.

  6. It should be named Blender 3.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Really, the list of new features and improvements is so impressive that, were it a company product, it would surely be named "3.0", not puny 2.42 (after 2.41)...

    1. Re:It should be named Blender 3.0 by Speare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seriously, look through the back changelogs-- there's a HUGE list of new features and capabilities and tweaks and improvements on EVERY dot release. Yet it's still binary-compatible with ancient .blend files (and the ancient versions of blender can load the newer .blend files ignoring for future parameters). Pretty impressive really.

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    2. Re:It should be named Blender 3.0 by It'sYerMam · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In the past year or so, every single release has something that got the modeller in me excited. Each time, there has been at least one feature that is almost immediately applicable, usually more, and with a raft of bugfixes and minor features that I doubt I'll use. Blender has been for quite a while a very impressive piece of software, and that is ignoring the fact that it is free. It is one of the main, (in my opinion) achievements of the F/OSS movement, and is competable with professional applications. If development continues at this rate, I expect is will quite possible be better than its expensive competitors.

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    3. Re:It should be named Blender 3.0 by stuuf · · Score: 1

      Actually, Blender 3.0 would have come and gone years ago. At the rate they've been adding features, by now it should be "Blender WorldStudio CR 9.0 Professional." Oh well, at least they're helping put an end to the people who try to compare the maturity of completely different products by looking at version numbers alone.

      --

      Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it

    4. Re:It should be named Blender 3.0 by lee7guy · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is one of the main, (in my opinion) achievements of the F/OSS movement

      Except that it was developed by a company as a commercial product and later released as open source. I am not trying to diminish the (impressive) efforts made after they released the source, only stating the fact.

      (That is, Photoshop would also qualify as one of the most impressive OSS projects if Adobe released the source.)

      --
      Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam
    5. Re:It should be named Blender 3.0 by It'sYerMam · · Score: 1

      As I recall, when I first used it, I found it awful. When it was first released as open source, it was, I am led to believe, barely useable - in spite of what people tell you about the interface just being "different." So yes, a lot of the groundwork was laid by commercial programming, but hot damn, has it come on since then. With the amount of recoding they do, I expect there will be little original code left, shortly.

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
  7. Re:eh hem. by ari_j · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You need a quote checker, too. "Necessity is the mother of invention." and "The best invention is necessity." do not mean the same thing. :)

  8. Wow... by dubmun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Blender has really come a long way since we tried to use it to program our game Log Cabin Adventure in it back when I was getting my BS in CS. I always liked it's UI better than 3DSM but it seems like their feature sets are getting closer and closer as well.

    --
    (end of post)
    1. Re:Wow... by mctk · · Score: 1

      I always thought CS was one of the few things you couldn't BS.

      --
      Paul Grosfield - the quicker picker upper.
    2. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? People are always bullshiting during counter strike.

    3. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I always liked it's UI" = "I always liked it is UI"

      You mean "its UI", mmmkay?

  9. Open Moves bad for America by MarkByers · · Score: 4, Funny

    Watching so called 'Open Movies' is Communistic and hurts the American economy. In particular it hurts us. There's no such thing as a free lunch. You get what you pay for. Open movies contain viruses and trojans. Sharing open movies is illegal in most countries.

    Don't download this movie or we will sue you. We know you broke the law when you were 14 years old. We have it on record.

    Your friends,
    The MPAA.

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
    1. Re:Open Moves bad for America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha (aside from the fact you misspelled Movies). The MPAA has never sued anyone for creating their own content (mistakes from their automated techniques nonwithstanding). Of course you can believe the party line, or you can actually ask people who create free content if the MPAA has pursued them. Quite frankly it just urks this forum that you can't get MPAA content free, and resent anyone who prevents you from doing so.

  10. Cool by yfkar · · Score: 2, Informative
    Great! Congrats to Ton and the rest of the developer team.

    It's always nice to see that every new release pushes Blender substantially forward. Especially the nodes are a nice addition.

  11. just FYI by christurkel · · Score: 2, Informative

    This release also sees official support for Irix restored. It had been been built for Irix but unsupported

    --

    CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
    1. Re:just FYI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that's not quite true. We're still in the process of restoring irix compatibility, (basically the game engine and fluid simulators won't be supported, since they use newer ISO C++ features not supported by the irix compiler).

      Joe

  12. Re:eh hem. by suso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wasn't quoting your mother. I wasn't quoting anyone. I was just SAYING IT ON MY OWN.

  13. oh great, now blender gets slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been using blender for quite a while, I've been using the 2.42 RC3 package for a while, Its really getting quite easy. And yes the interface is kinda wierd, but then again, I have yet to figure out how maya's interface works. Its all a learning curve, just for some people its learning Blender, for others its learning 3d studio max, or maya, or the slew of other 3d packages out there. Personally, I prefer free(gratis), and the plus that its also free(open source) is very cool.

    Now that i've talked blender up. Why did you have to go and take down the whole site. I did kinda want to download the new version sometime :(

  14. I'm not trying to troll, but... by oldosadmin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has anyone seen Elephants Dream? It's a horrible movie. Sure the 3d stuff is cool, but that's not what I want advertised everywhere as "the product of open source". The movie is *bad*. We're talking worse than Gigli, seriously.

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
    1. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so what, its build on open tools make your own story :)

    2. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by freqmod · · Score: 1

      I think the move is quite good, but they should have gotten someone to make a decent story. The move (and story) was made by 3d artists & programmers, and not story authors. The best story would probably be made in collaboration between story authors and 3d artists to make a decent story while showing off new 3d features.

    3. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen Gigli (and I think I'm glad), so I can't compare the 2.

      But Elephant's Dream does lack of a lot of the things that make a movie successful. You know, plot, good voice acting, good dialog... that stuff. the only things it DOES have going for it are pretty good CG and a neat idea. Oh, and it's free.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    4. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by oldosadmin · · Score: 1

      I agree wholeheartedly. This is also why most OSS games don't have good textures, they are made by programmers, not gfx artists.

      --
      Jay | http://oldos.org
    5. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hate to point this out to you and ruin a perfectly good rant against hobbyists and open source jacks-of-all-trades, but they hired a professional screenwriter to write the script. They asked him for "artsy" and that's what he gave them. Sure, it's not Pixar by any stretch of the imagination, since Eddy Murphy's not providing the voice of a wisecracking fax machine, but there's a hell of a lot going on in ED. It's crafted like a puzzlebox, with multilayered symbolism hidden in the imagery and dialogue. It wasn't meant for saturday matinees, it was made for the art film festivals. If that not your cup of tea, that's fine, but don't decry it as "crap" and insist that just because you didn't see it, there must be nothing there. Film is subjective, not objective.

      (Disclaimer: I'm not really a huge fan of arthouse films. I know 'em when I see em, and I'll give 'em the respect they deserve, but I usually end up watching Hollywood's output.)

        Oh, and it's completely open. If you can do a mean Eddie Murphy Fax-machine voice, you're free to render your own Dream.

    6. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by Dasaan · · Score: 1

      Considering the voice acting was done gratis it's not *that* bad. You want real bad voice acting then try watching some fan-dubbed anime, the first episode of Prince of Tennis for example, aweful.

      The rest you have right, the story and dialog is pretty crappy. But for a real-world demo of what can be done with blender it is an impressive piece of work. If you don't agree then put your money where your mouth is and make your own CG movie for the same budget.

      --
      XP is basicly 98 with a lot more extra features to hunt down and disable. --Dram
    7. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by LindseyJ · · Score: 1

      The people who say these sorts of things are the people whom I envision sitting in smoke-filled coffee houses in the wee hours, wearing black long-sleeved shirts and berets and hipster glasses, and snapping at each others' bongo-accompanied 'artsy' poetry, then leaving to go to some artsy movie festival where something like this movie would be playing. Staring down their noses at people too uncouth to understand the deeper symbolism and meaning behind their higher artforms. In short, I look at them like Litchfield from Instant Classic.

      Like the parent, I'm not trying to troll, but I'd wager my views are held by a lot of your everyday people. And most professional graphic artists are just everyday people off the clock. If they're trying to send this message out as an example of the 'open-source' mentality, I think they're making a little bit of a mistake.

      Yes, the movie looks amazing. As an example of what their software is capable of in the right hands (regardless of what people have been saying about it being user-unfriendly (IANA3DA)), it's a shoo-in. Anyone can see that. But as the first example of an 'Open Movie' (don't get me started) - and one that's probably going to get some press at that - I don't know what to think of it.

    8. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Has anyone seen Elephants Dream? It's a horrible movie. Sure the 3d stuff is cool, but that's not what I want advertised everywhere as "the product of open source"."

      I bolded the important part of your post. Lots of us were talking about switching to Maya after that horrible Star Wars movie came out.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    9. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by SirSlud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're looking down your nose at a strawman you think is looking down its nose at you.

      Gotcha.

      Lighten up. =) It is true that some people can eek out a deeper meaning in more abstract forms of communication; some people come out of a play going, "Okay, Tom ran away from his home, then screwed Lily underneath a tree in a park, then his brother came and got him, and they both went home." Some people (note I'm not saying better people, or more sophisticated, or more intelligent people) come away from some plays with the suspicion or hypothesis that the playright was making snide social commentary on social disenfranchisement brought on by the increased population growth of the suburbs. Anybody who looks down on anybody else for not interpreting art or theatre at the level the artist is intending to communicate is really no different than people who suspect everybody that likes 'arthouse' art is a snobby elitist .. you're both missing the point. Live and let live.

      That said, I saw the movie, and I didn't think it was even meant to be particularly deep. I was annoyed by the dialog, but in its defence it was clearly translated, and not very successfully it would appear.

      Funny comic, but coming from an arts background and knowing the scene pretty well, these 'art snobs' I hear so much are pretty damn rare (and I've never ever EVER seen one in a beret, lol.) It does seem to be a stereotype that lots of people can agree to hate tho .. it brings us together. :)

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    10. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by LindseyJ · · Score: 1

      So you're looking down your nose at a strawman you think is looking down its nose at you.

      Haha, I knew somebody would come back with that :)

      You're right, though, and I see your point. But I believe the point I was making is still valid. As much as we can agree to disagree, as it were, there are others that are not so open-minded. It's like that OO.org ad that was in some NYC paper a little while back. This is the face that the open-source community is starting to show the world, and it's bound to be compared to the proprietary products it's trying to emulate. And when it doesn't have that same spit-n-polish to it, people will just say "You get what you pay for" and continue using those other "better" products.

      Again, this is just my opinion. And for what it's worth, I did know an artsy snob-type guy once. And he did wear a beret ;)

    11. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by symbolic · · Score: 1

      Disney has plenty of movies waiting for you at your local video rental outlet.

    12. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by westlake · · Score: 1
      Disney has plenty of movies waiting for you at your local video rental outlet.

      which is not a bad place to be if you want to generate the money and exposure needed to make Blender a must-have tool for the professional in animation.

    13. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by SirSlud · · Score: 1

      Well, hey waitaminute, you never said you lived in New York. I take it all back. ;)

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    14. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by symbolic · · Score: 1

      For those that work in the production of the pop-cultural, money-driven industry, yes, that's true. However, I believe that people will continue push Blender in ways that will drive its future development - *other* people, not necessarily those working for Disney and Pixar. Because of this, I think Blender stands a good chance of continuing to gain ground. It may *never* be *as good* as the tools used by these studios, but at some point, it may very well be good enough to accomplish 95% of what the studios can manage.

    15. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Like the parent, I'm not trying to troll, but I'd wager my views are held by a lot of your everyday people"

      (Diff AC than GP.)

      You hit the nail. Everyday people will probably enjoy Disney way more. People who e.g. like/used Blender, who like the initiative, who like indy and artsy movies, dislike Hollywood, etcetera (a minority in society) will probably enjoy ED. Thing is, the most popular/bigger group/opinion is not necessarily the "correct" one as far as that is even possible w/sth subjective as art.

      I've seen both 'types' of movies and would say this: 1) sometimes differentiating on this kind of type doesn't say ath about quality similar to OSS vs closed source software. 2) they each have their own advantages and disadvantages. Some subjects, issues, elements you never see in one or another.

      The movie may be used to show people what Blender is capable of. I mean potential users. Think of it. You may be cheaper off paying someone to implement a feature in Blender and using that inhouse, than buying say Maya (or far less Maya licenses). If not now, perhaps in future. Those potential users look "through" whatever the storyline is because such is not what they're interested in or looking for when they watch a movie made by a potential powerful tool they could use freely as well. A sublime storyline is no big point in that regard

      (I've not watched the movie yet, btw.)

    16. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by gowen · · Score: 1
      but they hired a professional screenwriter to write the script.
      So did Gigli...
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    17. Re:I'm not trying to troll, but... by ryanw · · Score: 1
      So did Gigli...


      HAHAHHA, EXACTLY! I thought this movie's technical stuff rocked, but dialog, script, story, just didn't work.
  15. My impressions of Elephant's Dream. by enitime · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "See, the best invention really is neccesity. They should try to make a movie every year or two."


    In future they should try to get better writers. I saw the Elephant's Dream movie, and technically it's not too bad. The models seemed fairly on-par with most "real" 3D animation feature movies. The animation was worse, but at least still around what you get on those 3D animated kids' shows or in-game cut-scenes. I was more impressed than I thought I'd be.

    But did anyone think that story was any good? I didn't. And with all the stories and fan-fiction out there surely there must be hordes of aspiring writers out there who would like nothing more than a movie based on one of their scripts, even if it means making it creative common licensed. If nothing else, it gets their name on IMDB. That's a decent foot-in-the-door these days, if they're looking for a career. Then you perfect it with collaborative writing, TV-show style, where a whole team of writing staff have input (or in this case the whole Internet.)

    Couldn't get open-sourcier than that.

    But get WRITERS to do it. I'd bet good money this thing was written by animators and modelers. If you're a professional-level animator/modeler you're probably not a professional-level writer. No one's good at everything. Get over your egos and suck it up.

    I guess it's the same problem open source programmers have with, for example, user interfaces or documentation. "It's just a minor detail, what really matters is this other aspect. Besides, how hard can it be? I'll do it myself."

    1. Re:My impressions of Elephant's Dream. by joshier · · Score: 1

      I agree, I did enjoy elephants dream for the visual quality, and the fact that it was made in an open and free environment (aka software).. But yes, story was awful. But as you point out that the modellers/animators can't be story writers, in my belief is wrong. I think (I don't know) but I'm pretty sure that none of them would attempt that. I have experience in the computer graphic area, and it's becoming more and more important to excel in one small area, for example - modelling or texturing - and the industry is really blatantly telling these 3d graphic enthusiasts that that is how it is, therefore I don't personally believe any of them would write the story - they know the deal with 'not being good at everything' Anyway, I really do hope they carry on doing this, as a poster above said.

    2. Re:My impressions of Elephant's Dream. by ramunasg · · Score: 1

      I think the story was one of the strongest part of the movie. It has sureal, uncertain mood, like watching one of "Twin Peaks" episodes. Yes I agree with you on with animation part, but I have no complaints about the story.

    3. Re:My impressions of Elephant's Dream. by symbolic · · Score: 1, Insightful

      But did anyone think that story was any good?

      I did, for several reasons. Perhaps the most salient is that it wasn't the typical sugar-coated, start-to-finish, spoon-fed, junk. It was thought-provoking, and open to interpretation. This doesn't work with a lot of people, but it's only because they're too young to understand it, or they're old enough, but fail to allow themselves to think in more abstract terms.

    4. Re:My impressions of Elephant's Dream. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, some of us may have been put off by the fact that half the dialogue consisted of the name 'Emo'...

    5. Re:My impressions of Elephant's Dream. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever. The "story" was terrible. I was trying really hard to make sense of it, but anyone can flash some images in front of you and leave you to interpret it however you feel. It takes a good writer to actually have something communicated and understood without being too vague or too descriptive. The story was terrible, cool effects though.

  16. Sequence editor by freqmod · · Score: 1

    Even if it isn't the main purpose of the program the sequence editor has been improved too, e.g support for FFMPEG formats, longer movies etc. At last a working relativly stable NLE on linux.

    (and yes I know about LiVES, Kino and others, but I they have been unstable and with a diffecoult interface, even if the interface of Blender takes a while to get used to.)

    1. Re:Sequence editor by arose · · Score: 1

      Cinelerra is quite stable these days and not too difficult.

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  17. Run Away Now! by pipingguy · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Lock up your hookers, money, cigars and booze!

    Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about Bender.

  18. Re:eh hem. by ari_j · · Score: 1

    Nobody said anything about my mother, but rather the mother of invention. Regardless, the way you worded it, using the word "really," implied that you were indicating that someone else was correct in saying it. But, if you weren't quoting anyone, can you explain what you mean? "The best invention really is necessity." Did the Blender team invent necessity?

  19. Re:eh hem. by Score+Whore · · Score: 1
    I was just SAYING IT ON MY OWN.


    Whether you were quoting someone or just have the verbal diarrhea, it makes no sense. It's kind of like saying "the best invention is starvation."
  20. XSI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I'm a fan of Softimage's XSI

    It has a free mod tool for those who want to play around and learn the system (also excellent for game mods, hence the name)
    It has a personal seat that sells for $495 so it is affordable for people to purchase for hobby/indie game usage.

    http://www.softimage.com/products/xsi/default.aspx

    I believe that it was also used to make Half-Life 2

    1. Re:XSI by suckmysav · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is the seat leather upholstered or just some cheap material?

      --
      "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
  21. P.S. by Jack+Action · · Score: 0, Redundant

    It also makes the baby Jesus cry.

  22. Wow...Plugins. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    For ME, the most important thing is the running of plugins* ment for other 3D tools. A lot of games release development plugins for 3Dmax. Fine if that's what you have. Not so fine if you don't.

    *Number two is the running of published scripts.

    BTW how well does Blender do hair, fur and cloth, along with particle effects like water and fire?

    1. Re:Wow...Plugins. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      That's impossible due to the different data structures used and since MAX uses a proprietary scripting language. Hell, they can't even get MAX to be compatible with MAX pluugins for other versions, how could an opensource project without any access to the specifications compete there? Your best bet is to look at any file specifications released and build your own exporter.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  23. Open Source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Then where is the script and story board? As an open source zealot I need these things!

    1. Re:Open Source? by labratuk · · Score: 1

      All on the DVD. Though you'll probably be able to find someone who has mirrored the whole thing on the web somewhere.

      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
  24. my experiences with Blender & 3ds max by edxwelch · · Score: 2, Informative

    I tried an earlier version of Blender and liked it, but I had to switch to 3DS max because blender didn't support an export format that I needed. I like 3DS max as well, but it suffers from a big focus problem that Blender doesn't have. There are mouse shortcuts for zooming panning and rotating, but they only work when the window has focus and the main window is always loosing focus.
    The one gripe with both packages I have is why is it so difficult to paint texture on an object?

    1. Re:my experiences with Blender & 3ds max by fobsta · · Score: 1

      'point to focus' means faster workflow in applications In the Irix version of Maya I would just move the pointer to get window focus. In the Windows port of Maya you have to move your pointer and then click on the window border (or header). When your working with 3d apps full time this can save you click a few mouse clicks.

    2. Re:my experiences with Blender & 3ds max by joshier · · Score: 1

      Maxon cinema 4d with bodypaint will fulfill your needs, I'm too lazy to link, but yeah, it's really fun and easy to visuaully paint.

      Also, Zbrush is also very good for this kind of thing (better than bodypaint)

    3. Re:my experiences with Blender & 3ds max by edxwelch · · Score: 1

      A lot of time I am doing very low-res work and just need a quick and dirty way to paint some texture on an object. A one-click method to fill a poligon with a colour is needed. I did used bodypaint (there's a m3ds max plug-in), but it doesn't have this feature. I thought Bodypaint 3d really was really too complicated for the simple stuff I was trying to do.

    4. Re:my experiences with Blender & 3ds max by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the Windows users need turn on x-window-mouse-behaviour in Windows, I think it's a PowerToy or in TweakUI.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
  25. Re:eh hem. by suso · · Score: 1, Funny

    There are plenty of things in this world that don't make any sense. Especially things people say. Honestly, I've heard people say it both ways.

    If all of you want to get stupidly technical about all this, then try this on. To say that necessity is the mother of all invention implies that necessity is an invetion, since its other invention's mother and all. Unless of course necessity copulated with another species of concept in order to create an new hybrid species to create a new one which we now call invention.

    Sound insane? I must be to keep posting my thoughts to slashdot.

  26. Not even close by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "support for anisotropic materials"

    Wow, so Blender is only 15 years behind the times now?

    Sorry, I think I'll stick with maya for making movies

    1. Re:Not even close by fobsta · · Score: 1

      Maya 1.0 was released in 1998. It didn't have anistropic material support until later versions. I guess Blender is only a decade or so behind our glorious leader. Both packages could learn a great deal from one another.

    2. Re:Not even close by Qbertino · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "support for anisotropic materials"

      Wow, so Blender is only 15 years behind the times now?

      Sorry, I think I'll stick with maya for making movies


      Sorry, but you're a dick. I hope Autodesk, Mayas new owner, makes you pay through the nose, Mr. Oh-I'm-so-professional Moviemaker. Allthoug I doubt you've got a legal licence. Then I hope they sue your ass off.
      Finally Blender has overcome the largest part of it's shortcomings compared to bizarely priced 3D Studio Crap and Co. and all you've got is a wiseass remark. Let's see you're great "Maya Movie Work". I doubt it comes even near Elefants Dream in any respect.
      In case you haven't gotten the drift yet: Blender is on the fast lane to becoming the 3D industries business model nightmare and allready is causing prices to drop and quality rising left, right and center. Try that with Gimp vs. Photoshop.

      Bottom line: Quit being a jerk and give the Blender team some credit and cudos allready. If anybody deserves it in the OSS design app dept. it's them first. Many times over.

      --
      We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    3. Re:Not even close by PostPhil · · Score: 1

      I heard about the new release from Blendernation before it was Slashdotted, and I could already see the countless trolling of "Blender's GUI isn't like my other 3D app" or "Maya's had that feature for years". Yadda yadda.

      Feature-wise, Blender has many advantages over the other apps. Sometimes you can be a master at being a jack-of-all-trades (ironically), regardless if you are the best at any one thing. Blender is a production pipeline from top to bottom, including compositing that is integrated with the rest of the rendering pipeline and video editing. Blender also has decent built-in support for using Python to access its internals. Python alone is a great language, capable of serious programming from filesystems (e.g. using FUSE) to net protocols (e.g. Twisted), and the possibilities with Blender are endless. Sorry, but Maya still doesn't have comparable scripting power like this at its disposal. The point is not to say that Maya is bad, but rather that Blender has a lot of things going for it that makes it worthwhile in its own right.

      Aside from feature comparisons, Blender's advantage is that it's open source. Maybe Maya will stay popular, maybe it won't, or maybe it'll get acquired by another company that might ruin it as a product. An interesting thing to notice is that community enthusiasm is different between proprietary and open source apps. Maya users tend to be enthusiastic about using Maya because of its feature set or becuase it's considered "professional". But I've seen some users turn on Maya once they started using ZBrush, probably because it gives them an easier way to make bragging-rights-quality organic models. Blender users like Blender because it is different than professional apps in its philosophy, and because they see that they have a role in Blender's future potential. Sometimes even the pure novelty of such a great project being open source is enough to keep users interested.

      All this taken together, Blender is quite unique.

  27. Re:eh hem. by Score+Whore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It has nothing to do with being stupidly technical. It has to do with language. When it is said "necessity is the mother of invention" anyone with even a little bit of intelligence can identify that it's not a literal statement of fact, it's figurative. That same person will then think about what it might mean. Then being the marginally smart person they are, they will see the idea being expressed and the particularily articulate way that idea was expressed.

    Your statement of "the best invention really is necessity" makes very little sense. At it's most literal, no one will agree with you. What is so great about necessity? Even taken figuratively... well, there's nothing figurative about it. If you've heard people say that and you connected it to the famous "necessity is the mother of invention", then you either didn't understand what they said or both you and the speaker aren't very good at the english language.

    I realize that english is a living language, but even so if you want people to take you seriously and be persuaded by what you have to say, you need to use the language in a skilled fashion. Being articulate, forming complex ideas with efficient use of words, and constructing logical statements is the very basics of being a proficient communicator.

  28. Physics better, but still bad by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative

    Tried the new physics engine, by dropping a cube and a cone onto a slanted plane. Things are definitely better than in 2.41, where the objects just hit the plane and stuck. Now they hit, bounce a bit, and slowly fall to align with the plane. They start to slide.

    Then the cone goes spinning and flying off into space. Huge conservation of energy violation. Oops.

    The Bullet Physics guys don't have sliding friction right yet. But they're making progress.

    1. Re:Physics better, but still bad by fobsta · · Score: 1

      I just tried a falling cone onto a plane and it works perfectly here (Win2k).

    2. Re:Physics better, but still bad by Eideewt · · Score: 1

      Ooh, that's cool. The old engine did underwhelm me a little.

    3. Re:Physics better, but still bad by Animats · · Score: 1

      Try tilting the plane, so that the cone should slide slowly once it stops bouncing. Set "No sleeping", so it doesn't come to rest and stop too soon. Set the collision mode on everything to "Convex Hull Polytope", so the cone isn't treated as a box.

      This is failing for point-down, flat side down, and cone side down orientations.

      You should be able to model a spinning top with the cone. Spin it up, watch it precess and slow down, then fall over and roll around a bit. That's a basic validity test for a single rigid body system.

    4. Re:Physics better, but still bad by Animats · · Score: 0

      Actually, you can probably use this engine just fine for "destructable environments". It's OK for blowing stuff up. Just turn up the damping and don't set "no sleeping", and all the debris will come to rest.

      But if you want to do hard stuff where the physics matters, like legged characters with real physics, it's not there yet.

    5. Re:Physics better, but still bad by erwincoumans · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thanks for the report, John! I'll definately look into it and try to fix it for next release! In the meanwhile, please try out the latest physics demos here: http://download.blender.org/demo/test/engine-physi cs-demos-2.42-preview34.zip

  29. Hair please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Still waiting for a way to give my characters hair-hair, with real hair physics and principles. Right now you still have to combine static particles and physics deflectors, which is but a crude hack and only really useful if you want to make your characters look like Ziggy Stardust.

  30. Re:eh hem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, just SHUT UP and stop hounding him, okay? Seriously, go get a life.

  31. Desk Blend by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    How about a Blender upgrade to a window manager that pipes graphics to Blender in realtime? Not just screengrabs, but any rendering being sent to the screen, before getting dressed in the widgets, or including them. With loopback to let us Blendo our desktops as we use them.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Desk Blend by deathguppie · · Score: 1

      That is actually a pretty funny comment. To create ED Ton and company used a render farm of servers to render scenes in excess of 1GB of texture space. If you can find me a graphics card that can handle that much texture space, I'll buy it!

      On the other side of things, b2cs will enable you to use what you can hardware graphics render pipeline in the near future (that is when Jorrit can find time to work on it again), but what you see in the window will not be able to handle more than what your card will. Besides the fact that CS's render pipeline will not render the same as the blender internal renderer. So you won't be able to see what your eventual renders will be like.

      That said, for game developers, b2cs will be a god send. I just hope someone writes a good UT2007 export script. =)

      --
      once more into the breach
    2. Re:Desk Blend by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it would be useful for rendering games or movies. I thought it would give better control and retouching to general app graphics. "Realtime" not in FPS but as opposed to exporting to an interactive or scripted retouching shell.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  32. Yeah, why can't they make a violin easier to play? by shadowman99 · · Score: 1

    Or a piano? Why can't you make music with just hitting one or two keys? Oh yeah, there is such a musical instrament. It's called a radio.

    Building 3d models is work. I spend months on mine. If you want to download a Tie Fighter and hit the 'render' button and pretend you 'know 3d', whatever.

    The software isn't the problem. Your expectations of how easy/difficult 3d work is off the mark.

  33. Consider it a technology demo. by shadowman99 · · Score: 1

    From the outset the 'look' of Elephant Dream and the creative process were given higher priority than the story telling. It is a movie by first time movie makers.

    As such, it's visually amazing for a shoestring budget and small team that produced it. And every visual in the movie was created with Free software. That was the main point, Emo.

    1. Re:Consider it a technology demo. by oldosadmin · · Score: 1

      As I said, 3d stuff = cool, but overall movie = terrible.

      --
      Jay | http://oldos.org
  34. So where's the PPC 10.4 version? by warrigal · · Score: 1

    The PPC 10.3 version won't launch on 10.4. The only 10.4 version is i386. No, I won't buy a new Mac just to run Blender.

    I have a nasty feeling that this is the tip of a very worrying iceberg.

    1. Re:So where's the PPC 10.4 version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have a few more choices than you think.
      1. You could move to linux(or install a vm or a compatibility layer for ppc linux) and run blender for ppc linux(seeing as it seems native on linux)
      2. You could download the source code and build blender so that you have a native build of the latest version (Which would probably be a lot more convenient for you)
      3. Use Virtual pc and run the windows version
      4. Complain because no one has contributed a ppc OS 10.4 build to the blender project(and continue not having a build for your favorite platform)

      Yes I realize building it on your own can be a pain in the ass but you have to consider that it's very likely most of the developers use windows or linux, and the ones who use OS 10 probably don't have OS 10.4 on PPC. This is mainly because it is a free project and they aren't getting paid to make sure it runs on every possible architecture on every possible OS. If it were being created by Microsoft you would have had a valid point though, and the source wouldn't be available to you. Good luck on whatever option you choose.

    2. Re:So where's the PPC 10.4 version? by labratuk · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So? Build your own. I'm sick of seeing mac users who think Free software is a free lunch that they're entitled to.

      --
      Malike Bamiyi wanted my assistance.
    3. Re:So where's the PPC 10.4 version? by pHatidic · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are two versions, one for if you have the newest version of Python and one for if you don't. You probably have the older version of Python installed and downloaded the wrong one.

    4. Re:So where's the PPC 10.4 version? by daverabbitz · · Score: 1

      Option 2 is the only reasonable option, as there is no Ati or Nvidia drivers for Linux/PPC (last time I checked), and as Blender is highly GPU intensive, you aren't going to have much luck running it without hardware support, which also eliminates using Virtual PC (which would be dog slow even if it did have Accelerated OpenGL (Does it?)).

      Option 4 is not an option because people who complain about things they could fix themselves, especially when they're expecting something for nothing are dicks.

      --
      What could be better than a jet powered motorcycle? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8l6GTHLSWE
    5. Re:So where's the PPC 10.4 version? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The PPC 10.3 version works fine on 10.4. Just get the one with python 2.3.

  35. Cool to see more project-driven development by Two99Point80 · · Score: 1

    It's worked before, as when Todd Rundgren's "Change Myself" drove development of Lightwave. Not to mention a certain sci-fi show...

  36. Re:eh hem. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get fucked.

  37. Re:and it doesn't even play in Windows by Minshu · · Score: 1

    You have too much faith in Windows Media Player. You should know better than to NOT use that, especially if you're already using Linux. I'll also assume that since you're on Linux, you must have a clue as to what a Codec is and why you need them. If not, well, I guess you'd just wind up throwing the video away instead of making a small fix and watching it. Right?

  38. "open-sourcier" by Vorondil28 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    That is now, by far, my favorite word.

    Oh, the posibilities...
    "Oh, don't play 'open-sourcier than thou' with me!"
    or
    "Debian GNU/Linux: It's the open-sourciest!"
    oh oh, or
    "RedHat: Proving open-sourciness pays!"

    $my_vocabulary = $my_vocabulary++;
    =)

    --
    This sig rocks the casbah.
    1. Re:"open-sourcier" by Deltaspectre · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hate to point this out to you, but $my_vocabulary was never declared!

      I jest :P

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
  39. Fix it yourself by bigtrike · · Score: 1

    Isn't that the open source way? Of course, like most open source projects, your fixes will probably be ignored.

  40. Disturbance in The Force by HangingChad · · Score: 1
    During this project, Blender's lead developer Ton Roosendaal was coding the features that were required by the artists to produce their movie.

    It's as if a cold shiver just ran through thousands of proprietary software companies all at once.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  41. Desk Blend-MoccaTop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *smirk* I see I'm not the only one who's thought of this. Not Blender specifically, but using a game engine for more than just "games". I might give X3D a whirl.

    1. Re:Desk Blend-MoccaTop. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I was reading through a _Warriors_ game "strategy" (cheats) book at Blockbuster today, thinking "why aren't there more little movies with good stories using these game engines?" All it takes is one killer video to get everyone doing it.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Desk Blend-MoccaTop. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google for Machinima.

      There are plenty of videos, and with the new games coming out (crysis, Unreal 2007). The "movies" will be better.

      Anyway I was talking about your idea of using a 3D engine (commercial or otherwise) to do a "looking Glass" desktop.

  42. Last time I checked by TheSeer2 · · Score: 1

    There was no way to export to .3ds, a requirement of many projects. Has such an export script been implemented yet?

    1. Re:Last time I checked by filipncs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, it's in File->Export->3D Studio (.3ds).
      (It's actually the first choice in the Export menu).

      At least version 2.41 also had it, but I'm not sure when it became a part of blender.

  43. Re:and it doesn't even play in Windows by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 1

    avi is spported by WMP and in fact avi is defined by MS, however you may not have the correct codec for the video or audio files in the *.avi. Check out the MS support page for further info.

    --
    Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
  44. Blender3D needs better-written tutorials.... by Khyber · · Score: 2, Informative

    The program itself is awesome. Sadly, every tutorial, video or text, doesn't really help you. They just say "Do this, do that" without ever telling you why you're doing this task or that task, they only assume you know what each tool does and what it's primarily used for. Bad way to get people to use your program - I tried making a simple head using the step-by-step instructions in a tutorial, and failed miserably because the tutorial failed to mention that you need to select two certain regions for a loop cut.

    Blender hardly needs improvement (though the new particle/hair stuff is insanely cool,) it's the tutorials that need major improvement. You're not teaching anyone anything when you don't explain why you do this cut or select this part of the mesh. If you can't teach people the whys and hows, nobody can learn it. "Do this, do that" does nothing.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  45. 3D needs better-written [books]. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Blender hardly needs improvement (though the new particle/hair stuff is insanely cool,) it's the tutorials that need major improvement. You're not teaching anyone anything when you don't explain why you do this cut or select this part of the mesh. If you can't teach people the whys and hows, nobody can learn it. "Do this, do that" does nothing."

    You do realize that there are nonprogram-specific books on modeling, don't you? They'll give you the "why". The "how" comes from understanding your tools. Everything after is just practice.

    1. Re:3D needs better-written [books]. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      You must forget - everyone also uses slightly different terminology in their programs - one thing may be called a loop cut and in another program it could be called a plane shear - the terminology is NOT the same, looking between Maya, Blender, and 3DSMax.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  46. Re:Physics better, but buggy by Animats · · Score: 1

    It turns out that the big problem is a bug - large objects don't work right, due to a roundoff problem. If you limit all objects, including the ground, to 50 meters in the longest dimension, they work better.