DAW software lags behind other creative software like 3D animation packages

[telecode]

I think my issue with new DAWs is that are advanced and fully featured in that the vendors are constantly adding new features which may be adding instability to the main application, I don't know. Perhaps it's better to have a DAW that does one thing but does it really well.

[SparkySpark]

people doing video expect to be rendering for hours at a time.
i doubt musicians would do that for a reverb?

You're a gunny guy, Vurt!

[vurt]

people doing video expect to be rendering for hours at a time.
i doubt musicians would do that for a reverb?

You're a gunny guy, Vurt!

i goo my best

[THE INTRANCER]

3D software is not an editor/arranger on a timeline. You could go your whole career in a 3D package without seeing a timeline.

Feel free to post a screengrab of the default UI of any name 3D package showing a DAW-style timeline, though.

3D based software do have timelines however, animation timelines thus they are editors in effect. Cinema 4D for example has a motion clip feature which is really quite similar in the way you arrange clips or events as you would within a DAW for automation. This isn't a new feature either as it's been around since version 11 (2008).

"You could go your whole career in a 3D package without seeing a timeline."

Only if you were blind.... Photoshop CS6 / CC has a timeline, even ZBrush has a timeline.

[txl]

I think the nature of 3d/Computer Graphics are to create and use the latest greatest tools. And usability, workflow, and production pipeline are important for big studios. If you can save 1 minute/day on a task, multiple by a team of 100 for a year or two of production then that can save some money and time. Major industry standard 3d software tends to focus on open ended with many different type of user in mind (from technical to artist). So everyone one can use the same tools in different ways according to their focus.

The Production Pipelines used by major VFX and animation studios are a very efficient way of producing artistic goals. Some of those processes could be useful in music if they had native support in all DAW software. The current workflow of drop boxing each other stereo stems isn't very efficient. Music nowadays is a highly collaborative process with many people working remotely often in different countries.

I do agree For 3D, it's part of the business to be user friendly/customizable, open architecture, and integrate well with other softwares (render engines, game engines, etc.). Zbrush is the exception with it's odd interface and workflow but no one can compete with their powerful high-res sculpting. The good thing with Zbrush is that you can make your own custom floating/docking menus and assign hotkeys for them. So any buttons/sliders from the software, you can drag and drop into your own menu.

You can make your own ui with Maya but require some light scritping. With coding, you can write plugins as well. In Maya you have the option to see codes splitting out while you are working and make button from that to duplicate your process. Imagine if you can do that in your favorite DAW.

Alias Wavefront PowerAnimator was the version before Maya and it was a menu digging hell. They hire a good UI designer for Maya and it's much more user friendly. The floating marking menu was first introduce in Maya and you see that in video game for selecting weapons/abilities, Wacom Pen products, etc. In Maya you can manage your scene/connect nodes from many different type of workflow...could be from hierarchical list, connection editor, or node editor for different level of task. PowerAnimator/Maya hypershade node editor was influence from audio/synthesizer diagram.

Live and it cousin Bitwig try to be as user friendly as possible from the get go and that help with gaining popularity. It also doesn't hurt though to look at other industry for future improvements. I think intuitive customizable UI, open architecture, and option for different type of workflows can benefit for any type of complex software (audio, 2D, 3D, etc.).

[CasualHobbyist]

@inkwarp I already answered that in my previous post, go back and read it,if you care.

in general: I wonder how big teams need to be in order to make a full-scale 3D movie. I know that, aside from technology, you need to script out and make a lot of models, textures, rendering it all, etc. And for a 2-hour movie, that must take quite some time.

[whyterabbyt]

i don't know what that means.
the OP is referring to technological innovation, not their pricing model or economic issues.

all I was saying was that the problems we have with Photoshop arent problems with Photoshop itself...

[THE INTRANCER]

Blender was first released 21 years ago... it's taken almost 20 to bring it's GUI up to modern standards. Maxon, developers of Cinema 4D for example were able to do that and get all the foundation stuff done in just 7..yet the Blender Foundation are still trying to get these basics tied up quickly for the 2.8 iterations.

To be fair it's a monumental achievement for a free open source application to be able to make Hollywood production quality assets or to even be considered by major studios such as Ubisoft. 2.8 has a lot going for it including the comprehensive 2D animation tools, Eevee and the updated Cycles renderer which is as good as Vray.

Well Blender is more open development platform with some key bespoke features... so naturally these multi-million doller gaming companies have some spare cash to throw to the Blender Foundation way to help fund development.

It's good to see the GUI is improving but there are some functionality things with it (2.80).. that bug me still and these are still legacy things they have carried over or not recognised as being an issue...
Tiny icons you can't rescale, delete, edit, resize and move elsewhere, create tabs for icons, endless cascade of the linear drop down panels, interactive things like when you want to light your scene, you can't do that whilst in modelling mode, you need to be in object mode or otherwise it disapears from the Add menu above the viewport... The things with the Outliner that bugged me immediately are thankfully addressed.. I know what it's capable of, but I have some issue's adjusting to it's weird and frustrating issues... I still feel more comfortable modelling in Cinema 4D, and being able to customise the GUI in a much more flexible and powerful way...

This is my latest revision to it...




Infact.. there are some things I'd like carried over to Studio One and that's user creatable tabs to organise things like plugins of different types.

[whyterabbyt]

3D software is not an editor/arranger on a timeline. You could go your whole career in a 3D package without seeing a timeline.

Feel free to post a screengrab of the default UI of any name 3D package showing a DAW-style timeline, though.

3D based software do have timelines however, animation timelines thus they are editors in effect.

Yes, Im aware what they have, Ive been running 3D facilities for 20 years. Having a timeline is not the same thing as being an editor/arranger on a timeline.

"You could go your whole career in a 3D package without seeing a timeline."

Only if you were blind.... Photoshop CS6 / CC has a timeline, even ZBrush has a timeline.

Are you making the very dumb assumption that everyone working in a 3D package is an animator?

[Michael L]

If you want to see a DAW created by the developer of 3D software, look at Eric Wenger's MetaSynth and ArtMatic: with one you can paint audio, and with the other synthesize 3D graphics.

[whyterabbyt]

@inkwarp I already answered that in my previous post, go back and read it,if you care.

in general: I wonder how big teams need to be in order to make a full-scale 3D movie. I know that, aside from technology, you need to script out and make a lot of models, textures, rendering it all, etc. And for a 2-hour movie, that must take quite some time.

About the size of the team required to make any full-scale movie. Which obviously can vary massively depending on the movie itself...
The longest entirely solo 3D film by anyone Ive known was 15 minutes long, and was done part-time over 2 years.

[whyterabbyt]

Well Blender is more open development platform with some key bespoke features... so naturally these multi-million doller gaming companies have some spare cash to throw to the Blender Foundation way to help fund development.

Yes, but those companies have always had that spare cash, yet hadnt done that until now. The change has been that Blender 'grew up' considerably with 2.8 by deliberately addressing the reasons it previously hadnt had traction against the big commercial products. Instead of staying in the unfortuately typical open source 'if you dont like it fix it yourself' ghetto, they refactored Blender so that it appealed to multi-million dollar gaming companies and the like.
Because those scale of companies dont care about the pricetag, Blender couldnt compete by being free, it had to compete by being free and a good replacement for something costing £5K per seat or whatever. And until now, it wasnt.

[LawrenceF]

I'm also shocked that physics based interactions have not made their way into Audio yet - such as using real physics to model sound vibrations in different environments rather than the hacks commonly used in most delay based fx.

I'm not quite sure why you think "real physics" is not an integral part of digital and/or emulated reverb design.

https://byjus.com/physics/reverberation/

That's what all of those sliders and knobs on your reverb plugin are for ... "...to (help) model (or emulate) sound vibrations in different environments."… based on the physics of how sound reacts to different surfaces or similar things.

[foosnark]

DAWs for example have stuck rigidly to the piano roll metaphor when composing, whereas in the aforementioned there are dozens of different but equally valid methods to create (model or animate) content.

This is just my opinion, but I think musicians in general tend to be more conservative than visual artists.

Look at all the people who complain about "useless" modular features in Bitwig 3.

Look at all the people who think the constraints of MIDI are just fine.

Look at all the people mostly using 12-tone equal tempered scales, and even mostly using 4/4 time with a kick on 1 and 3...

For that matter, look at all the people using all this technology to imitate hitting a stretched animal hide with a mechanical beater.

So yeah, DAWs are going to have piano rolls and maybe not offer other ways to sequence music. Thankfully there's hardware and all that silly modular stuff to help one break away from it...

[vurt]

dont tell everyone!!!