3d market consolidation

[Roger]

So I read today that a competing product that rhymes with Loft-Fromage is being killed off by its parent company.

 

I never would have thought there would be the market consolidation that there has been, but I guess it makes sense that it had to happen at some point.

Glad we've got AM still (and for a long time to continue hopefully). Maybe we will pick up some of their users?

[robcat2075]

I'm surprised it took so long. Actually, I thought it was gone already.

 

Martin predicted it would be discontinued quite a while ago.

[Roger]

Well I knew they had been bought by Autodesk/Kinetix, I figure they must have bought them to eventually kill off the product since they now have just Max and Maya. I don't see how they can have two flagship products, though, unless they are deprecating one at the expense of the other.

[robcat2075]

So far, Max and Maya seem to have maintained their separate followings without major collapses.

 

I don't know really. It would make economic sense to merge those two groups to one product but they are two rather different products.

[Roger]

So far, Max and Maya seem to have maintained their separate followings without major collapses.

 

I don't know really. It would make economic sense to merge those two groups to one product but they are two rather different products.

 

I'd also have thought they would have either merged the product lines or killed one or the other off by now. I guess they're too different.

[robcat2075]

Autodesk remains profitable overall.

 

It's possible that Maya and 3DS are both at least breaking even on their own and that Softimage was not and that's why it is going away.

[largento]

It's not a good thing when competition starts to disappear. Adobe managed to get there and now they basically have all their customers at gunpoint.

[Rodney]

Adobe managed to get there and now they basically have all their customers at gunpoint.

 

Heh. There are so many things wrong with that view I won't even try to convince you otherwise.

Adobe has lots of competition but consumers (in the guise of customers) have defined the conditions of the marketplace by consistently holding a gun to their own head saying,"more features... new tech... better quality... now... free... or else".

[Simon Edmondson]

I Haven't seen it yet ( although hope to soon ) but, " The Lego Movie" was done using `Soft Image. At least according to the "making off" I saw the other week.

 

I started withImagine, then 3DS and moved onto Max when I was given a legal copy in exchange for some work. I was reminded of that this weekend when trying the retopology feature here to try and make a car. The mesh used was obj format and 130mb in size. It made the work so painfully slow that I stopped and used rotos in AM to start again ( this is not a dig at retopology, far from it, hope to use that for some figures soon ). There is a lot of competition out there but it doesn't get the coverage of the two M's, thats either very astute work by Autodesk or innate conservatism on the part of big budget users ? Back in the 90's Lightwave was the big noise because of its use in several big name TV shows, with 3DS being used extensively in games. Is adobe facing some fightback over its current pricing and useage policy, anecdotally, many of my friends have not followed the upgrade path and are looking for alternatives. My guess would be that a similar thing could happen to the 2 M's but I'm no marketing strategist so will stop waffling at this point.

regards

simon

[robcat2075]

One of our A:M forum members, Mike Sanderson, was working at DNA Studios here in Dallas on "The Ant Bully" and very kindly gave me a tour of their facilities.

 

They were using Softimage and I half-seriously asked "Does it ever crash?"

 

"All the time!" he said.

 

On that day he was wrestling with a shot that I knew would be easy to get done in A:M with a distortion box but couldn't get through the Softimage pipeline without crashing it.

[largento]

Adobe managed to get there and now they basically have all their customers at gunpoint.

 

Heh. There are so many things wrong with that view I won't even try to convince you otherwise.

Adobe has lots of competition but consumers (in the guise of customers) have defined the conditions of the marketplace by consistently holding a gun to their own head saying,"more features... new tech... better quality... now... free... or else".

 

Oh, I forgot, corporate monopolies are peachy keen!

 

Yes, I should be saying how much I love Adobe for buying Aldus and Macromedia and discontinuing some of the applications I spent years learning. And you know what, I can't tell you how happy I am that I spent years becoming a master of Quark Xpress only to have Adobe force them out by bundling InDesign as part of the Creative Suite.

 

I love, too, that I can't get a job in the industry without knowing and being up to date on Adobe's applications.

 

Yesiree, bob! My viewpoint that Adobe has their customers at gunpoint is clearly wrong wrong wrong (plus bunches of other wrongs, too many to count.)

 

Yes, when I say, "Hey Adobe, I'd love to buy the three apps I need to be up to date on so that I can get an agency job!" I LOVE it when Adobe says, "no can do, you have to buy ALL of our apps!" I say, "But I don't need or want those other apps," and they say, "Tough, kid. We own the industry. Take it or leave it."

 

Yep, that's not like having their customers at gunpoint at all.

[thefreshestever]

Adobe managed to get there and now they basically have all their customers at gunpoint.

 

Heh. There are so many things wrong with that view I won't even try to convince you otherwise.

Adobe has lots of competition but consumers (in the guise of customers) have defined the conditions of the marketplace by consistently holding a gun to their own head saying,"more features... new tech... better quality... now... free... or else".

 

Oh, I forgot, corporate monopolies are peachy keen!

 

Yes, I should be saying how much I love Adobe for buying Aldus and Macromedia and discontinuing some of the applications I spent years learning. And you know what, I can't tell you how happy I am that I spent years becoming a master of Quark Xpress only to have Adobe force them out by bundling InDesign as part of the Creative Suite.

 

I love, too, that I can't get a job in the industry without knowing and being up to date on Adobe's applications.

 

Yesiree, bob! My viewpoint that Adobe has their customers at gunpoint is clearly wrong wrong wrong (plus bunches of other wrongs, too many to count.)

 

Yes, when I say, "Hey Adobe, I'd love to buy the three apps I need to be up to date on so that I can get an agency job!" I LOVE it when Adobe says, "no can do, you have to buy ALL of our apps!" I say, "But I don't need or want those other apps," and they say, "Tough, kid. We own the industry. Take it or leave it."

 

Yep, that's not like having their customers at gunpoint at all.

 

you´re absolutely right. there´s no way for a professional graphic designer to get around adobe. in total they are not completely free of competition, but for a certain rather big customer group they are. i´m curious when they will get into 3D, and which package they will buy.

 

i hope maxon will stay independent, i´m really enjoying c4d, and i´m really glad i didn´t switch to some autodesk product. my condolences to all SI users, this must really suck.

[Rodney]

 

How many errors in Marks reasoning do I need to point out to be considered 'right' here?

Is there a threshold or will one suffice?

 

Again, I cannot convince someone of anything they are unwilling to consider in the first place.

Especially if they feel they have been slighted.

 

I'm not much one to talk though, I'm still mad at Microsoft for burying DOS under the Windows interface.

[largento]

Rodney, get a job as a creative in an ad agency without knowing the holy trinity of apps (or any adobe app). Then you can tell me I'm wrong.

[robcat2075]

Rodney, I'd say it's certainly possible to get by with some non-Adobe products, but so many of their apps are the best in their niche that it is undesirable to migrate to a competitor.

 

It's like if A:M disappeared tomorrow you might tell me that I could still do lots of 3D with Maya or Blender and it would be true... they do exist and they do 3D... but it wouldn't be a simple transition or a desirable one.

[Fuchur]

Rodney, get a job as a creative in an ad agency without knowing the holy trinity of apps (or any adobe app). Then you can tell me I'm wrong.

 

Certainly true... we are using Adobe products in my agency too and I really do not know anyone using anything else with the exception of Painter or PaintShopPro maybe.

(not that I ever learned anything else extensivly. Had a look at some Corel products, but in the end, I liked Adobe's products better...)

 

However this is of course strange to say for an A:M user, since it is the same stupidity people have about 3d software out there... "Au to de sk is the one and only... you should use M... or M...").

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[robcat2075]

Dire opinion from the professional financial world which means it may be meaningless.

 

 

 

 

UPDATE: Citigroup Downgrades Autodesk to Sell

 

3:53p ET March 3, 2014 (Benzinga) Print

 

Shares of Autodesk (NASDAQ: ADSK) were downgraded from Neutral to Sell by Citigroup Monday morning. While analyst Walter Pritchard maintains his $36 price target, he believes the stock has run “meaningfully above...fair value.”

 

In full year 2015, Pritchard expects “commentary from partners and financial metrics will show momentum in upgrades, not subscriptions.” Furthermore, Pritchard views the “transition of core upgrade to maintenance subscription is revenue accretive.”

 

Pritchard believes management's “long-term targets look too high.” He sees EPS of $4 as "possible over some timeframe,” but not before full year 2018.

 

 

ADSK currently trades at about $52 but traded as low as $36 last July. It hasn't paid its measly 1.5¢ per quarter dividend since 2005. I think $36 would still be high since the company only makes about a dollar per share.

[largento]

You know, there's some interesting stuff in the Jobs biography about 3D applications.

 

Jobs was inspired to buy Pixar because he thought everyone would want to make 3D stuff on their home computer. That's why they were so software/hardware focused in the beginning. This was when Jobs was losing money on Pixar because the steep learning curve and the expense of the software/hardware only contributed to the fact that most people don't want to do 3D animation. The animation was secondary and it wasn't until they made the partnership with Disney to make Toy Story that Pixar figured out that was where the money was.

 

I know Pixar and Disney use their own proprietary software and I'm assuming there are other studios that do the same.

 

That puts them at a distinct advantage where they are not beholden to Autodesk or any other software company. Yet, Autodesk's software (and most other 3D packages) are priced for studios, not individuals.

 

I don't understand Rodney's point of view on the adobe thing, but he does point to a trend that we're seeing: independent content producers. Apple sliced the price of Final Cut Pro awhile back and made it a consumer level product (instead of a strictly high-end pro app.) This alienated a lot of professionals, but the bottom-line was that there were more amateur film-makers out there than professional editors. I've got to assume that the number of professional editors working today is in the hundreds, not thousands, or ten thousands, or hundred thousands. By lowering the cost to make it accessible to the masses, they stand to make more from it.

 

We are clearly turning away from the day when software was prohibitively expensive to it being affordable to the individual.

 

And quite frankly, that's the only way to survive. Gone are the days when companies employed extra staff and paid for a large number of seats of software packages. We unfortunately, live in a time where companies were forced to cut their staff and are staying that way. Even Microsoft's found itself in the unenviable position where companies are not upgrading to their new OSes. What used to be seen as necessary maintenance is now considered too costly. There's been a lot of stuff lately about the VFX industry and how the actual people doing the work are becoming nomads, going from production to production with no stability ...and even then facing the odds that the company will shut down over night and not pay them for work done.

 

Freelancers aren't going to be able to spend thousands of dollars a year on software and hardware. Companies could, but individuals cannot.

 

In fact, working freelance for the last five years, I've noticed more and more jobs requiring that you bring your OWN hardware and software to work onsite. They no longer have computers and software seats for freelancers.

 

And the large corporations have only themselves to blame. They were the ones that absorbed all those small companies and left us with the barren landscape we find ourselves in.

[jakerupert]

As far as Adobe is concerned, i freezed on cs 6 and since I own Mangastudio 5 i tend to fire up Photoshop fewer and fewer for coloring lineart, i still need it for its videoxapabilities though...

Also hope c4 d stays free of adobe...

[Rodney]

Huge corporations move slowly but they do turn eventually.

Of more interest is the domino effect about to happen with Autodesk's other products.

Things are about to get interesting.

 

RIP Softimage.

 

 

 

 

Note that I am intentionally neglecting to chase the strange rabbits that have popped up in this discussion that would attribute things to me that I would never claim but this one I want to cherry pick to clarify my position a little:

 

Rodney, I'd say it's certainly possible to get by with some non-Adobe products

 

I will go on the record as recommending (at this time... not 15 years from now silly people!) every digital artist will do themselves a favor by saving their pennies and investing in Adobe's Creative Cloud.

In this I'm not advocating their software as much as I am advocating common sense. We could discuss their software and the ins and outs of it for days on end.

If you are in business and need to be competitive (and you do) get into it now and you'll be ahead of your peers.

 

If you are a hobbyist... I still recommend the Adobe Creative Cloud but... hey you are just playing at this thing anyway so dig deeply into the world of open source and freeware and maximize that experience.

As a hobbyist or someone not under deadline it's very good thing to make tons of mistakes.

If you make a living with digital art you cannot afford such luxury.

 

Adobe has a long way to go to get to where they need to be but they are oriented in the right direction and their price is fair.

I hope their price gets better.

 

I am a huge fan of open source and non-corporate software but the value of Adobe's products is self evident.

You can certainly do the same and similar things with other products (I still prefer CorelDraw and Corel Photopaint over Illustrator and Photoshop in almost every case) but Adobe makes great software and they listen to their customers who are grounded in the same reality they are in. There is a reason Adobe products are the industry standard that others plug into and imitate.

[largento]

Note that I am intentionally neglecting to chase the strange rabbits that have popped up in this discussion that would attribute things to me that I would never claim...

 

Nor did I credit you for any insight into those thoughts. :-) I wrote "point at" not "point out."

 

Your view that customers are the antagonists (holding guns to their own heads?) and software companies are saintly protagonists is exactly what's wrong with Adobe today.

 

"We'll tell you what you want and you'll like it."

 

I will go on the record as recommending (at this time... not 15 years from now silly people!) every digital artist will do themselves a favor by saving their pennies and investing in Adobe's Creative Cloud.

 

I will go on the record as recommending people breathe air. 'Cause just like there's not another breathing option, Adobe offers no other option than the cloud. But choose your words more carefully next time, Rodney. It is NOT an investment. It's a rental. Once you stop paying, all of it goes away. Investing in the Creative Suite put you into the system where you received upgrade pricing, but that doesn't exist anymore.

 

If, on the other hand, you are suggesting that they invest in adobe stock, then that's a good idea. They are making a killing right now. Just this past December, they reached their highest stock value in their company's history.

 

I remember the last time we had the argument, you championed Adobe's CC, but did you ever take your own advice?

 

Unlike you, I am a CC subscriber. I know exactly firsthand what the experience is like. And I can tell you, that I preferred having a choice. That monthly email I get telling me that they've received my protection money is a crude reminder that I only think I own the software on my computer. As soon as I stop paying, they throw the switch and I'm nobody.

 

Adobe has a long way to go to get to where they need to be but they are oriented in the right direction and their price is fair. I hope their price gets better.

 

Don't hold your breath. Right now, at $20 a month (because I paid $500 for an upgrade that lasted two months), it's affordable. That's only $240 for the year, but when my 12 months expire, and it becomes $600 a year, I will be forced to cancel my subscription.

 

If I paid $500 every 18 months to upgrade before, tell me how $600 every 12 months is a "fair" price.

 

No, Rodney, in just a few months, my "investment" of thousands of dollars and two decades of being a loyal customer will simply go "poof."

 

But then, I'm only a customer ...and apparently we deserve to be mistreated.

 

You've said over and over again how wrong I am and despite the fact that other people have stood up to say that I'm not wrong, you continue to maintain it. If you disagree with me, please have the courtesy to explain why rather than accuse me of being in the wrong.

[Rodney]

please have the courtesy to explain why rather than accuse me of being in the wrong.

 

I'm in the awkward position of quoting myself here:

There are so many things wrong with that view I won't even try to convince you otherwise.

One fundamental error that complicates any discussion on the matter is the view that software is owned by the user.

Software companies have figured their customers prefer to hold on to that erroneous view and have taken steps to move to their current offerings where there is no confusion on the matter.

 

Oh what the heck, here's an (easy) error to correct:

 

Unlike you, I am a CC subscriber.

 

I am a CC subscriber.

(But this topic is not about Adobe)

[largento]

"There are four lights!" :-)

 

Whatever, Rodney. I'm getting off this carousel of circular logic. I take offense when somebody dismissively invalidates my opinion. You can choose to file that away for future reference or not.

[Rodney]

FWIW I am sorry you were offended.

[robcat2075]

For the first time ever I am going to use my never-before-used moderator power to close this topic which has wandered from the enjoyable discussion of the demise of a direct A:M competitor to an un-resolvable argument about Adobe.