3 ms·

Someday, one of the big studios will adopt blender internally instead of paying through the nose for Maya, and Blender will get really solid. Frankly, I'm surp

• jcl 18y ago
  The problem is that the cost of Maya seems expensive to the student or casual 3D artist, but it's actually peanuts for a full-time visual effects company; it probably works out to less than the cost of the hardware -- certainly less than a month of employee costs. If you add in the network effects of reduced training costs, "standard" formats, and consultant availability, Maya may actually be cheaper than Blender... at least in the current market. I wouldn't look to a big studio to change the situation, either. They are not "paying through the nose"... In fact, they are in a good position to negotiate even cheaper prices and better service than smaller studios. Any initial adoption will come from small, independent groups that teach themselves Blender in school, end up preferring it to the big packages, and don't mind that this keeps them from working at larger studios.
  • far33d 18y ago
    I guess what I meant is that the alternative to blender isn't Maya - Maya is a closed system (yes, it has plugins and scripting, but you can't change the internals, which are pretty messy). Right now the biggest studios are choosing to build their own proprietary platforms (ILM, Pixar, DD, Disney, DWA, etc) and replicate work instead of collaborating on an open-source platform. It's an opportunity for a medium sized studio to start taking a competitive advantage in technology, imho.