Carrara compared to the "big boys" (Maya, 3DS Max, etc.)

Dartanbeck

..and the cool part about the above Intro is that all of the elements he's using in his scene can be created in Carrara, from the image of the girl to the various multi-pass elements for the window, which he's created by hand in Fusion, to the background image, etc.,

magaremoto

ThomasSc said:

magaremoto said:

for such a price I would jump into maya + arnold, less plugins and more user friendly; in many aspects a carraraist can find it handy to use

http://www.autodesk.com/products/maya/compare/compare-products

That was the first time ever I've read "Maya" and "user friendly" in the same sentence  / I bet it will never happen again

Arnold is freaking slow on a normal machine. You have to buy at least 10 Xeons

well, let's say is "user friendly" for being an autodesk product

arnold has 1 great feature: it has been built with animations and VFX in mind, very versatile and adjustable for any need

Dartanbeck

magaremoto said:

ThomasSc said:

magaremoto said:

for such a price I would jump into maya + arnold, less plugins and more user friendly; in many aspects a carraraist can find it handy to use

http://www.autodesk.com/products/maya/compare/compare-products

That was the first time ever I've read "Maya" and "user friendly" in the same sentence  / I bet it will never happen again

Arnold is freaking slow on a normal machine. You have to buy at least 10 Xeons

well, let's say is "user friendly" for being an autodesk product

arnold has 1 great feature: it has been built with animations and VFX in mind, very versatile and adjustable for any need

I'll have to check it out ;)

magaremoto

I never appreciated policies and products by autodesk, I find them overrated and too expensive for what they offer, but (with deadlines in mind):

- if we have to make a production with characters and complex storyboards and scenes, the first choice is going to be maya for animations and 3dmax for all the rest where to aggregate contibutions from all partners and softwares as well; this is what the director of production pipeline will say. lightwave? c4d? a viable second choice. Houdini? Clarisse? who knows them in depth? modo? not ready for big productions yet

deadlines (that is to say money) make the decisions for you and very often they are wrong

according to daz policies, carrara can only be part of amateur productions unless someone spread the world (and daz as well) what it's capable to do

magaremoto

@ Starboard and PhilW about story and image:

following are 2 examples about how story can or not affect audience and box office:

the first had a great story appeal and well made storyboarding too, but awful final look (made in maya and rendered with mentalray); it was sold in many countries but was a flop mainly for simple and "already seen" graphics   http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=gladiatorsofrome.htm

the second with great appearance but a messed-up story and screenplay, that shrunk its success a lot, didn't get the needed revenue too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Pirate_Captain_Harlock_(film)

you MUST  MUST have either two, story and look (and music, and marketing budget, and right distribution channel etc etc..), if you want to survive in the CG world, otherwise give it up

ThomasSc

Hi,

if we have to make a production with characters and complex storyboards and scenes, the first choice is going to be maya for animations and 3dmax for all the rest

In fact, Dreamworks and Pixar use their own software. So, when you talk of big productions, what are you referring to?

PhilW

magaremoto said:

@ Starboard and PhilW about story and image:

following are 2 examples about how story can or not affect audience and box office:

the first had a great story appeal and well made storyboarding too, but awful final look (made in maya and rendered with mentalray); it was sold in many countries but was a flop mainly for simple and "already seen" graphics   http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=gladiatorsofrome.htm

the second with great appearance but a messed-up story and screenplay, that shrunk its success a lot, didn't get the needed revenue too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Pirate_Captain_Harlock_(film)

you MUST  MUST have either two, story and look (and music, and marketing budget, and right distribution channel etc etc..), if you want to survive in the CG world, otherwise give it up

Your first example didn't do well domestically, but I noticed it made $10m in overseas sales, so it depends what you call a flop. If I made an animation that made $10m, I'd be quite happy!

The Pokemon TV series and South Park are good examples that have frankly pretty poor animation, but have sold really well across the world. South Park because it is funny, Pokemon because, err, well I never really got the appeal of that!  I once took my kids to the cinema to see a film version, and I fell asleep...

Dartanbeck

ThomasSc said:

Hi,

if we have to make a production with characters and complex storyboards and scenes, the first choice is going to be maya for animations and 3dmax for all the rest

In fact, Dreamworks and Pixar use their own software. So, when you talk of big productions, what are you referring to?

LOL! All of the competing studios popping up around the globe, bidding for Hollywood jobs! ;)

Dartanbeck

PhilW said:

magaremoto said:

@ Starboard and PhilW about story and image:

following are 2 examples about how story can or not affect audience and box office:

the first had a great story appeal and well made storyboarding too, but awful final look (made in maya and rendered with mentalray); it was sold in many countries but was a flop mainly for simple and "already seen" graphics   http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=gladiatorsofrome.htm

the second with great appearance but a messed-up story and screenplay, that shrunk its success a lot, didn't get the needed revenue too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Pirate_Captain_Harlock_(film)

you MUST  MUST have either two, story and look (and music, and marketing budget, and right distribution channel etc etc..), if you want to survive in the CG world, otherwise give it up

Your first example didn't do well domestically, but I noticed it made $10m in overseas sales, so it depends what you call a flop. If I made an animation that made $10m, I'd be quite happy!

Right but since it doesn't cover the $15m budget, heads rolled! 

Not fact... I just made that up for fun, is all! LOL

magaremoto

ThomasSc said:

Hi,

if we have to make a production with characters and complex storyboards and scenes, the first choice is going to be maya for animations and 3dmax for all the rest

In fact, Dreamworks and Pixar use their own software. So, when you talk of big productions, what are you referring to?

 

unfortunately for the rest of the world    each big production cannot help using autodesk products, type autodesk+pixar or autodesk+dreamworks on YT

magaremoto

Dartanbeck said:

PhilW said:

magaremoto said:

@ Starboard and PhilW about story and image:

following are 2 examples about how story can or not affect audience and box office:

the first had a great story appeal and well made storyboarding too, but awful final look (made in maya and rendered with mentalray); it was sold in many countries but was a flop mainly for simple and "already seen" graphics   http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=gladiatorsofrome.htm

the second with great appearance but a messed-up story and screenplay, that shrunk its success a lot, didn't get the needed revenue too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Pirate_Captain_Harlock_(film)

you MUST  MUST have either two, story and look (and music, and marketing budget, and right distribution channel etc etc..), if you want to survive in the CG world, otherwise give it up

Your first example didn't do well domestically, but I noticed it made $10m in overseas sales, so it depends what you call a flop. If I made an animation that made $10m, I'd be quite happy!

Right but since it doesn't cover the $15m budget, heads rolled! 

Not fact... I just made that up for fun, is all! LOL

yes, I have known some of the guys behind that movie @ Rainbow CGI, they are very skilled ( worked for weta or MPC for example) but  they completely were wrong trying to enter a market very competitive where the bar is too high for almost everyone

different speech for broadcasting productions like pokemon, the level is very often low and it's much more easy to have revenues all over the world especially with regards to licensing and merchandising, a totally different market, just like the difference between a consumer product sold everywhere and a pro one sold in few places instead. For example at Rainbow they earn with the winx tv series and the merchandising linked to them, but on the movie side the winx were an half disaster

Dartanbeck

Amazing. I wonder how much of this disaster can be accountable to marketing the show. For example, I've never even heard of it, and I get notified of a lot of animated productions.

starboard

I don't think Disney or the large 3D production houses come to this forum. They operate in another galaxy far, far away. They have huge human resources and the luxury of delegating to specialists any problems they encounter.  The result is they can produce hours of high resolution 3D content that go into their movie theater offerings. In contrast we are a brotherhoood of small independent, low budget entrepeneurs. We have limited time, limited resources, and although we do not like to admit it, limited skills. The result is if we pour in the hours into a project and at best, we can turn out minutes of content at a lower resolution.  However, no matter how big and vast the production studio, or how costly and well promoted the result,  they must compete on an even footing with the smallest of producers, and that leveling force is holding the attention of the viewer.  Putting it a different way; no matter how many degrees you have in literature, no matter how many members of you family received Nobel Prizes, or how many people you know who write books, or how advanced the technology you write with....If you can't write in that magical way that holds the attention of the reader......you are doomed.

With respect to Carrara, it has many faults, and we could all give a list of its shortcomings,..BUT, look at what it CAN do for the money  and the learning effort required.  I think it can be said that if the project fails that you are working on, don't blame Carrara. No matter how elegant and sophisticated the 3D program you used, the results would have been the same. The project will have failed due to other aspects, such as poor story, poor post work and  editing, and lacking just enough of that certain magic that comes to gifted story tellers. In other words don't blame the typewriter.  Carrara is caperable of turning out high quality work..Its up to us to live up to it.  Sometimes..most of the time we can over reach, I know I do, in trying to wow with 3D instead of keeping it simple and clean and just tell the story.

Errr sorry all I got carried away....and the fingers kept typing and typing.

Starboard

PhilW

You might have got carried away - but I think you are absolutely right.

magaremoto

Dartanbeck said:

Amazing. I wonder how much of this disaster can be accountable to marketing the show. For example, I've never even heard of it, and I get notified of a lot of animated productions.

well, in the case of the winx movies (2 or 3 if I recall correctly) the movies were the marketing itself, they said: 'hey we are here look at us we are the fairies of the tv series', so they made an advertising production and the revenues had been coming with the sell of the CG series all over the world and so on; for the gladiators it was only a pinch of pride but you can't fight against mountains, you make only laugh

magaremoto

starboard said:

I don't think Disney or the large 3D production houses come to this forum. They operate in another galaxy far, far away. They have huge human resources and the luxury of delegating to specialists any problems they encounter.  The result is they can produce hours of high resolution 3D content that go into their movie theater offerings. In contrast we are a brotherhoood of small independent, low budget entrepeneurs. We have limited time, limited resources, and although we do not like to admit it, limited skills. The result is if we pour in the hours into a project and at best, we can turn out minutes of content at a lower resolution.  However, no matter how big and vast the production studio, or how costly and well promoted the result,  they must compete on an even footing with the smallest of producers, and that leveling force is holding the attention of the viewer.  Putting it a different way; no matter how many degrees you have in literature, no matter how many members of you family received Nobel Prizes, or how many people you know who write books, or how advanced the technology you write with....If you can't write in that magical way that holds the attention of the reader......you are doomed.

With respect to Carrara, it has many faults, and we could all give a list of its shortcomings,..BUT, look at what it CAN do for the money  and the learning effort required.  I think it can be said that if the project fails that you are working on, don't blame Carrara. No matter how elegant and sophisticated the 3D program you used, the results would have been the same. The project will have failed due to other aspects, such as poor story, poor post work and  editing, and lacking just enough of that certain magic that comes to gifted story tellers. In other words don't blame the typewriter.  Carrara is caperable of turning out high quality work..Its up to us to live up to it.  Sometimes..most of the time we can over reach, I know I do, in trying to wow with 3D instead of keeping it simple and clean and just tell the story.

Errr sorry all I got carried away....and the fingers kept typing and typing.

Starboard

that's true but the majors are always looking for skilled guys or good softwares that help them to speed up the workflow, they will never end the search

keeping the product simple and just tell the story? mmh that sounds good for prescholar market only, from 6 onwards the path is going difficult more and more but it's my opinion

starboard

Margemoto said,

"that's true but the majors are always looking for skilled guys or good softwares that help them to speed up the workflow, they will never end the search

keeping the product simple and just tell the story? mmh that sounds good for prescholar market only, from 6 onwards the path is going difficult more and more but it's my opinion "

"There is an old saying, Going fast in the wrong direction is not fast at all"  They may be speeding up their workflow...but between you and me I wish they would'nt. They may be turning out a lot of product... But my wife and I  have a very hard time finding something to see at the movies.  All that money spent, with all the assets available and what do they turn out... Duds.    Never has so much been spent to produce so little. It is a sad commentary, that movies made over fifty years ago, with what is now ancient technology, shown on the Turner Movie Channel,  are better options than most of what is offered to the public today.  In my estimation the biggest shortcoming is in those that decide what is made in the first place. There is obviously a lot of talent out there.   Again, Going fast in the wrong direction is not fast afterall." I did see,"A dogs Purpose"... great flick.. As far as I can tell a whole new perspective.

 

Another thing..have you noticed how bad the sound is today. If you watch say a 1940's movie..you can actually understand the actors.   Many of the modern films  and TV series I have seen over the past few years have terrible sound with respect to the dialogue. Despite fantastic microphones which would have beeen the envy of old hollywood,...much of the conversation is garbled mystery.  I defy anyone that does not lip read to understand what they are saying.

Starboard.

starboard

Phil,

Thanks for  response. Its fun to spout off..Just hope my own project ( which is beginning to seem eternal) does not put Carrara to shame.

By the way I bought you new tutorials ...Excellent.

 

Starboard.

PhilW

I don't know about the US, but in the UK, cinemas just had their best year in takings for ages, so something must be going right. Part of it was put down to better cinemas than the "flea pits" of old.  But part of it must be the films too. In recent months I have been to watch Rogue One, Sully, A Street Cat Called Bob, I'm sure there are one or two others.  If you dial back ten years, I maybe saw one movie a year at the cinema.

But I'm with you on the quality of the sound!

PhilW

starboard said:

Phil,

Thanks for  response. Its fun to spout off..Just hope my own project ( which is beginning to seem eternal) does not put Carrara to shame.

By the way I bought you new tutorials ...Excellent.

 

Starboard.

Thanks - we were posting at the same time!

gregsgraphics_cafd0962a0

Dartanbeck said:

gregsgraphics_cafd0962a0 said:

I've used 3dsmax for over 10 years off and on, but have had to recently switch to Blender because I came upon some financial issues and can't afford it anymore.  I also have some experience in the recent past with Carrara, and I'm being perfectly honest saying that while Carrara is great for throwing together some preset objects and materials to make a "fast" render, there is really very little comparison when it comes to creating complex scenes or animations from scratch.  3dsmax (and probably Maya and Modo and Houdini) have years and years of high end development for professional output in the world of animation and films, and the tools available in those applications reflect that kind of serious and deep development.

In terms of modelling, 3dsmax has hundreds of more features for the creation of complex geometry than Carrara and someone who knows the tools well enough would be able to achieve models much much faster than they would in Carrara because of the optimized tools.  The same can be said for the animation tools.  Again, the big difference with Carrara is the ability to use pre-existing, pre-rigged models from Poser or Daz. That's really the only advantage of Carrara.  Carrara is an entry-level application which is great for what they call "kit bashing" a scene together.

Absolutely. 3DS Max certainly must be worth it's cost... for sure.

So I was wondering: when you say you've used Max for ten years and cannot afford it anymore, does that mean that you cannot update it anymore, or does one actually have to keep paying for it to even work?

I know a lot of high-end software requires things like dongles. And if the price wasn't paid, the software simply won't work anymore. Does 3DS Max require payment to work, or just to upgrade?

I would ask the same question regarding Maya and the others as well.

I can't afford to upgrade it on a monthly basis, but once in a while when I really need it again I have the option of paying to use it for the month.  I still have my "old" copy of the software from 2013, which is the last time I upgraded it, and I suppose I'm free to use that version forever since I paid for it in full.  I'm hoping I can freelance enough work this year to get 3dsmax back in my workflow on a regular basis, because some of the new features like the Max Creation Graph are amazing... the ability to create your own modifier tools with a node based workflow is something I'd always wanted to do in the software.

Even with Blender at my daily disposal, I find myself really missing 3dsmax for modelling, because the tools in it are really just that good and I was able to do certain things much faster.  Again, I feel Carrara is a great package for kit bashing scenes together very quickly, if that's what you choose to do..  However, I would never depend on it for all my modelling and unwrapping requirements simply because it would just take too long to get the same results. Of course pretty much all modelling software is based on the same basic principals.  You can extrude or bevel polygons just the same in any package, but there is a huge workflow difference when it comes down to more complicated modelling endeavors.  Maya's polygon modelling tools have only recently caught up to speed with 3dsmax, and Modo has a really nice subd workflow, but Max has more overall flexibility in how to achieve certain types of objects, and so far the only other package I've found that comes close to that same flexible workflow is Blender.  Anyway, it all comes down to what you are comfortable with I suppose,

Steve K

I'll vote (again) for story being the key element of any movie.  I saw 12 short Oscar nominees yesterday (7 animated, 5 live action), and they all had good stories.  Some better than others, but none were just fancy footwork.  I think that may be why I prefer Pixar feature animations to Dreamworks, Pixar puts a lot of work into the story (and puts out about half as many features I think).   My favorite reviewer is Roger Ebert (RIP), whose funniest reviews are the negative ones, like: "The production is first-rate ... The physical look of the picture is splendid. The screenplay is dead on arrival.  ... I hope [it] plays mostly at multiplexes, because it's the kind of movie you want to watch from the next theater."  (An alltime quote: " ... the first movie I have seen that does not improve on the sight of a blank screen viewed for the same length of time.")  

Dartanbeck

starboard said:

I don't think Disney or the large 3D production houses come to this forum. They operate in another galaxy far, far away. 

Perhaps, and I do agree with the sentiments of your post. While the new movies may be doing very well at the box office, I hear what you're saying. Some of this stuff just doesn't really draw me in - although there are some that do.

However, one of our forum members, NASSOS, is the creator of several popular, award-winning shorts now, winner of an EMMY award for his animation work for ESPN, and many other wonderful achievements... we are very lucky to be treated by his visits - he used to frequent us much more often. 

Carrara was a part of his pipeline in his latest wonderfully successful animated short, Dinner for Few, which is still collecting huge acclaim!

He's been a Carrara forum member when I first came here, and was also a helpful and sharing member of the community. I think he still would if his responsibilities didn't draw him away so much. He really seems to enjoy working in Carrara - and really... why not?

Whoa... the EMMY looks good on him, doesn't it? :)

 

Dartanbeck

Also, Dinner for Few was rendered in Carrara, along with other duties.

Dartanbeck

You just watch. We'll all start rendering our animations and visual effects and get Carrara Pro noticed by Movieland! ;)

TangoAlpha

PhilW said:

I don't know about the US, but in the UK, cinemas just had their best year in takings for ages, so something must be going right. Part of it was put down to better cinemas than the "flea pits" of old.  But part of it must be the films too. In recent months I have been to watch Rogue One, Sully, A Street Cat Called Bob, I'm sure there are one or two others.  If you dial back ten years, I maybe saw one movie a year at the cinema.

But I'm with you on the quality of the sound!

 

I haven't counted the number of films I saw last year at the cinema, but I'm sure it was over 50. I saw three films there just this weekend: Hidden Figures (utterly awesome), The Great Wall (okay, but geared more towards the Chinese market), and John Wick Chapter 2 (people firing guns at each other on full auto with unlimited reloads gets kinda boring after a bit)

starboard

Phil, 
I agree there are some good ones out there. I thought Sully was good also.  "A Dog's Purpose" was clever and very entertaining.  La La Land.. was OK but left me wondering where all the great musical writers have gone. (Couldn't remember the tune of single song/dance later.)   Still it was worth seeing. I have not seen Rogue One yet.  I guess my complaint is all the coming attractions....They are painful to watch. It seems like there are so many that appear to be duds, that it makes you wonder why anyone would want to make them in the first place.  Anyway, enough bellyaching...Time to be constructive.

Starboard

starboard

Dart,

Thanks for the input.  Nassos was before my time on the forum, hopefully he will return. A person who the forum cannot aford to lose is you.  Your enthusiasm is refreshing and envigorating.  I have learned a lot from you over the last couple of years....Thanks. 

Gotta get back to Carrara... The front office is complaing

Starboard

Dartanbeck

starboard said:

Dart,

Thanks for the input.  Nassos was before my time on the forum, hopefully he will return. A person who the forum cannot aford to lose is you.  Your enthusiasm is refreshing and envigorating.  I have learned a lot from you over the last couple of years....Thanks. 

Gotta get back to Carrara... The front office is complaing

Starboard

Awww, shucks!!! (blushes)

As a matter of fact, I just played Mr. Live Support for NASSOS just the other day here! ;)

Something I'd do for anyone... but when someone like him sounds like he's in a hurry, I drop everything until his problem is either resolved or deemed something I'm no longer able to help with. Yeah... I always want him to feel welcome.

The funny thing is, he was like that with me when I was first starting out in 2010

Dartanbeck

TangoAlpha said:

PhilW said:

I don't know about the US, but in the UK, cinemas just had their best year in takings for ages, so something must be going right. Part of it was put down to better cinemas than the "flea pits" of old.  But part of it must be the films too. In recent months I have been to watch Rogue One, Sully, A Street Cat Called Bob, I'm sure there are one or two others.  If you dial back ten years, I maybe saw one movie a year at the cinema.

But I'm with you on the quality of the sound!

 

I haven't counted the number of films I saw last year at the cinema, but I'm sure it was over 50. I saw three films there just this weekend: Hidden Figures (utterly awesome), The Great Wall (okay, but geared more towards the Chinese market), and John Wick Chapter 2 (people firing guns at each other on full auto with unlimited reloads gets kinda boring after a bit)

Oh... the Great Wall... is that out now?