"Bruno Cabasson" <bru### [at] cabassoncom> wrote:
> But it is also a weak point because 3D artists are not programmers
> (to my opinion). So, if the language itself were more 'accessible' to the many,
> perhaps artists would be less reluctant to dive into POV-Ray. To give it a new
> interest, making the language itself more 'attractive' would serve POV-Ray's
> purpose.

I am genuinely curious if you have worked with digital artists before.

2 jobs ago for me, I ran the IT department for a small digital art studio. Had
about 25 artists doing 2D and 3D work. For our software inventory we had Maya,
3DS Max, Adobe Creative Suite, ZBrush, Unity 3D, and so many plug ins (around
200 or so covering effects, pipeline management, and other utilities). The
company did a mix of legal cases, marketing, movie work (as a secondary
studio), and other things.

Any conversation with the artists, if it didn't start with how the tool worked
with their Wacom tablet and special smart pens, was a non-starter. The tablet
was closest to the artist, keyboard was in between the tablet and monitor (not
easy to type on, for occasional shortcuts), the mouse was pushed off to the
side. It was amazing how much work they could do with the smart pen buttons and
the buttons on the tablet.

Basically at no point will a language change entice the artistic folks
unfortunately. The artists have tens of thousands of hours on their tablets,
practically extensions of their will, and all of the plugins available for the
other tools. Tools like Blender that are similar to what they already use has
almost no adoption because it lacks the pipeline and plugins.

I really like the direction of your ideas for extending the language. I would
like to see new changes like this to be a super set of the SDL. Meaning, like
C++ or Typescript, you can use the classic SDL (c or javascript), or you can use
the advanced syntax for more complex efforts.

Post a reply to this message