|
Author
|
Topic: future of Studio Tools
|
tobot
unregistered
|
posted 12-08-2003 06:04 PM
Anyone have any predictions about the future of Studio Tools? The last releases have been pretty incremental and haven't done a damn thing to address the clunky old interface from the UNIX days, and on the Alias website everythings Maya, Maya, Maya... Has Alias become complacent about competition, while the midrange Solids packages edge in from one side and Rhino from the other? Will Studio Tools be able to keep its place or will Alias create something new to supercede it?
IP: Logged |
hmmm . . .
unregistered
|
posted 12-08-2003 06:38 PM
Well, there is Alias Image Studio:
http://www.alias.com/eng/products-services/imagestudio/index.shtml Looks like a surface painting and rendering software - cool for presentations, but in a way I doooo know what you mean. Software like Rhino is soooo much cheaper and its interface (in my opinion) is much better. Then there are engineering packages (IDEAS and ProE) which started implementing
surfacing capability which NURBS packages have. I do believe that Studio has to do more in order to stay competitive. They either need to bring down the price for their full version of Alias Studio or to start including some engineering aspects in their packages. IP: Logged |
cha-cha
unregistered
|
posted 12-09-2003 11:04 AM
I've heard rumors that AW has scaled back the number of engineering resources dedicated to Studio and allocated them to Maya. I also heard from a rep a year or two back that there was an effort to phase out Studio and add "ID" tools to Maya, but there are just too many big companies that still rely on it. Just stories though. They'll keep sending out lame revs until there's someone around to really challenge them. I'm a ProE/ISDX user (and formally an Alias user) and Pro is definitely not there yet. Probably at least 2 years away, even with Wildfire. IP: Logged |
Pro-User
unregistered
|
posted 12-09-2003 12:23 PM
I agree, Pro is steadily filling the gap in the surfacing department. And with the Pro-concepts that I am testin currently it will begin to edge in on the sketch and rapid ideation capabilities as well. Maybe an actual all inclusive Industrial Design software is in the making! One where you can go from Ideation to virtual testing, with out any file translation issues. Well I can only dream of the day............ IP: Logged |
dasmo
unregistered
|
posted 12-10-2003 01:34 PM
So what's the verdict so far on Pro/Concept? Have you tested the advanced renderer?IP: Logged |
Pro-User
unregistered
|
posted 12-12-2003 11:07 AM
So far it is good. Still has some things missing that I like that I have only seen in 3D Max r5, and yes it is licensed. (haven't used Alias in years so it could be there too). Such as being able to make objects into light sources to simulate neon or flourescent bulbs. But the overall quality is good, and well suited for the hard to impress clients. IP: Logged |
"."
unregistered
|
posted 12-12-2003 11:13 AM
From the images in the gallery of image studio I would say what I have seen of Pro's advanced render is camarable if not better, than these atleast. And you would think that AW would only put the best images on the web. To me they look cartoony and out of perspective, especially the Heli, and helmets.Just my 2˘ IP: Logged |
"."
unregistered
|
posted 12-12-2003 04:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ".":
From the images in the gallery of image studio I would say what I have seen of Pro's advanced render is camarable if not better, than these atleast. And you would think that AW would only put the best images on the web. To me they look cartoony and out of perspective, especially the Heli, and helmets.Just my 2˘
I kinda figured going from . to "." would avoid confusion on this board. Maybe there never was any confusion. IP: Logged |
lopez
unregistered
|
posted 12-12-2003 06:12 PM
Are there any posted ProE advanced renderer images or any links where I can find some? Seeing is believing. IP: Logged |
PTC
unregistered
|
posted 12-12-2003 07:00 PM
Chech out their site....That is a simple one!IP: Logged |
diddy
unregistered
|
posted 12-14-2003 06:58 AM
I feel very frustrated at the lack of progress in Studio Tools, particularly . . .• very poor round tool - fails very often, to the extent that I round in Solidworks instead • renderer - how out of date? For the money it costs why isn't it kicking Lightwave's ass ??? Need good radiosity, caustics and high def rendering.
Image studio doesn't seem that good to me - maybe I'm just not used to it yet. I think that Rhino is catching up pretty fast- they will be a gold partner to Solidworks soon (if not already) - that will be a pretty compelling set of tools. Solidworks already beats Pro/E in many respects (cost, ease of use, features etc), as an ID person its easy to use - instead of being obstructive like Pro. Alias need to invest a lot of time and effort in writing a new system from the ground up - fast, easy to use, build on the marking menu, clean up the main GUI, better faster easier rendering. Maybe they should even consider solids?? partnering with Solidworks?? otherwise it will be left as an automotive surfacing tool (like ICE-M surf and CATIA) that only big car companies buy. IP: Logged |
caid > cad
unregistered
|
posted 12-15-2003 06:43 AM
Design and product development is always iterative process. So all methods should be also. If you try to use caid and cad, id and engineer tools in single process, you will fail. You need integrated tools without data transfes disasters without construction history. Rhino and SW co-op is doomed to fail for that reason. Try pro/E, catia or Ug instead. They all have integrated id and engineering capabilities.IP: Logged |
pete
unregistered
|
posted 12-15-2003 06:54 AM
SW is mid-range software to compared Pro/E which is high-end.
Read article what IDEO says about comparing SW and Pro/E.
http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/solidworks/select/cadcamnet_proe_vs_solidworks.htm quote:
Originally posted by diddy:
I feel very frustrated at the lack of progress in Studio Tools, particularly . . .• very poor round tool - fails very often, to the extent that I round in Solidworks instead • renderer - how out of date? For the money it costs why isn't it kicking Lightwave's ass ??? Need good radiosity, caustics and high def rendering.
Image studio doesn't seem that good to me - maybe I'm just not used to it yet. I think that Rhino is catching up pretty fast- they will be a gold partner to Solidworks soon (if not already) - that will be a pretty compelling set of tools. Solidworks already beats Pro/E in many respects (cost, ease of use, features etc), as an ID person its easy to use - instead of being obstructive like Pro. Alias need to invest a lot of time and effort in writing a new system from the ground up - fast, easy to use, build on the marking menu, clean up the main GUI, better faster easier rendering. Maybe they should even consider solids?? partnering with Solidworks?? otherwise it will be left as an automotive surfacing tool (like ICE-M surf and CATIA) that only big car companies buy.
IP: Logged |
lopez
unregistered
|
posted 12-15-2003 09:09 AM
Thanks PTC for pointing out the rendering samples on the PTC website, they're horrible. Bad bump maps, bad lighting, unimpressive.IP: Logged |
ren
unregistered
|
posted 12-15-2003 01:16 PM
Hey. Pro/E rendering engine is lightworks. Visit their site. Im sure your rendering limits isn´t software based. quote:
Originally posted by lopez:
Thanks PTC for pointing out the rendering samples on the PTC website, they're horrible. Bad bump maps, bad lighting, unimpressive.
IP: Logged |
samweis
unregistered
|
posted 12-15-2003 06:38 PM
back to the topic start - yes, studio hasn't had dramatic changes in a long time. certain toolsets like sketching and direct modeling are new, other tools have been updated, but no new ui, no major modeling or rendering changes (imagestudio excepted).alias never wanted to sell 3d to every designer, or they'd have lowered the price even more. they don't want to compete on price. they aren't a solids modeler cause they don't want to do that either. nobody thinks the others are better surfacers right now, but they are cheaper (some drastically) and do well enough for some classes of product design. the question is, how many designers are left who think they need those surfacing and rendering tools enough to pay for it? or to get the bosses to pay? i don't know, but as long as there are some out there, alias will sell studio to them. imagestudio is an attempt to make some cash and avoid some technical issues. marketing pared down maya+mental ray means selling rendering to rhino, solidworks, pro-e, and studio users who want modern features such as an easy ui, radiosity and hdri without tinkering with the studio renderer. IP: Logged |
maya
unregistered
|
posted 12-16-2003 10:04 AM
Hello. Am I right about this: Maya is became number one from Wavefront?
Is Maya good construction history (design iteration capabilities)?
IP: Logged |
samweis
unregistered
|
posted 12-17-2003 12:10 AM
maya's construction history is superior in that it allows cv translation while retaining surface construction history. so i can move surface points on the resulting surface OR adjust the surface via the source curves and neither action breaks the history connections.but the surfacing tools aren't as deep or broad as in studio and there are few surface evaluation tools. so maya doesn't really work well for many designers who want toolable geometry from alias data. this analysis depends on the designer's products and workflow, because if the model is redone in cad downstream then anything is good enough.
IP: Logged |
ykh
unregistered
|
posted 12-17-2003 01:12 PM
quote:
Originally posted by diddy:
Solidworks already beats Pro/E in many respects (cost, ease of use, features etc), as an ID person its easy to use - instead of being obstructive like Pro.
this is based on a current comparison? IP: Logged |
ykh
unregistered
|
posted 12-17-2003 01:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by samweis:
but the surfacing tools aren't as deep or broad as in studio and there are few surface evaluation tools. so maya doesn't really work well for many designers who want toolable geometry from alias data. this analysis depends on the designer's products and workflow, because if the model is redone in cad downstream then anything is good enough.
but old Studio didn't have surf eval either. or other things back then. CV-tweak draft wasnt great but worked. draft-check iges in CAD. i agree tho. depends on workflow. does StudioTools or Studio have real draft now? or draft along a curve? select surf.
select ref.
enter draft angle.
done. maybe Maya is a priority bc of the videogame industry. big money there right now. more than movies maybe. IP: Logged |
(:)
unregistered
|
posted 12-17-2003 02:17 PM
Does anybody know if the effects and quality of Mental Ray and HDRI can be achieved in studiotools ?
I wonder if alias plan on incorporating these rendering engines into studiotools..IP: Logged |
Opposite View of ykh
unregistered
|
posted 12-17-2003 06:50 PM
I disagree, I have over 2 years experiance in both SW and Pro-e. I find that I have more control over splines and curves in pro that I do in SW, especially now with Wildfire. And now that I am using Pro-Concepts for the initial presentation scketches I find Pro to be absolutly unobstructive. And I actually prefer the new Wildfire interface to SW 2003 and 2004.Well since the original SW code is actually stollen (By a couple of discruntaled ex-employees)pro code I believe the SW Pro argument will last forever and is a matter of personal preffence and choosing the one that best fits your thought process, and workflow. IP: Logged |
Sorry I ment Diddy
unregistered
|
posted 12-17-2003 06:52 PM
Not ykh!
IP: Logged |
samweis
unregistered
|
posted 12-18-2003 10:59 PM
quote:
Originally posted by (  :
Does anybody know if the effects and quality of Mental Ray and HDRI can be achieved in studiotools ?
I wonder if alias plan on incorporating these rendering engines into studiotools..
there are tricks to rendering in studio to simulate certain aspects of gi, hdri, caustics, color spill, etc., but certain mental ray results are impossible with raytracing/rendering in studio. only alias employees and beta testers know if they're adding anything to the suite of studio renderers. but here's a clue: alias imagestudio is a standalone app, for extra dollars, not integrated into studio. maybe in the future it gets bundled with studio, integrated into the studio ui, who knows. IP: Logged |
samweis
unregistered
|
posted 12-18-2003 11:03 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ykh:
...does StudioTools or Studio have real draft now? or draft along a curve?
yeah, all levels of studio include draft/collar/flange tool. edit the pull dir, distance, draft angle with manipulator or editor window sliders. some eval tools like surf-to-surf continuity analysis and zebra stripe refl map came down to studio and designstudio. surf curvature eval color maps (like gaussian, princ min/max, etc.) still only in studio+advanced eval, surfstudio, autostudio. IP: Logged |
Parel
unregistered
|
posted 12-23-2003 08:26 AM
Have any Alias users tried Solidthinking? It is a surfacing prog from Gestel. Does anyone know how it compares to Alias?IP: Logged |
ykh
unregistered
|
posted 12-30-2003 01:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by samweis:
yeah, all levels of studio include draft/collar/flange tool. edit the pull dir, distance, draft angle with manipulator or editor window sliders.some eval tools like surf-to-surf continuity analysis and zebra stripe refl map came down to studio and designstudio. surf curvature eval color maps (like gaussian, princ min/max, etc.) still only in studio+advanced eval, surfstudio, autostudio.
never really missed eval maps in old Alias. real models worked fine. interested in the draft tools. saw a draft tool in Alias 9. very limited. has it improved? how about jogged p/l's not on centerline? stuff like that? collar and flange tools? IP: Logged |
Core77 Discussion Groups
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
