OTOY Forums

I vote for FBX.
I've had a lot more luck with it in blender than Collada. A lot of this has to do with the version differences issue mentioned earlier. I am sure there are FBX scripts out there for many of the other 3d apps as well if enough of a search is done. If not, blender can always work as an intermediary app to go in between. I know the FBX export in the last couple of blender versions didn't work for some odd reason, so if its not working for you, but grab an old version of blender (like 2.46/7) and grab the scripts from the scripts folder and put it into your 2.4x folder. I think 2.5 still has some issues with it because of the newer python v3 language issues.
If it is also easier to implement it would make sense to add it before Collada as Refractive Software can appease more people quicker. Instead of waiting for Collada to be ready and then wait for FBX to be ready. Just seems like there would be a gap in prospective consumers from time of release to next importer ready.

3dsmax, Revit, Maya, Motion builder etc etc etc..
So many so strong out of the box ready to go.
Dont go on compromise to satisfy hobbists IMO, yes I know google sketchup is shiny for a tiny part of our industry, but its not a good enough argument over the master packs suporting fbx.

I'd prefer Octane development constantly filtered out alternative solutions.
again, no question about it ->
FBX

[gk] wrote:3dsmax, Revit, Maya, Motion builder etc etc etc..
So many so strong out of the box ready to go.
Dont go on compromise to satisfy hobbists IMO, yes I know google sketchup is shiny for a tiny part of our industry, but its not a good enough argument over the master packs suporting fbx.

It's not so much about sketchup as it i about 3d warehouse... you don't get that much models freely available elsewhere.

[gk] wrote:I'd prefer Octane development constantly filtered out alternative solutions.

By alternative you mean such as Max? There's more to [professional] life then max. I use Cinema and it's not because Cinema doesn't exports FBX I pick Collada any day, it's because of it's openness, which in the end will benefit all, not only alternatives such as Max...

I use Max Maya and revit daily, If Octane can suport FBX I know for a fact we will look into getting 100+ seats of Octane. easily.

If we have to screw around with Collada this wont happen. ever.

There is full continuity through Autodesk main aps via FBX which - last time i checked is the major player when it gets to sold seats in small to large shops around the world.

I Dont know anyone using Cinema exept you guys on this board.
However I know a good stack of shops that use cinema to poke on shader level, but thats it.

All in all, the Autodesk community hook will make a TON more sales than any other strategy.

I refuse to accept Collada as an alternative. Due my own opinions.

[gk] wrote: All in all, the Autodesk community hook will make a TON more sales than any other strategy.

I refuse to accept Collada as an alternative. Due my own opinions.

wow, "refuse" you make it sound like the world is going to end if FBX isn't implemented first.

There are Collada plugins for most of Autodesk DCC apps, so i really don't see the point your making?
There is going to be TONs of sale be it FBX or Collada

At this point i do not really care which one gets implemented first, because the developer will support both within the Octance 1.0 cycle.

Down the road eventually all - activly developed softwares will include larger pots of flexibility.

I just read that, main coder wrote in terms that...whatever the next format would be..it wouldnt be done right around the corner. with some "..." after it to indicate it would take a while.

So, for me awhile is a good portion of time especially if its followed "..". In which case I try to spend 30 seconds of my life to pursuade why FBX ( for my opinion strickly and not on the behalf of the entire universe ) should be intergrated first

As you, I also don't care that much, but politics on either large or micro scale can be fun at times...

Did they make a poll working? I can't seem to find it

[gk] wrote:I use Max Maya and revit daily, If Octane can suport FBX I know for a fact we will look into getting 100+ seats of Octane. easily.

Yeah, right...

[gk] wrote:If we have to screw around with Collada this wont happen. ever.

So you would buy the app based solely on the object format it imports but wouldn't buy by its own merits... yeah right, I know each one is entitled to their own set of dumb decisions, but please, don't try enforce them as a set of truth onto others.

[gk] wrote:I Dont know anyone using Cinema exept you guys on this board.
However I know a good stack of shops that use cinema to poke on shader level, but thats it.

Perhaps it's time you to get out more...


BTW, Nemetchek is number two... it's alternative, but not the alternative kind you try to convey.

I'm sure Max exports to Collada!? Can't remember but I'm sure I did some conversion between Modo and Max a while back, and that seemed to work the best.

I vote Collada. This way it opens up to the peeps who can't justify spending loads on a renderer (i.e. Arion/VRay RT and a host of others). The other argument is that if these renderers supported FBX then I would imagine the bigger companies would go with them, they have been around for quite sometime.

I think FBX plugin exporter for more application is more accurate and have more parameters to export .....collada is open...but is more less accurate on the paramaters (ex textures and shader exporter)

I think....but i'm not shure..... ....my opinion based on Cinema4d user

Collada (.DAE) is reliable from sketchup the other formats like 3ds and obj can be very touchy when there are intersect errors. As its a low end poly editor and very popular it would be wise to support its outputs.