I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to share.
Market share and growth: When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
There are basically three options for growth in this situation: 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest of the market share 2 Raise prices to grow revenue 3 Sell more products to your current user base
Breakdown - let's examine these options: 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is already in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would not be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think not.
3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could also make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
Growth Strategy: So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth potential (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
Tweak the value proposition: After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
Marketing: Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and doubt. I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value proposition.
Training: Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
What does this all mean for Softimage?: Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, Softimage will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not make sense.
Conclusions: Softimage is here to stay Suites are the future. The marketing message will change. Softimage seats will grow.
Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones Softimage Product Manager
i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs overlapping disciplines given its 3 major products.
unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development team be deleted.
john
________________________________ From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to share.
Market share and growth: When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
There are basically three options for growth in this situation: 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest of the market share 2 Raise prices to grow revenue 3 Sell more products to your current user base
Breakdown - let's examine these options: 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is already in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would not be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think not.
3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could also make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
Growth Strategy: So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth potential (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
Tweak the value proposition: After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
Marketing: Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and doubt. I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value proposition.
Training: Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
What does this all mean for Softimage?: Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, Softimage will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not make sense.
Conclusions: Softimage is here to stay Suites are the future. The marketing message will change. Softimage seats will grow.
Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones Softimage Product Manager
Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> wrote: > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to share.
> Market share and growth: > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price (it > is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
> There are basically three options for growth in this situation: > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest > of the market share > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
> Breakdown - let's examine these options: > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is already > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share one > could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. This > costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
> 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would not > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also does > that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think not.
> 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could also > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
> Growth Strategy: > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
> Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth potential > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
> Tweak the value proposition: > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point of > the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the Suite > helps maintains the value proposition.
> Marketing: > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. Trying > to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap between the > products. Too many features is also harder to remember for Sales people - > and for marketing to craft a clear message.
> For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They > could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and doubt. > I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see more > air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value proposition.
> Training: > Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education > Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, > Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can influence > their decisions (as well as what product was used for their favorite > film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
> What does this all mean for Softimage?: > Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, Softimage > will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
> Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is > the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not make > sense.
> Conclusions: > Softimage is here to stay > Suites are the future. > The marketing message will change. > Softimage seats will grow.
> Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones > Softimage Product Manager
~~ This email address is ONLY my email for lists. If you want to send a personal email to me and do not know my main email address, please use my website's contact *form*. www.genecrucean.com. Thanks. ~~
Chinny. Thanks for sharing the insight. I'm always hoping for the best. I like the idea of a suite. Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the option to buy each package a la carte.
Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users?
Remember, Adobe invests a huge amount of resources towards development and marketing despite having virtually complete coverage of their market. The reason for this is twofold:
- Competition. Any company which rests on their laurels after cornering their market is doomed to be supplanted by a newcomer, which can come out of nowhere, leapfrogging the technology and outshining the existing marketing.
- Growing the market once the market share has been cornered... By increasing the capabilities of your applications, new markets will emerge and existing markets will gain more users. Simpler versions (ex Adobe elements) can also be spawned off to appeal to hobbyists and prosumers who might not otherwise be in the market.
Multiple applications appealing to the same market (internal competition) can be an excellent way to keep dominance of market share. Softimage's value to autodesk is not only from it's sales, it is also valuable in that it's user base is under the AD umbrella instead of splitting off and possibly empowering a competitor.
Adobe seems to follow that same formula, for instance many of their applications have huge overlaps in basic functionality but entirely different user bases. Adobe markets and develops each application aggressively, and in fact seems to increase their efforts on the applications with less sales - the applications which have a greater potential to reach new customers.
Under that way of thinking, AD would be wise to redouble efforts to promote and develop the packages with less market share, because they have more room to grow and in doing so can interest and excite new users into the market.
Anyway, thanks for the open outreach. Softimage is stronger and more exciting than it's ever been, and I think it has generated huge interest in potential new users of late. Keep it up. :)
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Andy Moorer <andymoo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Very interesting, thanks for sharing.
> Remember, Adobe invests a huge amount of resources towards development and > marketing despite having virtually complete coverage of their market. The > reason for this is twofold:
> - Competition. Any company which rests on their laurels after cornering > their market is doomed to be supplanted by a newcomer, which can come out of > nowhere, leapfrogging the technology and outshining the existing marketing.
> - Growing the market once the market share has been cornered... By > increasing the capabilities of your applications, new markets will emerge > and existing markets will gain more users. Simpler versions (ex Adobe > elements) can also be spawned off to appeal to hobbyists and prosumers who > might not otherwise be in the market.
> Multiple applications appealing to the same market (internal competition) > can be an excellent way to keep dominance of market share. Softimage's value > to autodesk is not only from it's sales, it is also valuable in that it's > user base is under the AD umbrella instead of splitting off and possibly > empowering a competitor.
> Adobe seems to follow that same formula, for instance many of their > applications have huge overlaps in basic functionality but entirely > different user bases. Adobe markets and develops each application > aggressively, and in fact seems to increase their efforts on the > applications with less sales - the applications which have a greater > potential to reach new customers.
> Under that way of thinking, AD would be wise to redouble efforts to promote > and develop the packages with less market share, because they have more room > to grow and in doing so can interest and excite new users into the market.
> Anyway, thanks for the open outreach. Softimage is stronger and more > exciting than it's ever been, and I think it has generated huge interest in > potential new users of late. Keep it up. :)
...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the option to buy each package a la carte.
>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users?
>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the price to get the Suite will be most appealing.
________________________________ From: john clausing
i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs overlapping disciplines given its 3 major products.
>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales are going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as a growth strategy.
unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development team be deleted.
>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We are not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the team and are still hiring.
________________________________ From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to share.
Market share and growth: When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
There are basically three options for growth in this situation: 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest of the market share 2 Raise prices to grow revenue 3 Sell more products to your current user base
Breakdown - let's examine these options: 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is already in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would not be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think not.
3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could also make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
Growth Strategy: So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth potential (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
Tweak the value proposition: After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
Marketing: Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and doubt. I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value proposition.
Training: Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
What does this all mean for Softimage?: Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, Softimage will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not make sense.
Conclusions: Softimage is here to stay Suites are the future. The marketing message will change. Softimage seats will grow.
Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones Softimage Product Manager
Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from ,say MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, these should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of the third party training.
> ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the > option to buy each package a la carte. >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
> Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. > ________________________________ > From: john clausing
> i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs overlapping > disciplines given its 3 major products. >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales are >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as >>>> a growth strategy.
> unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development > team be deleted. >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We are >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the >>>> team and are still hiring.
> ________________________________ > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
> I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to share.
> Market share and growth: > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
> There are basically three options for growth in this situation: > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest > of the market share > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
> Breakdown - let's examine these options: > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is already > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share > one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
> 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would not > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think > not.
> 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could also > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
> Growth Strategy: > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
> Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth potential > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
> Tweak the value proposition: > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the > Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
> Marketing: > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. > Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap > between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for > Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
> For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They > could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and doubt. > I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see > more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value > proposition.
> Training: > Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education > Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, > Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can > influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their > favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
> What does this all mean for Softimage?: > Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, Softimage > will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
> Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is > the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not > make sense.
> Conclusions: > Softimage is here to stay > Suites are the future. > The marketing message will change. > Softimage seats will grow.
> Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones > Softimage Product Manager
Up until a couple of moths ago I would have agreed wholeheartedly, but there has been an explosion of training material put up on youtube since then, most of it still relevant.
> Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that > continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
> However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any > software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, > probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest > problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training > material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from ,say > MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to > invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, these > should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to > buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a > free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of > the third party training.
> my 2 cents, > m@
> > From: David Barosin
> > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the > > option to buy each package a la carte. > >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite > >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and > >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
> > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and > > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? > >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the > >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. > > ________________________________ > > From: john clausing
> > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to > > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs overlapping > > disciplines given its 3 major products. > >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales are > >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at > >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the > >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as > >>>> a growth strategy.
> > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be > > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development > > team be deleted. > >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We are > >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the > >>>> team and are still hiring.
> > ________________________________ > > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> > > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM > > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
> > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other > > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to > share.
> > Market share and growth: > > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced > > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price > > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
> > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: > > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest > > of the market share > > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue > > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
> > Breakdown - let's examine these options: > > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is > already > > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share > > one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. > > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
> > 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would > not > > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also > > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think > > not.
> > 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds > > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large > > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could > also > > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the > > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
> > Growth Strategy: > > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of > > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
> > Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's > > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth > potential > > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
> > Tweak the value proposition: > > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point > > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the > > Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
> > Marketing: > > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. > > Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap > > between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for > > Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
> > For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They > > could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and > doubt. > > I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see > > more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value > > proposition.
> > Training: > > Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education > > Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, > > Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can > > influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their > > favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
> > What does this all mean for Softimage?: > > Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, > Softimage > > will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
> > Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is > > the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not > > make sense.
> > Conclusions: > > Softimage is here to stay > > Suites are the future. > > The marketing message will change. > > Softimage seats will grow.
> > Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones > > Softimage Product Manager
> Up until a couple of moths ago I would have agreed wholeheartedly, but > there has been an explosion of training material put up on youtube since > then, most of it still relevant.
> I'd still like to see more training for recent tech, like ice kinematics in > particular, but I believe that is on the cards (3dquakers).
> More example scenes shipping with softimage wouldn't go amiss either.
> On 1 July 2011 12:02, <ma...@glassworks.co.uk> wrote:
>> Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that >> continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
>> However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any >> software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, >> probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest >> problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training >> material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from ,say >> MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to >> invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, these >> should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to >> buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a >> free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of >> the third party training.
>> my 2 cents, >> m@
>> > From: David Barosin
>> > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the >> > option to buy each package a la carte. >> >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite >> >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and >> >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
>> > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and >> > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? >> >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the >> >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. >> > ________________________________ >> > From: john clausing
>> > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to >> > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs >> overlapping >> > disciplines given its 3 major products. >> >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales >> are >> >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at >> >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the >> >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as >> >>>> a growth strategy.
>> > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be >> > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development >> > team be deleted. >> >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We >> are >> >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the >> >>>> team and are still hiring.
>> > ________________________________ >> > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> >> > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> >> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM >> > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
>> > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other >> > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to >> share.
>> > Market share and growth: >> > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced >> > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price >> > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
>> > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: >> > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the >> rest >> > of the market share >> > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue >> > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
>> > Breakdown - let's examine these options: >> > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is >> already >> > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share >> > one could consider making some significant changes to existing >> offerings. >> > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
>> > 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would >> not >> > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also >> > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think >> > not.
>> > 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds >> > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large >> > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could >> also >> > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the >> > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
>> > Growth Strategy: >> > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of >> > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to >> success)
>> > Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's >> > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth >> potential >> > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
>> > Tweak the value proposition: >> > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point >> > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the >> > Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
>> > Marketing: >> > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. >> > Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap >> > between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for >> > Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
>> > For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. >> They >> > could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and >> doubt. >> > I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see >> > more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value >> > proposition.
>> > Training: >> > Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education >> > Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, >> > Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can >> > influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their >> > favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
>> > What does this all mean for Softimage?: >> > Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, >> Softimage >> > will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
>> > Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is >> > the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not >> > make sense.
>> > Conclusions: >> > Softimage is here to stay >> > Suites are the future. >> > The marketing message will change. >> > Softimage seats will grow.
>> > Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones >> > Softimage Product Manager
> What does this all mean for Softimage?: > Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, Softimage will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
Just as Toxik is the largest compositing software out there, as it comes with every Softimage, 3dsmax, maya license sold... and MatchMover owns the tracking market.
Seats doesn't mean jack shit if people don't use it.
Here is how I see it.
Autodesk wants to own the market, nothing strange with that (would be weird if you wanted to be the smallest player...) Autodesk has SideFX as a target. Autodesk will promote Softimage as a Houdini replacement. Autodesk will promote Softimage as a simulation package.
Problem with that for autodesk is, most vfx pipelines are becoming houdini based, and won''t be switching anytime soon (read ever as the software is solid, efficient, smart and completely multiplatform). Even old time xsi studios are adding it to the pipeline instead of going all ice. Can we not taste the irony in that?
I think it is nice that Softimage is put into the Suites. But this also could be recognized as some sort of sell out of an not so important thing.
And if you don t know Softimage this is fortified when you go to the Autodesk Website. Maya & Max are well promoted, but you have to dig around to find Softimage itself and related stuff. Same thing on nearly all marketing channels: Print Advertising: Max & Maya, mess & exhibitions: same thing.
If nobody promotes the strength auf Softimage other than the hype things like ICE & Lagoa etc. nobody will have a closer look at Softimage for general use. Cause everybody has enought to do to be up to date with his/her Main Software, so you only will use another package if there could be a big advantage.
In the actual "Digital Production" (German 3D Mag) at one place they talk about the integration of mental ray into Cinema4D. And whiche packages do you think they talk about where mental ray was integrated long times before? No! It is not Softimage, it is Max& Maya. Not very important but it makes another bit of the puzzle.
Ok, sorry, getting a bit offtopic...
-- Stephan Haitz 3D-Animation und Compositing Hauptstra e 57, 77652 Offenburg Telefon: 0781 / 203 64 51 Mobil: 0049 (0)178 322 41 94 Mail: ha...@trickpix.de Web: www.trickpix.de
> I think it is nice that Softimage is put into the Suites. But this also > could be recognized as some sort of sell out of an not so important thing.
First of all, thank you very much Chinny for bringing up these points! :)
Stephan mentioned that the bundling (especially in combination with the current under-representation on all Autodesk sites / news and even in their Twitters messages) could be misunderstood as a degradation of Softimage as a mere particle plugin and / or its fate as Toxic-Matchmover-like abandonware. I talked to an official Autodesk reseller (mainly selling Max) some weeks ago and this was what he actually told me!!! Of course I know that this is completely ignorant FUD-shit but usually (potential) customers trust the words of a well-informed dealer who should be in close dialogue with Autodesk and this influences their decision of investment quite a bit, I fear.
Re: "are becoming houdini based" - Houdini is still too expensive (twice the cost), hard to use, and based on practicality, interoperability, and performance more studios appear to be piping-in Softimage. And this trending makes sense, because it's coming to most them via the Suites.
I respect Houdini, but it's too expensive, too difficult to use, requires raw scripting to do anything of substance, and even a newbie to SI can get better dynamics out of ICE in less time with much less hassle. And some of you want to gripe about SI training being thin, well take a dive into Houdini and let us know how many tutorials you find in contrast.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Octavian Ureche <okt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Problem with that for autodesk is, most vfx pipelines are becoming > houdini based, and won''t be switching anytime soon (read ever as the > software is solid, efficient, smart and completely multiplatform). > Even old time xsi studios are adding it to the pipeline instead of > going all ice. > Can we not taste the irony in that?
Actually there has been a very large push of both commercial and community driven Softimage training that has notably appeared within the last year. A Twitter account can really help in staying informed: http://twitter.com/#!/search/softimage
i3DTutorials just finished an upcoming training series on Lagoa Multiphysics and it should be out soon http://twitter.com/#!/i3DTutorials
Helge Mathee (the guy who never sleeps) and Exocortex have been steadily pushing out Momentum tutorials and updates. By the way, here's a Tech Preview for Momentum 2.5 with the new Create Fracture utility: http://vimeo.com/25813920
Stephen Blair (the one man army) cranked out 24 support and tutorial videos for SI within the last 3 months on his Vimeo channel: http://vimeo.com/user595557/videos
It's easy to observe that Softimage training is trending up at a fast rate, which speaks to its rapidly increasing user base.
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:02 AM, <ma...@glassworks.co.uk> wrote: > Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that > continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
> However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any > software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, > probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest > problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training > material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from ,say > MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to > invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, these > should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to > buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a > free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of > the third party training.
> my 2 cents, > m@
> > From: David Barosin
> > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the > > option to buy each package a la carte. > >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite > >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and > >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
> > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and > > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? > >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the > >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. > > ________________________________ > > From: john clausing
> > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to > > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs overlapping > > disciplines given its 3 major products. > >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales are > >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at > >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the > >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as > >>>> a growth strategy.
> > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be > > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development > > team be deleted. > >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We are > >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the > >>>> team and are still hiring.
> > ________________________________ > > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> > > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM > > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
> > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other > > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to > share.
> > Market share and growth: > > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced > > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price > > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
> > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: > > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest > > of the market share > > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue > > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
> > Breakdown - let's examine these options: > > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is > already > > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share > > one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. > > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
> > 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would > not > > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also > > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think > > not.
> > 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds > > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large > > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could > also > > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the > > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
> > Growth Strategy: > > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of > > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success)
> > Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's > > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth > potential > > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
> > Tweak the value proposition: > > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point > > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the > > Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
> > Marketing: > > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. > > Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap > > between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for > > Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
> > For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. They > > could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and > doubt. > > I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see > > more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value > > proposition.
> > Training: > > Do you know that for all students and facilities there is the Education > > Suite - which has all the products in one package? Maya, 3ds Max, > > Softimage, Mudbox and MotionBuilder. For sure. the job market can > > influence their decisions (as well as what product was used for their > > favorite film/game), but sill this exposure is amazing.
> > What does this all mean for Softimage?: > > Well the irony is that if every Max and Maya user buys a suite, > Softimage > > will actually have the highest seat count of all the products.
> > Does this mean Autodesk will eventually kill Softimage? If Softimage is > > the driving force behind a Suite - why would they? It simply does not > > make sense.
> > Conclusions: > > Softimage is here to stay > > Suites are the future. > > The marketing message will change. > > Softimage seats will grow.
> > Jason "Chinny" Brynford-Jones > > Softimage Product Manager
..but this type of thing does concern me and I will look into this. If we have a reseller who is actually suggesting that because Softimage has been added to a Suite that it’s abandonware, then frankly that is not on. Especially when I/we have been telling resellers quite the opposite.
Graham
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Steffen Dünner
Sent: 01 July 2011 16:25
To: softim...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
2011/7/1 Stephan Haitz <ha...@trickpix.de<mailto:ha...@trickpix.de>>
I think it is nice that Softimage is put into the Suites. But this also could be recognized as some sort of sell out of an not so important thing.
First of all, thank you very much Chinny for bringing up these points! :)
Stephan mentioned that the bundling (especially in combination with the current under-representation on all Autodesk sites / news and even in their Twitters messages) could be misunderstood as a degradation of Softimage as a mere particle plugin and / or its fate as Toxic-Matchmover-like abandonware.
I talked to an official Autodesk reseller (mainly selling Max) some weeks ago and this was what he actually told me!!! Of course I know that this is completely ignorant FUD-shit but usually (potential) customers trust the words of a well-informed dealer who should be in close dialogue with Autodesk and this influences their decision of investment quite a bit, I fear.
Softimage community aside from Japan is very much a little bubble. Sadly, in order for Softimage to gain the mass popularity, it needs to find it's way into a large facility doing big vfx work. I know that some people on the list do stuff that make the big screen, but I'm really referring to the shops that get the bulk of the shots. And in a lot of ways, Softimage isn't on the tip of the brain when it comes to this kind of work. At least not now...
Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much have a job anywhere here in LA. Softimage still has gaps in the FX arsenal that needs to be covered. Volumes?? This stuff is JUST beginning to be dev'ed by Mootz and Holger but very well established in Houdini. There's work to be done for sure and I'm sure Softimage has the team to do it.
If Softimage's future is to replace Houdini, it's going to have to be multi-platform. Get that stuff good. And secondly, it needs a rendering solution that can beat Mantra. Distributed farm meshing and voxel rendering when it gets it would be sweet too. All the particles slinging and pretty ICE easiness don't mean jack if I can't render it. The FX are only gonna get bigger guys, not smaller.
Look at it this way. It's not like we got 3 feet left in the finish line to win this race. We have a looooooooong ways to go. But don't sit here in the bubble and ignore the strengths of our competition. As Sun Tzu put it, "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril."
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Daniel H <vfxc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Re: "There's not enough training material"
> Actually there has been a very large push of both commercial and community > driven Softimage training that has notably appeared within the last year. A > Twitter account can really help in staying informed: > http://twitter.com/#!/search/softimage
> i3DTutorials just finished an upcoming training series on Lagoa > Multiphysics and it should be out soon http://twitter.com/#!/i3DTutorials
> Helge Mathee (the guy who never sleeps) and Exocortex have been steadily > pushing out Momentum tutorials and updates. By the way, here's a Tech > Preview for Momentum 2.5 with the new Create Fracture utility: > http://vimeo.com/25813920
> Stephen Blair (the one man army) cranked out 24 support and tutorial videos > for SI within the last 3 months on his Vimeo channel: > http://vimeo.com/user595557/videos
> It's easy to observe that Softimage training is trending up at a fast rate, > which speaks to its rapidly increasing user base.
> -Daniel
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:02 AM, <ma...@glassworks.co.uk> wrote:
>> Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that >> continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
>> However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any >> software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, >> probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest >> problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training >> material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from ,say >> MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to >> invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, these >> should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to >> buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a >> free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of >> the third party training.
>> my 2 cents, >> m@
>> > From: David Barosin
>> > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the >> > option to buy each package a la carte. >> >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite >> >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and >> >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
>> > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and >> > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? >> >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the >> >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. >> > ________________________________ >> > From: john clausing
>> > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to >> > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs >> overlapping >> > disciplines given its 3 major products. >> >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales >> are >> >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at >> >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the >> >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as >> >>>> a growth strategy.
>> > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be >> > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development >> > team be deleted. >> >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We >> are >> >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the >> >>>> team and are still hiring.
>> > ________________________________ >> > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> >> > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> >> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM >> > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
>> > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other >> > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to >> share.
>> > Market share and growth: >> > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced >> > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price >> > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
>> > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: >> > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the >> rest >> > of the market share >> > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue >> > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
>> > Breakdown - let's examine these options: >> > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is >> already >> > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share >> > one could consider making some significant changes to existing >> offerings. >> > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
>> > 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would >> not >> > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also >> > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think >> > not.
>> > 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds >> > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large >> > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could >> also >> > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the >> > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened.
>> > Growth Strategy: >> > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of >> > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to >> success)
>> > Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's >> > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth >> potential >> > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
>> > Tweak the value proposition: >> > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point >> > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the >> > Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
>> > Marketing: >> > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. >> > Trying to market the whole product is really hard when there is overlap >> > between the products. Too many features is also harder to remember for >> > Sales people - and for marketing to craft a clear message.
>> > For sure Autodesk could do more marketing and events for Softimage. >> They >> > could articulate the vision better and clear up some confusion and >> doubt. >> > I think this will change with the Suite being the focus. We will see >> > more air time for Softimage as it will be a big factor in the value >> > proposition.
> Softimage community aside from Japan is very much a little bubble. Sadly, > in order for Softimage to gain the mass popularity, it needs to find it's > way into a large facility doing big vfx work.
I agree! But without stripping all of the windows dependencies... this will never happen.
> Softimage community aside from Japan is very much a little bubble. Sadly, > in order for Softimage to gain the mass popularity, it needs to find it's > way into a large facility doing big vfx work. I know that some people on > the list do stuff that make the big screen, but I'm really referring to the > shops that get the bulk of the shots. And in a lot of ways, Softimage isn't > on the tip of the brain when it comes to this kind of work. At least not > now...
> Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn > it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much > have a job anywhere here in LA. Softimage still has gaps in the FX arsenal > that needs to be covered. Volumes?? This stuff is JUST beginning to be > dev'ed by Mootz and Holger but very well established in Houdini. There's > work to be done for sure and I'm sure Softimage has the team to do it.
> If Softimage's future is to replace Houdini, it's going to have to be > multi-platform. Get that stuff good. And secondly, it needs a rendering > solution that can beat Mantra. Distributed farm meshing and voxel rendering > when it gets it would be sweet too. All the particles slinging and pretty > ICE easiness don't mean jack if I can't render it. The FX are only gonna > get bigger guys, not smaller.
> Look at it this way. It's not like we got 3 feet left in the finish line > to win this race. We have a looooooooong ways to go. But don't sit here in > the bubble and ignore the strengths of our competition. As Sun Tzu put it, > "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in > peril."
> Sorry for the long post...
> -Lu
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Daniel H <vfxc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Re: "There's not enough training material"
>> Actually there has been a very large push of both commercial and community >> driven Softimage training that has notably appeared within the last year. A >> Twitter account can really help in staying informed: >> http://twitter.com/#!/search/softimage
>> i3DTutorials just finished an upcoming training series on Lagoa >> Multiphysics and it should be out soon http://twitter.com/#!/i3DTutorials
>> Helge Mathee (the guy who never sleeps) and Exocortex have been steadily >> pushing out Momentum tutorials and updates. By the way, here's a Tech >> Preview for Momentum 2.5 with the new Create Fracture utility: >> http://vimeo.com/25813920
>> Stephen Blair (the one man army) cranked out 24 support and tutorial >> videos for SI within the last 3 months on his Vimeo channel: >> http://vimeo.com/user595557/videos
>> It's easy to observe that Softimage training is trending up at a fast >> rate, which speaks to its rapidly increasing user base.
>> -Daniel
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:02 AM, <ma...@glassworks.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that >>> continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
>>> However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any >>> software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, >>> probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest >>> problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training >>> material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from >>> ,say >>> MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to >>> invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, >>> these >>> should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to >>> buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a >>> free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of >>> the third party training.
>>> my 2 cents, >>> m@
>>> > From: David Barosin
>>> > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the >>> > option to buy each package a la carte. >>> >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite >>> >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and >>> >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
>>> > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite >>> and >>> > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? >>> >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the >>> >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. >>> > ________________________________ >>> > From: john clausing
>>> > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to >>> > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs >>> overlapping >>> > disciplines given its 3 major products. >>> >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales >>> are >>> >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad >>> at >>> >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects >>> the >>> >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as >>> >>>> a growth strategy.
>>> > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be >>> > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development >>> > team be deleted. >>> >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We >>> are >>> >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the >>> >>>> team and are still hiring.
>>> > ________________________________ >>> > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> >>> > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com
>>> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM >>> > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
>>> > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the >>> other >>> > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to >>> share.
>>> > Market share and growth: >>> > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced >>> > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock >>> price >>> > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
>>> > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: >>> > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the >>> rest >>> > of the market share >>> > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue >>> > 3 Sell more products to your current user base
>>> > Breakdown - let's examine these options: >>> > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is >>> already >>> > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share >>> > one could consider making some significant changes to existing >>> offerings. >>> > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity.
>>> > 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would >>> not >>> > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also >>> > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think >>> > not.
>>> > 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds >>> > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large >>> > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could >>> also >>> > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to >>> the >>> > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already >>> happened.
>>> > Growth Strategy: >>> > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of >>> > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to >>> success)
>>> > Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's >>> > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth >>> potential >>> > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base).
>>> > Tweak the value proposition: >>> > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling >>> point >>> > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the >>> > Suite helps maintains the value proposition.
This isn't really a fair comparison because Autodesk and SideFX, although software companies are very similar but also very different.
Autodesk have a range of great products, covering many industries, Architectural, Engineering, Construction, Manufacturing, Educations, Govenment, Automotive, Transport, etc, etc. Out of all the products, the ones listed on the front page perhaps give the best snapshot of the Autodesk folio and the industries Autodesk cover. Products like Alias Design, Civil Navisworks, Moldflow, Flame, Motionbuilder aren't listed on the main pages either, but they are no lesser product in quality or importance. The front page is just the main entrance to Autodesk and gives an overall impression of what we do, before people go further and find what they might be looking for. Look at Adobe's site, they do a similar thing. Maurice has posted about the websites before, we really should move on from the whole 'Softimage on the front page of Autodesk.com thing' :)
On Houdini, having used it myself in the past, I'm very much an admirer of it, but holey moley you need the chops to use it :) (pardon the pun, it's been a long day, lol)
I have one thing to add, since no one has mentioned it. I think in the Houdini/XSI comparison you simply can't ignore the fact that Softimage is a viable package for bread and butter cg work, as well as FX, where Houdini is less so (if only in terms of the expense of the software and talent, and the learning curve). One of Softimage's best features has always been its lighting, and we are fortunate enough to be yet again in a position of dominance with renderer integration with SItoA. Competing with Houdini in effects is a bit like trying to outrun someone when you own a car and they don't. You still want to be the fastest runner, but if you really need to beat them, just get in your car.
I feel strongly that the future (and present, for some) of rendering involves fully aggregated scenes, not separate passes of different scene components. You need that big fiery explosion to sit next to your cg car when you render it. Otherwise you have to think about how to cheat it, and thinking costs time and money. There's a reason why Sony built Katana -- they needed to aggregate scenes for lighting/render, and Maya isn't good at it.
If nothing changes, Maya, Max, Softimage and Houdini are all about to become "plugins" for Katana/Nuke. Once that happens, the force that has kept studios in Maya since its takeover will start to diminish, and the barrier to incorporating new applications into pipelines will wane. If Autodesk wants to protect their investment, they should be looking to get scene aggregation, lighting/rendering, and comp integrated into at least one of the 3D packages. The smart choice is to put it in the package with the best effects capabilities, since that's the last piece of the vfx puzzle before the bake-down to images, and the most difficult to send to a separate aggregation tool. (i.e., how do you export a heavy ICE instance scene to Maya? To the extent that you can, it's a complex thing with a lot of moving parts).
That's my opinion on the matter. I've never actually seen Katana, so correct me if I'm way off in my assumptions about it.
In terms of implementation, my brainstorm on what I would do is this:
1) Help push Alembic as far as it will go in every package, as that will be the backbone of aggregation.
2) Push cross-package scene handoff as far as it can go for cases where baked caches aren't suitable. With ICE Kinematics, there's no good reason why rigged characters shouldn't be able to be imported from Maya and Max.
3) Make shading work more like an external property that can be edited and overridden all the way to the end of the pipeline. I.e., it needs to be editable at the beginning of the pipeline, and the same shader needs to be able to be edited/overridden within the aggregated scene. For example, the shader could be referenced with an id (which could be a filename or database entry, for example). When the scene is aggregated, the shading can't be buried inside the Alembic files or washed out of existence by them. Do this in a way such that object IDs/tags can potentially be used to examine the shader from a comp, and send specific tweaks backwards into the 3D pipeline from comp, so that when a compositor wants a specular parameter increased, they can actually do something about it. Make it a standard that other 3rd party apps at the beginning of the pipeline (ZBrush, Modo, etc) can feed into. Leverage native shader formats from the renderers themselves, and allow hooks for custom parsers.
4) Fix the render tree and its sister editors in the other packages to properly support multiple renderers simultaneously. My asset needs to know how to render itself in whatever renderer I might need to render it in later. For example, Arnold most of the time, Mental Ray when Arnold doesn't have a feature I need yet, or Renderman when I'm handing it off to our Vancouver facility that uses Renderman. Auto-conversion from one renderer to another needs to be a button in the editor, OR a callback that happens when I export, and the renderer doesn't see a shader for itself. Not just the latter.
5) Create an optional command line callback for executing comps from the render region, etc. I.e., facilitate studios in piping our renders through a precomp.
6) Although it's been considered before, I would re-examine the prospect of going cross-platform with Softimage, and potentially re-releasing it as the "next new thing" with some cosmetic tweaks. And if you did all of the above properly, that would not be a sham. Without knowing the code, I can't comment on whether it would be cost-effective even after all that, but if Soft were really going to be Autodesk's way of making Katana look like an obsolete piece of over-complicated big studio pipeline pushing the convergence of 3D and 2D in the exact wrong direction, that might change the equation from where it's been in the past.
Meanwhile,
7) Keep pushing ICE.
8) Add something to fill the gap with iterative L-system type simulations, and integrate it beautifully with ICE, so that each execution step can take full advantage of multi-threading. I.e., we need a way to break out into something that's a little more code-like in its execution (potentially just code...) that executes as part of ICE. Sort of a generic context-sensitive scop. Then we'd need some wrappers for the obvious things (trees, lightning, fractal geo, etc).
9) Everything that seems like a good idea.
I suppose this is getting OT, but I think the initial post naturally begs the question of where it's all going, assuming the suites have the stated effect we're all hoping for. FWIW, XSI is slowly creeping into our (now pretty big) shop as we speak. And it's happening in a very passive manner, just the way it's being described. I.e., our software dept in LA is actively trying to avoid it, and our office in NY isn't trying to push it on them, but the suites and the need for globalization (i.e., a universal platform in all locations) are slowly moving it forward. Once it's there, they just need to be given a good reason to use it, and I can come back from the underworld. (They are heavy Houdini/Maya, currently).
> Softimage community aside from Japan is very much a little bubble. Sadly, > in order for Softimage to gain the mass popularity, it needs to find it's > way into a large facility doing big vfx work. I know that some people on > the list do stuff that make the big screen, but I'm really referring to the > shops that get the bulk of the shots. And in a lot of ways, Softimage isn't > on the tip of the brain when it comes to this kind of work. At least not > now...
> Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn > it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much > have a job anywhere here in LA. Softimage still has gaps in the FX arsenal > that needs to be covered. Volumes?? This stuff is JUST beginning to be > dev'ed by Mootz and Holger but very well established in Houdini. There's > work to be done for sure and I'm sure Softimage has the team to do it.
> If Softimage's future is to replace Houdini, it's going to have to be > multi-platform. Get that stuff good. And secondly, it needs a rendering > solution that can beat Mantra. Distributed farm meshing and voxel rendering > when it gets it would be sweet too. All the particles slinging and pretty > ICE easiness don't mean jack if I can't render it. The FX are only gonna > get bigger guys, not smaller.
> Look at it this way. It's not like we got 3 feet left in the finish line to > win this race. We have a looooooooong ways to go. But don't sit here in > the bubble and ignore the strengths of our competition. As Sun Tzu put it, > "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in > peril."
> Sorry for the long post...
> -Lu
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Daniel H <vfxc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Re: "There's not enough training material"
>> Actually there has been a very large push of both commercial and community >> driven Softimage training that has notably appeared within the last year. A >> Twitter account can really help in staying informed: >> http://twitter.com/#!/search/softimage
>> i3DTutorials just finished an upcoming training series on Lagoa >> Multiphysics and it should be out soon http://twitter.com/#!/i3DTutorials
Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much have a job anywhere here in LA.
Ha thats what friend of mine did...after year of learning H. he moved from company in Poland no one heard about to weta, did there some vegetation work on Abadah. From: Meng-Yang Lu Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 7:12 PM To: softim...@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
Redemption on my earlier comment...
I agree that 1) Softimage is awesome. 2) I can do a lot of things better than Houdini and faster 3) The community is the best.
Softimage community aside from Japan is very much a little bubble. Sadly, in order for Softimage to gain the mass popularity, it needs to find it's way into a large facility doing big vfx work. I know that some people on the list do stuff that make the big screen, but I'm really referring to the shops that get the bulk of the shots. And in a lot of ways, Softimage isn't on the tip of the brain when it comes to this kind of work. At least not now...
Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much have a job anywhere here in LA. Softimage still has gaps in the FX arsenal that needs to be covered. Volumes?? This stuff is JUST beginning to be dev'ed by Mootz and Holger but very well established in Houdini. There's work to be done for sure and I'm sure Softimage has the team to do it.
If Softimage's future is to replace Houdini, it's going to have to be multi-platform. Get that stuff good. And secondly, it needs a rendering solution that can beat Mantra. Distributed farm meshing and voxel rendering when it gets it would be sweet too. All the particles slinging and pretty ICE easiness don't mean jack if I can't render it. The FX are only gonna get bigger guys, not smaller.
Look at it this way. It's not like we got 3 feet left in the finish line to win this race. We have a looooooooong ways to go. But don't sit here in the bubble and ignore the strengths of our competition. As Sun Tzu put it, "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in peril."
Sorry for the long post...
-Lu
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Daniel H <vfxc...@gmail.com> wrote:
Re: "There's not enough training material"
Actually there has been a very large push of both commercial and community driven Softimage training that has notably appeared within the last year. A Twitter account can really help in staying informed: http://twitter.com/#!/search/softimage
i3DTutorials just finished an upcoming training series on Lagoa Multiphysics and it should be out soon http://twitter.com/#!/i3DTutorials
Helge Mathee (the guy who never sleeps) and Exocortex have been steadily pushing out Momentum tutorials and updates. By the way, here's a Tech Preview for Momentum 2.5 with the new Create Fracture utility: http://vimeo.com/25813920
Stephen Blair (the one man army) cranked out 24 support and tutorial videos for SI within the last 3 months on his Vimeo channel: http://vimeo.com/user595557/videos
It's easy to observe that Softimage training is trending up at a fast rate, which speaks to its rapidly increasing user base.
-Daniel
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:02 AM, <ma...@glassworks.co.uk> wrote:
Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from ,say MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, these should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of the third party training.
my 2 cents, m@
>>>> > > From: David Barosin > > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the > option to buy each package a la carte. >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer > > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite and > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. > ________________________________ > From: john clausing > > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs overlapping > disciplines given its 3 major products. >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales are >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad at >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects the >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as >>>> a growth strategy. > > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development > team be deleted. >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We are >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the >>>> team and are still hiring. > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation > > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the other > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to share. > > Market share and growth: > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock price > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year) > > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the rest > of the market share > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue > 3 Sell more products to your current user base > > Breakdown - let's examine these options: > 1 Continue as is. This is easy to do - everything is already > in place. However any growth will be small. To gain more market share > one could consider making some significant changes to existing offerings. > This costs a lot and will still only return a small growth opportunity. > > 2 Raising prices is a simple solution. Though this would not > be well received nor would it help maintaining being competitive. Also > does that mean price rises happen every time you need growth? I think > not. > > 3 Sell more products to existing customers. This sounds > simple but what else can be sold? In Autodesk's case they have a large > number of products which are applicable to the 3d market - they could also > make new ones. However simply trying to sell additional products to the > same customers is not easy - if it were, it would have already happened. > > Growth Strategy: > So Autodesk, has taken a leaf out of Adobe's book and made a Suite of > products at the same time improving interop (which is crucial to success) > > Given Maya and Max have the largest install base of Autodesk's > entertainment products, make a Suite for them to maximize growth potential > (or flip that for Japan where Softimage has a large install base). > > Tweak the value proposition: > After a couple of Suite combination iterations the biggest selling point > of the Suite is now Softimage. Over time adding more products to the > Suite helps maintains the value proposition. > > Marketing: > Now the biggest selling points of Softimage are ICE and Face Robot. > Trying to market the whole product is really hard
...
i'd like to chime in on this suites bundle idea as well, from a games perspective
here in japan, softimage is doing OK..not great by any means, most studios are still Maya or Max and its switching over more every day. we have some seats of Soft at our office, but no one wants to use it except me, all the maya guys are thinking Modo is the new hotness and are wanting to learn that now, even though many of the tools in modo exist in Soft. the problem i see with soft these days is that it no longer seems to care about the games market, Modo, Maya, Max, 3DCoat, Mudbox etc ALL have far more useful viewports than softimage now. Modelling tools is another area softimage has stagnated, there just doesnt seem to be any will to develop new tools, even if that development is just copy/pasting from Max and Maya...its all ICE this, Lagoa that...99% of people in games dont care about ice and softimage is putting itself firmly in the Houdini "FX tool only" category.
i'd like to think its rather telling, when you have free access to softimage...and would still prefer to buy another copy of Modo, that something is wrong. product development, marketing, training material...Luxology, a company far smaller than AD...seem to be doing far more.
I cant even recommend Softimage for new titles anymore, as no artists want to learn it, but more importantly, the other products have eclipsed it.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Piotrek Marczak <origi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn > it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much > have a job anywhere here in LA.
> Ha thats what friend of mine did...after year of learning H. he moved from > company in Poland no one heard about to weta, did there some vegetation work > on Abadah. > From: Meng-Yang Lu > Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 7:12 PM > To: softim...@listproc.autodesk.com > Subject: Re: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
> Redemption on my earlier comment...
> I agree that 1) Softimage is awesome. 2) I can do a lot of things better > than Houdini and faster 3) The community is the best.
> Softimage community aside from Japan is very much a little bubble. Sadly, > in order for Softimage to gain the mass popularity, it needs to find it's > way into a large facility doing big vfx work. I know that some people on > the list do stuff that make the big screen, but I'm really referring to the > shops that get the bulk of the shots. And in a lot of ways, Softimage isn't > on the tip of the brain when it comes to this kind of work. At least not > now...
> Bash Houdini all you want, but it's almost synonymous with FX jobs. Learn > it, beat your head in, claw for every scrap of info, and you pretty much > have a job anywhere here in LA. Softimage still has gaps in the FX arsenal > that needs to be covered. Volumes?? This stuff is JUST beginning to be > dev'ed by Mootz and Holger but very well established in Houdini. There's > work to be done for sure and I'm sure Softimage has the team to do it.
> If Softimage's future is to replace Houdini, it's going to have to be > multi-platform. Get that stuff good. And secondly, it needs a rendering > solution that can beat Mantra. Distributed farm meshing and voxel rendering > when it gets it would be sweet too. All the particles slinging and pretty > ICE easiness don't mean jack if I can't render it. The FX are only gonna > get bigger guys, not smaller.
> Look at it this way. It's not like we got 3 feet left in the finish line to > win this race. We have a looooooooong ways to go. But don't sit here in > the bubble and ignore the strengths of our competition. As Sun Tzu put it, > "If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain to be in > peril."
> Sorry for the long post...
> -Lu
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Daniel H <vfxc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Re: "There's not enough training material"
>> Actually there has been a very large push of both commercial and community >> driven Softimage training that has notably appeared within the last year. A >> Twitter account can really help in staying informed: >> http://twitter.com/#!/search/softimage
>> i3DTutorials just finished an upcoming training series on Lagoa >> Multiphysics and it should be out soon http://twitter.com/#!/i3DTutorials
>> Helge Mathee (the guy who never sleeps) and Exocortex have been steadily >> pushing out Momentum tutorials and updates. By the way, here's a Tech >> Preview for Momentum 2.5 with the new Create Fracture utility: >> http://vimeo.com/25813920
>> Stephen Blair (the one man army) cranked out 24 support and tutorial >> videos for SI within the last 3 months on his Vimeo channel: >> http://vimeo.com/user595557/videos
>> It's easy to observe that Softimage training is trending up at a fast >> rate, which speaks to its rapidly increasing user base.
>> -Daniel
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:02 AM, <ma...@glassworks.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Interesting comments. And it's great to here from an insider that >>> continued developement of softimage is still on the cards at Autodesk.
>>> However, I still believe that a key component to the growth on any >>> software package is the end user, and the experience they have using and, >>> probably more importantly, learning the software. This is the biggest >>> problem with softimage at the moment. There's not enough training >>> material. ICE is a fantastic tool, but for an artist coming over from >>> ,say >>> MAX, it can easily be judged a tool for tech heads. Autodesk needs to >>> invest in it's training material, tutorials, videos, example scenes, >>> these >>> should all ship with the package. The end user shouldn't be expected to >>> buy even the most basic training from a third party. Remember there's a >>> free trial of the software at Autodesk.com, but there's no free trial of >>> the third party training.
>>> my 2 cents, >>> m@
>>> > From: David Barosin
>>> > ...Adobe offers a suite at a much reduced cost and you always have the >>> > option to buy each package a la carte. >>> >>>>Same for Autodesk - I think you can even upgrade to the Premium Suite >>> >>>> for something like $1500. meaning you are adding Soft, Mudbox and >>> >>>> MotionBuilder for only $1500 which is a no-brainer
>>> > Are we saying that we won't be able to buy softimage without a suite >>> > and >>> > is the reciprocal going to be true for max and maya users? >>> >>>> no, you will still be able to buy any individual product - but the >>> >>>> price to get the Suite will be most appealing. >>> > ________________________________ >>> > From: john clausing
>>> > i wonder about "support"? isn't reducing the "support" staff one way to >>> > increase revenue? surely autodesk has noticed that it employs >>> > overlapping >>> > disciplines given its 3 major products. >>> >>>> Reducing staff is normally only done when times are bad (IE sales >>> >>>> are >>> >>>> going down) and then only as a last resort. And times are not bad >>> >>>> at >>> >>>> Autodesk. Reducing staff does not promote growth it only effects >>> >>>> the >>> >>>> bottom line. And like raising prices, you can't do it every year as >>> >>>> a growth strategy.
>>> > unfortunately, i find myself wondering if the odd man out will be >>> > softimage due to the obvious decrease in overhead should a development >>> > team be deleted. >>> >>>> I am sorry I don't really understand what you are saying here. We >>> >>>> are >>> >>>> not deleting development, quite the opposite - we have expanded the >>> >>>> team and are still hiring.
>>> > ________________________________ >>> > From: Jason Brynford-Jones <Jason.Brynford-Jo...@autodesk.com> >>> > To: "softim...@listproc.autodesk.com" <softim...@listproc.autodesk.com> >>> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 2:52 PM >>> > Subject: Softimage at Autodesk - an observation
>>> > I was trying to articulate the Autodesk big picture to someone the >>> > other >>> > day and thought the conversation and conclusions relevant enough to >>> > share.
>>> > Market share and growth: >>> > When a company has a good share of any market they are eventually faced >>> > with growth issues. And growth is key to a public company's stock >>> > price >>> > (it is never enough to simply make the same revenue every year)
>>> > There are basically three options for growth in this situation: >>> > 1 Continue with your current offerings and go after the >>> > rest >>> > of the market share >>> > 2 Raise prices to grow revenue
