License sales numbers

[MMaarrkk]

I think the problem isn't not having capable tools, but that YT tutorials and all reference materials are made using Serum/Ableton Live/Kontakt and it looks like, if you want to get to that sound, you can only do it by means of that specific product.

I have failed to mention that myself, but I think that sums up things quite nicely, at least regarding the new wave of producers growing up with YouTube.

Thankfully, nowadays it seems that free plugins have been getting a lot of attention and there are plenty of videos highlighting free alternatives. Obviously, that does not solve the problem, but might at least aid it somewhat.

[FarleyCZ]

True. I myself have been extremely pleasantly surprised by Surge's capabilities. In fact, a friend of mine, a beginner producer I try to teach a bit, preferes Surge to Serum. When he asked, I installed a bunch of freeware stuff on his computer and paid him Serum on Splice. Still do. He doesn't even know, lol. That's how much I hate piracy. )) And the other day he admited he uses Surge a bit more than Serum.

Anyway. I think you guys hit the nail there. It's about endorsement. Everybody feels they need the usual suspect. Ableton, Serum, Kontakt.... But I mean, let's be real. If you got really into cooking today, would you search for "ingredients that taste similar to the best ones, but are dirt cheap" or you would google "best ingredients for my recipe". And if you found out you can get them for free without nobody knowing you did so? Again. I don't endorse it, but even after spending thousands of dollars on software, I can't ignore how cool that sounds for broke youngsters.

It's actually really sad. I think there's huge room for educational institutions to help with this in collaboration with developers themselves. "Learn our software, pay us when you have a proper day job." kind of license. But it won't happen until this can be properly discussed somewhere without a fear Google bots might flag the whole forum as a piracy site.

[MMaarrkk]

It's actually really sad. I think there's huge room for educational institutions to help with this in collaboration with developers themselves. "Learn our software, pay us when you have a proper day job." kind of license. But it won't happen until this can be properly discussed somewhere without a fear Google bots might flag the whole forum as a piracy site.

This could as well be the case already, just with the software we don't mainly associate with "mainstream". When it comes to art and design, Adobe has partnerships with Universities and provide educational access to their software suites - in hand, dominating the industry.

When it comes to music, I wouldn't be surprised if a similar sponsorship/friendship applies, or at least you would hope so.

[whyterabbyt]

When it comes to art and design, Adobe has partnerships with Universities and provide educational access to their software suites - in hand, dominating the industry.

Yeah, but that educational access is still something we have to pay for, and its us who approached Adobe for that, not the other way around.
Also, most Universities don't really have much of a need for the full range of Adobe products. Up until fairly recently, the only product that our site wanted a site license for was Acrobat, whereas my department (art & design school) does need all of it. We had to negotiate our own arrangement for many years, and again, we went to Adobe, they didn't come to us.

Adobe dont do free student/educator versions either.

[MMaarrkk]

most Universities don't really have much of a need for the full range of Adobe products. Up until fairly recently, the only product that our site wanted a site license for was Acrobat, whereas my department (art & design school) does need all of it.

Obviously, I cannot speak for Countries or Universities in general terms, but at least in Universities that I have experience with in the UK, the Adobe access was mainly for the Art and Design department, understandably. And what is being offered in the University almost all of the suite is being utilised.

We had to negotiate our own arrangement for many years, and again, we went to Adobe, they didn't come to us.

The perspective of the argument was of students learning the practices of the industry, so having access to tools for free is greatly helpful. As the University I keep referring to, allowed access to Adobe products on and off-campus, letting people work with ease as long as you're a student.

So if access to mainstream music resources was applied in a similar fashion, it could make for an easier entry into using these tools. Or in the footsteps of Autodesk, offering student discounts or even free version of their slightly older versions, (In this case Maya 2018) which would be the optimal way to go about it.

[whyterabbyt]

Obviously, I cannot speak for Countries or Universities in general terms, but at least in Universities that I have experience with in the UK, the Adobe access was mainly for the Art and Design department, understandably. And what is being offered in the University almost all of the suite is being utilised.

Ive been involved in Adobe deployment for Art and Design department for a UK Uni for about 20 years. As a department we make very heavy usage of all of the Adobe suite, so the majority of the suite is on 120-plus student lab seats alone, plus most staff systems.
But usage in the rest of the Uni is nothing like ours. In order, its Acrobat, InDesign, occasional Photoshop. A tiny handful of PR folk who do some video editing etc (when they're not bugging us to do it for them). One or two web designers. Minimal.
And education agreements with Adobe are based on usage.

The perspective of the argument was of students learning the practices of the industry, so having access to tools for free is greatly helpful. As the University I keep referring to, allowed access to Adobe products on and off-campus, letting people work with ease as long as you're a student.

Yes, and that's something that's entirely dependent on the agreement a University has with Adobe. Its not automatic; just because there's a site license for the University, it doesn't mean that students or staff automatically get access to federated licenses on their own equipment.

Or in the footsteps of Autodesk, offering student discounts or even free version of their slightly older versions, (In this case Maya 2018) which would be the optimal way to go about it.

Yes, Autodesk is a far better example. That's another one Ive been doing for more than 20 years. (And actually Autodesk offer the current versions of their software to students for free, not older ones. Which is actually problematic for us.)

The fact that so many companies like Autodesk offer free student versions is one reason its notable to us that Adobe dont.

[FarleyCZ]

Autodesk started to validate student licences recently. Maya will get a huge hit by Blender in next few years, mark my words. (Blender got REALLY competent in last few years.)

University licences are cool, but they are no enough. Not at all. If you imagine the sum of young people interested in any major creative software, only a handful of them ends up in a school that is able to provide edu licences. Most of the kids actually learn at home while studying something else. Because when you're 15, you have no clue what's your life changing passion will be at 17, but you have to choose your career path either way and everyone tells you to stick to it. So the industry ends up with massive amounts of late teen and early twenties folks, that are broke, are studying something they don't care about (but are too invested at that point to quit) and are learning what they really love at home. Either on "free to learn", freeware or simply just on pirated software, if they are ballsy enough. Hoping they can get on employable level one day. And lots of them do given some talent.

Anyone remembers Delphi? It was a "modern" version of Pascal, coding language with HUUUGE unshakable heritage. Literally Pascal/Delphi and C/C++ were everlasting competitors. (Btw original versions of FL Studio were written in Delphi.) It was doing great exactly up until 2005. ...where Borland, company that owned Delphi, was bought by "Embaracedo Technologies" and they cut off the "free to learn version". I'm sure if you contacted them the way you can do that with Adobe or Autodesk, they would cook something up for your school. But nobody was interested. It was just too much of a hustle. Especially when C++ was open. ...and because even lifelong diehard fans (who were too old to go to school) couldn't code in it at home, the language just sunk. Nobody codes in it anymore.

Your user base is learning your product in a living room, not in a class room. That's the cold truth any kind of "free to learn" licence policy should be based upon.

[whyterabbyt]

Autodesk started to validate student licences recently.

Not sure what you mean by validate, but they've been doing free licenses for students for along time. I would have guessed at least a decade, this seems to indicate nearly 15 years.

https://www.coursestuff.co.uk/autodesk.php

Maya will get a huge hit by Blender in next few years, mark my words.

Im aware of the progress of Blender, but I have to disagree, TBH. Unless the existing animation/CG industry Maya users decide to commit productivity suicide by having all its talent change tools, they're still going to keep using Maya, so the jobs will still be in Maya.
There'll be changes in some places, yes. Huge hit, no.
This 'huge hit' on the incumbent has been the folklore of GIMP/Reaper/Blender evangelists for years, but its not pragmatic.

(Personally, if you want a job in CG, I actually reckon you're better off focussing on Houdini than Blender.)

Your user base is learning your product in a living room, not in a class room. That's the cold truth any kind of "free to learn" licence policy should be based upon.

You have evidence that self-educated bedroom users get the majority of industry jobs over University, Art School and specialised Training School graduates?

[FarleyCZ]

Autodesk started to validate student licences recently.

Not sure what you mean by validate, but they've been doing free licenses for students for along time. I would have guessed at least a decade, this seems to indicate nearly 15 years.

https://www.coursestuff.co.uk/autodesk.php

They had. Eventhough I had to prove mine student status, I heard that there was a way to get edu license without actually proving you're student. That changed recently. (Source: Sir Wade Neistadt's channel.)

Maya will get a huge hit by Blender in next few years, mark my words.

Im aware of the progress of Blender, but I have to disagree, TBH. Unless the existing animation/CG industry Maya users decide to commit productivity suicide by having all its talent change tools, they're still going to keep using Maya, so the jobs will still be in Maya.
There'll be changes in some places, yes. Huge hit, no.
This 'huge hit' on the incumbent has been the folklore of GIMP/Reaper/Blender evangelists for years, but its not pragmatic.

Not every major shift hast to be driven by the top players. Nobody is kidding themselves by believing ILM or Dreamworks would switch to an uknown piece of software. But for the smaller studios, especially when trained personel becomes available on the market, it's economically a really cool alternative.

(Personally, if you want a job in CG, I actually reckon you're better off focussing on Houdini than Blender.)

Yes. Especially for simulations. ...but also Maya, and 3DSMax, and Z-Brush, and Substance Painter, and all kinds of photogametry tools. There is a metric sh*tton of software you have to be able to control these days if you wan to be a functioning 3D generalist. That's also a reason I believe experienced 3D artist wouldn't be THAT confused by another piece of software like Blender. Vertex is vertex, UV map is UV map, bone is bone etc...

Your user base is learning your product in a living room, not in a class room. That's the cold truth any kind of "free to learn" licence policy should be based upon.

You have evidence that self-educated bedroom users get the majority of industry jobs over University, Art School and specialised Training School graduates?

No. But I haven't said that, have I? I said self-educated people can get on employable level, I haven't said they get employed. Because a lot of times studios scout directly on universities, having little interest in self-educated guys. Here in Czech Republic, UPP, the biggest postproduction house here, had to make "we'll teach you compositing and pay you for it" kind of program, because they employed everyone they could and there wasn't enough CGI artists in general. University OR bedroom educated. They just drained the pool.
And even in cities and states where universities do create a sufficient supply of workforce, that doesn't change the fact that you have a big number of employable people in the field that were self-educated, just sitting at home, doubting their life descisions... And they are all potential customers for the developers. But they won't be, if you won't let them self-educate in the first place.

[whyterabbyt]

They had. Eventhough I had to prove mine student status, I heard that there was a way to get edu license without actually proving you're student. That changed recently. (Source: Sir Wade Neistadt's channel.)

Ah, I see what you mean.

Not every major shift hast to be driven by the top players. Nobody is kidding themselves by believing ILM or Dreamworks would switch to an uknown piece of software. But for the smaller studios, especially when trained personel becomes available on the market, it's economically a really cool alternative.

Yes, I agree its going to make a difference. But you have to remember that its not separate pools of staff, one for large businesses, one for small. They interchange.

Yes. Especially for simulations.

Well, it always has been for simulations. Im more thinking pipeline, scene layout, procedural scene layout, procedural modelling, etc etc.

...but also Maya, and 3DSMax, and Z-Brush, and Substance Painter, and all kinds of photogametry tools. There is a metric sh*tton of software you have to be able to control these days if you wan to be a functioning 3D generalist.

Yup.

That's also a reason I believe experienced 3D artist wouldn't be THAT confused by another piece of software like Blender. Vertex is vertex, UV map is UV map, bone is bone etc...

Dont try Rhino, then. It'll do your head in.

But seriously, when the software is rather different (eg Maya vs ZBrush vs SubPainter) it seems to be easier 'conceptually' to develop in parallel than when its much more similar (Maya vs Max).
That's anecdotal, mind, but based on <cough> 'a while' supporting education facilities for 3D.

Because a lot of times studios scout directly on universities, having little interest in self-educated guys. Here in Czech Republic, UPP, the biggest postproduction house here, had to make "we'll teach you compositing and pay you for it" kind of program, because they employed everyone they could and there wasn't enough CGI artists in general. University OR bedroom educated. They just drained the pool.

That's an interesting way to do it.

And even in cities and states where universities do create a sufficient supply of workforce, that doesn't change the fact that you have a big number of employable people in the field that were self-educated, just sitting at home, doubting their life descisions... And they are all potential customers for the developers. But they won't be, if you won't let them self-educate in the first place.

Well, that 'let' thing is crux, isnt it. No-one's stopping them self-educate, they're just not underwriting it. But to a large profit-driven company like Autodesk, the attitude is almost certainly based on the balance between self-educators capable of working in industry and the rest (software collectors, dabblers, wannabes, etc) the former of which will be in the minority.
But the barrier to entry for a capable self-educator for Maya is now only £200 a year. If you're dedicated to doing that for your career, that's 'manageable,' (generally*) Its certainly less than some folk throw at Blender addons and rigs and stuff expecting that to do it all for them.

(* Thinking about it, if Blender is going to make a 'huge hit' it'll be in developing countries)

[FarleyCZ]

Well, that 'let' thing is crux, isnt it. No-one's stopping them self-educate, they're just not underwriting it. But to a large profit-driven company like Autodesk, the attitude is almost certainly based on the balance between self-educators capable of working in industry and the rest (software collectors, dabblers, wannabes, etc) the former of which will be in the minority.
But the barrier to entry for a capable self-educator for Maya is now only £200 a year. If you're dedicated to doing that for your career, that's 'manageable,' (generally*) Its certainly less than some folk throw at Blender addons and rigs and stuff expecting that to do it all for them.

(* Thinking about it, if Blender is going to make a 'huge hit' it'll be in developing countries)

We've really hijacked the thread, haven't we?

Two small reactions:

- Yes. I 100% agree on the balance. But that balace itself is to me the biggest hint that things are going to change. Big software companies like their profits to rise on a much steeper curve than universities like to increase their educational capacity. They simply need any potential customer they can get. Selfish pirate will stay a selfish pirate no matter what, but you have tons of young guys who just want to learn the stuff pros work in, but are not eligible for edu license of said software. And those are either forced out of the hobby for good, or forced to start pirating. I just think there's huge space for systematic impovement. ...and now, add Blender into the mix. (pun intended) Tool that can do 85 - 90% of what it's commercial competitors do. You know what's gonna happen to Maya? The same thing that happened to ProTools. It's gonna stay an "industry standard" in very narrow yet "tall" part of the bussiness. Schools will support it, because they closely work with major studios. But every hobbyist and small studio, every other usecase than these big film productions, will find some nicer and cheaper alternatives. (Btw those 200 bucks a month is just in certain countries. ...and they charge you much more if you forget about the first moth expiration. Quoting Wade again.)

- Those wannabes are customers too. Look my music career, LOL.

[MMaarrkk]

Thank you for such a detailed response. I really appreciate it.

The perspective of the argument was of students learning the practices of the industry, so having access to tools for free is greatly helpful. As the University I keep referring to, allowed access to Adobe products on and off-campus, letting people work with ease as long as you're a student.

Yes, and that's something that's entirely dependent on the agreement a University has with Adobe. Its not automatic; just because there's a site license for the University, it doesn't mean that students or staff automatically get access to federated licenses on their own equipment.

That is interesting. From your experience, what are the main reasons this difference would occur between universities? That some would gain this access, while others wouldn't.

Yes, Autodesk is a far better example. That's another one Ive been doing for more than 20 years. (And actually Autodesk offer the current versions of their software to students for free, not older ones. Which is actually problematic for us.)

The fact that so many companies like Autodesk offer free student versions is one reason its notable to us that Adobe dont.

I find this quite interesting as well. The currently offered Maya for one of the universities in the Midlands is 2018. If you were to log in to their portal with your student information, the only available option would be the 2018 version. Why do you think that's the case? Is in a similar situation as the different treatment of Adobe licenses?

[MMaarrkk]

Also, adding to the topic of Blender and Maya. I don't personally think Maya will get replaced by Blender, not just yet, but I also agree that Blender is making great advancements to prove to be a great alternative that shouldn't be ignored. The fact that Blender is free and has a great number of resources online, makes it an easy option for anyone who wants to learn it at home or to apply its use in a university setting, as usually you are allowed to use the software you like, even though Maya is greatly recommended due to the fact that that's the current industry standard.

My main argument that supports Blender over Maya is that Blender is becoming a very powerful 2D animation tool. That's where my stance of Blender not replacing Maya also comes from. As the 2D capabilities are getting better on Blender, I think the biggest change is going to be towards streamlining 2D animation work, not 3D. Maya is great for 3D, but you can't do much when it comes to 2D. And even though Blender is great for 3D, the industry already has a powerful 3D tool that they've been using for years - with Maya.

[whyterabbyt]

(* Thinking about it, if Blender is going to make a 'huge hit' it'll be in developing countries)

We've really hijacked the thread, haven't we? [/quote]

Erm, yeah.

- Yes. I 100% agree on the balance. ... You know what's gonna happen to Maya? The same thing that happened to ProTools. It's gonna stay an "industry standard" in very narrow yet "tall" part of the bussiness. Schools will support it, because they closely work with major studios. But every hobbyist and small studio, every other usecase than these big film productions, will find some nicer and cheaper alternatives.

No, I do think it'll shift a bit in some places, I just think there's a massive amount of inertia. And responses like Maya Indie show that companies like Autodesk are willing to adapt to stop things narrowing.

Btw those 200 bucks a month is just in certain countries. ...and they charge you much more if you forget about the first moth expiration. Quoting Wade again.)

I was actually talking about the £200/year Maya Indie pricing. Although that's limited countries only too.

- Those wannabes are customers too. Look my music career, LOL.

Well, I kind of meant the 'Ive done some Youtube tutorials, so now Im going to download all the autoriggers and get a job at ILM' type.

(edit for screwed up quoting)

[whyterabbyt]

My main argument that supports Blender over Maya is that Blender is becoming a very powerful 2D animation tool. That's where my stance of Blender not replacing Maya also comes from. As the 2D capabilities are getting better on Blender, I think the biggest change is going to be towards streamlining 2D animation work, not 3D. Maya is great for 3D, but you can't do much when it comes to 2D. And even though Blender is great for 3D, the industry already has a powerful 3D tool that they've been using for years - with Maya.

That's quite interesting. We're TVPaint based here, and TBH, Ive not had a single peep from anyone asking about Blender for 2D. I know it sounds daft, but it feels a bit like Blender is on the radar for 2D for 3D people not 2D people?