It was time to come back

[Heiner]

Hi all,

it seems as if its the great time of the comebacks.

Looking trough the forum is saw that not only me, but some

other users are coming back to A:M.

 

So, i had to use other software for a couple of years. Wrote books about

and managed to get hired by one of the major developers of 3D software

as a technical editor.

 

Now, established in my new job, i return with my personal projects to

A:M, because A:M still rocks.

 

One of my clients will sponsor me the latest version, and for the time beeing,

i monitor the forum for interesting topics. I am especialy interested in

building work pipelines, which involve A:M and other software. Since

the whole industry admitted, that a quad poly ist the purest thing to have

in a model, the world outside of A:M got closer and import and export

should not be such a super serious issue as it was in the old days.

 

I also noticed, that the mentioning of other software in the forum is

now not a absolute NoNo anymore. Do i understand that right?

I am really looking forward to digg into A:M again ...

Best regards

Heiner Stiller

[Shelton]

Glad to see you back. Welcome back

 

Steve

 

[robcat2075]

Welcome back!

[Fuchur]

Welcome back!

 

Hi Heiner ,

 

Welcome back!

 

The forum rules are still saying, the other software is not allowed to be mentioned...

in reallity this is no longer the case IF the post is still mainly about A:M and/or it is about how to get other software to work with A:M, especially if the software is more like an addition to A:M instead of a directly competing product.

 

This is how I see it. Rodney can give you a better statement and what I said is not abou

 

See you

*Fuchur*

 

PS: You may want to have a look at my signature at the video-tutorials (A:M2Unity, A:M2Quest3d) and you may be interested in the new retopology-tool "SnapToSurface" in A:M v17.0.

There are other interesting project about conversion like Trojer you may want to have a look at too .

[TheSpleen]

Welcome back!

I am one of the new guys.

Gene

[Ilidrake]

Welcome back!!!

[Rodney]

Welcome back Heiner!

 

The following will run a bit off topic... those that want to respond to the part of this discussion regarding forum rules should start a new topic so as not to derail this topic. I'm posting this here because Heiner asked and Fuchur requested my view.

 

One of my clients will sponsor me the latest version

 

I've been waiting a long time to hear words like that.

This is a great way to work. Clients take note!

 

Heiner said:

I also noticed, that the mentioning of other software in the forum is

now not a absolute NoNo anymore. Do i understand that right?

 

Fuchur said:

The forum rules are still saying, the other software is not allowed to be mentioned...

 

Let me address this because even folks that should know better get it wrong.

Other software certainly can be mentioned but it's the context in which it is mentioned that can have it coming into conflict with forum rules.

 

It is not now nor has it ever been forbidden to mention other software. (I perceive doubters but I speak the truth)

 

The problem is that where it comes to other software we have a dearth of people that use common sense when it comes to using A:M with other programs. They often pursue the path of incompatibility over compatibility. (Which is even farther removed from the general rule)

 

We get people who look at a feature somewhere else and decide A:M needs that exact same feature too (immediately too!). (Sometimes not realizing that A:M can already produce a similar result... I perceive the root error here is wishing A:M were a different program)

 

We'll get people who will promote other programs and run comparisons (It's a human tendency to compare and contrast everything... so that's why there has to be a rule).

 

There is a world wide web available to promote anything desirable. (The A:M Forum is one that focuses on those who prefer to use A:M)

 

 

The forum rules are common sense and quite simple. Discussions of competing products are not to be pursued.

So how do we explain the number of mentions of other programs throughout the forum?

Why is it that sometimes the name can be used and sometimes it leads to a topic being removed?

I submit to you that those who wrote those posts that remain applied common sense.

Note that this is very often not the fault of the originator of the topic.

There is a point were a discussion can be salvaged (usually by removing a personal attack and the responses to that attack) but on occasion the entire topic is unsalvageable. In these cases if you are the original author don't despair, simply consider where the topic went wrong, reword (add disclaimers or topic parameters if you must) and then repost. Then the discussion can move on.

 

As Fuchur states (correctly), the forum rules haven't changed. An attempt is made to save discussions where someone sees an opportunity to vent a frustration, push an personal agenda or consciously break the 'no competing program discussions' rule. Fuchur states (incorrectly) that other software is not to be mentioned. It can be mentioned and has been mentioned since I first logged into the forum back in 2003.

 

How is this possible? How can we mention too?

 

A possible recipe:

Consider the context and approach. (Is the post adversarial? Is it accusatory? Is it factual? Is it well thought out and presented? Will it educate and enlighten?)

 

Use common sense. (If you feel the compelling urge to type, "This post will probably be deleted" at the beginning of a post... that's your subconsciousness hinting that you should redraft your post)

 

Don't run advertisements for other programs here in the A:M Forum. (There are too many other venues for that)

Concentrate on what is working for you. (compatibility rather than what hasn't yet been perfected)

 

Edit: I have to insert this or run the risk of being misunderstood.

An announcement doesn't have to be an advertisement. Simply focus more on the announcing and less on the advert.

Also, there are some folks that have forum areas that specifically allow them to advertise their projects and programs.

If you want to advertise your program consider a Special Topic or 3rd Party forum.

Those areas are ideal for self promotion purposes and with everyone working together should see improvement in the future.

 

Don't look at something neat somewhere else and demand the exact same thing from A:M immediately and certainly don't take hostages as you do "If X is not implemented now I will leave and never return" can only be met with one response... yours. (Work with others to realize the ideas full potential)

 

Bridge gaps wherever possible. (Blessed are the peacemakers, etc. etc.)

 

 

Bottom Line: A:M works very well with other programs. It is presumed that all programs will work even better together in the future as technologies emerge and converge.

 

 

But back to the topic at hand...

 

Welcome back Heiner!

Looking forward to hearing more about your projects.

[Heiner]

Hello there,

 

so, I was traveling the 3D world the wide and the far, and i saw lots of things, and i came back to A:M.

I did so, because in wide parts of its functionality its still way ahead of everything else.

What i will do now, try to incorporate A:M in working pipelines, and get the best of more than one App, thats it ...

Cheers!

[Vertexspline]

welcome back Heiner----

It is apparent many folks do come back to AM after some trips to other softwares -----it does say a lot about its specialness.

and as far as speaking of other software in the forums --I think if you are referencing I/O stuff for instance there has been no troubles as far as I have seen lately.

 

Rich

[John Bigboote]

Welcome back, Heiner! I too, am always looking at other softwares with a 'grass is greener' eye. They will say, 'The new version is SO artist friendly and easy to learn and work with!' And then you start looking at their tutorials... and some things, yes- are definitely smarter and laid-out in a more comprehensive manner. But follow any 'doing a full job' tutorial and you will get into some parts where logic is just thrown out the window... and they say it's EASY... just do step A, B, C, and then you need to jump to Q, and adjust this over in F, and adjust these mathematical code based parameters in G, W, and finally step X! And you there thinking 'what happened to step D???" and then you look at A:M, and realize... wow! it was just A,B,C done in A:M.

 

In regards to your 'in/out' query... I happened to notice the new OBJ exporter(in 17.0C) now exports in higher quad counts than before... up to 64 now!!! A:M is actively improving the importer/exporters. The MDD animation exporter is an amazing thing too... I recently exported one of my character animations out of A:M (via OBJ and MDD) and INTO modo601(trial version) and it was brain-dead easy and looked great in modo... my trial ran out before I had chance to do a render.

[Fuchur]

Welcome back, Heiner! I too, am always looking at other softwares with a 'grass is greener' eye. They will say, 'The new version is SO artist friendly and easy to learn and work with!' And then you start looking at their tutorials... and some things, yes- are definitely smarter and laid-out in a more comprehensive manner. But follow any 'doing a full job' tutorial and you will get into some parts where logic is just thrown out the window... and they say it's EASY... just do step A, B, C, and then you need to jump to Q, and adjust this over in F, and adjust these mathematical code based parameters in G, W, and finally step X! And you there thinking 'what happened to step D???" and then you look at A:M, and realize... wow! it was just A,B,C done in A:M.

 

In regards to your 'in/out' query... I happened to notice the new OBJ exporter(in 17.0C) now exports in higher quad counts than before... up to 64 now!!! A:M is actively improving the importer/exporters. The MDD animation exporter is an amazing thing too... I recently exported one of my character animations out of A:M (via OBJ and MDD) and INTO modo601(trial version) and it was brain-dead easy and looked great in modo... my trial ran out before I had chance to do a render.

 

Yes, this is very helpful and was mainly introduced for STL-export. (of course you can use this for other stuff too)

Steffen may work again on it, since he did not like the way the patches are subdivided in that aspects.

 

Like that if you want to 3d-print something out, you can very likely just use A:M's output and dont need to increase the subdivision in another software.

With a subdivision-level of 16 this was sometimes a problem and you needed to increase the resolution in A:M before exporting... (since A:M is optimised for using small amounts of patches to be easily animated this could be much work)

 

See you

*Fuchur*