License sales numbers

[MMaarrkk]

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?

The 2D capabilities on Blender are still quite fresh, only becoming that noteworthy around 2018-ish, IMO. But because it can work both in 2D and 3D, a lot of post-processing and some advanced techniques can be done inside Blender, all the lighting effects, difficult camera movement, etc. And in the university here, there is no "main" 2D software that's being used, the main offer being After Effects, which I find rather limiting for 2D animation.

I think both for 3D and 2D Blender is still an underdog, but they have been pushing all aspects of it to be better and more user-friendly. So It would make sense to adopt a free tool for education - at least eventually.

[whyterabbyt]

I think both for 3D and 2D Blender is still an underdog, but they have been pushing all aspects of it to be better and more user-friendly. So It would make sense to adopt a free tool for education - at least eventually.

We've actually had Blender on all of our student labs (dedicated 3D setups and general-purpose) for a few years. I haven't seen much use of it though.

[MMaarrkk]

We've actually had Blender on all of our student labs (dedicated 3D setups and general-purpose) for a few years. I haven't seen much use of it though.

Ah, that's rather unfortunate. Having a prominent free option that's widely utilised would be wonderful. But I guess you can't really control that if the option is there, but no one is resonating towards it.

[FarleyCZ]

I think all of that is because of it's reputation. Blender has been that "program you can't control without googling shortcuts" for decades. That's why everyone didn't like a thought about switching to it for ages. That's why all the Maya artists hate the thought of switching to Blender, but are a bit less angry when somebody mentions Cinema 4D. (Which had intuitive GUI from the get go.)

But since Blender 2.8, the GUI got miles better and there are amazing resources available online now. That hit won't be over night. But it will slowly weaken Maya's user base.Because it's just fun. ...to start with the cube, switch to the Sculpt mode and see where you end up. Fun that kids didn't have when Blender sucked and other software was expansive.

I love this development. Back when I was in highschool, even a thought of 3D modeling ment either having four of your parent's monthly salaries at your disposal, or just stealing the software. I would love to have current version of Blender back then. Also ... to steer the discussion back a little bit. Blender is an exception. Extremely competent free alternative. Music field isn't that lucky I think.

[MMaarrkk]

But since Blender 2.8, the GUI got miles better and there are amazing resources available online now.

I must agree. 2.8 has definitely been a turning point. Some old Blender users did not fully appreciate it too much, but overall is a wonderful healthy change.

Also ... to steer the discussion back a little bit. Blender is an exception. Extremely competent free alternative. Music field isn't that lucky I think.

Could that be the case of how scattered the field is in comparison? When it comes to 3D or even 2D, you only need that much software to have a complete workflow. But when It comes to music, you need a DAW, synths, effect, etc., etc. So unless there's a single package that can be accessed, it's not that viable?

And I know DAWs introduce everything you need, but realistically, who only uses the stock plugins included?

[FarleyCZ]

Exactly. And that was my original point. If you have no money and decide to go the official route, you go to music school and they will grant you access to a ProTools equipped studio with a Waves bundle in it. If the techer there is a badass, there's may be a FabFilter bundle too. But that's it. But most of the music these days is made in Abletons, and FL Studios and Logics, and with tons of plugins. Synths, sample libraries. And each of them has a different developer with a different approach to edu licensing.

Thus I would love to see some place, where we can discuss this more freely without the fear of our conversation sounding like endorsing piracy. Where some kind of unified "free to learn, paywere when you have a stable income" kind of general license can be born, that would be acceptable by vast majority of devs.

[whyterabbyt]

And I know DAWs introduce everything you need, but realistically, who only uses the stock plugins included?

Unfortunately we see some of this with 3D software too. I get tired of fixing Maya scenes where the student has installed every third-party addon, rig and renderer known to man at home, causing their scenes to blow up on our bare install.

And FWIW, Blender is as bad as any DAW for 'plugin-itis', while ZBrush and Substance Painter match for 'preset-itis'

[MMaarrkk]

Unfortunately we see some of this with 3D software too. I get tired of fixing Maya scenes where the student has installed every third-party addon, rig and renderer known to man at home, causing their scenes to blow up on our bare install.

I guess in the comparison of DAWs and Maya, I would have assumed, that Maya on itself can hold everything it needs for educational purposes - the only thing that we had pushed past the stock Maya, was an outside encoder for VR support. But I guess you can never stop a student downloading a bunch of stuff they find on the internet, that might not really be necessary. And in all honesty, you could say the exact same thing about DAW.

If a "leading" DAW would allow for an educational license, most do have everything you need for creating music, mixing, etc. It just doesn't represent the rest of the music world.

Is there any DAW that has actually tried to be accessible in an educational setting? Something in the line of Autodesk?

[whyterabbyt]

Several offer student discounts, no free student license that Im aware of.

But then there's not really the same employment thing at the other end. Where do you get lots of graduates taken on to drive the same DAW that isnt ProTools?

[FarleyCZ]

Is there any DAW that has actually tried to be accessible in an educational setting? Something in the line of Autodesk?

None that I know of. I understand it with smaller DAWs, but when even Avid charges for edu licences? Dunno. But to ba fair, may be this is dealth with on case by case basis. May be if you write to Ableton or Steinberg, they could make you a personalized deal.

[v1o]

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.

They made changes this year. Many people, especially students, used to get Maya for free because Autodesk never used to validate student licences before. Now they do and you actually have to attend an accredited institution to get a student licence now or pay big bucks. So students from tiny art colleges or those learning online won't qualify. Many artists still looking for a job will just move to Blender to keep their portfolio up to date.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I129cROtI5w

[v1o]

I think all of that is because of it's reputation. Blender has been that "program you can't control without googling shortcuts" for decades. That's why everyone didn't like a thought about switching to it for ages. That's why all the Maya artists hate the thought of switching to Blender, but are a bit less angry when somebody mentions Cinema 4D. (Which had intuitive GUI from the get go.)

But since Blender 2.8, the GUI got miles better and there are amazing resources available online now. That hit won't be over night. But it will slowly weaken Maya's user base.Because it's just fun. ...to start with the cube, switch to the Sculpt mode and see where you end up. Fun that kids didn't have when Blender sucked and other software was expansive.

I love this development. Back when I was in highschool, even a thought of 3D modeling ment either having four of your parent's monthly salaries at your disposal, or just stealing the software. I would love to have current version of Blender back then. Also ... to steer the discussion back a little bit. Blender is an exception. Extremely competent free alternative. Music field isn't that lucky I think.

This guy was a Maya user for 15 years. He previously was a trainer at Dreamworks and also worked on several motion pictures. He seems very impressed by Blender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiLAlqMNTCI

[whyterabbyt]

They made changes this year. Many people, especially students, used to get Maya for free because Autodesk never used to validate student licences before. Now they do and you actually have to attend an accredited institution to get a student licence now or pay big bucks. So students from tiny art colleges or those learning online won't qualify.

and neither will people who arent students. which is presumably the point.

dont see much of a difference between lying to get a student license and software piracy, tbh.

[chk071]

This guy was a Maya user for 15 years. He previously was a trainer at Dreamworks and also worked on several motion pictures. He seems very impressed by Blender.

Without having dug deep into Blender, and without even knowing Maya, I'm sure that Blender is great, for free. And I absolutely have no doubt that Maya is great for its money, and tailored for a professional market, with users who demand great functionality and operation from the software they pay thousands of € for.

From what I heard from someone who used both, Blender is kind of a jack of all trades, which does a bit of everything, but, software like Maya and other professional tools are more focused on certain aspects of 3D modelling, and offer a lot more for the are they're being used in. All with a pinch of salt, because I'm really no expert. I just always have a problem with that "Why use something for thousands of € when you can get the same for free". Well, no, it surely won't be the same. GIMP is not remotely on a Photoshop level either. It's quite nice for free, but, let's be honest, it has a lot of shortcomings and lacks a lot of Photoshop's ease of use, and automation. I'd actually say that Affinity Photo does a much better job, even though, again, it lacks a lot compared to Photoshop.

And that's basically always the story with open source freeware, same with Libre Office. Not to talk about the lack of support these apps usually come with.

[whyterabbyt]

I'd actually put Blender in the same place as Maya. Along with 3DS Max, and maybe Cinema4D etc they're 'general purpose' 3D applications which would sit at the centre of a workflow, and could easily be the only 3D tool you'd need to use. Both handle all the core functionality; modelling, some sculpting, rigging, animation, texturing, lighting, dynamics, particles, rendering; their functionality is on par with each other.

Specialist tools would be Substance Painter, Houdini, Modo, ZBrush, 3DCoat that sort of thing.