"somebody" <x### [at] ycom> wrote:
> "Stefan Viljoen" <pov### [at] polardcom> wrote in message
> news:4af907c6@news.povray.org...
>
> > animation is completely indecipherable. But then, I've not really invested
> > REAL time (years) to get to learn all of that. And some people (admittedly
> > more dogged, hard-working and / or intelligent maybe?) can do AmAzInG
> stuff
> > with it.
>
> I give you this, without comment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5atPfhJ1Zk

Limitations seem to push inspiration forward more often than unrestricted
freedom.  That feeling of "I'll show you I can do it" that often comes when we
do some povving...

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:

> Stefan Viljoen escreveu:
>> I find myself
>> regularly scaling when I want to pan or translating when I want to pan
>> when using Moray nowadays - all down to "wiring" done in my subconscious
>> by Blender use.
> 
> I find myself often typing :wq to quit notepad.
> 

Ooo! VI!

:)
-- 
Stefan Viljoen

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:

> Point is that enoughly motivated people can do wonders with Blender if
> they just sit to learn to use it rather than complain of perceived
> limitations.  Isn't it true for everything we do, actually?  C
> programming, anyone? short code Povray?...

You may be right... I've been playing with Pov for a few years, and each
time I see some IRTC stuff I just realize once again how much I still have
to learn and how far I still need to go. But it is true that the more time
you invest in something, the better you SHOULD get - and hey, for the price
(completely free) you surely can't complain about what you get in Blender.
If you'd paid real MONEY for it though, it can be considered a bit... crap,
I guess.

As I said, it works just fine for my for odd geometry, but not for much
else. I write PHP for a living, so maybe Pov's more "programmatic" feel is
more appealing than the completely visual orientation / bias of Blender.

-- 
Stefan Viljoen

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:

> "Stefan Viljoen" <pov### [at] polardcom> wrote in message
> news:4af907c6@news.povray.org...
> 
>> animation is completely indecipherable. But then, I've not really
>> invested REAL time (years) to get to learn all of that. And some people
>> (admittedly more dogged, hard-working and / or intelligent maybe?) can do
>> AmAzInG
> stuff
>> with it.
> 
> I give you this, without comment:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5atPfhJ1Zk

! - Well I'll be hornswoggled...

-- 
Stefan Viljoen

Post a reply to this message

Stefan Viljoen schrieb:

> You may be right... I've been playing with Pov for a few years, and each
> time I see some IRTC stuff I just realize once again how much I still have
> to learn and how far I still need to go. But it is true that the more time
> you invest in something, the better you SHOULD get - and hey, for the price
> (completely free) you surely can't complain about what you get in Blender.
> If you'd paid real MONEY for it though, it can be considered a bit... crap,
> I guess.

It's not really free - you still have to invest something: Time!

Question is, whether that time is better invested into something else. 
For me personally, this is definitely the case.

Post a reply to this message

> I disagree.  It's probably much more documented than most other free tools 
> out there, thanks to tons of community generated tutorials, 
> video-tutorials, wiki entries, wiki learning trails etc.

The problems I came across were because the online tutorials I found were 
for versions much earlier than the one I had.  As such some buttons didn't 
do what the tutorial expected, others were in a different place, and some 
just plain didn't exist.  If proper documentation was provided with the 
software, it would be tied to each version and there wouldn't be this 
problem.

Post a reply to this message

> It's not really free - you still have to invest something: Time!

Yes, that is the thing a lot of people forget to take account of.

Mind you, are there actually any decent 3D packages out there priced below 
$5K?  Seems like a market hole for something priced around $100-$500 that is 
halfway between Blender and 3D Studio (or whatever it's called now).

Post a reply to this message

Stefan Viljoen escreveu:
> But it is true that the more time
> you invest in something, the better you SHOULD get

Well, that's exactly what I see happening to me with Blender.  Quit 
povvying for a while and you'll notice re-learning goes slow.  I've been 
out of Blender for quite some months, but it was just like mounting a 
bike again.

-- 
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> If proper documentation was provided 
> with the software, it would be tied to each version 

Oh, you wish!


-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Seems like a market hole for something priced around 
> $100-$500 that is halfway between Blender and 3D Studio (or whatever 
> it's called now).

There's Hash:Animation Master.  They have good video tutorials online and do 
a good job with character animation and such. It was like $300 last I 
looked. It was OK. Doesn't do as much as blender (such as, no 
post-processing, for example), but what it does I think it does better.

Also crappy documentation that doesn't match the release version.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message